Bonsai 2 27B — GGUF
104
2 commits
4 linked in READMEs
updated Sep 17, 2026
Prism ML Website | Whitepaper | Demo & Examples | Discord
Full 27B-class reasoning in ternary transformer weights, for llama.cpp (CUDA, Metal, CPU)
~9.3x smaller than FP16 (ideal) | 98.2% of FP16 intelligence retained | ~47 tok/s on an Apple M5 Max laptop
| Item | Specification |
|---|---|
| Base model | Derived from Qwen3.8-27B, a 27B hybrid-attention causal language model (architecture unchanged) |
| Parameters | 27.36B total — 24.35B language backbone (64 blocks) + 2.54B embedding/LM head + 0.46B vision tower (27 blocks) |
| Architecture | Hybrid attention (~75% linear / ~25% full attention), SwiGLU MLP, RoPE, RMSNorm |
| Context length | 262K tokens (inherited from the base model; kept practical on-device by the predominantly linear-attention backbone) |
| Weight format | Ternary g128: {−1, 0, +1} weights with FP16 group-wise scaling, packed as PTQ1_0 (dense trits) or PQ2_0 (2-bit slots) |
| Weight basis | Blockwise Hadamard rotation (block 1024, fixed ±1 signs) folded into the stored weights; the matching transform is applied to activations at runtime |
| Low-bit coverage | Embeddings, attention projections, MLP projections, LM head |
| Vision tower | optional ~0.63 GB mmproj pack (Q8_0), loaded only for image input |
| Deployed size | 5.95 GB (PTQ1_0) or 7.21 GB (PQ2_0); 5.8 GB ideal at 1.72 bits/weight — see below |
| Backends | llama.cpp (CUDA, Metal, CPU) |
| License | Apache 2.0 |
Each weight takes a value from {−1, 0, +1}, with one shared FP16 scale factor for every group of 128 weights. A ternary value carries log₂3 ≈ 1.585 bits of information, so the effective storage cost of the format is ~1.71 bits/weight (ternary code + 16-bit scale amortized over 128 weights); counting the small set of tensors held above the ternary representation brings the model as a whole to 1.72 bits/weight — an idealized ~9.3x reduction vs FP16.
The weights are stored in a rotated basis: each matrix is transformed blockwise by an orthogonal Hadamard rotation before the ternary assignment, and the runtime applies the matching transform to activations. The rotation is folded into the stored weights offline, so it costs no extra bits and no extra weight traffic; the packed model declares its rotation as metadata, so a runtime either applies the matching transform or refuses to load the file.
| Format | True bits/weight | Size | Reduction |
|---|---|---|---|
| FP16 (baseline) | 16.0 | ~54 GB | 1.0x |
| Ternary g128 (ideal) | 1.72 | 5.8 GB | ~9.3x |
| GGUF PTQ1_0 (dense trits) | 1.75 | 5.95 GB | ~9.0x |
| GGUF PQ2_0 (2-bit slots) | 2.13 | 7.21 GB | ~7.5x |
Practical deployment needs packing formats that efficient kernels can consume, and this repo ships two: PTQ1_0 packs trits densely and lands essentially on the information-theoretic target, while PQ2_0 stores each trit in a 2-bit slot, trading footprint for cheaper unpacking. Neither is uniformly faster — see the throughput table below for where each wins. These sizes describe the language model alone, the only component that must stay resident for text inference; 26.2M parameters (0.0976% of the language model — the recurrent state path of the linear-attention layers, plus the normalization weights) remain in higher precision and are counted in the 1.72 figure.
Unlike conventional low-bit builds — whose advertised labels understate their true average bit-width (a widely-used "2-bit" build of Qwen3.8-27B is really 2.8 bits/weight at 9.4 GB) — the Bonsai representation carries a bit-width that matches its name.
