Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

75% Positive

Analyzed from 4989 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#model#models#qwen#more#https#max#using#pro#open#unsloth

Discussion (200 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

goldenarm•about 7 hours ago
The non-hallucination rate in AA-omniscience is SOTA, better than Opus 4.7, Gemini 3.1 Pro and GPT5.5! Congrats to the team
gslepak•about 5 hours ago
> The non-hallucination rate in AA-omniscience is SOTA

Note that a perfect "non-hallucination rate" is rather meaningless as such tests can contain human hallucinations.

It means the model aligns with the possibly-true, possibly-false beliefs of the group that made the test.

rlt•about 5 hours ago
Well, yes, garbage in garbage out. That's a given and not what's meant by "hallucination" in this context.
tantaman•about 1 hour ago
the observation goes beyond garbage in garbage out. Mainly that we're always operating from some prior and limited understanding. That what may look like a hallucination could be closer to the truth than our current frameworks of understanding allow us to admit. The hermeneutic circle.
jcheng•about 3 hours ago
Here are some examples of the questions in the benchmark. If these are representative, they seem pretty cut and dry. https://artificialanalysis.ai/evaluations/omniscience#exampl...
throawayonthe•about 6 hours ago
referencing this:

https://artificialanalysis.ai/evaluations/omniscience?models...

(had to add it to the chart, wasn't displayed by default. is it the lowest rate in the datasetor no?)

jampekka•about 1 hour ago
This counts only incorrect answers though. A model can get 0% hallucination rate just by refusing to answer all questions.
ffsm8•25 minutes ago
Isn't that precisely the reason why we introduced the term hallucination? Because llms have historically always made up bullshit of they cannot answer directly... If they now nailed this to maybe the model not respond instead of responding incorrectly, then a lot of previously unusable usecases would become feasible.

So I feel like that's exactly the right metric and the way to track it wrt hallucinations.

speed_spread•15 minutes ago
Yes. A model that can answer "I don't know" would be much more trustable than the current used car salesman we have now.
sheepscreek•about 6 hours ago
Truly incredible! Very impressed by their progress. I wonder how much of their own chips did they use for training.
baq•about 5 hours ago
wonder at which level there's a capability state transition? 5%? 1%?
briga•about 5 hours ago
I was getting dangerously close to my weekly Claude Code limit last night so I had Claude set up Qwen3.6 with llama.cpp and OpenCode. Honestly it's a great (free!) alternative to Claude Code--certainly more than good enough for a lot of smaller less complex tasks. I'm excited to try this new version. The fact that open-source models are so close to the frontier is very impressive.
aembleton•3 minutes ago
> Today we introduce Qwen3.7-Max, our latest proprietary model

This is not an open model

pixelesque•about 4 hours ago
Out of interest, what machine and model are you running it on?

I tried the qwen3.6-27b Q6_k GUFF in llama.cpp and LM Studio on my M2 MacBook Pro 32GB machine last week, and I barely get a token a second with either.

What sort of speed should I be expecting?

I tried some of the Llama 3 34b (nous-capybara?) models two years ago with llama.cpp, and I seem to remember getting a few tokens a second then, so not sure if I've got something completely mis-configured, or I just have unreasonable expectations.

Or maybe qwen 3.x is slower for some reason? (Is it mixture of experts?)

I'm not expecting it to be instant, but what I'm currently seeing is not really usable.

gcr•about 3 hours ago
There are two flavors of Qwen 3.6:

- A 27B "dense" model

- A 35B "Mixture of Experts" model, which activates only 3B parameters for each token.

For your hardware, I strongly recommend `unsloth/Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-GGUF:Q4_K_M`. I have an M1 Max with 32GB VRAM from 2021 that can read at ~300-500 tokens/sec and write at ~30 tokens/sec with llama-cpp's default settings, which is plenty fast. The 27B model can read ~70tok/sec and write ~5tok/sec.

The 35B MoE model technically takes slightly more memory but is much faster because it's doing 1/9th the work. It's not quite as "smart", but it's comparable.

flockonus•35 minutes ago
For coding tasks 27B is reported to be much more effective, altho you can probably only run 4b or 5b quants @ this memory.

Recommend https://www.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/ as a great source for this type of discussion.

julianlam•about 3 hours ago
May I ask why the M instead of XL?

Obviously bigger != better but I don't know what the differences are.

pixelesque•about 2 hours ago
Thank you - I'll give that a go!
DiabloD3•14 minutes ago
I recommend sticking with the dense models for both Qwen and Gemma.

On testing I've done on same-quant apples to apples, with F16/F16 (ie, unquantized) kv cache, 35B-A3B underperforms against 27B on anything even remotely complex. But yes, 35B-A3B can be like 3-4x faster on my hardware.

By Qwen's own admission, on any meaningful benchmark (ie, ones that involve logic, math, or tool calling), 27B performs like 122B-10B and 397B-A17B, but 35B-A3B is somewhere between 27B dense and 9B dense.

