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

Qwen3.7-Max: The Agent Frontier

qwen.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 317 posts

Re: Qwen3.7-Max: The Agent Frontier

#51

Post by drob518 »

chrisweekly wrote: post #37
tarruda wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a 128G mac studio and even 397B was a happy surprise to me due to its high quantization resilience. I've created a 2.54BPW quant that fit on my hardware with 128k context, 20 tps tg and 200tps pp, while maintaining high scores on many benchmarks: https://huggingface.co/tarruda/Qwen3.5-397B-A17B-GGUF/discus...

Apple store's current options for mac studio seem to max out at 96GB. I'm questioning ROI, esp. given it's not upgradeable. Curious about others' takes on new mac hardware.

Currently, Apple is letting some of its models go out of stock in preparation for new models coming in a few weeks. I would expect at least 128 GB models at that time. That said, the memory crunch is hitting everyone.

Re: Qwen3.7-Max: The Agent Frontier

#52

Post by nickdothutton »

adjejmxbdjdn wrote: post #41
embedding-shape wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless US hyperscalers do the same in reverse, I hope the status quo stays as it is. Either people are happy to share, and the sharing should happen both ways, or US hyperscalers can keep isolating themselves as they've done so far.

I do hope The U.S. hyperscalers do the same as well. In an ideal world U.S. residents would use Chinese AI models and Chinese residents would use U.S. AI models. Governments in both countries are collecting data for nefarious reasons. But the Chinese government has far less influence on a U.S. resident and vice versa. We are all better off if our data is collected by a government halfway across the world instead of o…

China is much more interested in waging a campaign against companies that represent the material of the future growth in productivity, exports, and prosperity of the US and her people, than learning about you as an individual. Unless of course you are a Chinese dissident living in the US.

Re: Qwen3.7-Max: The Agent Frontier

#54

Post by giancarlostoro »

adjejmxbdjdn wrote: post #41
embedding-shape wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless US hyperscalers do the same in reverse, I hope the status quo stays as it is. Either people are happy to share, and the sharing should happen both ways, or US hyperscalers can keep isolating themselves as they've done so far.

I do hope The U.S. hyperscalers do the same as well. In an ideal world U.S. residents would use Chinese AI models and Chinese residents would use U.S. AI models. Governments in both countries are collecting data for nefarious reasons. But the Chinese government has far less influence on a U.S. resident and vice versa. We are all better off if our data is collected by a government halfway across the world instead of o…

It would have been the world we live in if China wasn't involved in so much corporate espionage. I don't even feel comfortable using their open weight models on anything my employer makes, the only time I use Qwen is for greenfield "how good is this?" type of projects, but otherwise, how do I trust that it wont mysteriously hallucinate phoning home?

On the other hand, there's other models where the source is 100% open, the training data is known, and people have reproduced the same model from scratch, so while those trail behind, there's definitely an effort to make models more open and capable.

Re: Qwen3.7-Max: The Agent Frontier

#55

Post by giancarlostoro »

nickdothutton wrote: post #52
adjejmxbdjdn wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do hope The U.S. hyperscalers do the same as well. In an ideal world U.S. residents would use Chinese AI models and Chinese residents would use U.S. AI models. Governments in both countries are collecting data for nefarious reasons. But the Chinese government has far less influence on a U.S. resident and vice versa. We are all better off if our data is collected by a government halfway across the world instead of o…

China is much more interested in waging a campaign against companies that represent the material of the future growth in productivity, exports, and prosperity of the US and her people, than learning about you as an individual. Unless of course you are a Chinese dissident living in the US.

Which is basically the current primary use for AI is programming more than anything, you hear about AI in programming more than in any other field.

Re: Qwen3.7-Max: The Agent Frontier

#56

Post by 0xbadcafebee »

tekacs wrote: post #25

As they start to release more proprietary models, I so wish that they partnered with one of the major US hyperscalers to allow using these models through something US-domiciled. Totally understand why it may not be reasonable or in their best interest (and that the US is _absolutely_ not doing the same reflexively). But it would be lovely to be able to try these out on production workloads in earnest.

I'm more interested in hearing specific reasons why one wouldn't use a Chinese company. Unless you're thinking Alibaba is going to ship chat logs to some government ministry that will then dole out proprietary information to new competitors (which doesn't seem logistically feasible), or you run a human rights organization, it feels a bit like FUD.

Re: Qwen3.7-Max: The Agent Frontier

#57

Post by epolanski »

tekacs wrote: post #25

As they start to release more proprietary models, I so wish that they partnered with one of the major US hyperscalers to allow using these models through something US-domiciled. Totally understand why it may not be reasonable or in their best interest (and that the US is _absolutely_ not doing the same reflexively). But it would be lovely to be able to try these out on production workloads in earnest.

US hyperscalers, all of them, are financially invested in the US AI labs and have the incentives to keep the status quo.

Re: Qwen3.7-Max: The Agent Frontier

#58

Post by epolanski »

Aurornis wrote: post #26
goyozi wrote: post #2

These are very good numbers. I still don’t get why they don’t compare against latest competitor versions in these posts, it’s not like we’re all not going to notice.

I think the argument is that trying to suggest that they’re close to N months from SOTA. Realistically I assume they hope readers don’t notice the fine details. The Qwen models are great for open weights but for every past release they haven’t performed as well as the benchmarks in my experience. They’re optimizing for benchmark numbers because they know it works.

> Realistically I assume they hope readers don’t notice the fine details.

The pool of people reading such articles while ignoring such details can't be big.

Re: Qwen3.7-Max: The Agent Frontier

#59

Post by [deleted] »

ai_fry_ur_brain wrote: post #47
tempoponet wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Expect to pay $4k-10k - Your RTX 6000 is closer to $10k now - Sparks are creeping into the $4-5k range - AMD Strix are ~3.5k - Apple depends on chipset and memory. Sweet spot would be 128gb M3 Ultra, probably $6-8k but admittedly haven't been tracking closely. New M5 might come in the fall. You can get a new 128gb M5 Max laptop for ~5-6k today. - a 4x3090 rig would take $5-6k Every platform has tradeoffs, but it's mo…

And for what? Spend 10-15k for the slopiest of slop code, non deterministic automations, and the ability to spawn an AI gf? This whole thing is really starting to remind me of the crypto hype phases of 2016-2018 when everyone thought their investment in GPUs was going to make them rich.

[deleted]

Re: Qwen3.7-Max: The Agent Frontier

#60

Post by Aurornis »

epolanski wrote: post #58
Aurornis wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the argument is that trying to suggest that they’re close to N months from SOTA. Realistically I assume they hope readers don’t notice the fine details. The Qwen models are great for open weights but for every past release they haven’t performed as well as the benchmarks in my experience. They’re optimizing for benchmark numbers because they know it works.

> Realistically I assume they hope readers don’t notice the fine details. The pool of people reading such articles while ignoring such details can't be big.

I disagree. Most people skim articles, not read them deeply.

On Hacker News I wonder if most people even opened the article at all most times.

Post reply on HN