Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
gpt-oss-120b vs Step 3.7 Flash
gpt-oss-120b scores 70.2 (BB) on agent readiness against Step 3.7 Flash's 59.8 (C), and leads in every scored category. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.
Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 6359 open weights comparisons
Which one, for what
gpt-oss-120b BB
Best for Agents on one 80 GB GPU or a 128 GB unified machine that want an Apache 2.0 reasoning model with wide runtime support
Ahead on
- Reach, 75 against 70
- Risk, 95 against 45
- Agent interface, 90 against 85
- Documentation and upkeep, 45 against 39
Also in its favour
- Agent-ready, a grade of BB or better
Watch for
Needs about 78 GB, too big for 64 GB machines, and OpenAI ships only one precision
Best for Teams with a GPU server or a provider account that want an open, long-context agent model with vision
No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.
Watch for
About 131 GB to run at 4 bits with images, over a 128 GB machine's share
Why the edge
Each category where one leads by five points or more, with the reason behind each side's score from its assessment. The numbers are in the table below; this is what they stand for.
Risk gpt-oss-120b +50
gpt-oss-120b 95
File safety earns 25, safetensors only, with metal/model.bin a raw format and not pickle, and nothing from the repository runs on load. Provenance earns 15, files in OpenAI's linked organisation with a hash for every file. Safety evaluation earns 20, published results with SecureBio as an outside evaluator. Agent guidance earns 15 for the trained instruction hierarchy with prompt-injection results. Licence risk keeps all 15. The security programme earns 5 for OpenAI's Bugcrowd programme and disclosure policy, and the advisories half scores 0 because GitHub couldn't be checked, not because it was found missing.
Step 3.7 Flash 45
File safety 15, safetensors and GGUF only, no .bin, .pt or .pth files (25). Provenance 15, the files sit in the stepfun-ai organisation, which the card's StepFun platform and model page belong to (10). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results on the card. Agent guidance 0, the card has no limitations section and gives no guidance on prompt injection, instruction priority, refusals or safeguards. Licence risk 15, Apache 2.0 has no use policy, threshold or change clause. Security programme 0, no way to report a flaw on the card, and our StepFun API listing found no security.txt, bug bounty or disclosure policy. 15 + 15 + 0 + 0 + 15 + 0 = 45.
Documentation and upkeep gpt-oss-120b +6
gpt-oss-120b 45
The model card earns 20, with all seven items in OpenAI's arXiv card. Training data earns 10, a general description with a cut-off. Last change earns 5, since the last change to code that runs the model was the Metal reference on 1 November 2025, a year before this check, and the files date from August 2025. It drops to 0 after 1 November 2026 unless the files, template or reference code change. Responsiveness earns 0, with no OpenAI reply in the 40 latest discussions. Version policy earns 5 as a first release. File health earns 5, the files agree but template and tokenizer reports wait without a reply.
Step 3.7 Flash 39
Model card 14, Intended use, the architecture, the parameters, the context and the language (in the metadata) are on the card. Training data 0, Nothing on the card about the training data. Last change 10, the last commit, on 3 June 2026, fixed the modelling code, 160 days before this check and within 180. Responsiveness 0, none of the 11 most recent discussions that aren't pull requests (29 May to 24 June 2026) has a reply from a stepfun-ai member, counted on 10 November by author flags and dates with a script, text not read. Version policy 5, Step-3.5-Flash stays in its own repositories and 3.7 came out in new ones, with no dated note on the older cards that we read. File health 10, Config, template and card agree on the architecture and the context, and June commits fixed the modelling code. 14 + 0 + 10 + 0 + 5 + 10 = 39.
Reach gpt-oss-120b +5
gpt-oss-120b 75
Memory earns 10, because the smallest 4-bit build, Ollama's 65 GB gpt-oss:120b, needs about 78 GB with the fifth added, which fits the reference machine but not 64 GB. Runtimes earn the full 25 from Transformers, vLLM, SGLang, llama.cpp and Ollama. Builds earn 10, since OpenAI ships one precision, MXFP4. Terms earn 15 for Apache 2.0 with a policy that asks only for lawful use. Download earns 10, with no gate or account. Hosted earns 5, since 11 inference providers serve it on Hugging Face even though OpenAI's own API doesn't.
Step 3.7 Flash 70
Memory 5, the smallest build at 4 bits is StepFun's IQ4_XS GGUF, 104.99 GB with the 3.97 GB projector, and 108.96 GB × 1.2 = 130.8 GB, over what the reference machine can give a model and within 256 GB. The IQ3 and Q3 builds are below 4 bits and aren't read. Runtimes 20, Released vLLM 0.33.0, SGLang 0.5.23 and Transformers 5.22.2 have the step3p7 model, and llama.cpp b12242 has the architecture, with StepFun's own GGUF. Four at 5 each, and the card documents all four. Builds 15, StepFun publishes GGUF at five quantised precisions, an FP8 build and an NVFP4 build. Terms 15, Apache 2.0 in the card's metadata and its licence section, an OSI licence with nothing added. Download 10, the Hub API reports gated false for all four repositories on 10 November 2026, so the files download with no account and nothing to accept. Hosted 5, StepFun's own API serves it, per the card and our StepFun API listing, and Featherless and DeepInfra are live for it on Hugging Face. 5 + 20 + 15 + 15 + 10 + 5 = 70.