Also, MTP recently got merged in, so I'd suggest downloading Qwen 3.6 MTP (I assume you get it from unsloth) and updating your copy of llama.cpp, and adding `--spec-type draft-mtp --spec-draft-n-max 2` to your arguments.

https://huggingface.co/unsloth/Qwen3.6-27B-MTP-GGUF/ https://huggingface.co/unsloth/Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-MTP-GGUF/

Also, I recommend not quantizing kv cache, and if you do, only quantize v. Lowering model quant while also lowering context size to fit F16/F16 or F16/Q8_0 massively improves model performance for thinking models. Also, quantizing cache, either k or v, decreases speed by a lot on some hardware.

I have a 24gb 7900xtx, so I can fit >32k F16/F16 context with Qwen3.6-27B, but use unsloth's Q3_K_XL. This performs better than Q(4,5,6)_K_XL with v quantized.

booty•about 1 hour ago

    I tried the qwen3.6-27b Q6_k GUFF in llama.cpp 
    and LM Studio on my M2 MacBook Pro 32GB machine 
    last week, and I barely get a token a second with either.
The fact that it was this slow makes me suspect it's a matter of insufficient free RAM. The entire model needs to fit into RAM (and stay there the entire time) for acceptable performance.

(not sure of exact diagnosis/fix, but definitely look in that direction if you're still having this issue when you give it another shot)

Also, there are two stages - prompt processing, and token generation. Prompt processing is notoriously slow on Apple Silicon unfortunately. If you have large context (which includes system prompts, lots of tools loaded by a harness like Claude Code, OpenCode, etc) it can take minutes for prompt processing before you see the first output token. On the bright side, the tokens are cached between turns, so subsequent turns won't be so bad.

mark_l_watson•about 1 hour ago
You are using Q6 6 bit quantization; on my 32G MacMini I use Q4 and it is faster but when I use it with OpenCode, I set up a task and go outside to walk for ten minutes. Smart, capable, and slow. Still, I love using local models.

EDIT: I run with context wired at 64K

satvikpendem•about 1 hour ago
Check out Unsloth Studio it provides MTP support now which 2x the token generation speed with no loss of accuracy: https://unsloth.ai/docs/models/qwen3.6#mtp-guide
mft_•about 3 hours ago
The 27B model is dense, so is relatively slow. The 35B-A3B model is marginally weaker but being MoE is much faster - like ~4-8x faster in basic benchmarks on my M1 Max.

For comparison, I just ran a couple of quick benchmarks (default settings) with llama-bench:

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B at Q6_K_XL gave 858 t/s pp512 (prompt processing) and 43 t/s tg128 (token generation).

Qwen3.6-27B at Q4_K_XL gave 103 t/s pp512 and 8 t/s tg128.

pixelesque•about 2 hours ago
Thanks for the info.
dzr0001•about 1 hour ago
My token throughput is much better using vLLM-mlx on my M2 ultra than llama.cpp. It might be worth a shot to give it a try.
Figs•about 3 hours ago
27B is the dense one. Try the Qwen3.6-35B-A3B variants for the MoE release. That's what I'm running on a Framework Desktop and I get ~50 tok/s plus or minus a few. The dense one is similarly slow for me -- not sure what to expect on your hardware from the MoE but it should probably be much faster.
pixelesque•about 2 hours ago
Thanks!
KronisLV•about 3 hours ago
> qwen3.6-27b Q6_k

That's the dense model, you probably want a mixture-of-experts (MoE) one.

Here's what you probably want instead: https://huggingface.co/unsloth/Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-GGUF

pixelesque•about 2 hours ago
Thanks!
plufz•about 5 hours ago
Which exact model are you using? And with which parameters and quant? And on what hardware? Are you using any specific MCPs or other tools to optimize performance like context-mode or dynamic context pruning? I’ve used local models a reasonable amount before but I’m just starting out with opencode. Haven’t had great results yet but really want this to work for simpler tasks. My opencode newly installed is also having iterm on 100% cpu in idle. :/
briga•about 5 hours ago
I'm running Qwen3.6:27b Q4 KM on a 4090 and similarly fast CPU and I think 32GB of RAM. Make sure the context window is set to be big enough otherwise the conversation will keep compacting. No special MCP tools set up yet. Qwen is able to do web search out-of-the-box although I think it is getting blocked by anti-bot firewalls--I still need to figure out if I can fix that.
SeriousM•about 2 hours ago
gcr•about 3 hours ago
here's a simple setup to get you started on an Apple M1 Max from 2021 with 32GB VRAM. it will download 20GB of models to `~/.cache/huggingface/hub`, which you can delete when you're done.

