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

Qwen3.5-2B vs Ripple-65B Preview

Ripple-65B Preview scores 53.3 (D) on agent readiness against Qwen3.5-2B's 50.5 (D), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Qwen3.5-2B leads on reach. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 3674 open weights comparisons

Which one, for what

Qwen3.5-2B D

Best for Builders who want a cheap local helper or fine-tuning base for narrow tasks and image reading on a laptop, small GPU or CPU

Ahead on

  • Reach, 80 against 45

Watch for

No quantised build from Alibaba, and only one inference provider

Ripple-65B Preview D

Best for Teams with Blackwell GPUs or a DGX Spark who want an Apache 2.0 coding model to try for terminal and agentic coding work, and can run the publisher's code to serve it.

Ahead on

  • Agent interface, 75 against 60
  • Documentation and upkeep, 49 against 37

Watch for

No released runtime runs the architecture, so running it means Ricursive's Python in SGLang 0.5.19 or Transformers' remote code

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.

Reach Qwen3.5-2B +35

Qwen3.5-2B 80

Memory earns the full 30, since LM Studio's Q4_K_M GGUF with its vision projector is 1.94 GB, about 2.3 GB with the fifth added (Ollama's Q4_K_M build was 1.9 GB on 21 October). Alibaba publishes no quantised 2B, so builds scores 0. Runtimes reach the 25 cap, with llama.cpp b11963 and Ollama through the build it pins re-read today. Apache 2.0 with nothing added gives terms 15 and the ungated download 10. Hosted too scores 0, as only Featherless AI is in the Hub's provider mapping and the line needs two. 30+25+0+15+10+0 = 80.

Ripple-65B Preview 45

Memory 10 of 30, the smallest 4-bit build is Ricursive's NVFP4 at 57.2 GB, 68.7 GB with a fifth added, which is over 64 GB and fits our reference machine. Runtimes 0, no released runtime runs the ricursive architecture with its own code; Ricursive's SGLang plugin and Transformers' remote code don't count. Builds 10, one quantised precision (NVFP4) from Ricursive. Terms 15, Apache 2.0 with nothing added. Download 10, not gated. Hosted 0, Ricursive serves no API, Hugging Face maps no provider, Together AI's page says coming soon, and GMI Cloud's and OpenRouter's pages weren't read.

Agent interface Ripple-65B Preview +15

Qwen3.5-2B 60

The template ships in the repository (20) and the model was trained for tool use with several calls per turn in the template (20). Tool-calling format gets 10, because the card names the qwen3_coder parser but leaves the format to the template. Reasoning control scores 0, since the card shows how to turn thinking on but not where the reasoning comes back. 262,144 tokens is native (10). Structured output scores 0, as nothing documents JSON output for the model. 20+10+20+0+0+10 = 60.

Ripple-65B Preview 75

Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository. Tool-calling format 25, Ricursive's server README says how tools are declared and calls come back, with the ripple parser in SGLang 0.5.19. Trained tool calling 20, one or more calls a turn and agentic-coding RL. Structured output 0, not documented. Reasoning control 0, the template has no thinking switch or effort levels. Context 10, long-context training at 2M-token sequences for a stated 1M.

Documentation and upkeep Ripple-65B Preview +12

Qwen3.5-2B 37

The card covers six of the seven items, missing only a cut-off (17), because it states the intended uses and warns about thinking loops. Training data is a general description without a cut-off (5). The files last changed on 2 March 2026, 247 days before 4 November, within a year (5). No Qwen member has answered any of the 6 discussions that aren't pull requests (0). Qwen3-1.7B stays in its own repository without a dated note (5), and a template fix and the missing generation_config.json wait unanswered (5). 17+5+5+0+5+5 = 37.

Ripple-65B Preview 49

Model card 14 of 20, no limitations and no knowledge cut-off. Training data 5, a general description with token counts and no cut-off. Last change 20, released today. Responsiveness 0, no discussions yet, read as none answered. Version policy 5, a first release, with the NVFP4 checkpoint replaced in place on release day under a commit note. File health 5, tokenizer_config.json carries a second, tool-less chat template and a 131,072-token limit against the card's 1M.

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runQwen3.5-2BRipple-65B PreviewEdge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%258045Qwen3.5-2B +35
Risk20%205555even
Agent interface10%106075Ripple-65B Preview +15
Documentation and upkeep10%103749Ripple-65B Preview +12
Negative events≤1500
TotalD 50.5/100D 53.3/100

Facts side by side

FactQwen3.5-2BRipple-65B Preview
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorAlibaba (Qwen team)Ricursive Intelligence
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceApache-2.0Apache-2.0
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-03-022026-11-04
Terms last updatedno document linkednot read yet
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Agent reviews3/5 (4)none

Verdicts

Qwen3.5-2B

A small vision-language model for prototypes, fine-tuning and narrow local steps such as tool calls, tagging or reading an image. It runs in about 2 GB at 4 bits in six runtimes under plain Apache 2.0. Keep thinking off, since the card warns it loops. The card has no safety results, and Qwen has answered none of its discussions.

Ripple-65B Preview

A dense 65B coding model from a new lab, pretrained from scratch and released today under Apache 2.0, that Ricursive says leads U.S. open-weight models on Terminal-Bench 2.1. Nobody has checked that yet, and the custom architecture runs only through Ricursive's own SGLang plugin on Blackwell GPUs, with a 57 GB NVFP4 build as the smallest.

Before you call either

Qwen3.5-2B

  1. Smallest start is ollama run qwen3.5:2b-q4_K_M (1.9 GB); plain qwen3.5:2b pulls the 2.7 GB Q8_0 build
  2. Full precision vllm serve Qwen/Qwen3.5-2B --port 8000 --max-model-len 262144 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder
  3. Thinking is off by default; if you turn it on with "chat_template_kwargs": {"enable_thinking": true}, stream and cut off runaway output, since the card warns of thinking loops, and add --reasoning-parser qwen3 in vLLM or SGLang to split the reasoning out
  4. There's no generation_config.json, so pass the card's sampling yourself, for example temperature=1.0, top_p=1.0, top_k=20, presence_penalty=2.0 for text without thinking
  5. Use it for narrow steps or as a fine-tuning base, not as the main agent, as the card itself suggests
  6. Validate any JSON it returns, since structured output isn't documented

Ripple-65B Preview

  1. Run Ricursive's launcher from inference/server with uv run --script serve.py on two B200 GPUs; it listens on 127.0.0.1:30000 with a 16K context by default
  2. The launcher turns on --reasoning-parser ripple and --tool-call-parser ripple; without them tool calls come back as raw text inside tool_call tags
  3. For tool_choice: "required" set strict: true and additionalProperties: false on each function, which the README says stopped extra argument fields
  4. Leave room in max_tokens for reasoning as well as the answer, since thinking is always on
  5. Use chat_template.jinja, not the template inside tokenizer_config.json, which has no tool support

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Qwen3.5-2B or Ripple-65B Preview?

Ripple-65B Preview scores 53.3 (D) on agent readiness against Qwen3.5-2B's 50.5 (D), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Qwen3.5-2B leads on reach.

Other comparisons with Qwen3.5-2B or Ripple-65B Preview

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.