The vision tower ships alongside the language model as an optional component (on-disk sizes):
| Component | Pack | Size | Residency |
|---|---|---|---|
| Language model | ternary g128 (PTQ1_0) | 5.95 GB | resident |
| Language model | ternary g128 (PQ2_0) | 7.21 GB | resident |
| Vision tower | mmproj (Q8_0) | 0.63 GB | optional — multimodal input only |
| Vision tower | mmproj BF16 (reference) | 0.93 GB | optional |
The Q8_0 file carries the vision tower in an 8-bit container. It is usually offloaded, loaded only when an image actually arrives, so text-only serving never pays for it.
We recommend using the following sets of sampling parameters for generation:
- Thinking Mode:
temperature=1.0,top_p=0.95,top_k=20,min_p=0.0,presence_penalty=0.0,repetition_penalty=1.0- Instruct (or non-thinking) mode:
temperature=0.7,top_p=0.80,top_k=20,min_p=0.0,presence_penalty=1.5,repetition_penalty=1.0
These match the base model's own generation_config.json and are the values carried in the GGUF
metadata (general.sampling.*), so a client that reads model defaults will use them without being
told. They are also the settings used for the reported benchmark results (thinking mode).
The model uses xhigh reasoning effort by default; use medium for shorter responses and a balance of speed and accuracy. low reasoning effort is not supported and when selected the model will behave close to xhigh.
You can use a simple system prompt such as:
You are a helpful assistant
PQ2_0 is the faster decode on H100, A100, and the Blackwell cards, is faster at prompt processing everywhere, and is the pack measured on Apple Silicon. PTQ1_0 is the faster decode on the Ada-generation cards and the L4, and is the pick wherever memory is tightest. See the throughput table below.
PrismML-Eng/Bonsai-demo is the source of truth for running these models. It carries the tested setup for every backend, pins a known-good binary release, and is kept current as the kernels move. Where anything here disagrees with it, it is right.
The ternary hybrid-attention kernels live in the
PrismML-Eng/llama.cpp fork. Stock llama.cpp will not
run these files. It rejects PQ2_0 and PTQ1_0 as unknown types, and it loads Q2_0 without any
warning and produces garbage, because it has no Hadamard activation runtime. Use a binary from the
fork.
# prebuilt, pick the archive for your platform
# https://github.com/PrismML-Eng/llama.cpp/releases/latest
tar -xzf llama-<tag>-bin-<platform>.tar.gz -C bin --strip-components=1
# or build it
git clone https://github.com/PrismML-Eng/llama.cpp && cd llama.cpp
cmake -B build -DGGML_CUDA=ON && cmake --build build -j # drop -DGGML_CUDA=ON on macOS, Metal is default
hf download prism-ml/Ternary-Bonsai-2-27B-gguf Ternary-Bonsai-2-27B-PQ2_0.gguf --local-dir .
./bin/llama-cli -m Ternary-Bonsai-2-27B-PQ2_0.gguf \
-ngl 99 -fa on -c 32768 \
--temp 1.0 --top-p 0.95 --top-k 20 \
-p "Explain quantum computing in simple terms." -n 256
The binary is ./bin/llama-cli from an extracted release archive, or ./build/bin/llama-cli if you
built the fork yourself. -ngl 99 offloads every layer, 0 is CPU-only; -c sets the context, up
to 262144.
This is a reasoning model and it thinks by default. For the server, tool calling, reasoning budgets,
image input with the mmproj file, and speculative decoding, follow
Bonsai-demo, which ships run scripts that pick the
right flags for your hardware.
tg128 is token-generation throughput over 128 generated tokens (the memory-bandwidth-bound, interactive phase); pp512 is prompt-processing throughput over 512 input tokens (the compute-bound phase). Both in tokens/s, measured with llama-bench on these GGUF packs (custom low-bit kernels), at batch size 1 and depth 0 with no vision tower. NVIDIA energy is board power including HBM/GDDR.