  /Users/gcr/llama.cpp/build/bin/llama-server
      -hf unsloth/Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-GGUF:Q4_K_M
      --no-mmproj-offload
      --fit on
      -c 65536 # edit to taste
      --reasoning on --chat-template-kwargs '{"preserve_thinking": true}'
      --sleep-idle-seconds 90 # very aggressive: purge model from vram after this long
      -ctk q8_0 -ctv q8_0 # Optional. Lower memory use, but lower speed. Omit if you can.
I don't recommend ollama or lm-studio. Ollama's in the process of switching from their llama-cpp backend anyway, but their new go framework frequently OOMs and crashes on my hardware. I also don't recommend MLX-based inference backends on this hardware; I've found them to consistently reduce performance, contrary to what I've read online. I've tried all the llama-cpp metal forks, but right now, MTP, TurboQuant, MLX, etc etc etc are too new and just slow things down. It's all dust in the wind still.

For agent harnesses, opencode is okay, as is pi or even Zed's built in agent panel. Claude code "works" with ANTHROPIC_BASE_URL=http://localhost:8080/v1, but is very chatty (the default system prompt burns 20k tokens). Crush (from the charm-bracelet folks) is particularly nice when starting out. I've personally converged on pi-agent under an otherwise-mostly-default setup. You can ask qwen to customize pi or write you an extension which helps a little.

You'll need to add `http://localhost:8080/v1` as an OpenAI-compatible model provider in your coding harness with any API key (doesn't matter) and any model identifier (doesn't matter with llama-cpp).

Note that pi doesn't have permissions. Everything is permitted. The hundred hungry ghosts you've trapped in a jar WILL find a way to delete your home folder someday. That's what Man gets for summoning demons without casting a circle of protection first. Flying too close to the sun etc etc etc

Take backups and then go have fun. Hope this helps.

leonidasv•about 5 hours ago
Qwen Max are usually closed, unfortunately.
wuliwong•about 1 hour ago
Do you have a feel for how it Qwen 3.6 compares to Sonnet 4.6? B/C in reality, that's what we use a lot. If we just use Opus 4.7 for everything code related, we'd have a monthly bill 10-20 times higher than using Sonnet where we can.
briga•4 minutes ago
I would say if Sonnet is a senior engineer, then Qwen3.6 (the 27b model) is probably closer to a junior engineer. Still capable of getting stuff done, just needs more guidance and makes mistakes more often.

Maybe that's underselling it. It is quite a good model and might end up replacing a lot of the work I was sending to Sonnet 4.6.

Also, Sonnet 4.6 is almost certain a much bigger model so the performance differences aren't unexpected.

ecshafer•about 4 hours ago
Qwen3.6 with claude code works great. I get a lot better results with that than opencode and qwen3.6. Claude Code is a great harness, and good harness/tool integration makes a big difference. You just have a settings.json with your ollama setup and the qwen model and you can use it.
growt•about 1 hour ago
Where and how do you run that? I tried it but somehow I always ran out of context or generation was incredibly slow (mbp m4 pro 48gb).
kolinko•about 3 hours ago
As Opus maximalist ;) I was very surprised by the quality if Qwen3.6-27B - trying to figure out how to get it going on RTX 90k now to offload some lighter tasks :)
ttoinou•about 1 hour ago
Which agentic coding tool and how do you make sure you have prefix consistency ?
wouldbecouldbe•about 3 hours ago
This one doesnt seem to be open source though sadly. Using chinese servers is a step to far for me personally
gcr•about 3 hours ago
Look for an open release from the Qwen team in the coming weeks. They like to showcase their proprietary models first, which score higher on benchmarks anyway due to model size.
par•about 3 hours ago
Do you have an opinion on OpenCode vs Aider?
briga•2 minutes ago
I haven't tried Aider yet but perhaps I will. Another one that seems to be getting traction is Pi Coding Agent.
tekacs•about 8 hours ago
As they start to release more proprietary models, I so wish that they partnered with one of the major US hyperscalers to allow using these models through something US-domiciled.

Totally understand why it may not be reasonable or in their best interest (and that the US is _absolutely_ not doing the same reflexively). But it would be lovely to be able to try these out on production workloads in earnest.

embedding-shape•about 8 hours ago
Unless US hyperscalers do the same in reverse, I hope the status quo stays as it is. Either people are happy to share, and the sharing should happen both ways, or US hyperscalers can keep isolating themselves as they've done so far.
adjejmxbdjdn•about 8 hours ago
I do hope The U.S. hyperscalers do the same as well.

In an ideal world U.S. residents would use Chinese AI models and Chinese residents would use U.S. AI models.

Governments in both countries are collecting data for nefarious reasons. But the Chinese government has far less influence on a U.S. resident and vice versa.

We are all better off if our data is collected by a government halfway across the world instead of our own governments which hold incredible amounts of power over us.

adrianN•about 6 hours ago
In an ideal world everybody runs open models on hardware they control.
MintPaw•about 2 hours ago
Interesting point, but I'd always thought the opposite, you're much better protected by the law if you use services from your own country.

If you use a service outside your country, I believe you could have all your code stolen and get hacked/exploited in a way that would be totally legal.

nickdothutton•about 7 hours ago
China is much more interested in waging a campaign against companies that represent the material of the future growth in productivity, exports, and prosperity of the US and her people, than learning about you as an individual. Unless of course you are a Chinese dissident living in the US.
giancarlostoro•about 7 hours ago
It would have been the world we live in if China wasn't involved in so much corporate espionage. I don't even feel comfortable using their open weight models on anything my employer makes, the only time I use Qwen is for greenfield "how good is this?" type of projects, but otherwise, how do I trust that it wont mysteriously hallucinate phoning home?

