Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Qwen3-Max-Thinking

qwen.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 450 posts

Re: Qwen3-Max-Thinking

#41

Post by segmondy »

epolanski wrote: post #22
isusmelj wrote: post #7

I just wanted to check whether there is any information about the pricing. Is it the same as Qwen Max? Also, I noticed on the pricing page of Alibaba Cloud that the models are significantly cheaper within mainland China. Does anyone know why? https://www.alibabacloud.com/help/en/model-studio/models?spm...

I guess they want to partially subsidize local developers? Maybe that's a requirement from whoever funds them, probably public money.

Seriously? Does Netflix or Spotify cost the same everywhere around the world? They earn less and their buying power is less.

Re: Qwen3-Max-Thinking

#42

Post by frankc »

throwaw12 wrote: post #2

Aghhh, I wished they release a model which outperforms Opus 4.5 in agentic coding in my earlier comments, seems I should wait more. But I am hopeful

One of the ways the chinese companies are keeping up is by training the models on the outputs of the American fronteir models. I'm not saying they don't innovate in other ways, but this is part of how they caught up quickly. However, it pretty much means they are always going to lag.

Re: Qwen3-Max-Thinking

#43

Post by miroljub »

xcodevn wrote: post #40

I'm not familiar with these open-source models. My bias is that they're heavily benchmaxxing and not really helpful in practice. Can someone with a lot of experience using these, as well as Claude Opus 4.5 or Codex 5.2 models, confirm whether they're actually on the same level? Or are they not that useful in practice? P.S. I realize Qwen3-Max-Thinking isn't actually an open-weight model (only accessible via API), but…

I don't know where your impression about benchmaxxing comes from. Why would you assume closed models are not benchmaxxing? Being closed and commercial, they have more incentive to fake it than the open models.

Re: Qwen3-Max-Thinking

#44

Post by orangebread »

xcodevn wrote: post #40

I'm not familiar with these open-source models. My bias is that they're heavily benchmaxxing and not really helpful in practice. Can someone with a lot of experience using these, as well as Claude Opus 4.5 or Codex 5.2 models, confirm whether they're actually on the same level? Or are they not that useful in practice? P.S. I realize Qwen3-Max-Thinking isn't actually an open-weight model (only accessible via API), but…

I haven't used qwen3 max yet, but my gut feeling is that they are benchmaxxing. If I were to rate the open models worth using by rank it'd be:

- Minimax

- GLM

- Deepseek

Re: Qwen3-Max-Thinking

#46

Post by segmondy »

xcodevn wrote: post #40

I'm not familiar with these open-source models. My bias is that they're heavily benchmaxxing and not really helpful in practice. Can someone with a lot of experience using these, as well as Claude Opus 4.5 or Codex 5.2 models, confirm whether they're actually on the same level? Or are they not that useful in practice? P.S. I realize Qwen3-Max-Thinking isn't actually an open-weight model (only accessible via API), but…

You are not familiar, yet you claim a bias. Bias based on what? I use pretty much just open-source models for the last 2 years. I occasionally give OpenAI and Anthropic a try to see how good they are. But I stopped supporting them when they started calling for regulation of open models. I haven't seen folks get ahead of me with closed models. I'm keeping up just fine with these free open models.

Re: Qwen3-Max-Thinking

#47

Post by segmondy »

orangebread wrote: post #44
xcodevn wrote: post #40

I'm not familiar with these open-source models. My bias is that they're heavily benchmaxxing and not really helpful in practice. Can someone with a lot of experience using these, as well as Claude Opus 4.5 or Codex 5.2 models, confirm whether they're actually on the same level? Or are they not that useful in practice? P.S. I realize Qwen3-Max-Thinking isn't actually an open-weight model (only accessible via API), but…

I haven't used qwen3 max yet, but my gut feeling is that they are benchmaxxing. If I were to rate the open models worth using by rank it'd be: - Minimax - GLM - Deepseek

Your ranking is way off, Deepseek crushes Minimax and GLM. It's not even a competition.

Re: Qwen3-Max-Thinking

#49

Post by USAyesUSA »

lysace wrote: post #24

I tried it at https://chat.qwen.ai/ . Prompt: "What happened on Tiananmen square in 1989?" Reply: "Oops! There was an issue connecting to Qwen3-Max. Content Security Warning: The input text data may contain inappropriate content."

[dead]

Re: Qwen3-Max-Thinking

#50

Post by Erlangen »

lysace wrote: post #24

I tried it at https://chat.qwen.ai/ . Prompt: "What happened on Tiananmen square in 1989?" Reply: "Oops! There was an issue connecting to Qwen3-Max. Content Security Warning: The input text data may contain inappropriate content."

It even censors contents related to GDR. I asked a question about travel restriction mentioned in Jenny Erpenbeck's novel Kairos, it displayed a content security warning as well.
Post reply on HN