| Platform | PQ2_0 TG128 | PQ2_0 PP512 | PQ2_0 J/tok | PTQ1_0 TG128 | PTQ1_0 PP512 | PTQ1_0 J/tok |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RTX 5090 (32 GB) | 129.9 | 3893 | 1.95 | 120.5 | 1805 | 2.15 |
| RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell | 124.8 | 4020 | 2.49 | 117.9 | 1972 | 2.77 |
| H100 SXM (80 GB) | 113.9 | 2830 | 2.69 | 86.9 | 1237 | 3.18 |
| RTX 6000 Ada (48 GB) | 82.8 | 2431 | 2.51 | 90.4 | 1657 | 2.49 |
| RTX 4090 (24 GB) | 81.2 | 3124 | 2.99 | 91.1 | 1645 | 2.58 |
| L40S (48 GB) | 74.4 | 2868 | 3.24 | 81.8 | 1543 | 2.82 |
| A100 SXM (80 GB) | 73.9 | 1328 | 3.43 | 54.7 | 706 | 4.28 |
| L4 (24 GB, 72 W) | 29.8 | 777 | 2.42 | 32.1 | 467 | 2.25 |
| Laptop (Apple M5 Pro, Metal) | 28.1 | 387 | — | — | — | — |
On the laptop the FP16 baseline (~54 GB) does not fit at all — the meaningful statement is not a speedup ratio but that a 27B model runs interactively on an everyday laptop. The measured decode streams ~204 GB/s of weights on the M5 Pro, confirming the memory-bandwidth-dominated profile that the low-bit representation is built to exploit. The M5 Pro figure is measured on a quiet machine; this laptop swings ~4% with background load.
The two packings are a genuine trade rather than a strict ordering. PTQ1_0 moves 17% less weight data per step, but unpacking dense trits costs arithmetic, so it wins on the Ada-generation parts and the L4 — where memory is the binding constraint — and loses on H100, A100, and the Blackwell cards, where batch-1 decode is limited by instruction throughput and launch overhead instead. Prompt processing, being compute-bound, favors PQ2_0 everywhere.
The Apple row carries no per-token energy figure because the two platforms' instrumentation does not enclose the same components: nvidia-smi includes the card's HBM/GDDR, while Apple's powermetrics reports CPU, GPU, and ANE with no DRAM rail. What the measurement does support is absolute draw: the M5 Pro decodes at 27.5 W on the GPU rail and 34.1 W across CPU and GPU, against 300–455 W of board power for the NVIDIA cards above.
Measured on the earlier pre-rotation build and reported pending re-measurement on the current stack (llama.cpp Metal backend):
| Platform | Footprint | TG128 (tok/s) | PP512 (tok/s) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Laptop (Apple M5 Max, Metal) | 7.2 GB | 47.0 | 765 |
| Laptop (Apple M5 Pro, Metal) | 7.2 GB | 28.7 | 393 |
| Laptop (Apple M4 Pro, Metal) | 7.2 GB | 18.0 | 125 |
On the wider M5 Max the model reaches ~47 tok/s; on the M4 Pro, prefill (~125 tok/s) rather than decode is the practical limit for very long prompts.
Evaluated with EvalScope + vLLM on NVIDIA H100 under identical infrastructure, decoding, and scoring, in thinking mode — where the model's full reasoning is exercised and the sub-4-bit collapse of conventional methods is most visible. 14 benchmarks across six skill categories. Bit-widths are true averages; "vs FP16" is relative to the Qwen3.8-27B FP16 reference.
| Variant | True bpw | Footprint | Thinking avg | vs FP16 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Qwen3.8-27B FP16 | 16.0 | 54 GB | 86.32 | 100% |
| Qwen3.8-27B UD-Q4_K_XL ("4-bit") | 5.2 | 17.6 GB | 85.18 | 98.7% |
| Qwen3.8-27B IQ2_XXS ("2-bit") | 2.8 | 9.4 GB | 72.59 | 84.1% |
| Bonsai 2 27B | 1.72 | 5.9 GB | 84.78 | 98.2% |
At 5.9 GB, Bonsai 2 27B outscores the sub-4-bit conventional build by more than twelve points at less than two-thirds of its size, and comes within 0.4 points of UD-Q4_K_XL at a third of its footprint.