On the other hand, there's other models where the source is 100% open, the training data is known, and people have reproduced the same model from scratch, so while those trail behind, there's definitely an effort to make models more open and capable.

boomskats•about 7 hours ago
CodingJeebus•about 7 hours ago
> We are all better off if our data is collected by a government halfway across the world instead of our own governments which hold incredible amounts of power over us.

Sure, that is until each government's dataset is interesting enough to the other to facilitate a data-sharing agreement.

There's gotta be an internet "law" that says something like "Eventually, the data you volunteer to a benign 3rd party eventually winds up being used against you by someone". This is short-term thinking at it's finest.

tmoravec•about 5 hours ago
Qwen3.6-Plus is available from Fireworks.
tekacs•about 2 hours ago
Thank you for pointing that out! If 3.7-Max makes its way to Fireworks that'd be a joy.
dchftcs•about 6 hours ago
fireworks hosts Qwen 3.6 Plus, they might also get Qwen 3.7 Plus.
motiw•about 7 hours ago
ChatLLM support QWEN, do you consider this as US safe?
epolanski•about 7 hours ago
US hyperscalers, all of them, are financially invested in the US AI labs and have the incentives to keep the status quo.
0xbadcafebee•about 7 hours ago
I'm more interested in hearing specific reasons why one wouldn't use a Chinese company. Unless you're thinking Alibaba is going to ship chat logs to some government ministry that will then dole out proprietary information to new competitors (which doesn't seem logistically feasible), or you run a human rights organization, it feels a bit like FUD.
vessenes•about 7 hours ago
All this data is accessible to national security agencies; this is true in every country in the world.

China has more integration between intelligence and industry than many western countries, and it does present a higher risk of unwanted “tech transfer” to industry than running on oracle or Google or ms or Amazon does in the US.

DHS has long staffed full time agents in California to deal with foreign IP exfiltration - using qwen is like fast/easy mode for IP exfiltration: why make anyone get a job in your palo alto office when you can just send it to them in Hanzhou?

Upshot - If you have something proprietary you’re working on I would generally advise not to just direct send it to Alibaba.

culi•about 4 hours ago
I highly doubt China has a more sophisticated integration of their intelligence ministries than the USA. The world in which that was true would look very different from our own.
bachmeier•about 6 hours ago
> Unless you're thinking Alibaba is going to ship chat logs to some government ministry

This made me think of a Seinfeld episode: "I didn't know it was possible not to know that."

tekacs•about 7 hours ago
… building and selling a product to US companies that sends company-internal data to Chinese AI providers is not a particularly good way to get people to buy it.

Even if they weren’t individually worried about their proprietary data being shared with Chinese domestic competitors or with government… their audit / security programs likely wouldn’t allow it for a _huge_ range of types of data.

noelsusman•about 6 hours ago
>Unless you're thinking Alibaba is going to ship chat logs to some government ministry that will then dole out proprietary information to new competitors (which doesn't seem logistically feasible)

That's exactly the fear, and why would it not be logistically feasible? The threat is definitely a bit overhyped, but China has a longstanding track record of aggressive corporate espionage.

dpoloncsak•about 6 hours ago
Because my CEO thinks China scary big hacker guys over there
maxdo•26 minutes ago
No opus 4.7 , gpt5.5 , Gemini flash 3.5 in benchmarks
flakiness•about 5 hours ago
I'm using pi agent and love to try qwen models (hosted). What are the good options? The official provider doesn't include Alibaba. Is OpenRouter etc. fast enough?

(As a reference, DeepSeek v4 is severely throttled on these proxy services.)

atilimcetin•about 4 hours ago
I use pi + openrouter (with qwen3.6-max-preview) a lot. I never hit any stability or performance problems yet.
ndom91•about 6 hours ago
Is this one of those ones where they'll drop the huggingface release a week later? Or do we know for sure that this is staying proprietary?
Davidzheng•about 6 hours ago
someone correct if i'm wrong, but I think the max models are usually non-open
sroussey•about 6 hours ago
The plus and max models have never been open as far as I know.
zackangelo•about 6 hours ago
With the 3.5 release, the Plus model was just a rebrand of the open weight 397B. But I suspect that will change going forward. They haven’t released the weights for 3.6 but they did make it available through a few US providers.
tarruda•about 8 hours ago
Looking forward to more open weight releases from Qwen, especially 122B and 397B.
smcleod•about 8 hours ago
Yeah that 60-150b~ range is such a sweet spot for current 'prosumer' hardware, I'd love to see something like a 120b-a14b or there about.
tarruda•about 8 hours ago
I have a 128G mac studio and even 397B was a happy surprise to me due to its high quantization resilience.

