on

Can the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT run Kimi-VL A3B Thinking 2506?

58Good quality (B) · 58 of 100: how capable the model is at Q5_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 81/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking.

Yes, it runs great

Runs great. At Q5_K_M it needs about 13.3 GB of 16.0 GB usable, with an estimated speed of 113 tok/s.

Best quant
Q5_K_M
Generation speed
113 tok/s
Prompt processing
20,109 tok/s
First token (1K prompt)
0.3 s
Largest safe context
92K

Best app to run it on the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT

On Windows

Lemonade

Desktop app · runs on llama.cpp, ONNX Runtime GenAI (Ryzen AI NPU)

  • AMD’s own app: llama.cpp tuned for Radeon on Vulkan and ROCm.
lemonade pull ggml-org/Kimi-VL-A3B-Thinking-2506-GGUF:Q5_K_M
  • LM Studio Point-and-click: search, download and chat in one window.
  • llama.cpp Usually the first to support new model architectures.

On Linux

Lemonade

Desktop app · runs on llama.cpp, ONNX Runtime GenAI (Ryzen AI NPU)

  • AMD’s own app: llama.cpp tuned for Radeon on Vulkan and ROCm.
lemonade pull ggml-org/Kimi-VL-A3B-Thinking-2506-GGUF:Q5_K_M
  • LM Studio Point-and-click: search, download and chat in one window.
  • llama.cpp Usually the first to support new model architectures.

How we choose: the files published for this model, your operating system and GPU, whether it fits fully in memory, and published speed tests (MLX vs llama.cpp on Apple silicon, vLLM vs llama.cpp vs Ollama on NVIDIA). Details.

Download Kimi-VL A3B Thinking 2506

Quantized files · GGUF

Works in LM Studio, llama.cpp, Jan and Ollama. No sign-in needed.

huggingface.co/ggml-org/Kimi-VL-A3B-Thinking-2506-GGUF (opens in a new tab)

ollama run hf.co/ggml-org/Kimi-VL-A3B-Thinking-2506-GGUF

Original weights · Hugging Face

Full-precision files from Moonshot AI, for fine-tuning, vLLM, Transformers.

huggingface.co/moonshotai/Kimi-VL-A3B-Thinking-2506 (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 58Good quality (B) · 58 of 100: how capable the model is at Q5_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 81/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking.
How capable the model itself is at Q5_K_M, 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 Runs great
How well it runs on the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT: 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.

Model qualityEditorial quality tier of the model, scaled by the quantization or precision used.26.2 / 45
Memory fitFull marks when everything sits in GPU memory; fewer when part spills to system RAM.25.0 / 25
SpeedGeneration speed against a 40 tokens/s target for LLMs, or render time against a target for image and video.15.0 / 15
Memory useRewards using the memory you have, so a bigger, better variant beats a tiny one that leaves most memory idle.15.0 / 15
Match score81.2 / 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 Radeon RX 9070 XT

Quant Memory needed Available Speed Runs Quality Download
Q2_K 8.2 GB 16.0 GB 172 tok/s Runs great 42Fair quality (C) · 42 of 100: how capable the model is at Q2_K, whatever it runs on. Match score 70/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. GGUF files (opens in a new tab)
Q3_K_M 9.7 GB 16.0 GB 150 tok/s Runs great 50Fair quality (C) · 50 of 100: how capable the model is at Q3_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 76/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. GGUF files (opens in a new tab)
Q4_K_M 11.7 GB 16.0 GB 128 tok/s Runs great 57Good quality (B) · 57 of 100: how capable the model is at Q4_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 80/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. GGUF (opens in a new tab)
Q5_K_M 13.3 GB 16.0 GB 113 tok/s Runs great 58Good quality (B) · 58 of 100: how capable the model is at Q5_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 81/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. GGUF files (opens in a new tab)
Q6_K 15.1 GB 16.0 GB 100 tok/s Runs welltight fit 59Good quality (B) · 59 of 100: how capable the model is at Q6_K, whatever it runs on. Match score 80/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. GGUF files (opens in a new tab)
Q8_0 19.0 GB 16.0 GB 42.4 tok/s Runs welloffloads to RAM 60Good quality (B) · 60 of 100: how capable the model is at Q8_0, whatever it runs on. Match score 67/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. GGUF (opens in a new tab)
F16 34.5 GB 16.0 GB 9.9 tok/s Slowheavy RAM offload 60Good quality (B) · 60 of 100: how capable the model is at F16, whatever it runs on. Match score 53/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. GGUF (opens in a new tab) Original weights (opens in a new tab)

Memory figures assume 8K of context. Longer conversations or documents grow the KV cache.

Other hardware that runs it

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.

Was this page helpful?