The aggregate gap also understates how the conventional builds fail: their degradation is selective, concentrated on the benchmarks that demand sustained chains of reasoning. IQ2_XXS falls to 57.5 on AIME26 and 56.4 on LiveCodeBench while still scoring 88.93 on MMLU-Redux — which is why casual testing misses the collapse. Bonsai 2 holds exactly these benchmarks, scoring 95.83 and 90.07. The previous Bonsai 27B report showed the same pattern on a second model family, Gemma-4-31B, so the collapse is a property of the methods rather than of one base model.
| Category | Benchmarks | FP16 | Bonsai 2 27B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge & reasoning | MMLU-Redux, MuSR | 85.55 | 79.86 |
| Math | GSM8K, MATH-500, AIME25, AIME26 | 97.06 | 96.57 |
| Coding | HumanEval+, MBPP+, LiveCodeBench | 89.07 | 89.42 |
| Instruction following | IFEval, IFBench | 81.25 | 82.66 |
| Agentic / tool calling | BFCL v3 | 76.74 | 74.92 |
| Vision | MMMU-Pro, OCR Bench v2 | 71.36 | 66.19 |
| Overall (14) | 86.32 | 84.78 |
The reasoning backbone comes through intact: math falls only from 97.06 to 96.57, coding is level with the baseline, and instruction following is slightly ahead of it. The remaining gap is concentrated in the most demanding categories — knowledge and reasoning, and vision.
| Benchmark | FP16 | UD-Q4_K_XL | IQ2_XXS | Bonsai 2 27B |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Redux | 91.46 | 93.35 | 88.93 | 89.09 |
| MuSR | 79.63 | 73.01 | 66.99 | 70.63 |
| GSM8K | 97.19 | 96.66 | 89.90 | 96.66 |
| MATH-500 | 99.80 | 99.40 | 84.60 | 98.80 |
| AIME25 | 96.67 | 92.91 | 66.67 | 95.00 |
| AIME26 | 94.58 | 93.00 | 57.50 | 95.83 |
| HumanEval+ | 93.29 | 95.73 | 91.46 | 95.12 |
| MBPP+ | 83.86 | 83.86 | 78.89 | 83.07 |
| LiveCodeBench | 90.05 | 87.96 | 56.40 | 90.07 |
| IFEval | 91.50 | 88.83 | 84.03 | 91.31 |
| IFBench (prompt-loose) | 71.00 | 65.65 | 53.76 | 74.00 |
| BFCL v3 | 76.74 | 75.05 | 70.28 | 74.92 |
| MMMU-Pro | 81.73 | 81.73 | 65.19 | 75.49 |
| OCR Bench v2 | 60.99 | 65.45 | 61.70 | 56.88 |
| Average (14) | 86.32 | 85.18 | 72.59 | 84.78 |
Intelligence density captures the ratio of a model's capability to its deployed size:
D = -log2(1 - score/100) / size_GB
| Variant | Size (GB) | Benchmark avg | Intelligence Density (1/GB) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bonsai 2 27B | 5.80 | 84.78 | 0.469 |
| Ternary Bonsai 27B (previous release) | 5.75 | 80.98 | 0.416 |
| Qwen3.8-27B IQ2_XXS | 9.4 | 72.59 | 0.199 |
| Qwen3.8-27B UD-Q4_K_XL | 17.6 | 85.18 | 0.157 |
| Qwen3.8-27B FP16 | 54 | 86.32 | 0.053 |
Bonsai 2 27B delivers over 2.3x the density of the densest conventional build (IQ2_XXS at 0.199) and nearly 9x FP16 — no conventional build of Qwen3.8-27B exceeds 0.2. Each stored gigabyte is translated into far more usable intelligence. Against the previous Bonsai 27B release, density rises from 0.416 to 0.469, a 12.5% gain; that row is recomputed on these same 14 benchmarks for a like-for-like comparison.