I've created a 2.54BPW quant that fit on my hardware with 128k context, 20 tps tg and 200tps pp, while maintaining high scores on many benchmarks: https://huggingface.co/tarruda/Qwen3.5-397B-A17B-GGUF/discus...

smcleod•5 minutes ago
That's impressive getting a 397B down to <110GB~. HF link is broken though!
chrisweekly•about 8 hours ago
Apple store's current options for mac studio seem to max out at 96GB. I'm questioning ROI, esp. given it's not upgradeable. Curious about others' takes on new mac hardware.
ttoinou•about 8 hours ago
better than antirez ds4 ?
KronisLV•about 3 hours ago
There definitely have been some options in the past, cool to see them.

Oddly enough, though, Qwen 3.6 35B A3B and Gemma got some really good reviews, despite being way smaller than any of these ones.

Qwen 3.5, 122B A10B: https://huggingface.co/unsloth/Qwen3.5-122B-A10B-GGUF

Qwen Coder Next, 80B A3B: https://huggingface.co/unsloth/Qwen3-Coder-Next-GGUF

It's kinda weird that DeepSeek V4 Flash is supposed to be 284B A13B, but shows up as 158B in HuggingFace, probably some weird bug: https://huggingface.co/unsloth/DeepSeek-V4-Flash and that's not even just Unsloth but like the official source too https://huggingface.co/deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-V4-Flash (so also doesn't fit the category unless you get a heavily quantized version to run, but cool regardless)

Mistral Medium 3.5 is interesting because it's 128B but dense, so probably too slow for most folks: https://huggingface.co/unsloth/Mistral-Medium-3.5-128B-GGUF

GPT-OSS, 120B A5B: https://huggingface.co/unsloth/gpt-oss-120b-GGUF

gcr•about 8 hours ago
What’s the price point for getting into that sweet spot?

I’m on an M1 Max with 32GB VRAM, so I’m looking forward to the 27B or 35B-A3B models. Is dropping $5k for an RTX 6000 or a DGX Spark really the best option?

smcleod•8 minutes ago
Really right now it's the M5 Max MacBook Pro 128GB, the RTX6000 is a nice card but you'd need more than one of them and you have to have a desktop to suit. The DGX Spark is slow and has pretty limited software support.
tempoponet•about 8 hours ago
Expect to pay $4k-10k

- Your RTX 6000 is closer to $10k now

- Sparks are creeping into the $4-5k range

- AMD Strix are ~3.5k

- Apple depends on chipset and memory. Sweet spot would be 128gb M3 Ultra, probably $6-8k but admittedly haven't been tracking closely. New M5 might come in the fall. You can get a new 128gb M5 Max laptop for ~5-6k today.

- a 4x3090 rig would take $5-6k

Every platform has tradeoffs, but it's mostly ecosystem, memory bandwidth, and power consumption. They're all slow. The best option is likely to rent hardware on Runpod. The RIO on self-hosting is very low unless you have a specific need or you're ok treating it as a hobby.

tarruda•about 8 hours ago
> What’s the price point for getting into that sweet spot?

In October/2024 I got my Mac studio M1 ultra with 128G, IIRC it was ~$2500. With recent prices explosion, it has certainly gotten more expensive. https://frame.work/ is selling 128G strix halo mainboard for $2700, but you have to add storage and case.

ttoinou•about 8 hours ago
M5 Max 64GB (sweet spot) or 128GB (only 1000 USD, better to keep it for the future) more are the best quality price ratio, future proof, reliable, resellable and flexible workloads. Harder to use as a server might be the only drawback
embedding-shape•about 8 hours ago
If I could find a RTX Pro 6000 for $5K I'd definitively grab it, I'm running RedHatAI/Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-NVFP4 on one (I had to pay closer to $10K for it though) with 260K context and it's a blast! ds4 by antirez also works well, even IQ2XXS seems to work relatively well but Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-NVFP4 is both faster and higher quality responses (at least for coding and translations which I use them mostly for).
anonym29•about 8 hours ago
Strix Halo at $2k with similar TG and about half the PP of DGX Spark was a pretty good deal IMO, especially considering it's also a full x86 system... 16c/32t Zen 5, 40 CU RDNA 3.5, 128 GB unified memory at ~220 GB/s real-world speeds (256 GB/s theoretical) - that runs full tilt at 140W in performance mode and idles at ~10W.

Unfortunately, the prices rose on these a lot, but unevenly. Beelink GTR 9 Pro is $4400, Framework Desktop is ~$3500, for what is basically the exact same mainboard as a Bosgame M5 for $2800.

Apple's M5 Max is another attractive option. Apple silicon traditionally had great MBW and was good at TG, but struggled with PP, but the new neural engines in those GPU cores have made a big difference in a good way here.

Gorgon Halo is rumored for June announcement with Q4'26 release with basically +100 MHz clocks on Strix Halo, LPDDR5X-8533 instead of LPDDR5X-8000, but more importantly, 192 GB max instead of 128 GB.

