on

Can the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT run Laguna XS 2.1 (33B-A3B)?

68Good quality (B) · 68 of 100: how capable the model is at Q3_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 84/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking.

Yes, it runs well (tight fit)

Runs well (tight fit). At Q3_K_M it needs about 19.3 GB of 20.0 GB usable, with an estimated speed of 167 tok/s.

Best quant
Q3_K_M
Generation speed
167 tok/s
Prompt processing
21,287 tok/s
First token (1K prompt)
0.3 s
Largest safe context
12K

Best app to run it on the AMD Radeon RX 7900 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 poolside/Laguna-XS-2.1-GGUF:Q3_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 poolside/Laguna-XS-2.1-GGUF:Q3_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 Laguna XS 2.1 (33B-A3B)

Quantized files · GGUF

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

huggingface.co/poolside/Laguna-XS-2.1-GGUF (opens in a new tab)

ollama run hf.co/poolside/Laguna-XS-2.1-GGUF

Original weights · Hugging Face

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

huggingface.co/poolside/Laguna-XS-2.1 (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 68Good quality (B) · 68 of 100: how capable the model is at Q3_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 84/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking.
How capable the model itself is at Q3_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 welltight fit
How well it runs on the AMD Radeon RX 7900 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.31.0 / 45
Memory fitFull marks when everything sits in GPU memory; fewer when part spills to system RAM.24.0 / 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 score85.0 / 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 7900 XT

Quant Memory needed Available Speed Runs Quality Download
Q2_K 16.3 GB 20.0 GB 189 tok/s Runs great 57Good quality (B) · 57 of 100: how capable the model is at Q2_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)
Q3_K_M 19.3 GB 20.0 GB 167 tok/s Runs welltight fit 68Good quality (B) · 68 of 100: how capable the model is at Q3_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 84/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. GGUF files (opens in a new tab)
Q4_K_M 23.3 GB 20.0 GB 81.1 tok/s Runs welloffloads to RAM 77Great quality (A) · 77 of 100: how capable the model is at Q4_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 75/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. GGUF (opens in a new tab)
Q5_K_M 26.7 GB 20.0 GB 52.4 tok/s Runs welloffloads to RAM 79Great quality (A) · 79 of 100: how capable the model is at Q5_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 75/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. GGUF files (opens in a new tab)
Q6_K 30.4 GB 20.0 GB 37.4 tok/s Slowheavy RAM offload 81Great quality (A) · 81 of 100: how capable the model is at Q6_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)
Q8_0 38.4 GB 20.0 GB 22.5 tok/s Slowheavy RAM offload 82Great quality (A) · 82 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 files (opens in a new tab)
F16 69.8 GB 20.0 GB — Won't run 82Great quality (A) · 82 of 100: how capable the model is at F16, whatever it runs on. Match score 11/100 (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?