Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

74% Positive

Analyzed from 1213 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#model#qwen#models#opus#flamingo#pelican#benchmark#training#https#test

Discussion (53 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

ericpauleyabout 4 hours ago
Going to have to disagree on the backup test. Opus flamingo is actually on the pedals and seat with functional spokes and beak. In terms of adherence to physical reality Qwen is completely off. To me it's a little puzzling that someone would prefer the Qwen output.

I'd say the example actually does (vaguely) suggest that Qwen might be overfitting to the Pelican.

wongarsuabout 2 hours ago
Qwen's flamingo is artistically far more interesting. It's a one-eyed flamingo with sunglasses and a bow tie who smokes pot. Meanwhile Opus just made a boring, somewhat dorky flamingo. Even the ground and sky are more interesting in Qwen's version

But in terms of making something physically plausible, Opus certainly got a lot closer

kmacdoughabout 2 hours ago
Given adherence is a more significant practical barrier, it's probably the better signal. That is, if we decide too look for signal here.
tecoholicabout 1 hour ago
Even the first one - Qwen added extra details in the background sure. But he Pelican itself is a stork with a bent beak and it's feet is cut off it's legs. While impressive for a local model, I don't think it's a winner.
mejutocoabout 1 hour ago
Did you see opus bike though for that same test? I know it is about the flamingo but that is bad.
irthomasthomas33 minutes ago
It's a 3B model. It should not be this close. Debating their artistic qualities is missing the point.
mentalgearabout 3 hours ago
I understand the 'fun factor' but at this point I really wonder what this pelican still proofs ? I mean, providers certainly could have adapted for it if they wanted, and if you want to test how well a model adapts to potential out of distribution contexts, it might be more worthwhile to mix different animals with different activity types (a whale on a skateboard) than always the same.
simonwabout 3 hours ago
That's why I did the flamingo on a unicycle.

For a delightful moment this morning I thought I might have finally caught a model provider cheating by training for the pelican, but the flamingo convinced me that wasn't the case.

furyofantaresabout 2 hours ago
It is completely wild to me that you prefer Qwen's flamingo. I think it's really bad and Opus' is pretty good.
simonwabout 2 hours ago
The Opus one doesn't even have a bowtie.
akavelabout 2 hours ago
r/LocalLlama is now doing a horse in a racing car:

https://redd.it/1slz38i

prodigycorpabout 3 hours ago
To me the opus flamingo is waaaay better than the qwen one. qwen has the better pelican, though.
dude250711about 3 hours ago
Is a flamingo on a unicycle not merely a special case of a pelican on a bicycle?
stephbookabout 1 hour ago
They're certainly aware of the test, but a turtle doing a kickflip on a skateboard? I seriously doubt they train their models for that.

https://x.com/JeffDean/status/2024525132266688757

If anything, the disastrous Opus4.7 pelican shows us they don't pelicanmaxx

bitwize43 minutes ago
I think I found the leaked Claude Mythos version of the turtle benchmark: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l82XWTKLZuk
BoorishBears43 minutes ago
This is a gag that's long outlived its humor, but we're in a space so driven by hype there are people who will unironically take some signal from it. They'll swear up and down they know it's for fun, but let a great pelican come out and see if they don't wave it as proof the model is great alongside their carwash test.
f33d517330 minutes ago
I don't know what such a demo would prove in the first place. LLMs are good at things that they have been trained on, or are analogues of things they have been trained on. SVG generation isn't really an analogue to any task that we usually call on LLMs to do. Early models were bad at it because their training only had poor examples of it. At a certain point model companies decided it would be good PR to be halfway decent at generating SVGs, added a bunch of examples to the finetuning, and voila. They still aren't good enough to be useful for anything, and such improvements don't lead them to be good at anything else - likely the opposite - but it makes for cute demos.

I guess initially it would have been a silly way to demonstrate the effect of model size. But the size of the largest models stopped increasing a while ago, recent improvements are driven principally by optimizing for specific tasks. If you had some secret task that you knew they weren't training for then you could use that as a benchmark for how much the models are improving versus overfitting for their training set, but this is not that.

simonw28 minutes ago
Comparing the SVGs I got for GPT-5.4, -mini and -nano at the different thinking levels was surprisingly interesting: https://simonwillison.net/2026/Mar/17/mini-and-nano/ (bottom of post)
wood_spiritabout 2 hours ago
Such a disconnect from the minutes I’ve lost and given up on Gemini trying to get it to update a diagram in a slide today. The one shot joke stuff is great but trying to say “that is close but just make this small change” seems impossible. It’s the gap between toy and tool.
jbellisabout 3 hours ago
For coding, qwen 3.6 35b a3b solved 11/98 of the Power Ranking tasks (best-of-two), compared to 10/98 for the same size qwen 3.5. So it's at best very slightly improved and not at all in the class of qwen 3.5 27b dense (26 solved) let alone opus (95/98 solved, for 4.6).
kristianpabout 1 hour ago
This has similar problems to swe bench in that models are likely trained on the same open source projects that the benchmark uses.

