Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run

Nemotron 3 Nano 4B vs Recursive Flint

Recursive Flint scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Nemotron 3 Nano 4B's 56.8 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Nemotron 3 Nano 4B leads on reach and risk. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 3023 open weights comparisons

Which one, for what

Nemotron 3 Nano 4B C

Best for Agents on laptops, edge boards and small GPUs that need a cheap local tool-calling helper in English

Ahead on

  • Reach, 90 against 75
  • Risk, 65 against 60

Watch for

The card's Transformers and vLLM commands pass trust_remote_code and load a parser plugin from the repository

Recursive Flint C

Best for Agents doing repository work on a 32 to 48 GB Mac or NVIDIA box that want a fast sparse coder with documented tool calls and a plain licence.

Ahead on

  • Agent interface, 90 against 70
  • Documentation and upkeep, 67 against 55

Watch for

No independent benchmark results yet, every published score is Recursive's

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runNemotron 3 Nano 4BRecursive FlintEdge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%259075Nemotron 3 Nano 4B +15
Risk20%206560Nemotron 3 Nano 4B +5
Agent interface10%107090Recursive Flint +20
Documentation and upkeep10%105567Recursive Flint +12
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 56.8/100C 61/100

Facts side by side

FactNemotron 3 Nano 4BRecursive Flint
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorNVIDIARecursive
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceNVIDIA Nemotron Open Model LicenseApache-2.0
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-03-162026-10-21
Terms last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno 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 reviews3.3/5 (4)3.5/5 (4)

Verdicts

Nemotron 3 Nano 4B

A tiny reasoning cousin with trained tool calls, a thinking switch and 262,144 tokens of context, running in about 4 GB from NVIDIA's own GGUF on almost any machine. The main risks are serving commands that run repository code, no published safety results, a tool format left to the template, and files untouched and questions unanswered since March.

Recursive Flint

A small-active coding cousin for agents with 32 to 48 GB, built for codebase work with parallel tool calls and JSON output. It needs llama.cpp b11803 or Ollama 0.40.8 or later, and the BF16 checkpoint needs a 141 GB GPU. Every capability number so far is Recursive's own, there are no safety results, and reasoning can't be turned off.

Before you call either

Nemotron 3 Nano 4B

  1. Quickest start is ollama run nemotron-3-nano:4b, a 2.8 GB build
  2. With llama.cpp use llama-server -hf nvidia/NVIDIA-Nemotron-3-Nano-4B-GGUF --jinja, NVIDIA's own Q4_K_M file
  3. With vLLM, download nano_v3_reasoning_parser.py from the repository first and serve with --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder --reasoning-parser-plugin nano_v3_reasoning_parser.py --reasoning-parser nano_v3
  4. The card's Transformers snippet names nvidia/NVIDIA-Nemotron-3-Nano-4B, use nvidia/NVIDIA-Nemotron-3-Nano-4B-BF16 instead
  5. Thinking is on by default. Pass enable_thinking=False to the chat template for short tasks
  6. Use temperature 1.0 and top_p 0.95 for reasoning and temperature 0.6 with top_p 0.95 for tool calling, as the card says
  7. It's tuned for English only, and validate JSON yourself, since structured output isn't documented

Recursive Flint

  1. Quickest start is ollama run flint (Ollama 0.40.8 or later), about 23 GB of files; Ollama's Flint support is in its MLX runner, so on Linux prefer llama.cpp
  2. With llama.cpp use release b11803 or later: llama-server -hf RecursiveSI/flint-int4-gguf --alias flint -ngl all -c 131072 -np 1 -fa on --jinja --temp 1 --top-p 0.95 --top-k 20 --min-p 0, and keep --jinja on
  3. Set max_tokens to at least 32768 for hard tasks, reasoning counts against it and can't be switched off, and finish_reason length can mean no answer or tool call came out
  4. Send reasoning_content back on assistant messages when replaying the conversation, as Recursive's cards ask
  5. Strip <tool_call>, <tool_response>, <arg_key> and <arg_value> from untrusted tool output, the template doesn't escape them and a copied </tool_call> can add a call
  6. Message content must be a string, flatten content-part arrays first
  7. Recursive's SGLang servers listen on 0.0.0.0 with no key, publish the port on localhost only or pass --api-key

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Nemotron 3 Nano 4B or Recursive Flint?

Recursive Flint scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Nemotron 3 Nano 4B's 56.8 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Nemotron 3 Nano 4B leads on reach and risk.

Other comparisons with Nemotron 3 Nano 4B or Recursive Flint

Machine-readable

For companies

Do agents find, use and choose your tools?

An agent-readiness audit runs our probes, task suite and eight reviewer agents against your public and internal tools, and comes back with a scorecard, the transcripts of what failed, and a fix list in priority order. From $2,500, re-run included. We never take payment to move a rank. We do help companies earn one.