If you use Bonsai 2 27B, please cite:
@techreport{bonsai2_27b,
title = {Bonsai 2 27B: A 27B Ternary Reasoning Model},
author = {Prism ML},
year = {2026},
month = {September},
url = {https://prismml.com}
}
For questions, feedback, or collaboration inquiries: contact@prismml.com
1 commits
1 commits
Bonsai 2 27B — GGUF
104
2 commits
4 linked in READMEs
updated Sep 17, 2026
Prism ML Website | Whitepaper | Demo & Examples | Discord
Full 27B-class reasoning in ternary transformer weights, for llama.cpp (CUDA, Metal, CPU)
~9.3x smaller than FP16 (ideal) | 98.2% of FP16 intelligence retained | ~47 tok/s on an Apple M5 Max laptop
| Item | Specification |
|---|---|
| Base model | Derived from Qwen3.8-27B, a 27B hybrid-attention causal language model (architecture unchanged) |
| Parameters | 27.36B total — 24.35B language backbone (64 blocks) + 2.54B embedding/LM head + 0.46B vision tower (27 blocks) |
| Architecture | Hybrid attention (~75% linear / ~25% full attention), SwiGLU MLP, RoPE, RMSNorm |
| Context length | 262K tokens (inherited from the base model; kept practical on-device by the predominantly linear-attention backbone) |
| Weight format | Ternary g128: {−1, 0, +1} weights with FP16 group-wise scaling, packed as PTQ1_0 (dense trits) or PQ2_0 (2-bit slots) |
| Weight basis | Blockwise Hadamard rotation (block 1024, fixed ±1 signs) folded into the stored weights; the matching transform is applied to activations at runtime |
| Low-bit coverage | Embeddings, attention projections, MLP projections, LM head |
| Vision tower | optional ~0.63 GB mmproj pack (Q8_0), loaded only for image input |
| Deployed size | 5.95 GB (PTQ1_0) or 7.21 GB (PQ2_0); 5.8 GB ideal at 1.72 bits/weight — see below |
| Backends | llama.cpp (CUDA, Metal, CPU) |
| License | Apache 2.0 |
Each weight takes a value from {−1, 0, +1}, with one shared FP16 scale factor for every group of 128 weights. A ternary value carries log₂3 ≈ 1.585 bits of information, so the effective storage cost of the format is ~1.71 bits/weight (ternary code + 16-bit scale amortized over 128 weights); counting the small set of tensors held above the ternary representation brings the model as a whole to 1.72 bits/weight — an idealized ~9.3x reduction vs FP16.
The weights are stored in a rotated basis: each matrix is transformed blockwise by an orthogonal Hadamard rotation before the ternary assignment, and the runtime applies the matching transform to activations. The rotation is folded into the stored weights offline, so it costs no extra bits and no extra weight traffic; the packed model declares its rotation as metadata, so a runtime either applies the matching transform or refuses to load the file.
| Format | True bits/weight | Size | Reduction |
|---|---|---|---|
| FP16 (baseline) | 16.0 | ~54 GB | 1.0x |
| Ternary g128 (ideal) | 1.72 | 5.8 GB | ~9.3x |
| GGUF PTQ1_0 (dense trits) | 1.75 | 5.95 GB | ~9.0x |
| GGUF PQ2_0 (2-bit slots) | 2.13 | 7.21 GB | ~7.5x |
Practical deployment needs packing formats that efficient kernels can consume, and this repo ships two: PTQ1_0 packs trits densely and lands essentially on the information-theoretic target, while PQ2_0 stores each trit in a 2-bit slot, trading footprint for cheaper unpacking. Neither is uniformly faster — see the throughput table below for where each wins. These sizes describe the language model alone, the only component that must stay resident for text inference; 26.2M parameters (0.0976% of the language model — the recurrent state path of the linear-attention layers, plus the normalization weights) remain in higher precision and are counted in the 1.72 figure.
Unlike conventional low-bit builds — whose advertised labels understate their true average bit-width (a widely-used "2-bit" build of Qwen3.8-27B is really 2.8 bits/weight at 9.4 GB) — the Bonsai representation carries a bit-width that matches its name.
