on

Can the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT run NuExtract 2.0 2B?

67Good quality (B) · 67 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.

Yes, it runs great

Runs great. At Q5_K_M it needs about 3.0 GB of 16.0 GB usable and makes one decision in about 108 ms.

Best quant
Q5_K_M
Time per decision
108 ms
Decisions per second
9.2/s
Input assumed
256 tokens
Returns
Labeled spans or fields

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 numind/NuExtract-2.0-2B-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 numind/NuExtract-2.0-2B-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 NuExtract 2.0 2B

Recommended for the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT: Q5_K_M. Every other quantization has its own download link in the table below.

Quantized files · GGUF

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

Download the Q5_K_M file (opens in a new tab)

huggingface.co/numind/NuExtract-2.0-2B-GGUF (opens in a new tab)

ollama run hf.co/numind/NuExtract-2.0-2B-GGUF:Q5_K_M

Original weights · Hugging Face

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

huggingface.co/numind/NuExtract-2.0-2B (opens in a new tab)

No sign-in needed.

Links checked 3 days ago against Hugging Face, Ollama and GitHub.

How it’s rated

Quality 67Good quality (B) · 67 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.
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: S 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.

PrecisionEditorial precision tier from the model’s published benchmarks, scaled by the quantization or precision used.30.6 / 45
Memory fitFull marks when everything sits in GPU memory; fewer when part spills to system RAM.25.0 / 25
SpeedTime for one decision against a 100 ms target: reading the input plus any tokens the model writes.14.4 / 15
ClarityHow easy the answer is to use in code: a probability or score earns the most, written feedback before a score the least.13.0 / 15
Match score83.0 / 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 9070 XT

Quant Memory needed Available Time per decision Runs Quality Download
Q4_K_M 2.8 GB 16.0 GB 92 ms Runs great 66Good quality (B) · 66 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 3.0 GB 16.0 GB 108 ms Runs great 67Good quality (B) · 67 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 3.3 GB 16.0 GB 126 ms Runs great 69Good quality (B) · 69 of 100: how capable the model is at Q6_K, whatever it runs on. Match score 82/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. GGUF (opens in a new tab)
Q8_0 3.8 GB 16.0 GB 167 ms Runs well 70Great quality (A) · 70 of 100: how capable the model is at Q8_0, whatever it runs on. Match score 81/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. GGUF (opens in a new tab)
F16 5.9 GB 16.0 GB 348 ms Runs well 70Great quality (A) · 70 of 100: how capable the model is at F16, whatever it runs on. Match score 77/100 (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 256-token input and about 24 tokens written. Batching servers process many requests at once.

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.