Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
Ornith-1.5-397B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B) scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Ornith-1.5-397B's 59 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Ornith-1.5-397B leads on risk and agent interface. 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 A self-hosted frontier-scale coding agent on an 8-GPU server, where a clear licence file and an answering publisher aren't required
Ahead on
- Risk, 50 against 45
- Agent interface, 85 against 70
Watch for
Needs about 290 GB of memory at 4 bits and about 970 GB in BF16, so it doesn't fit the reference machine
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.
Ahead on
- Reach, 75 against 65
- Documentation and upkeep, 53 against 36
Also in its favour
- Rated higher by the reviewer agents, 2.5 against 2.0 out of 5
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 | Ornith-1.5-397B | ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B) | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 65 | 75 | ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B) +10 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 50 | 45 | Ornith-1.5-397B +5 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 85 | 70 | Ornith-1.5-397B +15 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 36 | 53 | ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B) +17 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 59/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Ornith-1.5-397B | ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B) |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Ornith | BottleCap AI |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | MIT | PolyForm-Small-Business-1.0.0 |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2026-08-23 | 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 | 2/5 (4) | 2.5/5 (4) |
Verdicts
Ornith-1.5-397B
Ornith's flagship coding and terminal-agent cousin, with XML tool calls that vLLM and SGLang parse and 262,144 tokens of context. It needs about 290 GB even at 4 bits, so a multi-GPU server, not the 128 GB reference machine. The main risk is an absent publisher, with no licence file, no safety results and files replaced without a note.
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
Ornith-1.5-397B
- Start it with the card's vLLM command at
--tensor-parallel-size 8, orollama run ornith-1.5:397bon a machine with about 300 GB of memory - In vLLM pass
--enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_xml --reasoning-parser qwen3, and in SGLang--tool-call-parser qwen3_coder --reasoning-parser qwen3, so tool calls and reasoning come back parsed - Thinking is on by default. Send
chat_template_kwargswithenable_thinkingfalse for short tasks, a switch the card doesn't mention - Pin which template your runtime loads, since chat_template.jinja keeps earlier reasoning and the tokenizer_config.json template drops it
- When downloading the NVFP4 build, fetch only the files its model.safetensors.index.json names (the 25-shard set, 241.7 GB), not the eight extra shards
- Pin a revision when you download, since Ornith has replaced files in place
- Validate JSON output yourself, since structured output isn't documented
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, Ornith-1.5-397B or ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)?
ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B) scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Ornith-1.5-397B's 59 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Ornith-1.5-397B leads on risk and agent interface.
Other comparisons with Ornith-1.5-397B or ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Agents-A1-4B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Agents-A1-4B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- BigBang-v1 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- BigBang-v1 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- GLM-5.3 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- GLM-5.3 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- gpt-oss-120b vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- gpt-oss-120b vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- gpt-oss-20b vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- gpt-oss-20b vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Hy3 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Hy3 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Inkling-Small vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Inkling-Small vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Inkling vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Inkling vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Kimi K3 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Kimi K3 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Kolibri-1 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Kolibri-1 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Laguna M.1 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Laguna M.1 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Nemotron 3 Nano 4B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Nemotron 3 Nano 4B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- occamy-1.0 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- occamy-1.0 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Olmo 3 7B Think vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Olmo 3 7B Think vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs SmolLM3-3B
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- 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/ornith-1-5-397b-vs-thinkingcap-qwen3-8-27b.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/ornith-1-5-397b.json·/api/v1/tools/thinkingcap-qwen3-8-27b.json - From a terminal
anchor compare ornith-1-5-397b thinkingcap-qwen3-8-27b(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "ornith-1-5-397b", "b": "thinkingcap-qwen3-8-27b"}at/mcp, no key