Datasets:
File size: 6,670 Bytes
d634c5f 0b82111 d634c5f 0b82111 d634c5f 0b82111 9fdfcdc 44231e7 9fdfcdc d6ba477 9fdfcdc d6ba477 cf52b8c 9fdfcdc cf52b8c 9fdfcdc 0b82111 9fdfcdc 0b82111 9fdfcdc 0b82111 d634c5f 0b82111 d634c5f 0b82111 d634c5f 0b82111 d634c5f 0b82111 d634c5f 0b82111 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 | ---
license: mit
task_categories:
- text-generation
tags:
- benchmark
- inference
- llm
- nvidia
- rtx-5090
- llama-cpp
- vllm
- speed
- quality
- mmlu
- gsm8k
- humaneval
- moe
size_categories:
- n<1K
configs:
- config_name: default
data_files:
- split: train
path: benchmarks.csv
---
# RTX 5090 LLM Benchmarks
Speed and quality benchmarks for quantized LLMs on NVIDIA RTX 5090 32GB, measured with [llm-bench-rig](https://github.com/notwitcheer/llm-bench-rig).
## Quality Benchmarks
Generative evaluation through llama-server chat completions. Replicates standard benchmark methodology using custom evaluators — no `lm-evaluation-harness` dependency.
Results are **split by reasoning mode**: comparing a thinking-on (reasoning) model's quality against a thinking-off model is apples-to-oranges, so the two groups are ranked separately. `q_avg` is the mean of the five tasks.
### Thinking OFF (non-reasoning · direct answer)
| Model | Params | Quant | MMLU | ARC-C | HellaSwag | GSM8K | HumanEval | q_avg |
|-------|-------:|-------|-----:|------:|----------:|------:|----------:|------:|
| Gemma 4 31B-it | 30.70B | Q6_K | 87.8 | 97.6 | 92.0 | 97.5 | 96.3 | **94.2** |
| Qwen3.6-27B | 26.90B | Q6_K | 87.9 | 96.9 | 95.4 | 97.3 | 92.7 | **94.0** |
| Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | 34.66B | UD-Q4_K_M | 85.0 | 95.7 | 93.3 | 96.7 | 95.7 | **93.3** |
| Qwen3.6-27B | 26.90B | NVFP4 | 87.0 | 96.7 | 94.9 | 97.1 | 90.2 | **93.2** |
| Qwen3-Coder-Next | 79.67B | UD-Q2_K_XL | 83.7 | 96.0 | 89.3 | 96.0 | 93.3 | **91.7** |
| Gemma 4 12B-it | 11.91B | Q6_K | 78.9 | 94.0 | 81.6 | 96.4 | 87.2 | **87.6** |
| gpt-oss-20b | 20.91B | Q4_K_M | 78.6 | 94.6 | 74.5 | 94.8 | 94.5 | **87.4** |
| Nemotron-3-Nano | 31.58B | UD-Q4_K_XL | 74.5 | 89.9 | 75.6 | 90.5 | 80.5 | **82.2** |
| Nemotron-Cascade-2 | 31.58B | Q4_K_M | 74.4 | 91.5 | 75.7 | 87.1 | 79.3 | **81.6** |
### Thinking ON (reasoning · extended chain-of-thought)
| Model | Params | Quant | MMLU | ARC-C | HellaSwag | GSM8K | HumanEval | q_avg |
|-------|-------:|-------|-----:|------:|----------:|------:|----------:|------:|
| Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | 34.66B | UD-Q6_K | 94.7 | 97.0 | 87.0 | 92.0 | 98.0 | **93.8** |
| gpt-oss-120B¹ | 116.83B | MXFP4 | 89.5 | 95.0 | 80.0 | 97.0 | 98.0 | **91.9** |
| Qwen3.6-28B-REAP-A3B | 28.24B | Q6_K | 87.7 | 95.0 | 82.0 | 90.0 | 94.0 | **89.7** |
> **HumanEval correction (2026-06-04).** An earlier harness passed API stop sequences (`\ndef`, `\nclass`) that fired *mid-reasoning*, truncating inline-reasoning models before they emitted code — producing false-low scores (Qwen3-Coder-Next read **10%**, not 93%). Every model has since been re-run on the fixed, reasoning-aware harness (no stop sequences, `max_tokens=4096`, indentation-preserving response handling). A second extraction fix (2026-06-04) makes program assembly format-agnostic — it generates candidate assemblies and keeps whichever one compiles — after Nemotron-3-Nano exposed a case where the model indents only the *first* body line differently (raw HumanEval read **21%**; corrected to 80.5%). **Do not cite any HumanEval figure published before this date.**
>
> **Why two tables.** Thinking-off rows answer directly; thinking-on rows emit an extended reasoning chain first. The two modes are not comparable on the same axis — including on MCQ/GSM8K — so they are ranked separately. Within a family, turning thinking on trades raw knowledge recall for reasoning depth (compare Qwen3.6-35B-A3B in both tables: MMLU 85.0 → 94.7).
