Live data from Hacker News

Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: Smarter, Sharper, Still Evolving

qwen.ai

331–340 of 400 posts

Re: Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: Smarter, Sharper, Still Evolving

#331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GLM 5.1 was the model that made me feel like the Chinese models had truly caught up. I cancelled my Claude Max subscription and genuinely have not missed it at all. Some people seem to agree and some don't, but I think that indicates we're just down to your specific domain and usage patterns rather than the SOTA models being objectively better like they clearly used to be.

What is your workflow? Do you use Cursor or another tool for code Gen?

I use Opencode, both directly and through Discord via a little bridge called Kimaki.

https://github.com/remorses/kimaki

Re: Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: Smarter, Sharper, Still Evolving

#333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GLM 5.1 was the model that made me feel like the Chinese models had truly caught up. I cancelled my Claude Max subscription and genuinely have not missed it at all. Some people seem to agree and some don't, but I think that indicates we're just down to your specific domain and usage patterns rather than the SOTA models being objectively better like they clearly used to be.

The value in Claude Code is its harness. I've tried the desktop app and found it was absolutely terrible in comparison. Like, the very nature of it being a separate codebase is already enough to completely throw off its performance compared to the CLI. Nuts.

I thought the desktop app used the cli app in the background?

Re: Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: Smarter, Sharper, Still Evolving

#334
post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's an overgeneralization. We've seen all the American models be closed and proprietary from the start. Meanwhile the non-American (especially the Chinese ones) have been open since the start. In fact they often go the opposite direction. Many Chinese models started off proprietary and then were later opened up (like many of the larger Qwen models)

> We've seen all the American models be closed and proprietary from the start What about Gemma and Llama and gpt-oss, not to mention lots of smaller/specialized models from Nvidia and others? I would never argue that China isn't ahead in the open weights game, of course, but it's not like it's "all" American models by any stretch.

The more accurate version is only Chinese companies (plus Facebook briefly) really open source their frontier models. The rest are non frontier. They are either older or specialized for something.

Re: Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: Smarter, Sharper, Still Evolving

#336
post #71

Ok I find it funny that people compare models and are like, opus 4.7 is SOTA and is much better etc, but I have used glm 5.1 (I assume this comes form them training on both opus and codex) for things opus couldn't do and have seen it make better code, haven't tried the qwen max series but I have seen the local 122b model do smarter more correct things based on docs than opus so yes benchmarks are one thing but realit…

Not to mention, that Opus cost orders of magnitude more money. These are VERY impressive and usage.

FAANGS love to give away money to get people addicted to their platforms, and even they, the richest companies in the world, are throttling or reducing Opus usage for paying members, because even the money we pay them doesn't cover it.

Meanwhile, these are usable on local deployments! (and that's with the limited allowance our AI overlords afford us when it comes to choices for graphics cards too!)

Re: Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: Smarter, Sharper, Still Evolving

#337
post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The value in Claude Code is its harness If this was the case then Anthropic would be in a very bad spot. It's not, which is why people got so mad about being forced to use it rather than better third party harnesses. Pi is better than CC as a harness in almost every respect.

Can you enumerate why?

- Claude Code has repeatedly had enormous token wastage bugs. Its agent interactions are also inefficient. These are the cause of many of the reports of "single prompt blew through 5-hour quota" even though it's a reasonable prompt.

- It still lacks support for industry standards such as AGENTS.md

- Extremely limited customization

- Lots of bugs including often making it impossible to view pre-compaction messages inside Claude Code.

- Obvious one: can't easily switch between Claude and non-Claude models

- Resource usage

More than anything, I haven't found a single thing that Pi does worse. All of it is just straight up better or the same.

Re: Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: Smarter, Sharper, Still Evolving

#338
post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But I've recently found that Cursor's composer2 is also really good to use.

Composer 2 is just Kimi 2.5, it's not their own model.

it's such a misinformed statement, as kimi2.5 was used as a base model for composer 2 and then heavily RLed

Re: Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: Smarter, Sharper, Still Evolving

#339
post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't magically get better results by spending 10x more on a model. If your prompt is crap and harness is crap, you get crap results, regardless of model. And if you run into limits, you aren't working at all. Buying the most expensive circular saw doesn't get you the best woodworking, but it is the most expensive woodworking.

Not really true. Remember the prompt engineering craze a few years ago with crazy complex prompt composers (langchain) that don’t need to exist any more because the underlying model got so much better at understanding what the humans are actually asking for?

A model cannot read your mind. It can guess, and those guesses are more likely to be wrong if you don't give it the right input, and model performance gets worse if not steered/curated properly. The output depends on the input.

https://medium.com/@adambaitch/the-model-vs-the-harness-whic... | https://aakashgupta.medium.com/2025-was-agents-2026-is-agent... | https://x.com/Hxlfed14/status/2028116431876116660 | https://www.langchain.com/blog/the-anatomy-of-an-agent-harne...

(I don't think anecdotes are useful in these comparisons, but I'll throw mine in anyway: I use GPT-5.4, GPT-5.3-Codex, Gemini-3-Pro, Opus, Sonnet, at work every week. I then switch to GLM-5.1, K2-Thinking. Other than how chatty they get, and how they handle planning, I get the same results. Sometimes they're great, sometimes I spent an hour trying to coax them towards the solution I want. The more time I spend describing the problem and solution and feeding them data, the better the results, regardless of model. The biggest problem I run into lately is every website in the world is blocking WebFetch so I have to manually download docs, which sucks. And for 90% of my coding and system work, I see no difference between M2.5 and SOTA models, because there's only so much better you can get at writing a simple script or function or navigating a shell. This is why Anthropic themselves have always told people to use Sonnet to orchestrate complex work, and Haiku for subagents. But of course they want you to pay for Opus, because they want your money.)

Re: Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: Smarter, Sharper, Still Evolving

#340
post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have been using GLM-5.1 with pi.dev through Ollama Cloud for my personal projects and I am very happy with this setup. I use pi.dev with Claude Sonnet/Opus 4.6 at work. Claude Code is great but the latest update has me compacting so much more frequently I could not stand it. I don't miss MCP tool calling when I am using pi.dev; it uses APIs just fine. I actually think GML-5.1 builds better websites than Claude Opus…

Why use ollama cloud versus like Openrouter?

The limits seem higher on Ollama Cloud to me than paying for API access. I don't have solid stats on that though. I have an OpenRouter account and the service I am creating is going to need to use that. I will have better measuring stick then.
Post reply on HN