The vision tower ships alongside the language model as an optional component (on-disk sizes):
| Component | Pack | Size | Residency |
|---|---|---|---|
| Language model | ternary g128 (PTQ1_0) | 5.95 GB | resident |
| Language model | ternary g128 (PQ2_0) | 7.21 GB | resident |
| Vision tower | mmproj (Q8_0) | 0.63 GB | optional — multimodal input only |
| Vision tower | mmproj BF16 (reference) | 0.93 GB | optional |
The Q8_0 file carries the vision tower in an 8-bit container. It is usually offloaded, loaded only when an image actually arrives, so text-only serving never pays for it.
We recommend using the following sets of sampling parameters for generation:
- Thinking Mode:
temperature=1.0,top_p=0.95,top_k=20,min_p=0.0,presence_penalty=0.0,repetition_penalty=1.0- Instruct (or non-thinking) mode:
temperature=0.7,top_p=0.80,top_k=20,min_p=0.0,presence_penalty=1.5,repetition_penalty=1.0
These match the base model's own generation_config.json and are the values carried in the GGUF
metadata (general.sampling.*), so a client that reads model defaults will use them without being
told. They are also the settings used for the reported benchmark results (thinking mode).
The model uses xhigh reasoning effort by default; use medium for shorter responses and a balance of speed and accuracy. low reasoning effort is not supported and when selected the model will behave close to xhigh.
You can use a simple system prompt such as:
You are a helpful assistant
PQ2_0 is the faster decode on H100, A100, and the Blackwell cards, is faster at prompt processing everywhere, and is the pack measured on Apple Silicon. PTQ1_0 is the faster decode on the Ada-generation cards and the L4, and is the pick wherever memory is tightest. See the throughput table below.
PrismML-Eng/Bonsai-demo is the source of truth for running these models. It carries the tested setup for every backend, pins a known-good binary release, and is kept current as the kernels move. Where anything here disagrees with it, it is right.
The ternary hybrid-attention kernels live in the
PrismML-Eng/llama.cpp fork. Stock llama.cpp will not
run these files. It rejects PQ2_0 and PTQ1_0 as unknown types, and it loads Q2_0 without any
warning and produces garbage, because it has no Hadamard activation runtime. Use a binary from the
fork.
# prebuilt, pick the archive for your platform
# https://github.com/PrismML-Eng/llama.cpp/releases/latest
tar -xzf llama-<tag>-bin-<platform>.tar.gz -C bin --strip-components=1
# or build it
git clone https://github.com/PrismML-Eng/llama.cpp && cd llama.cpp
cmake -B build -DGGML_CUDA=ON && cmake --build build -j # drop -DGGML_CUDA=ON on macOS, Metal is default
hf download prism-ml/Ternary-Bonsai-2-27B-gguf Ternary-Bonsai-2-27B-PQ2_0.gguf --local-dir .
./bin/llama-cli -m Ternary-Bonsai-2-27B-PQ2_0.gguf \
-ngl 99 -fa on -c 32768 \
--temp 1.0 --top-p 0.95 --top-k 20 \
-p "Explain quantum computing in simple terms." -n 256
The binary is ./bin/llama-cli from an extracted release archive, or ./build/bin/llama-cli if you
built the fork yourself. -ngl 99 offloads every layer, 0 is CPU-only; -c sets the context, up
to 262144.
This is a reasoning model and it thinks by default. For the server, tool calling, reasoning budgets,
image input with the mmproj file, and speculative decoding, follow
Bonsai-demo, which ships run scripts that pick the
right flags for your hardware.
tg128 is token-generation throughput over 128 generated tokens (the memory-bandwidth-bound, interactive phase); pp512 is prompt-processing throughput over 512 input tokens (the compute-bound phase). Both in tokens/s, measured with llama-bench on these GGUF packs (custom low-bit kernels), at batch size 1 and depth 0 with no vision tower. NVIDIA energy is board power including HBM/GDDR.
