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 ran Gemma 4 as a local model in Codex CLI
51–60 of 123 posts
Re: I ran Gemma 4 as a local model in Codex CLI
#52Re: I ran Gemma 4 as a local model in Codex CLI
#53I'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.
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
#54I 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-...
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
#55I 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
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> 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.
Re: I ran Gemma 4 as a local model in Codex CLI
#57Rubbish, 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
#58For 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.
Re: I ran Gemma 4 as a local model in Codex CLI
#59I 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-...
Re: I ran Gemma 4 as a local model in Codex CLI
#60Ollama 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.