>
> ¹ **gpt-oss-120B** runs via MoE CPU-offload (`--n-cpu-moe 20`) — it does not fit 32GB VRAM (59GB model); ~30GB VRAM + the rest in system RAM, ~47 tok/s generation. It and the other two thinking-on rows were run on a ~100-item-per-task subset (MMLU 2/subject).
> **Sampling.** MMLU & HellaSwag use 50% stratified sampling (seed=42); ARC-Challenge, GSM8K, and HumanEval run the full item counts (HumanEval = all 164). Full per-model reports in [`reports/`](reports/).
### Methodology
| Benchmark | Dataset | Few-shot | Scoring | Items |
|-----------|---------|----------|---------|------:|
| MMLU | `cais/mmlu` | 5-shot | Letter extraction (A/B/C/D) | 14,042 |
| ARC-Challenge | `allenai/ai2_arc` | 25-shot | Letter extraction | 1,172 |
| HellaSwag | `Rowan/hellaswag` | 10-shot | Letter extraction | 10,042 |
| GSM8K | `openai/gsm8k` | 5-shot CoT | Exact numeric match | 1,319 |
| HumanEval | `openai/openai_humaneval` | 0-shot | pass@1 (code execution) | 164 |
All benchmarks run at `temperature=0`. MCQ and GSM8K use `max_tokens=2048`; HumanEval uses `max_tokens=4096` with **no stop sequences** (reasoning models emit code only after long inline reasoning — premature stops were the bug corrected above). Multiple-choice tasks use generative letter extraction instead of loglikelihood scoring — scores are internally consistent for model comparison but may differ from logprob-based evaluations by 5-15%.
Full per-model reports with MMLU category breakdowns, parse reliability stats, and speed data: [`reports/`](reports/)
---
## Speed Benchmarks
### What's measured
- **Prompt processing (pp)**: parallel batched token throughput at context lengths 128, 512, 2048, 4096, 8192, 16384
- **Text generation (tg)**: sequential autoregressive token throughput at 128 tokens
- All models fully GPU-offloaded (ngl=99)
### Speed data schema
| Column | Description |
|--------|-------------|
| `model` | Model name |
| `architecture` | Dense or MoE (with active param count) |
| `params_b` | Total parameters in billions |
| `quant` | Quantization method |
| `size_gib` | File size in GiB |
| `engine` | Inference engine (llama.cpp or vLLM) |
| `backend` | Compute backend (CUDA) |
| `gpu` | GPU model |
| `vram_gb` | VRAM in GB |
| `test` | Benchmark test (pp128, pp512, ..., tg128) |
| `tokens_per_sec` | Throughput in tokens/second |
| `stddev` | Standard deviation |
| `date` | Benchmark date |
### Key findings
MoE (3B active) vs Dense (27B) on same-family Qwen3.6 models:
- Prompt processing: **2.4x faster** across all context lengths
- Text generation: **3.5x faster** (271 vs 77 t/s)
- Both degrade ~17% at 16K context (attention + VRAM, not parameter count)
---
## Hardware
| Component | Spec |
|-----------|------|
| GPU | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 32GB (Blackwell, sm_120a) |
| CPU | AMD Ryzen 5 9600 (6c/12t) |
| RAM | 64GB DDR5-5600 |
| OS | Ubuntu 26.04 LTS |
| CUDA | 12.8 (patched for glibc 2.41) |
## Tooling
All benchmarks generated with [llm-bench-rig](https://github.com/notwitcheer/llm-bench-rig) — open-source pipeline for speed and quality benchmarks on GGUF and safetensors models.
|