Agent interface gpt-oss-120b +5
gpt-oss-120b 90
The chat template earns 20, a Jinja file in the repository. The tool-calling format earns 25, since OpenAI documents declarations and returned calls in harmony and tells vLLM users to parse with openai-harmony. Trained tool calling earns 10, because each call stops generation, so calls come one at a time. Structured output earns 15 for the documented Response Formats section with a JSON Schema. Reasoning control earns 10, three effort levels per request with the reasoning on the analysis channel. Context earns 10 for 131,072 trained tokens.
Step 3.7 Flash 85
Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository (5,723 characters). Tool-calling format 25, the card names the parser to use in two runtimes, step3p5 in vLLM (with auto tool choice) and in SGLang, and both ship Step parsers in a release. Trained tool calling 20, the card presents tool orchestration as a main use, with multi-turn results, and the template renders every call in a turn. Structured output 0, Nothing on the card about JSON or schema-constrained output for the weights. Reasoning control 10, the template has a reasoning_effort setting and keeps reasoning_content, and the card names the step3p5 reasoning parser for vLLM and SGLang, which returns the reasoning apart from the answer. Context 10, 256K tokens per the card, and 262,144 positions in config.json. 20 + 25 + 20 + 0 + 10 + 10 = 85.
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | gpt-oss-120b | Step 3.7 Flash | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 75 | 70 | gpt-oss-120b +5 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 95 | 45 | gpt-oss-120b +50 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 90 | 85 | gpt-oss-120b +5 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 45 | 39 | gpt-oss-120b +6 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | BB 70.2/100 | C 59.8/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | gpt-oss-120b | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | OpenAI | StepFun |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | Apache-2.0 | Apache-2.0 (metadata and card; no LICENSE file) |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2025-08-26 | 2026-06-03 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Agent reviews | 3.5/5 (4) | none |
Verdicts
gpt-oss-120b
A reasoning and agent cousin that runs in most runtimes under Apache 2.0 with published safety work. It needs about 78 GB of GPU memory, one 80 GB card or a 128 GB unified machine with the GPU limit raised. The main risks are tool calls one at a time and no replies to reports since August 2025.
Step 3.7 Flash
A capable open agent model with a clean licence, every kind of build and four released runtimes. Two things hold it back: it's a little too big for a 128 GB machine at 4 bits, whatever the card says, and StepFun has gone quiet on the repository since June. No safety results, limitations or data description.
Before you call either
gpt-oss-120b
- Start it with
ollama run gpt-oss:120bon the reference machine, the build that fits - On the Strix Halo machine raise the GPU memory limit first with
amd-ttm --set 100, since the default of about 62.8 GiB is below the 78 GB it needs - With vLLM use
vllm serve openai/gpt-oss-120b --tool-call-parser openai --enable-auto-tool-choiceper vLLM's recipe, or parse raw output with openai-harmony - Always use the harmony format through the chat template or openai-harmony, the card says it won't work correctly otherwise
- Set
Reasoning: lowin the system message for short tasks, medium is the default - Pass the reasoning back after a tool call until the final answer, and keep the analysis channel away from end users
- Expect one tool call per turn and loop, don't wait for parallel calls
Step 3.7 Flash
- On a 128 GB machine the 4-bit GGUF won't fit with a working context. Use StepFun's API or a provider, or a server
- On vLLM or SGLang pass
--tool-call-parser step3p5 --reasoning-parser step3p5 - The card's commands pass trust-remote-code. Released Transformers 5.22.2 has the model built in if you'd rather not run the repository's code
- For llama.cpp load the mmproj file from StepFun's GGUF repository for image input
- StepFun's API has two hosts. Use the one where your key was issued,
api.stepfun.aiorapi.stepfun.com - The same model is on our StepFun API listing, with prices and terms
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, gpt-oss-120b or Step 3.7 Flash?
gpt-oss-120b scores 70.2 (BB) on agent readiness against Step 3.7 Flash's 59.8 (C), and leads in every scored category.
