Live data from Hacker News

I ran Gemma 4 as a local model in Codex CLI

blog.danielvaughan.com

51–60 of 123 posts

Re: I ran Gemma 4 as a local model in Codex CLI

#51

I don't really have the hardware to try it out, but I'm curious to see how Qwen3.5 stacks up against Gemma 4 in a comparison like this. Especially this model that was fine tuned to be good at tool calling that has more than 500k downloads as of this moment: https://huggingface.co/Jackrong/Qwen3.5-27B-Claude-4.6-Opus-...

[dead]

Re: I ran Gemma 4 as a local model in Codex CLI

#53
post #52

I'm suprised folks are having such great coding experiences. Using Gemma-4 on a moderately complex code base, it utterly flailed and gave a half baked implementation.

I mean OP had them code something called "parse_csv_summary", which sounds like something a junior dev can whip up in an hour or so, since CSV manipulation in Python is one of the most basic tasks you can encounter in the problem space.

Banking, scientific data analysis, sales, etc. Everything uses and manipulates csvs.

So it was firmly in the bottom quartile of difficulty - and there LLMs actually do quite well.

Re: I ran Gemma 4 as a local model in Codex CLI

#54

I don't really have the hardware to try it out, but I'm curious to see how Qwen3.5 stacks up against Gemma 4 in a comparison like this. Especially this model that was fine tuned to be good at tool calling that has more than 500k downloads as of this moment: https://huggingface.co/Jackrong/Qwen3.5-27B-Claude-4.6-Opus-...

I'm just some guy on hackernews, but I actually did try this on my DGX Spark. I went back to Gemma 4 after a few rounds. My orchestration model kept having to send the Qwen model back to fix mistakes that Gemma wouldn't have made. I wound up with less working code per hour due to the mistakes.

Technically, I use OpenWebUI with Ollama, so I used the weights below, but it should be the same.

https://ollama.com/kwangsuklee/Qwen3.5-27B-Claude-4.6-Opus-R...

Re: I ran Gemma 4 as a local model in Codex CLI

#55
post #24

I don't really have the hardware to try it out, but I'm curious to see how Qwen3.5 stacks up against Gemma 4 in a comparison like this. Especially this model that was fine tuned to be good at tool calling that has more than 500k downloads as of this moment: https://huggingface.co/Jackrong/Qwen3.5-27B-Claude-4.6-Opus-...

It's rather surprising that a solo dev can squeeze more performance out of a model with rather humble resources vs a frontier lab. I'm skeptical of claims that such a fine-tuned model is "better" -- maybe on certain benchmarks, but overall? FYI the latest iteration of that finetune is here: https://huggingface.co/Jackrong/Qwopus3.5-27B-v3

> can squeeze more performance out of a model with rather humble resources vs a frontier lab.

That's the idea behind distillation. They are finetuning it on traces produced by opus. This is poor man's distillation (and the least efficient) and it still works unreasonably well for what it costs.

Re: I ran Gemma 4 as a local model in Codex CLI

#56
post #12

> The finding I did not expect: model quality matters more than token speed for agentic coding. I'm really surprised how that was not obvious. Also, instead of limiting context size to something like 32k, at the cost of ~halving token generation speed, you can offload MoE stuff to the CPU with --cpu-moe.

[deleted]

Re: I ran Gemma 4 as a local model in Codex CLI

#57
"The reason I had not done this before is that local models could not call tools. "

Rubbish, we have been calling tools locally for 2 years, and it's very false that gemma3 scored under 7% in tool calling. Hell, I was getting at least 75% tool calling with llama3.3

Re: I ran Gemma 4 as a local model in Codex CLI

#58
post #10

For coding it makes no sense to use any quantization worse than Q6_K, from my experience. More quantized models make more mistakes and if for text processing it still can be fine, for coding it's not.

I don't think most people realize that. Quality of tokens beats quantity of token. I always tell folks to go as high a quant as you can only go lower if you just don't have the memory capacity.

Re: I ran Gemma 4 as a local model in Codex CLI

#59

I don't really have the hardware to try it out, but I'm curious to see how Qwen3.5 stacks up against Gemma 4 in a comparison like this. Especially this model that was fine tuned to be good at tool calling that has more than 500k downloads as of this moment: https://huggingface.co/Jackrong/Qwen3.5-27B-Claude-4.6-Opus-...

Jackrong has published the finetuning steps here. It seems to be quite thorough with notebooks etc. I am going through it myself now...

https://github.com/R6410418/Jackrong-llm-finetuning-guide

Re: I ran Gemma 4 as a local model in Codex CLI

#60

Ollama is the worst engine you could use for this. Since you are already running on an Nvidia stack for the dense model, you should serve this with vLLM. With 128GB you could try for the original safetensors even though you might need to be careful with caches and context length.

Strangely, I haven't had a lot of luck with vLLM; I finally ended up ditching Ollama and going straight to the tap with llama-serve in llamacpp. No regrets.
Post reply on HN