| Platform | PQ2_0 TG128 | PQ2_0 PP512 | PQ2_0 J/tok | PTQ1_0 TG128 | PTQ1_0 PP512 | PTQ1_0 J/tok |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RTX 5090 (32 GB) | 129.9 | 3893 | 1.95 | 120.5 | 1805 | 2.15 |
| RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell | 124.8 | 4020 | 2.49 | 117.9 | 1972 | 2.77 |
| H100 SXM (80 GB) | 113.9 | 2830 | 2.69 | 86.9 | 1237 | 3.18 |
| RTX 6000 Ada (48 GB) | 82.8 | 2431 | 2.51 | 90.4 | 1657 | 2.49 |
| RTX 4090 (24 GB) | 81.2 | 3124 | 2.99 | 91.1 | 1645 | 2.58 |
| L40S (48 GB) | 74.4 | 2868 | 3.24 | 81.8 | 1543 | 2.82 |
| A100 SXM (80 GB) | 73.9 | 1328 | 3.43 | 54.7 | 706 | 4.28 |
| L4 (24 GB, 72 W) | 29.8 | 777 | 2.42 | 32.1 | 467 | 2.25 |
| Laptop (Apple M5 Pro, Metal) | 28.1 | 387 | — | — | — | — |
On the laptop the FP16 baseline (~54 GB) does not fit at all — the meaningful statement is not a speedup ratio but that a 27B model runs interactively on an everyday laptop. The measured decode streams ~204 GB/s of weights on the M5 Pro, confirming the memory-bandwidth-dominated profile that the low-bit representation is built to exploit. The M5 Pro figure is measured on a quiet machine; this laptop swings ~4% with background load.
The two packings are a genuine trade rather than a strict ordering. PTQ1_0 moves 17% less weight data per step, but unpacking dense trits costs arithmetic, so it wins on the Ada-generation parts and the L4 — where memory is the binding constraint — and loses on H100, A100, and the Blackwell cards, where batch-1 decode is limited by instruction throughput and launch overhead instead. Prompt processing, being compute-bound, favors PQ2_0 everywhere.
The Apple row carries no per-token energy figure because the two platforms' instrumentation does not enclose the same components: nvidia-smi includes the card's HBM/GDDR, while Apple's powermetrics reports CPU, GPU, and ANE with no DRAM rail. What the measurement does support is absolute draw: the M5 Pro decodes at 27.5 W on the GPU rail and 34.1 W across CPU and GPU, against 300–455 W of board power for the NVIDIA cards above.
Measured on the earlier pre-rotation build and reported pending re-measurement on the current stack (llama.cpp Metal backend):
| Platform | Footprint | TG128 (tok/s) | PP512 (tok/s) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Laptop (Apple M5 Max, Metal) | 7.2 GB | 47.0 | 765 |
| Laptop (Apple M5 Pro, Metal) | 7.2 GB | 28.7 | 393 |
| Laptop (Apple M4 Pro, Metal) | 7.2 GB | 18.0 | 125 |
On the wider M5 Max the model reaches ~47 tok/s; on the M4 Pro, prefill (~125 tok/s) rather than decode is the practical limit for very long prompts.
Evaluated with EvalScope + vLLM on NVIDIA H100 under identical infrastructure, decoding, and scoring, in thinking mode — where the model's full reasoning is exercised and the sub-4-bit collapse of conventional methods is most visible. 14 benchmarks across six skill categories. Bit-widths are true averages; "vs FP16" is relative to the Qwen3.8-27B FP16 reference.
| Variant | True bpw | Footprint | Thinking avg | vs FP16 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Qwen3.8-27B FP16 | 16.0 | 54 GB | 86.32 | 100% |
| Qwen3.8-27B UD-Q4_K_XL ("4-bit") | 5.2 | 17.6 GB | 85.18 | 98.7% |
| Qwen3.8-27B IQ2_XXS ("2-bit") | 2.8 | 9.4 GB | 72.59 | 84.1% |
| Bonsai 2 27B | 1.72 | 5.9 GB | 84.78 | 98.2% |
At 5.9 GB, Bonsai 2 27B outscores the sub-4-bit conventional build by more than twelve points at less than two-thirds of its size, and comes within 0.4 points of UD-Q4_K_XL at a third of its footprint.