I'd say it's better to wait for Gorgon Halo than to grab Strix Halo now. However, Medusa Halo, rumored for H2'27, is slated to have up to 26c Zen 6 (heterogeneous cores - kinds funny that AMD is heading towards these as Intel retreats from them), 48 CU of RDNA 5 instead of 40 CU RDNA 3.5, and a 384 bit bus w/ LPDDR6, which should make 256 GB at more like ~490-600 GB/s MBW, which will really make Strix and Gorgon Halo obsolete.

Also worth keeping an eye out for Serpent Lake (intel CPU + nvidia iGPU on a single board with unified memory, rumored for 2028-2029 iirc), and on the 160 GB Crescent Island Intel dGPU.

ricardobayes•about 4 hours ago
Personally even more a lower quantized model like 9B.
mixtureoftakes•about 8 hours ago
I'm more excited for qwen3.7 9b and 72b, these are usually so good for their size
guitcastro•about 8 hours ago
I am still waiting for qwem image-edit 2.0 open weight
Pxtl•about 6 hours ago
Ouch. I'm just getting into tinkering with these things - mine is running on a vanilla gaming desktop with a 12gb 3060 and 32gb of ram. Even going above Qwen 9B risks completely locking up the machine.
goyozi•about 10 hours ago
These are very good numbers. I still don’t get why they don’t compare against latest competitor versions in these posts, it’s not like we’re all not going to notice.
NiloCK•about 8 hours ago
I find it forgivable if it's within minor version bump. (NB that x.5 is now a defacto major-version bump for LLMs for whatever reason).

Even with LLMs, posts like this don't just fall out of a coconut tree. If you have a set of target benchmarks for your own model, then keeping "the set" of side-by-side comparable models is its own maintenance headache.

Aurornis•about 8 hours ago
I think the argument is that trying to suggest that they’re close to N months from SOTA.

Realistically I assume they hope readers don’t notice the fine details.

The Qwen models are great for open weights but for every past release they haven’t performed as well as the benchmarks in my experience. They’re optimizing for benchmark numbers because they know it works.

epolanski•about 7 hours ago
> Realistically I assume they hope readers don’t notice the fine details.

The pool of people reading such articles while ignoring such details can't be big.

Aurornis•about 7 hours ago
I disagree. Most people skim articles, not read them deeply.

On Hacker News I wonder if most people even opened the article at all most times.

htrp•about 8 hours ago
I think its part of the expectation setting (with a side of we did our distillation/ eval harness on a specific model).

if they say it's 4.7 comparable, it anchors that into your head as the model to evaluate against.

hmokiguess•about 9 hours ago
this puzzles me too, I want to know
beydogan•about 8 hours ago
honestly, initial version of Opus-4.6 was much better than whatever we are being served right now as 4.7. If it performs same level to that, i'm totally willing to switch.
hypercube33•about 7 hours ago
4.6 was an awful experience the month I used it right after launch where it didn't ask anything just made assumptions and went on its merry way. 4.5 and 4.7 don't do that for me but 4.7 eats my quota for breakfast so I've been avoiding using it because I like to have it for more than an hour a day.
goyozi•about 6 hours ago
I feel like I had the best and worst ~month experience on 4.6. Initially when it came out, it seemed to ask good questions and genuinely do well on complex tasks. From about mid-March it was absolutely abysmal, it seemed to assume the stupidest answer/angle for everything and make weird mistakes. 4.7 seems decent so far but usage hurts - at some point my company switched me to standard seat and I used up 80% of my session usage in 1 prompt. I got my premium seat back since but I think pro/standard plan + opus 4.7 is unusable for daily driving.
verdverm•about 5 hours ago
That experience is also likely tied to the claude harness around the model, and not being as tuned right after model release. They iterate on this and different models need different words (unfortunately...).
maelito•about 8 hours ago
Marketing.
eleventen•about 1 hour ago
Checking openrouter (it's not available yet) and, uh, what's up with the spike in Qwen usage from early april here? https://openrouter.ai/qwen

Is this normal humans kicking the tires on a new model, or a few whales doing serious benchmarks?

d2kx•about 1 hour ago
Qwen 3.6 Plus released and they offered it for free
spaceman_2020•about 1 hour ago
personally seen a lot of people switch to Kimi and Qwen after Opus 4.7. Kimi 2.6 feels like Opus 4.6 which, to me, was a great model for 98% of coding tasks
wolttam•about 1 hour ago
Frontier: Need it done quick and I'm willing to pay.

Open-weight: Good enough for the majority of tasks, and I'm willing to spend a bit more time and effort steering towards my desired result.

jdw64•about 6 hours ago
QWEN really hits the sweet spot it's cheap, fast, and actually good.
eddyaipt•about 7 hours ago
The pattern I trust most is adding a small verification artifact after every external action. Agents usually fail from silent state drift faster than from lack of reasoning depth.
_boffin_•about 6 hours ago
Can you go into more depth about this
Advertisement
bratao•about 9 hours ago
It is super strange that all last (3?) releases they keep comparing older models such as Opus-4.6.
vessenes•about 8 hours ago
Some of it’s probably timing. Some of it is wanting to look good. That said, I just went to the claw-eval site, and neither 4.7 nor 5.5 from oAI are listed on the benchmarks. So there’s also just the time from others to get benchmarking done and published.
varispeed•about 7 hours ago
Opus-4.6 was probably the best model so far before it got nerfed. 4.7 is nowhere near experience I had. In fact I stopped using it completely because more often than not its output is just dumber than local models.
leonidasv•about 5 hours ago
Same here. Can't stand 4.7.
solenoid0937•about 3 hours ago
Opus 4.6 was never nerfed, that's FUD. There were harness-level problems that were fixed.

