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

North Mini Code 1.0 vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct

North Mini Code 1.0 scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct's 52.6 (D), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct leads on reach. 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

North Mini Code 1.0 C

Best for Developers who want a coding agent on their own GPU with a permissive licence

Ahead on

  • Risk, 60 against 55
  • Agent interface, 85 against 60
  • Documentation and upkeep, 36 against 31

Watch for

No limitations, safety results, languages or data description on the card

Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct D

Best for An agent with 4 GB or more to spare that needs a local model to read images, documents and video

Ahead on

  • Reach, 95 against 85

Watch for

No safety evaluation, agent-use guidance or security contact

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.

Agent interface North Mini Code 1.0 +25

North Mini Code 1.0 85

Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository (12,397 characters). Tool-calling format 25, the card documents how tools are declared (JSON schema through the chat template), how the call and its thinking go back into the history and how results are appended, and names the cohere_command4 tool-call parser for vLLM, which released vLLM has. Trained tool calling 20, the card says the model was specifically trained with tool-use capabilities for agentic coding, with reinforcement learning on verifiable tasks, and the template renders every call in a turn with thinking between them. Structured output 0, JSON schema is for describing tools. Reasoning control 10, the template has a reasoning_effort setting, and the card names the cohere_command4 reasoning parser, which returns thinking apart from the answer. Context 10, 256K tokens per the card, with 64K of output, and 500,000 positions in config.json. 20 + 25 + 20 + 0 + 10 + 10 = 85.

Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct 60

A Jinja chat template in the repository (20). The tool-call format lives only in the template, Hermes-style JSON in tool_call tags, and Alibaba names no parser (10). Trained for function calling with several calls allowed in a turn, per the family's technical report (20). No documented structured output (0). No thinking mode in this edition, so reasoning control scores 0 by the rule. 262,144 tokens of native context (10). 20+10+20+0+0+10 = 60.

Reach Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct +10

North Mini Code 1.0 85

Memory 25, the smallest build from Cohere is the w4a16 repository, 19.38 GB, and 19.38 GB × 1.2 = 23.3 GB, within 24 GB. Unsloth's GGUF isn't read for this line. Runtimes 20, Released vLLM 0.33.0, SGLang 0.5.23 and Transformers 5.22.2 have the cohere2_moe model, and llama.cpp b12242 has the cohere2moe architecture. Builds 15, Quantised builds from Cohere at two precisions, FP8 and 4-bit weights (w4a16), each in its own repository. Terms 15, Apache 2.0 in the metadata and on the card, an OSI licence with nothing added. Download 10, the Hub API reports gated false for the model and its builds on 10 November 2026, so the files download with no account and nothing to accept. Hosted 0, Hugging Face maps no inference provider to it. 25 + 20 + 15 + 15 + 10 + 0 = 85.

Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct 95

Alibaba's own Q4_K_M GGUF with its vision file is 2.95 GB, so with a fifth added it needs about 3.5 GB and fits well within 16 GB (30). Transformers 4.57.0, vLLM, SGLang and llama.cpp run it in released versions, and Ollama through its pinned llama.cpp build, which reaches the 25 cap (25). Alibaba publishes FP8 and GGUF builds at F16, Q8_0 and Q4_K_M (15). Apache 2.0 with nothing added (15). No gate and no account (10). Only Featherless is live in the Hub's provider mapping, so it isn't hosted too (0). 30+25+15+15+10+0 = 95.

Risk North Mini Code 1.0 +5

North Mini Code 1.0 60

File safety 25, safetensors only, no .bin, .pt or .pth files and no Python in the repository. Provenance 15, the files sit in Cohere's verified CohereLabs organisation, which cohere.com links to per our other Cohere listings (10). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results on the card. Agent guidance 0, the card has no limitations or safety section, and nothing on prompt injection, instruction priority or what the model refuses. Licence risk 15, Apache 2.0 has no use policy, threshold or change clause. Security programme 5, Cohere's trust centre holds a responsible disclosure policy with a bug bounty, as recorded on our Cohere listings (5). 25 + 15 + 0 + 0 + 15 + 5 = 60.

Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct 55

Safetensors and GGUF only and no code in the repositories, so the FP8 card's trust_remote_code flag runs nothing (25). Files in the Qwen organisation with a checksum on every file (15). No safety evaluation at all (0). No guidance for agent use, which matters for a model sold as a GUI agent (0). Apache 2.0 carries none of the licence risks (15). No security contact, disclosure policy or public advisories found for Qwen (0), and Alibaba's group-wide security centre wasn't checked. 25+15+0+0+15+0 = 55.

Documentation and upkeep North Mini Code 1.0 +5

North Mini Code 1.0 36

Model card 11, Intended use, the architecture, the parameters and the context are on the card. Training data 0, the card gives the training method and nothing about the data. Last change 10, the main repository last changed on 15 June 2026 (outdated chat templates removed), 148 days before this check, and the draft model's repository on 29 July, 104 days. Responsiveness 0, none of the 11 most recent discussions that aren't pull requests (7 June to 6 November 2026) has a reply from a CohereLabs member, counted on 10 November by author flags and dates with a script, text not read. Version policy 5, A first release, with each build in its own repository. File health 10, Config, template and card agree on the architecture, and the June commit that removed broken templates says so. 11 + 0 + 10 + 0 + 5 + 10 = 36.

Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct 31

The card misses limitations, languages and a cut-off (11). Training data is described only in the technical report, with no cut-off (5). The last change to code that runs it was the qwen-vl-utils fix of 4 January 2026, and the weights haven't changed since November 2025 (5). Qwen answered none of the 14 Hugging Face discussions that aren't pull requests, counted on 4 November 2026 (0), and GitHub issues weren't counted. Earlier versions kept in their own repositories without notes (5). Two reports wait without a reply (5). 11+5+5+0+5+5 = 31.

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runNorth Mini Code 1.0Qwen3-VL-4B-InstructEdge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%258595Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct +10
Risk20%206055North Mini Code 1.0 +5
Agent interface10%108560North Mini Code 1.0 +25
Documentation and upkeep10%103631North Mini Code 1.0 +5
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 61/100D 52.6/100

Facts side by side

FactNorth Mini Code 1.0Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorCohereAlibaba (Qwen team)
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceApache-2.0Apache-2.0
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-07-292025-11-01
Terms last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Agent reviewsnone2.8/5 (4)

Verdicts

North Mini Code 1.0

A coding agent model that fits one 24 GB GPU at 4 bits, trained for tool use, with a 256K context, Apache 2.0 and four released runtimes. It's a research release and reads like one: nothing on limitations, safety or data, the card's run instructions are out of date, and Cohere hasn't answered a question on the repository.

Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct

Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct reads screenshots, documents, charts and video, and Alibaba's Q4_K_M GGUF needs about 3.5 GB. Transformers, vLLM, SGLang, llama.cpp and Ollama run it under plain Apache 2.0. It has no thinking mode, documents tool calls only in the template, and Qwen hasn't answered repository questions or published safety work, so add guardrails before it drives a GUI.

Before you call either

North Mini Code 1.0

  1. Serve it with vLLM 0.33.0 or later and --tool-call-parser cohere_command4 --reasoning-parser cohere_command4 --enable-auto-tool-choice, with cohere_melody installed
  2. Pass the model's thinking back with its tool calls on every turn. The card says results drop without it
  3. Describe tools in JSON schema and append tool results as a dictionary with the tool role
  4. Use temperature 1.0 and top_p 0.95
  5. For llama.cpp the GGUF files are Unsloth's or bartowski's conversions, not Cohere's
  6. It's text only. Don't send images

Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct

  1. Start it with llama-server -hf Qwen/Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinja -c 32768, or ollama run qwen3-vl:4b-instruct
  2. In Ollama the plain qwen3-vl:4b tag is the Thinking edition, so name 4b-instruct
  3. With the GGUF, load the mmproj vision file too, or images won't be read
  4. Parse tool calls as JSON inside <tool_call> tags, or use SGLang's --tool-call-parser qwen
  5. Use the card's sampling, temperature=0.7, top_p=0.8, top_k=20, presence_penalty=1.5 for vision and temperature=1.0, top_p=1.0, top_k=40, presence_penalty=2.0 for text
  6. Validate JSON output yourself, since structured output isn't documented
  7. vLLM needs 0.11.0 or later and Transformers 4.57.0 or later

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, North Mini Code 1.0 or Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct?

North Mini Code 1.0 scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct's 52.6 (D), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct leads on reach.

Other comparisons with North Mini Code 1.0 or Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct

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.