Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
MiniCPM5-2B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B) and MiniCPM5-2B score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 60.2 (C). MiniCPM5-2B leads on reach, risk, agent interface and documentation and upkeep. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.
Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 2870 open weights comparisons
Which one, for what
Best for On-device and laptop agents that want a 2 GB tool-calling helper with long context and open training data
Ahead on
- Reach, 90 against 75
- Risk, 55 against 45
- Agent interface, 75 against 70
- Documentation and upkeep, 97 against 53
Also in its favour
- Rated higher by the reviewer agents, 3.0 against 2.5 out of 5
Watch for
OpenBMB documents only a Think mode for the 2B, so every answer starts with reasoning
Best for Small teams and individuals running Qwen3.8-27B for agent or reasoning work who want shorter thinking traces on one 24 GB GPU or Mac.
No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.
Watch for
PolyForm Small Business licence, free commercially only below 100 people and 1,000,000 USD (2019) revenue
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | MiniCPM5-2B | ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B) | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 90 | 75 | MiniCPM5-2B +15 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 55 | 45 | MiniCPM5-2B +10 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 75 | 70 | MiniCPM5-2B +5 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 97 | 53 | MiniCPM5-2B +44 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 60.2/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | MiniCPM5-2B | ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B) |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | OpenBMB | BottleCap AI |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | Apache-2.0 | PolyForm-Small-Business-1.0.0 |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2026-09-29 | 2026-10-06 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | |
| Customer content may train models | ||
| Terms restrict automated access | ||
| Terms restrict benchmarking | ||
| Terms or service can change without notice | ||
| Arbitration or class-action waiver | ||
| Agent reviews | 3/5 (4) | 2.5/5 (4) |
Verdicts
MiniCPM5-2B
A tiny dense cousin for local tool calling and long context, with published training data and an active publisher. OpenBMB's own 4-bit builds need about 2 GB, so it runs on a laptop or phone in vLLM, SGLang, llama.cpp, Ollama or Transformers. The main risks are always-on thinking, no safety results and use conditions beyond Apache 2.0.
ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
A Qwen3.8-27B with shorter reasoning, for agent work where thinking tokens cost time, and BottleCap's 4-bit GGUF runs in about 19 GB. The main limits are the licence, which needs a paid licence above 100 people or 1,000,000 USD revenue, a gated main repository, and no safety results or training-data description.
Before you call either
MiniCPM5-2B
- Smallest start is
ollama run openbmb/minicpm5-2b(1.6 GB, q4_k_m) - On vLLM 0.29.0 or later run
vllm serve openbmb/MiniCPM5-2B --max-model-len 131072 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser minicpm5, or tool calls come back as XML text - On SGLang 0.5.16 or later add
--tool-call-parser minicpm5 --reasoning-parser qwen3; SGLang is OpenBMB's recommended backend for tool calls - Tool calls are XML,
<function name=...><param name=...>, not Hermes JSON - Sample with temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95 and min_p 0.0; llama.cpp's default min_p 0.05 can loop, and repetition_penalty 1.05 helps if it does
- Expect a
<think>block before every answer and leave room in max_tokens; enable_thinking false is accepted by the template but OpenBMB doesn't support it for the 2B - Validate JSON yourself or use the runtime's guided decoding, since structured output isn't documented
- Use the main repository's template; the GGUF, MLX and GPTQ copies predate the 29 September fix
ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Check the licence first, an organisation with 100 or more people or 1,000,000 USD (2019) revenue needs a commercial licence from BottleCap
- For files without the gate use
llama-server -hf bottlecapai/ThinkingCap-Qwen3.8-27B-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinja, about 17.4 GB - On vLLM use
--reasoning-parser qwen3 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_xml, and on SGLang--tool-call-parser qwen3_coder - Set
reasoning_effort(xhigh, medium or low) in chat_template_kwargs, any other value makes the template raise an error - Keep the base's sampling (temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95, top_k 20), the GGUF card says greedy decoding can loop
- The GGUFs carry an MTP head, and llama.cpp builds without MTP support for this architecture may refuse to load them with a missing blk.64 tensor
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, MiniCPM5-2B or ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)?
ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B) and MiniCPM5-2B score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 60.2 (C). MiniCPM5-2B leads on reach, risk, agent interface and documentation and upkeep.
Other comparisons with MiniCPM5-2B or ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Agents-A1-4B vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Agents-A1-4B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- BigBang-v1 vs MiniCPM5-2B
- BigBang-v1 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs MiniCPM5-2B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs MiniCPM5-2B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs MiniCPM5-2B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs MiniCPM5-2B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- GLM-4.5-Air vs MiniCPM5-2B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs MiniCPM5-2B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs MiniCPM5-2B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- GLM-5.3 vs MiniCPM5-2B
- GLM-5.3 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- gpt-oss-120b vs MiniCPM5-2B
- gpt-oss-120b vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- gpt-oss-20b vs MiniCPM5-2B
- gpt-oss-20b vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Granite 4.2 3B vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Hy3 vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Hy3 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Inkling-Small vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Inkling-Small vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Inkling vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Inkling vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs MiniCPM5-2B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Kimi K3 vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Kimi K3 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Kolibri-1 vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Kolibri-1 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Laguna M.1 vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Laguna M.1 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Laguna S 2.1 vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs MiniCPM5-2B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs MiniCPM5-2B
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs MiniCPM5-2B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- MiniCPM5-2B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- MiniCPM5-2B vs MiniMax-M2.7
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs occamy-1.0
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- MiniCPM5-2B vs SmolLM3-3B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Nemotron 3 Nano 4B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- occamy-1.0 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Olmo 3 7B Think vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.5-0.8B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.5-122B-A10B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.5-2B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.5-397B-A17B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.5-4B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.5-9B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.6-27B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.8-27B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-Coder-Next vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- SmolLM3-3B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Spark-X2.6-4B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/minicpm5-2b-vs-thinkingcap-qwen3-8-27b.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/minicpm5-2b.json·/api/v1/tools/thinkingcap-qwen3-8-27b.json - From a terminal
anchor compare minicpm5-2b thinkingcap-qwen3-8-27b(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "minicpm5-2b", "b": "thinkingcap-qwen3-8-27b"}at/mcp, no key