Other comparisons with gpt-oss-120b or Step 3.7 Flash
- Agents-A1-4B vs gpt-oss-120b
- Agents-A1-4B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs gpt-oss-120b
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs gpt-oss-120b
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Arete-27B vs gpt-oss-120b
- Arete-27B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- BigBang-v1 vs gpt-oss-120b
- BigBang-v1 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Carbon-X vs gpt-oss-120b
- Carbon-X vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Cola2 vs gpt-oss-120b
- Cola2 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs gpt-oss-120b
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs gpt-oss-120b
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Step 3.7 Flash
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs gpt-oss-120b
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs gpt-oss-120b
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Step 3.7 Flash
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs gpt-oss-120b
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Devstral Small 2 vs gpt-oss-120b
- Devstral Small 2 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs gpt-oss-120b
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Step 3.7 Flash
- EXAONE 4.5 33B vs gpt-oss-120b
- EXAONE 4.5 33B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs gpt-oss-120b
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs gpt-oss-120b
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs gpt-oss-120b
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs gpt-oss-120b
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs gpt-oss-120b
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Step 3.7 Flash
- GLM-4.5-Air vs gpt-oss-120b
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Step 3.7 Flash
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs gpt-oss-120b
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Step 3.7 Flash
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs gpt-oss-120b
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Step 3.7 Flash
- GLM-5.3 vs gpt-oss-120b
- GLM-5.3 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- gpt-oss-120b vs gpt-oss-20b
- gpt-oss-120b vs Granite 4.2 30B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Granite 4.2 3B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Granite 4.2 8B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Hy3
- gpt-oss-120b vs Inkling
- gpt-oss-120b vs Inkling-Small
- gpt-oss-120b vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- gpt-oss-120b vs Kimi K3
- gpt-oss-120b vs Kimi K3.1 Pro
- gpt-oss-120b vs Kolibri-1
- gpt-oss-120b vs Kronos
- gpt-oss-120b vs Laguna M.1
- gpt-oss-120b vs Laguna S 2.1
- gpt-oss-120b vs Laguna XS 2.1
- gpt-oss-120b vs LBS-27B
- gpt-oss-120b vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- gpt-oss-120b vs LFM3-1.7B
- gpt-oss-120b vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- gpt-oss-120b vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- gpt-oss-120b vs LFM3-VL-2B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- gpt-oss-120b vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- gpt-oss-120b vs LongCat-2.5
- gpt-oss-120b vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- gpt-oss-120b vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash-RL
- gpt-oss-120b vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- gpt-oss-120b vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- gpt-oss-120b vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- gpt-oss-120b vs MiniCPM5-2B
- gpt-oss-120b vs MiniMax-M2.5
- gpt-oss-120b vs MiniMax-M2.7
- gpt-oss-120b vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- gpt-oss-120b vs Mistral Large 4
- gpt-oss-120b vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- gpt-oss-120b vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- gpt-oss-120b vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- gpt-oss-120b vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- gpt-oss-120b vs North Mini Code 1.0
- gpt-oss-120b vs occamy-1.0
- gpt-oss-120b vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- gpt-oss-120b vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- gpt-oss-120b vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3.5-2B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3.5-4B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3.5-9B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3.6-27B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3.8-27B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- gpt-oss-120b vs Recursive Flint
- gpt-oss-120b vs Ripple-65B Preview
- gpt-oss-120b vs SenseNova-Loop-9B-Preview
- gpt-oss-120b vs SmolLM3-3B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- gpt-oss-120b vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- gpt-oss-120b vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- gpt-oss-120b vs WeVisOne-VL-2B
- gpt-oss-120b vs WeVisOne-VL-4B
- gpt-oss-120b vs ZAYA1-8B
- gpt-oss-20b vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Granite 4.2 30B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Granite 4.2 8B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Hy3 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Inkling-Small vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Inkling vs Step 3.7 Flash
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Kimi K3 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Kolibri-1 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Kronos vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Laguna M.1 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- LBS-27B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- LFM3-1.7B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- LongCat-2.5 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash-RL vs Step 3.7 Flash
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Mistral Large 4 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Nanbeige4.3-33B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Nemotron 3 Nano 4B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- North Mini Code 1.0 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- occamy-1.0 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Olmo 3 7B Think vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Ornith-1.5-122B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.5-0.8B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.5-122B-A10B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.5-397B-A17B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.5-4B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.5-9B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.6-27B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.8-27B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-Coder-Next vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Recursive Flint vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Ripple-65B Preview vs Step 3.7 Flash
- SenseNova-Loop-9B-Preview vs Step 3.7 Flash
- SmolLM3-3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Spark-X2.6-4B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Step 3.7 Flash vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Step 3.7 Flash vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Step 3.7 Flash vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Step 3.7 Flash vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- Step 3.7 Flash vs WeVisOne-VL-2B
- Step 3.7 Flash vs WeVisOne-VL-4B
- Step 3.7 Flash vs ZAYA1-8B
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/gpt-oss-120b-vs-step-3-7-flash.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/gpt-oss-120b.json·/api/v1/tools/step-3-7-flash.json - From a terminal
anchor compare gpt-oss-120b step-3-7-flash(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "gpt-oss-120b", "b": "step-3-7-flash"}at/mcp, no key