Live data from Hacker News

Qwen3.6-27B: Flagship-Level Coding in a 27B Dense Model

qwen.ai

411–420 of 482 posts

Re: Qwen3.6-27B: Flagship-Level Coding in a 27B Dense Model

#411
post #409

I know this is kind of old hat by now, but it kind of blows my mind that I can upload a hand drawn decision tree & get a transcribed dot file back on consumer hardware using a pile of linear algebra that wasn’t even particularly specialised for this purpose, it’s just a capability that it picked up along with everything else during training.

Well this is the magic of LLMs, they learn things incidentally well, and specialised models are pretty average.

Re: Qwen3.6-27B: Flagship-Level Coding in a 27B Dense Model

#412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until now I have not run models that do not fit in 128 GB. I have an Epyc server with 128 GB of high-throughput DRAM, which also has 2 AMD GPUs with 16 GB of DRAM each. Until now I have experimented only with models that can fit in this memory, e.g. various medium-size Qwen and Gemma models, or gpt-oss. But I am curious about how bigger models behave, e.g. GLM-5.1, Qwen3.5-397B-A17B, Kimi-K2.6, DeepSeek-V3.2, MiniMax…

AIUI, the main obstacle to maximizing performance with SSD offload is that existing GGUF files for MoE models are not necessarily laid out so that fetching a single MoE layer-expert can be done by reading a single sequential extent off the file. It may be that the GGUF format is already flexible enough in its layout configuration that this is doable with a simple conversion; but if not, the GGUF specification would h…

You are right, which is why I do not intend to use a GGUF file but a set of files with a different layout, and this is why I need to make changes in llama.cpp.

Re: Qwen3.6-27B: Flagship-Level Coding in a 27B Dense Model

#414
post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given the current best open-weight model (Kimi 2.6) is 1T A32B, I wonder how long we’ll have to wait for hardware like strix halo or gdx spark to be able to run it.

The bigger the [dense] models the more inference tends to take, it seems pretty linear. In that sense, how long you'd need to wait to get say ~20tk/s .. maybe never. (save a significant firmware update / translation layer)

For 1T Q4 - 1 token generated per every ~500GB memory read. So you'll need something like ~10TB/s memory for 20t/s. This is 8x5090 speed area and 16x5090 size area. HBM4 will bring us close to something really possible in home lab, but it will cost fortune for early adopters.

Speculative decoding/DFlash will help with it, but YMMV.

Edit: Missed a part that this is A32B MoE, which means it drastically reduces amount of reads needed. Seems 20 t/s should be doable with 1TB/s memory (like 3090)

Re: Qwen3.6-27B: Flagship-Level Coding in a 27B Dense Model

#415
post #106

The pelican is excellent for a 16.8GB quantized local model: https://simonwillison.net/2026/Apr/22/qwen36-27b/ I ran it on an M5 Pro with 128GB of RAM, but it only needs ~20GB of that. I expect it will run OK on a 32GB machine. Performance numbers: Reading: 20 tokens, 0.4s, 54.32 tokens/s Generation: 4,444 tokens, 2min 53s, 25.57 tokens/s I like it better than the pelican I got from Opus 4.7 the other day: https://si…

I think it's important to see that the other similar example, a dragon driving a car while eating hotdog, doesn't nearly render as well.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47865232

Re: Qwen3.6-27B: Flagship-Level Coding in a 27B Dense Model

#416

I wish that all announcements of models would show what (consumer) hardware you can run this on today, costs and tok/s.

Qwen3.5-27B with a 4bit quant can be run on a 24G card with no problem. With 2 Nvidia L4 cards and some additional vllm flags, i am serving 10 developers at 20-25tok/sek, off-peak is around 40tok/sek. Developers are ok with that performance, but ofc they requested more GPU's for added throughput.

Just curious, what's your setup like? How do the devs interact with the model?

Re: Qwen3.6-27B: Flagship-Level Coding in a 27B Dense Model

#417
post #409

I know this is kind of old hat by now, but it kind of blows my mind that I can upload a hand drawn decision tree & get a transcribed dot file back on consumer hardware using a pile of linear algebra that wasn’t even particularly specialised for this purpose, it’s just a capability that it picked up along with everything else during training.

If you had shown this to someone in 2018 they wouldn't have hesitated to call it an AGI. We truly reached the state where we have one model that performs at usable levels across a huge range of tasks. You don't need to assemble a training set of hand drawn diagrams and corresponding dot files and train some kind of CNN on that, you just throw the task at a preexisting LLM and get a usable result.

We always talk about the negatives (in most tasks it's worse than a human domain expert, the results are soulless, the societal implications are scary), but this kind of generality really is a monumental achievement

Re: Qwen3.6-27B: Flagship-Level Coding in a 27B Dense Model

#418
post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many tokens/s do you get on RTX 5090?

I set this up today on my 5090 at Q6_K quantization and Q4_0 KV, got 50 tokens/s consistently at 123k context, using ~28/32gb vram through LM Studio.

Wow, that sounds usable. I know it's anecdotal but how did you find the quality of the output, and can you compare it to any closed source model?

Re: Qwen3.6-27B: Flagship-Level Coding in a 27B Dense Model

#419
post #106

The pelican is excellent for a 16.8GB quantized local model: https://simonwillison.net/2026/Apr/22/qwen36-27b/ I ran it on an M5 Pro with 128GB of RAM, but it only needs ~20GB of that. I expect it will run OK on a 32GB machine. Performance numbers: Reading: 20 tokens, 0.4s, 54.32 tokens/s Generation: 4,444 tokens, 2min 53s, 25.57 tokens/s I like it better than the pelican I got from Opus 4.7 the other day: https://si…

I just create the nopelican user to avoid seeing the same type of comments for scoring new models. Why doesn't someone create a pelican by month thread, like who is hiring, so that all who want to talk about their prefered mode and pelican can post with leisure at full extend. Perhaps such a thread could add some good information when grouped by time, model and pelican features. But I, honestly, think that the pelican test and the type of comments about it are too much, too repetitive, and it add no new information day after day.

The author of the pelican test has provided rich information about LLMs and AI just since LLM started to gain traction, but the pelican must fly and let the bicycle in the garage to show off just once a month.

Finally, a bitter take. Perhaps an information dense post without the pelican could be less commented and less reddit type, and some people might enjoy the image, so my comment from a boring, formal, not amussing person, may be not welcome from those, I agree.

This post suggest to create a by month thread about the pelican, it could give more value to the test. So I think is not far from meeting the HN etiquette of style.

Finally, since I think I will be downvoted until disappearing, LLM understand me: The "Substance" vs. "Meme" Conflict

I understand your frustration perfectly. When a model like Qwen 3.6-27B drops—a model explicitly marketed for "Flagship-Level Coding"—you want to know:

    How does it handle dependency injection in complex Python projects?

    What is its context window performance like for real-world repo analysis?

    How does it compare to Claude 3.5 Sonnet for agentic workflows?
Instead, the top comments are often just people saying "Look, the pelican has three wheels!" or "The pelican is floating!" To you, this feels like a waste of the front page.
Post reply on HN