The aggregate gap also understates how the conventional builds fail: their degradation is selective, concentrated on the benchmarks that demand sustained chains of reasoning. IQ2_XXS falls to 57.5 on AIME26 and 56.4 on LiveCodeBench while still scoring 88.93 on MMLU-Redux — which is why casual testing misses the collapse. Bonsai 2 holds exactly these benchmarks, scoring 95.83 and 90.07. The previous Bonsai 27B report showed the same pattern on a second model family, Gemma-4-31B, so the collapse is a property of the methods rather than of one base model.
| Category | Benchmarks | FP16 | Bonsai 2 27B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge & reasoning | MMLU-Redux, MuSR | 85.55 | 79.86 |
| Math | GSM8K, MATH-500, AIME25, AIME26 | 97.06 | 96.57 |
| Coding | HumanEval+, MBPP+, LiveCodeBench | 89.07 | 89.42 |
| Instruction following | IFEval, IFBench | 81.25 | 82.66 |
| Agentic / tool calling | BFCL v3 | 76.74 | 74.92 |
| Vision | MMMU-Pro, OCR Bench v2 | 71.36 | 66.19 |
| Overall (14) | 86.32 | 84.78 |
The reasoning backbone comes through intact: math falls only from 97.06 to 96.57, coding is level with the baseline, and instruction following is slightly ahead of it. The remaining gap is concentrated in the most demanding categories — knowledge and reasoning, and vision.
| Benchmark | FP16 | UD-Q4_K_XL | IQ2_XXS | Bonsai 2 27B |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Redux | 91.46 | 93.35 | 88.93 | 89.09 |
| MuSR | 79.63 | 73.01 | 66.99 | 70.63 |
| GSM8K | 97.19 | 96.66 | 89.90 | 96.66 |
| MATH-500 | 99.80 | 99.40 | 84.60 | 98.80 |
| AIME25 | 96.67 | 92.91 | 66.67 | 95.00 |
| AIME26 | 94.58 | 93.00 | 57.50 | 95.83 |
| HumanEval+ | 93.29 | 95.73 | 91.46 | 95.12 |
| MBPP+ | 83.86 | 83.86 | 78.89 | 83.07 |
| LiveCodeBench | 90.05 | 87.96 | 56.40 | 90.07 |
| IFEval | 91.50 | 88.83 | 84.03 | 91.31 |
| IFBench (prompt-loose) | 71.00 | 65.65 | 53.76 | 74.00 |
| BFCL v3 | 76.74 | 75.05 | 70.28 | 74.92 |
| MMMU-Pro | 81.73 | 81.73 | 65.19 | 75.49 |
| OCR Bench v2 | 60.99 | 65.45 | 61.70 | 56.88 |
| Average (14) | 86.32 | 85.18 | 72.59 | 84.78 |
Intelligence density captures the ratio of a model's capability to its deployed size:
D = -log2(1 - score/100) / size_GB
| Variant | Size (GB) | Benchmark avg | Intelligence Density (1/GB) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bonsai 2 27B | 5.80 | 84.78 | 0.469 |
| Ternary Bonsai 27B (previous release) | 5.75 | 80.98 | 0.416 |
| Qwen3.8-27B IQ2_XXS | 9.4 | 72.59 | 0.199 |
| Qwen3.8-27B UD-Q4_K_XL | 17.6 | 85.18 | 0.157 |
| Qwen3.8-27B FP16 | 54 | 86.32 | 0.053 |
Bonsai 2 27B delivers over 2.3x the density of the densest conventional build (IQ2_XXS at 0.199) and nearly 9x FP16 — no conventional build of Qwen3.8-27B exceeds 0.2. Each stored gigabyte is translated into far more usable intelligence. Against the previous Bonsai 27B release, density rises from 0.416 to 0.469, a 12.5% gain; that row is recomputed on these same 14 benchmarks for a like-for-like comparison.
If you use Bonsai 2 27B, please cite:
@techreport{bonsai2_27b,
title = {Bonsai 2 27B: A 27B Ternary Reasoning Model},
author = {Prism ML},
year = {2026},
month = {September},
url = {https://prismml.com}
}
For questions, feedback, or collaboration inquiries: contact@prismml.com
1 commits
1 commits