Best local LLMs for the Intel Celeron N5105 / N5095 NAS (4 GB)

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. 39Basic quality (D) · 39 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. LFM3 1.7B Q2_K · 11.4 tok/s · Runs well
  2. 35Basic quality (D) · 35 of 100: how capable the model is at Q2_K, whatever it runs on. Match score 68/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. LFM3-VL 2B Q2_K · 10.3 tok/s · Runs well
  3. 34Basic quality (D) · 34 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. MiniCPM5 1B Q4_K_M · 11.1 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 67/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B Q3_K_M · 10.0 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 66/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. PaddleOCR-VL 1.6 0.9B Q4_K_M · 12.5 tok/s · Runs well

Coding at 32K context

  1. 25Basic quality (D) · 25 of 100: how capable the model is at Q2_K, whatever it runs on. Match score 65/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. MiniCPM5 1B Q2_K · 18.3 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  2. 39Basic quality (D) · 39 of 100: how capable the model is at Q4_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 65/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. PaddleOCR-VL 1.6 0.9B Q4_K_M · 12.5 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  3. 39Basic quality (D) · 39 of 100: how capable the model is at Q2_K, whatever it runs on. Match score 64/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. LFM3 1.7B Q2_K · 11.4 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  4. 35Basic quality (D) · 35 of 100: how capable the model is at Q3_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 63/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. MiniCPM-OCR 1.0 1.3B Q3_K_M · 12.0 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  5. 5Basic quality (D) · 5 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. Qwen2.5 Coder 0.5B Instruct Q2_K · 40.3 tok/s · Runs great

Reasoning at 32K context

  1. 25Basic quality (D) · 25 of 100: how capable the model is at Q2_K, whatever it runs on. Match score 65/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. MiniCPM5 1B Q2_K · 18.3 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  2. 39Basic quality (D) · 39 of 100: how capable the model is at Q4_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 65/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. PaddleOCR-VL 1.6 0.9B Q4_K_M · 12.5 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  3. 39Basic quality (D) · 39 of 100: how capable the model is at Q2_K, whatever it runs on. Match score 64/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. LFM3 1.7B Q2_K · 11.4 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  4. 35Basic quality (D) · 35 of 100: how capable the model is at Q3_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 63/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. MiniCPM-OCR 1.0 1.3B Q3_K_M · 12.0 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  5. 35Basic quality (D) · 35 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. LFM3-VL 2B Q2_K · 10.3 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 70/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. PaddleOCR-VL 1.6 0.9B Q4_K_M · 12.5 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 · 11.4 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  3. 35Basic quality (D) · 35 of 100: how capable the model is at Q3_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 Q3_K_M · 12.0 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 67/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. LFM3-VL 2B Q2_K · 10.3 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 · 10.0 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)

Agents & tools at 64K context

  1. 9Basic quality (D) · 9 of 100: how capable the model is at Q5_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 59/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. LFM2.5 230M Q5_K_M · 43.2 tok/s · Runs great
  2. 11Basic quality (D) · 11 of 100: how capable the model is at Q3_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 59/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. LFM2.5 350M Q3_K_M · 44.4 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  3. 21Basic quality (D) · 21 of 100: how capable the model is at Q3_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 58/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. Qwen3.5 0.8B Q3_K_M · 17.9 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  4. 8Basic quality (D) · 8 of 100: how capable the model is at Q2_K, whatever it runs on. Match score 58/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. LFM2-VL 450M Q2_K · 43.9 tok/s · Runs great
  5. 9Basic quality (D) · 9 of 100: how capable the model is at Q2_K, whatever it runs on. Match score 58/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. Falcon-H1 0.5B Instruct Q2_K · 38.0 tok/s · Runs great

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 65/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. PaddleOCR-VL 1.6 0.9B Q4_K_M · 12.5 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 64/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. LFM3 1.7B Q2_K · 11.4 tok/s · Runs well (tight fit)
  3. 35Basic quality (D) · 35 of 100: how capable the model is at Q3_K_M, whatever it runs on. Match score 63/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. MiniCPM-OCR 1.0 1.3B Q3_K_M · 12.0 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 62/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. LFM3-VL 2B Q2_K · 10.3 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 61/100 (quality, fit, speed and memory use) sets the ranking. MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B Q3_K_M · 10.0 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?