Best local LLMs for the Other Android device (4 GB RAM)

Each list assumes the context that task needs, so a model that fits for chat may rank lower for long documents.

General chat at 8K context

  1. 53Fair quality (C) · 53 of 100: how capable the model is at Q4_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 77/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. LFM3 1.7B Q4_K_M · 17.8 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  2. 42Fair quality (C) · 42 of 100: how capable the model is at Q3_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 73/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. LFM3-VL 2B Q3_K_M · 20.7 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  3. 34Basic quality (D) · 34 of 100: how capable the model is at Q4_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 73/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. MiniCPM5 1B Q4_K_M · 28.5 tok/s · Runs well
  4. 33Basic quality (D) · 33 of 100: how capable the model is at Q3_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 72/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B Q3_K_M · 25.7 tok/s · Runs well
  5. 39Basic quality (D) · 39 of 100: how capable the model is at Q4_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 71/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. PaddleOCR-VL 1.6 0.9B Q4_K_M · 32.1 tok/s · Runs great

Coding at 32K context

  1. 39Basic quality (D) · 39 of 100: how capable the model is at Q4_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 70/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. PaddleOCR-VL 1.6 0.9B Q4_K_M · 32.1 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  2. 39Basic quality (D) · 39 of 100: how capable the model is at Q2_K, whatever it runs on. Match score 69/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. LFM3 1.7B Q2_K · 29.3 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  3. 39Basic quality (D) · 39 of 100: how capable the model is at Q4_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 68/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. MiniCPM-OCR 1.0 1.3B Q4_K_M · 23.7 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  4. 35Basic quality (D) · 35 of 100: how capable the model is at Q2_K, whatever it runs on. Match score 66/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. LFM3-VL 2B Q2_K · 26.4 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  5. 33Basic quality (D) · 33 of 100: how capable the model is at Q3_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 66/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B Q3_K_M · 25.7 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)

Reasoning at 32K context

  1. 39Basic quality (D) · 39 of 100: how capable the model is at Q4_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 70/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. PaddleOCR-VL 1.6 0.9B Q4_K_M · 32.1 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  2. 39Basic quality (D) · 39 of 100: how capable the model is at Q2_K, whatever it runs on. Match score 69/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. LFM3 1.7B Q2_K · 29.3 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  3. 39Basic quality (D) · 39 of 100: how capable the model is at Q4_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 68/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. MiniCPM-OCR 1.0 1.3B Q4_K_M · 23.7 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  4. 35Basic quality (D) · 35 of 100: how capable the model is at Q2_K, whatever it runs on. Match score 66/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. LFM3-VL 2B Q2_K · 26.4 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  5. 33Basic quality (D) · 33 of 100: how capable the model is at Q3_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 66/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B Q3_K_M · 25.7 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)

Documents (RAG) at 32K context

  1. 39Basic quality (D) · 39 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. PaddleOCR-VL 1.6 0.9B Q4_K_M · 32.1 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  2. 39Basic quality (D) · 39 of 100: how capable the model is at Q2_K, whatever it runs on. Match score 74/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. LFM3 1.7B Q2_K · 29.3 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  3. 39Basic quality (D) · 39 of 100: how capable the model is at Q4_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 73/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. MiniCPM-OCR 1.0 1.3B Q4_K_M · 23.7 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  4. 35Basic quality (D) · 35 of 100: how capable the model is at Q2_K, whatever it runs on. Match score 71/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. LFM3-VL 2B Q2_K · 26.4 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  5. 33Basic quality (D) · 33 of 100: how capable the model is at Q3_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 71/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B Q3_K_M · 25.7 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)

Agents & tools at 64K context

  1. 16Basic quality (D) · 16 of 100: how capable the model is at Q3_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 62/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. Gemma 3 1B Q3_K_M · 39.8 tok/s · Runs great
  2. 18Basic quality (D) · 18 of 100: how capable the model is at Q2_K, whatever it runs on. Match score 62/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. Qwen3.5 0.8B Q2_K · 58.2 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  3. 19Basic quality (D) · 19 of 100: how capable the model is at Q2_K, whatever it runs on. Match score 61/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. Granite 4.0 H 1B Q2_K · 34.7 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  4. 13Basic quality (D) · 13 of 100: how capable the model is at Q6_K, whatever it runs on. Match score 61/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. Falcon-H1 0.5B Instruct Q6_K · 41.1 tok/s · Runs great
  5. 15Basic quality (D) · 15 of 100: how capable the model is at Q3_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 60/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. LFM2 700M Q3_K_M · 53.8 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)

Reverse engineering at 32K context

  1. 39Basic quality (D) · 39 of 100: how capable the model is at Q4_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 70/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. PaddleOCR-VL 1.6 0.9B Q4_K_M · 32.1 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  2. 39Basic quality (D) · 39 of 100: how capable the model is at Q2_K, whatever it runs on. Match score 69/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. LFM3 1.7B Q2_K · 29.3 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  3. 39Basic quality (D) · 39 of 100: how capable the model is at Q4_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 68/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. MiniCPM-OCR 1.0 1.3B Q4_K_M · 23.7 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  4. 35Basic quality (D) · 35 of 100: how capable the model is at Q2_K, whatever it runs on. Match score 66/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. LFM3-VL 2B Q2_K · 26.4 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  5. 33Basic quality (D) · 33 of 100: how capable the model is at Q3_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 66/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B Q3_K_M · 25.7 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)

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?