4.7 is much better. But perception is a funny thing, once you think something is bad you start looking for it everywhere.

dyauspitr•about 6 hours ago
Because these can’t compete with the SoTA but they’re close.
bsenftner•about 8 hours ago
Any reports from people using their coding agent(s)?
rayboy1995•about 7 hours ago
I'm running Qwen 3.6 27B Q5 K M GGUF on a Tesla P40 and koboldcpp using pi.dev as the harness, I gotta say I am impressed. Took some setup and configuring but I already have some code it has made commited and pushed. It can be slow on my hardware at >50k tokens, but the fact I bought this one P40 for like $150 back when the LLM trend started I can't complain. (I have a second one too but I couldn't physically fit the card in my server unfortunately.)

The setup I had to do was important and I had to compile koboldcpp with a few special params for my hardware, I mostly just had Claude figure it out. I don't remember everything I did now but it was very slow and would often stop mid task, it seems it was mostly a parsing issue. It made the model seem broken/dumb, but once I had all that settled I actually am able to use this how I use Claude Code. Disclaimer, I am pretty explicit with requirements, I imagine this fails more when you leave it to figure out things on its own but for my flow its pretty rad.

Currently setting it up as an automated agent now to pull Trello cards, create PRs for them, and move the card to be reviewed.

Command I am using to run: python koboldcpp.py \ --port 61514 --quiet --multiuser --gpulayers 999 --contextsize 262144 --quantkv 2 \ --usecublas normal --threads 4 --jinja --jinja_tools --jinja_kwargs '{"enable_thinking":true, "preserve_thinking":false}' \ --skiplauncher --model /data/models/Qwen3.6-27B-Q5_K_M.gguf --smartcache 5

lostmsu•about 5 hours ago
Qwen recommends to preserve_thinking: true for agentic/coding workloads.
rayboy1995•about 3 hours ago
Thanks!! I had disabled that previously while debugging, I can confirm this is helping accuracy from what I can tell so far. (And speed since the cache is preserved more often!)
vibe42•about 7 hours ago
I'm using the pi-mono coding agent (open source, free) without any extensions and very simple prompts. The 3.6 27B model (BF16, 250k context) uses 67GB VRAM on an RTX PRO 9000.

It's very capable on almost any coding task I've thrown at it, and very good for easy-to-medium hard scripts, new code bases.

It struggles on some complex tasks in larger code bases, e.g. using to debug and fix bugs in llama.cpp it gets close to working code but often introduces errors. For such tasks its still very useful as a search/explore tool and drafting fixes.

aliljet•about 4 hours ago
Where can a user reasonably host this in an affordable way to access the local LLM revolution?
satvikpendem•about 1 hour ago
Unsloth Studio with its MTP support: https://unsloth.ai/docs/models/qwen3.6#mtp-guide
julianlam•about 3 hours ago
Try llama.cpp and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B

Good balance of intelligence and speed.

plagiarist•about 3 hours ago
I think their Max models are far bigger than fits on consumer hardware. People are typically using Apple, AMD Halo, or dGPUs if/when they do smaller versions. Those are all varying degrees of "affordable."
XCSme•about 8 hours ago
Any info on pricing and latency?
mchusma•about 4 hours ago
I've looked like a dozen places, I don't see anything. :(
xiaoluolyg•about 5 hours ago
congrats to qwen teams, remarkable
hmaddipatla•about 6 hours ago
The tokenomics and value for capability, context and latency look like they could deliver super competitive offer - what would it take for you to switch??
cft•about 4 hours ago
Downloading this and cancelling Google Antigravity Pro at the same time:

I had a Google Pro account that I inherited from buying a Pixel 9 XL - it's free for a year after a flagship Pixel phone purchase. After a year they started charging for it, and i tolerated it, because Flash was usable in Antigravity for dumb auxiliary tasks that I did not want to waste GPT/Opus on. It had a separate generous quota from Gemini 3.1 Pro. Now with Flash 3.5 they combined the quotas with Pro, such that on a Google pro account you can work 4-5 hours per week in Flash. And by the way, 3.1 Pro is useless for programming, compared to Codex/Opus

bel8•about 3 hours ago
same boat. Google Pro AI quota became barely useful for anything meaningful.

I think they envision Pro plan as "just a taste of AI, enough to lure folks into the Ultra plan" but that won't work for me when Codex is half the price and DeepSeek 4 Flash is 1/10 of their price per task.

