Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
Recursive Flint vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Recursive Flint scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next's 52.3 (D), and leads in every scored category. 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
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
- Reach, 75 against 60
- Risk, 60 against 45
- Agent interface, 90 against 60
- Documentation and upkeep, 67 against 40
Also in its favour
- Rated higher by the reviewer agents, 3.5 against 1.8 out of 5
Watch for
No independent benchmark results yet, every published score is Recursive's
Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next D
Best for Teams under US$1M revenue, or researchers, with an 8-GPU node who want Qwen3.8-Flash-Next with shorter thinking for coding and agent work.
No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.
Watch for
Two licences to satisfy, UkisAI's US$1M revenue limit and Qwen's separate licence for model-as-a-service businesses
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Recursive Flint | Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 75 | 60 | Recursive Flint +15 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 60 | 45 | Recursive Flint +15 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 90 | 60 | Recursive Flint +30 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 67 | 40 | Recursive Flint +27 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 61/100 | D 52.3/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Recursive Flint | Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Recursive | UkisAI |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | Apache-2.0 | Swift Open License v1.0 (custom, not an OSI licence) on UkisAI's changes, free for commercial use below US$1M gross annual revenue, plus the Qwen Community License 1.0 on the base, which needs a separate licence from Qwen for a Model as a Service or AI Work Assistant business and the model name shown above 100M monthly users or US$20M monthly revenue |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2026-10-21 | 2026-09-24 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | 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 | 3.5/5 (4) | 1.8/5 (4) |
Verdicts
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.
Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
A large mixture-of-experts cousin, Qwen3.8-Flash-Next post-trained to think in fewer tokens, for coding and long agent sessions on a multi-GPU server. Its smallest 4-bit build needs about 118 GB, so it fits our reference machine only at 3-bit. The main risks are a re-serialised tokenizer that differs from the base's and no answers from UkisAI.
Before you call either
Recursive Flint
- 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 - 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 - 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
- Send reasoning_content back on assistant messages when replaying the conversation, as Recursive's cards ask
- 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
- Message content must be a string, flatten content-part arrays first
- Recursive's SGLang servers listen on 0.0.0.0 with no key, publish the port on localhost only or pass --api-key
Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- On a multi-GPU node use
vllm serve ukisai/Swift1.5-Qwen3.8-Flash-Next --tensor-parallel-size 8 --max-model-len 262144 --reasoning-parser qwen3 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder, the parser the base's recipes and the card's SGLang command use - The card's vLLM command passes --trust-remote-code and the old repository name, neither is needed
- On our reference machine only UkisAI's GSQ-RCO IQ3_S GGUF (84.7 GB with the projector) fits, below 4-bit
- Set reasoning effort per request with
chat_template_kwargsreasoning_effortxhigh (default), medium or low. UkisAI's own runs lose about 2.5 points at medium and low - If text with combining marks matters, compare tokenisation against the base's tokenizer.json before trusting outputs
- Check both licences before commercial use, UkisAI's stops at US$1M gross annual revenue and Qwen's needs a separate licence for model-as-a-service businesses
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, Recursive Flint or Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?
Recursive Flint scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next's 52.3 (D), and leads in every scored category.
Other comparisons with Recursive Flint or Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Agents-A1-4B vs Recursive Flint
- Agents-A1-4B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Recursive Flint
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Recursive Flint
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- BigBang-v1 vs Recursive Flint
- BigBang-v1 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Carbon-X vs Recursive Flint
- Carbon-X vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Recursive Flint
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Recursive Flint
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Recursive Flint
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Recursive Flint
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Recursive Flint
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Recursive Flint
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- GLM-5.3 vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-5.3 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- gpt-oss-120b vs Recursive Flint
- gpt-oss-120b vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- gpt-oss-20b vs Recursive Flint
- gpt-oss-20b vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Recursive Flint
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Hy3 vs Recursive Flint
- Hy3 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Inkling-Small vs Recursive Flint
- Inkling-Small vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Inkling vs Recursive Flint
- Inkling vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Recursive Flint
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Kimi K3 vs Recursive Flint
- Kimi K3 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Kolibri-1 vs Recursive Flint
- Kolibri-1 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Laguna M.1 vs Recursive Flint
- Laguna M.1 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Recursive Flint
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs Recursive Flint
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Recursive Flint
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Recursive Flint
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs Recursive Flint
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Recursive Flint
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Recursive Flint
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Recursive Flint
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs Recursive Flint
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Recursive Flint
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Nemotron 3 Nano 4B vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Nano 4B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- occamy-1.0 vs Recursive Flint
- occamy-1.0 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Olmo 3 7B Think vs Recursive Flint
- Olmo 3 7B Think vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Recursive Flint
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Recursive Flint
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Recursive Flint
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507 vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507 vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Qwen3.5-0.8B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-0.8B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Qwen3.5-122B-A10B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-122B-A10B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Qwen3.5-397B-A17B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-397B-A17B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Qwen3.5-4B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-4B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Qwen3.5-9B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-9B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Qwen3.6-27B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.6-27B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Qwen3.8-27B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.8-27B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Qwen3-Coder-Next vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-Coder-Next vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2 vs Recursive Flint
- Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Recursive Flint vs SmolLM3-3B
- Recursive Flint vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Recursive Flint vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Recursive Flint vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- SmolLM3-3B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Spark-X2.6-4B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/recursive-flint-vs-swift-1-5-qwen3-8-flash-next.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/recursive-flint.json·/api/v1/tools/swift-1-5-qwen3-8-flash-next.json - From a terminal
anchor compare recursive-flint swift-1-5-qwen3-8-flash-next(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "recursive-flint", "b": "swift-1-5-qwen3-8-flash-next"}at/mcp, no key