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.