Qwen3 Reranker 4B on AMD EPYC 7002 / 7003 series NAS (512 GB)

Can the AMD EPYC 7002 / 7003 series NAS (512 GB) run Qwen3 Reranker 4B?

Barely: it runs very slowly

Very slow. At Q8_0 it needs about 42.8 GB of 471 GB usable and makes one decision in about 5.2 s.

Best quant: Q8_0
Time per decision: 5.2 s
Decisions per second: 0.2/s
Input assumed: 512 tokens
Returns: Probability or score

Best app to run it on the AMD EPYC 7002 / 7003 series NAS (512 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 mradermacher/Qwen3-Reranker-4B-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 Qwen3 Reranker 4B

Recommended for the AMD EPYC 7002 / 7003 series NAS (512 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/mradermacher/Qwen3-Reranker-4B-GGUF (opens in a new tab)

llama-server -hf mradermacher/Qwen3-Reranker-4B-GGUF:Q8_0 --rerank

Original weights · Hugging Face

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

huggingface.co/Qwen/Qwen3-Reranker-4B (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 90Excellent quality (A+) · 90 of 100: how capable the model is at Q8_0, whatever it runs on. Match score 82/100 (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 Very slow: How well it runs on the AMD EPYC 7002 / 7003 series NAS (512 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.	40.5 / 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.	2.1 / 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	82.6 / 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 (512 GB)

Quant	Memory needed	Available	Speed	Runs	Quality	Download
`Q4_K_M`	41.0 GB	471 GB	5.2 s	Very slow	85Excellent quality (A+) · 85 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`	41.4 GB	471 GB	5.2 s	Very slow	87Excellent quality (A+) · 87 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 (opens in a new tab)
`Q6_K`	41.9 GB	471 GB	5.2 s	Very slow	89Excellent quality (A+) · 89 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`	42.8 GB	471 GB	5.2 s	Very slow	90Excellent quality (A+) · 90 of 100: how capable the model is at Q8_0, whatever it runs on. Match score 82/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking.	GGUF (opens in a new tab)
`F16`	46.6 GB	471 GB	5.3 s	Very slow	90Excellent quality (A+) · 90 of 100: how capable the model is at F16, whatever it runs on. Match score 82/100 (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

90Excellent quality (A+) · 90 of 100: how capable the model is at F16, whatever it runs on. Match score 95/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX F16 · 48 ms · Runs great
90Excellent quality (A+) · 90 of 100: how capable the model is at F16, whatever it runs on. Match score 95/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT F16 · 63 ms · Runs great
90Excellent quality (A+) · 90 of 100: how capable the model is at Q8_0, whatever it runs on. Match score 95/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 (128 GB) Q8_0 · 89 ms · Runs great
90Excellent quality (A+) · 90 of 100: how capable the model is at F16, whatever it runs on. Match score 95/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 F16 · 99 ms · Runs great
90Excellent quality (A+) · 90 of 100: how capable the model is at Q8_0, whatever it runs on. Match score 95/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER Q8_0 · 97 ms · Runs great
90Excellent quality (A+) · 90 of 100: how capable the model is at F16, whatever it runs on. Match score 95/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER F16 · 90 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.