So I'll downgrade just enough to keep my Google Drive space. And use DeepSeek 4 as workhorse plus Codex or Copilot for advanced stuff.

cft•about 2 hours ago
How do you use DeepSeek 4 Flash? Via a cli?
bel8•about 2 hours ago
I use their VSCode extension:

https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=sst-dev....

It adds a button to VSCode to open a tab with opencode loaded. It's a bit better than just opening the CLI because it has some vscode integration.

With their $10/mo opencode go plan: https://opencode.ai/go

For my use it's about endless use of DS4 Flash on high setting. I find high better than max because it's less chatty.

The best thing is the speed. So many tokens per second.

edit: This is how it looks in action https://i.imgur.com/RNDXr07.png

indigodaddy•about 5 hours ago
Is it multimodal/vision?
joshjob42•about 4 hours ago
I really like what Qwen are doing, and a lot of these Chinese labs, but until I can ask their models what happened during the student protests in 1989 or why human rights groups are upset about the Uighurs and the model gives me a straight answer I'm just not able to trust these models with anything of substance.
arcanemachiner•about 4 hours ago
Just download a heretic abliterated versionof the model you want to use. I believe those are the current state of the art for uncensored models.
mynameisbilly•about 4 hours ago
This is silly. Would you perform the same test against Western models in asking them whether Israel is a genocidal apartheid state? It'll give you the same roundabout explanations and "some say no some say yes" responses that you'll get from asking Qwen about Uighurs or the protests of 1989.
jaynetics•about 3 hours ago
hey Qwen, how many civilians were killed on Tiananmen Square in 1989?

> Oops! There was an issue connecting to Qwen3.6-Plus.

> Content Security Warning: The input text data may contain inappropriate content.

hey ChatGPT, how many civilians were killed in Gaza in the war since 2023?

> [one page of estimates from local and international sources with links]

esafak•about 7 hours ago
Does anyone have experience with the Alibaba Cloud Model Studio that serves these qwen models?
Advertisement
howmayiannoyyou•about 8 hours ago
I can't bring myself to use any model that trains or sends telemetry back to my country's primary competitor/adversary. I don't care how much money is saved.
Mashimo•about 8 hours ago
That is understandable. Just don't do it. No need to announce it.
throawayonthe•about 4 hours ago
assuming that country is the united states, why not? seems like an honourable thing to do if anything, lol
mynameisbilly•about 4 hours ago
Yeah, I prefer my data to be used and trained by the very trustworthy and benevolent tech oligarchs in my home country.
deepfriedbits•about 4 hours ago
On some level, it's the lesser of two evils. Both do suck as options, I agree.
plagiarist•about 3 hours ago
The Shanghai government surveillance drones are mobile, whereas the Flock government surveillance cameras are stationary! USA FTW, liberty and justice for all
InsideOutSanta•about 8 hours ago
As somebody in Europe, uh, that doesn't leave many options.
czottmann•about 2 hours ago
Look around for EU LLM routers. There are some, but none are as big as OpenRouter. Still, Cortecs (Austria) is quite good and offers a couple of recent models through its EU-based providers. Zero data retention, GDPR compliant, etc. Really nice.

https://cortecs.ai/serverlessModels

avazhi•about 7 hours ago
This is the current European modus operandi: virtue signal and cry about tech that other countries produce, pass local laws that limit its use in their countries even though they have no viable local alternatives, brag amongst themselves about decoupling from US and Chinese tech, and then look on wistfully as the rest of the world moves on without a single fuck given.

Europe's sense of superiority and actual global importance/relevance is assbackwards.

deaux•about 6 hours ago
> as the rest of the world moves on without a single fuck given.

Hilarious thing to say when half this comment section is Americans giving so much of a fuck that they consider China-adjacent hosted models unusable due to the supposed risks. If what you were saying was true then those pragmatic Americans would just use whatever is most effective.

dfansteel•about 8 hours ago
Can anyone check its knowledge base for me? I’m honestly not able to run it and the Qwen models I can run censor information critical towards the Chinese government.

Tiananmen Square is the first place to start.

wren6991•about 3 hours ago
Qwen models know about Tiananmen Square but they are post-trained to refuse to talk about it. The decensored versions will happily chatter away about it.

Similarly, try talking to Nemotron about Epstein and see how quickly it shuts down.

Mashimo•about 8 hours ago
> I’m honestly not able to run it

What do you mean? This is not self hosted, it's closed source. And any website that targets China or is hosted in China will probably censor Tiananmen Square.

dfansteel•26 minutes ago
My computer lacks the ram.
polski-g•about 6 hours ago
There is no reason why they couldn't license the model to Friendli/Fireworks/etc and have it hosted in the US to alleviate this concern.
SR2Z•about 6 hours ago
The reason is to create domestic demand for Chinese AI chips so they can eventually be free of NVIDIA.
Mashimo•about 6 hours ago
I don't know about this model specifically, but other china models did not have the limitation. It was purely on the hosted end, tacked on as a self check while the text was generating. Did that change?