Jina Reranker v3.5 on AMD EPYC 7002 / 7003 series NAS (16 GB)

Can the AMD EPYC 7002 / 7003 series NAS (16 GB) run Jina Reranker v3.5?

Yes, but slowly

Slow. At Q8_0 it needs about 2.4 GB of 12.0 GB usable and makes one decision in about 780 ms.

Best quant: Q8_0
Time per decision: 780 ms
Decisions per second: 1.3/s
Input assumed: 512 tokens
Returns: Probability or score

Best app to run it on the AMD EPYC 7002 / 7003 series NAS (16 GB)

On Linux

llama.cpp

Command line + local API · runs on llama.cpp

Serves the GGUF build behind a /v1/rerank endpoint with llama-server --rerank.

llama-server -hf jinaai/jina-reranker-v3.5-GGUF:Q8_0 --rerank

How we choose: the files published for this model, which apps run in a container on a NAS without a graphics card (models run on its processor), and whether the model fits fully in the memory models can use. Details.

Download Jina Reranker v3.5

Recommended for the AMD EPYC 7002 / 7003 series NAS (16 GB): Q8_0. Every other quantization has its own download link in the table below.

Quantized files · GGUF

Works in llama.cpp (llama-server --rerank), Lemonade and other llama.cpp servers with a rerank endpoint. No sign-in needed.

Download the Q8_0 file (opens in a new tab)

huggingface.co/jinaai/jina-reranker-v3.5-GGUF (opens in a new tab)

llama-server -hf jinaai/jina-reranker-v3.5-GGUF:Q8_0 --rerank

Original weights · Hugging Face

Full-precision files from Jina AI, for Transformers, Sentence Transformers, Text Embeddings Inference, Infinity or vLLM.

huggingface.co/jinaai/jina-reranker-v3.5 (opens in a new tab)

No sign-in needed.

Links checked 1 day ago against Hugging Face, Ollama and GitHub.

How it’s rated

Quality 86Excellent quality (A+) · 86 of 100: how capable the model is at Q8_0, whatever it runs on. Match score 84/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking.: How capable the model itself is at Q8_0, from its editorial quality tier scaled by the quantization or precision. It’s the same on any hardware that runs this variant. Scale: A+ 85+ · A 70+ · B 55+ · C 40+ · D under 40.
Runs Slow: How well it runs on the AMD EPYC 7002 / 7003 series NAS (16 GB): speed, capped by how well it fits in memory. Runs great: 30+ tokens/s (or near the image, video or decision speed target) · Runs well: 10+ tokens/s · Slow: 3+ tokens/s · Very slow: under 3 · Won’t run: doesn’t fit even with offload. A tight fit or RAM offload caps it at Runs well; heavy offload caps it at Slow.

Match score

To order lists, each result also gets a match score out of 100 from four parts. It favors the most capable model that still runs well.

PrecisionEditorial precision tier from the model’s published benchmarks, scaled by the quantization or precision used.	38.7 / 45
Memory fitFull marks when the model fits in the share of the NAS’s memory that models can use (the rest stays with the NAS system and its storage services); fewer when it goes past that limit.	25.0 / 25
SpeedTime for one decision against a 100 ms target: reading the input plus any tokens the model writes.	5.4 / 15
ClarityHow easy the answer is to use in code: a probability or score earns the most, written feedback before a score the least.	15.0 / 15
Match score	84.1 / 100

The match score orders results; it is not shown as a grade. Quality and Runs are the two ratings in the tables.

Every quantization on the AMD EPYC 7002 / 7003 series NAS (16 GB)

Quant	Memory needed	Available	Speed	Runs	Quality	Download
`Q4_K_M`	2.2 GB	12.0 GB	776 ms	Slow	81Great quality (A) · 81 of 100: how capable the model is at Q4_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 82/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking.	GGUF (opens in a new tab)
`Q5_K_M`	2.2 GB	12.0 GB	777 ms	Slow	83Great quality (A) · 83 of 100: how capable the model is at Q5_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 82/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking.	GGUF (opens in a new tab)
`Q6_K`	2.3 GB	12.0 GB	778 ms	Slow	85Excellent quality (A+) · 85 of 100: how capable the model is at Q6_K, whatever it runs on. Match score 83/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking.	GGUF (opens in a new tab)
`Q8_0`	2.4 GB	12.0 GB	780 ms	Slow	86Excellent quality (A+) · 86 of 100: how capable the model is at Q8_0, whatever it runs on. Match score 84/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking.	GGUF (opens in a new tab)
`F16`	3.0 GB	12.0 GB	790 ms	Slow	86Excellent quality (A+) · 86 of 100: how capable the model is at F16, whatever it runs on. Match score 84/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking.	GGUF (opens in a new tab) Original weights (opens in a new tab)

Times are for one request with a 512-token input and about 1 tokens written. Batching servers process many requests at once.

Other hardware that runs it

86Excellent quality (A+) · 86 of 100: how capable the model is at F16, whatever it runs on. Match score 93/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX F16 · 11 ms · Runs great
86Excellent quality (A+) · 86 of 100: how capable the model is at F16, whatever it runs on. Match score 93/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT F16 · 13 ms · Runs great
86Excellent quality (A+) · 86 of 100: how capable the model is at F16, whatever it runs on. Match score 93/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 (128 GB) F16 · 22 ms · Runs great
86Excellent quality (A+) · 86 of 100: how capable the model is at F16, whatever it runs on. Match score 93/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. Apple M1 Max (64 GB) F16 · 58 ms · Runs great
86Excellent quality (A+) · 86 of 100: how capable the model is at F16, whatever it runs on. Match score 93/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. Apple M2 Ultra (192 GB) F16 · 25 ms · Runs great
86Excellent quality (A+) · 86 of 100: how capable the model is at F16, whatever it runs on. Match score 93/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. Apple M3 Ultra (256 GB) F16 · 24 ms · Runs great

Estimates come from published hardware specs and our open formulas, not from running the model on your machine. Real speed varies with runtime, drivers and settings. Numbers marked “Measured” come from a linked benchmark.