https://blog.brokk.ai/introducing-the-brokk-power-ranking/

yorwba26 minutes ago
If all models are trained on the benchmark data, you cannot extrapolate the benchmark scores to performance on unseen data, but the ranking of different models still tells you something. A model that solves 95/98 benchmark problems may turn out much worse than that in real life, but probably not much worse than the one that only solved 11/98 despite training on the benchmark problems.

This doesn't hold if some models trained on the benchmark and some didn't, but you can fix this by deliberately fine-tuning all models for the benchmark before comparing them. For more in-depth discussion of this, see https://mlbenchmarks.org/11-evaluating-language-models.html#...

__natty__about 2 hours ago
You compare tiny modal for local inference vs propertiary, expensive frontier model. It would be more fair to compare against similar priced model or tiny frontier models like haiku, flash or gpt nano.
javawizardabout 2 hours ago
Not when the article they're commenting on was doing literally exactly the same thing.
ericdabout 2 hours ago
Eh it’s important perspective, lest someone start thinking they can drop $5k on a laptop and be free of Anthropic/OpenAI. Expensive lesson.
VHRangerabout 2 hours ago
That's not surprising; Opus & Sonnet have been regressing on many non-coding tasks since about the 4.1 release in our testing
sailingcodeabout 2 hours ago
I'm an iguana and need to wash my bicycle in the carwash. Shall I walk or take the bus?
layer8about 1 hour ago
You should have the pelican ride it to the carwash and wash it for you.
DANmodeabout 2 hours ago
That’s a long walk! You should reserve a ride with $PartnerRideshareCo.
bottlepalmabout 1 hour ago
I really wish they spent some time training for computer use. This model is incapable of finding anywhere near the correct x,y coordinate of a simple object in a picture.
whywhywhywhy26 minutes ago
How can this be a test when every lab is testing against it... You spam this every model release but it's asinine.
simonw17 minutes ago
If they're testing against it why do most of their attempts suck so much?
comandillosabout 4 hours ago
I've been using Qwen3.5-35B-A3B for a bit via open code and oMLX on M5 Max with 128Gb of RAM and I have to say it's impressively good for a model of that size. I've seen a huge jump in the quality of the tool calls and how well it handles the agentic workflow.
iibabout 3 hours ago
This is about the newly release Qwen3.6. Just wanted to make sure you got that correctly.
justinbaker84about 1 hour ago
I love this benchmark!
Advertisement
aliljetabout 2 hours ago
I'm really curious about what competes with Claude Code to drive a local LLM like Qwen 3.6?
smashedabout 2 hours ago
OpenCode?
refulgentis42 minutes ago
I liked both of Opus' better, it was very illuminating, in both cases I didn't see the error's Simon saw and wondered why Simon skipped over the errors I saw.

Pelican: saturated!

nba456_34 minutes ago
Good reminder that these tests have always been useless, even before they started training on it.
lofaszvanittabout 2 hours ago
That Qwen flamingo on the unicycle is actually quite good. A work of art.
throwuxiytayqabout 2 hours ago
I literally cannot believe that people are wasting their time doing this either as a benchmark or for fun. After every single language model release, no less.
recursive24 minutes ago
Fun is so un-productive. Everyone doing things for "fun" is going to be sorry when they look back and realizes they were wasting time having a "good time" rather than optimizing their KPIs.
sharkjacobsabout 2 hours ago
It feels like the results stopped being interesting a little while ago but the practice has become part of simonw's brand, and it gives him something to post even when there is nothing interesting to say about another incremental improvement to a model, and so I don't imagine he'll stop.
stephbookabout 1 hour ago
I, for one, expected progress. Uneven, sometimes delayed, but ever increasing progress.

But that Opus pelican?

segmondyabout 1 hour ago
I can't believe you're such a party pooper. It's exciting times, the silly things do matter!
simon_is_geniusabout 1 hour ago
Great analysis
jedisct1about 2 hours ago
I'm currently testing Qwen3.6-35B-A3B with https://swival.dev for security reviews.

It's pretty good at finding bugs, but not so good at writing patches to fix them.

JaggerFooabout 2 hours ago
FYI, using a 128GB M5 MacBook Pro, sourced from another article by the author.
19qUqabout 3 hours ago
How about switching to MechaStalin on a tricycle? It gets kind of boring.
mvanbaakabout 2 hours ago
boring ... the ways all the models fail at a simple task never gets boring to me