Live data from Hacker News

Qwen 3.6 27B is the sweet spot for local development

quesma.com

361–370 of 809 posts

Re: Qwen 3.6 27B is the sweet spot for local development

#361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want to do coding with a local LLM your best bet is a 6 year old Nvidia 3090 which is substantially more powerful than the highest end overhyped Apple product for 1/5th the price.

That’s 24GB VRAM. Not enough to run a 27B model at a useful quant+context size.

[deleted]

Re: Qwen 3.6 27B is the sweet spot for local development

#362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This really resonates with me, and I'm only a decade and change into my career. I use claude a lot day to day. I try to use it sensibly, making me more productive and produce better work. I'm also trying not to lose understanding along the way. I want to be able to actually talk to the conclusions I'm reaching. I have colleagues that seem perfectly content to delegate too much to the agents, and it saddens me. It fee…

For me (about halfway between you and dofm in my career by your own statements in this thread), it's a dream at the moment. I can delegate all the tedious stuff that I've done "the hard way" a thousand times already and feel I have very little of value remaining to learn, so that I can spend more time on all the things that are actually new and thus much more interesting.

It's been a great multiplier for me in similar ways. The "dreamiest" thing has been that it has freed up time that I would normally have spent doing sprint work, to work on things that just don't make the cut until it's bad enough to deprioritize other work.

Over the last few months, I've been digging into performance problems with a high throughput service that my team owns. I started working on the problems in my own time, put out short and medium term improvements that legitimately avoided operational issues, and started developing an alternate architecture that should meaningfully address the problems for the long term.

I've learned new things and made improvements that probably wouldn't have ever gone in otherwise.

Re: Qwen 3.6 27B is the sweet spot for local development

#363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> no need to learn, just ask it to do it for you And that's how skills die.

When's the last time you shoed a horse? The reason I delegate so much of local LLM installation and administration to Claude Code is simply because there's no point learning practical things that will work completely differently in a couple of years, or in memorizing procedures that I'll forget long before I need to perform them again. No longer having to sweat all the details is a Good Thing, not a Bad Thing.

>When's the last time you shoed a horse?

That skill died too, so what's your point?

Re: Qwen 3.6 27B is the sweet spot for local development

#364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am considering getting something like NVIDIA's RTX Spark when it comes out, though even that will be limited to 128GB.

They’ll sell you a bundle, either a pair or a quartet so you can have 256 or 512GB over a 400GB/s network link I can’t figure out when it makes sense to pay 10k up front for a quantized Llama 3.1 but it’s an interesting option

You could fit a Q4 GLM5.2 in 512GB and still have some space for context (372-475GB for the model): https://unsloth.ai/docs/models/glm-5.2

But yeah, there's a bit of a dearth of models that could fully utilize memory in the 128-256GB bracket at the moment. But things move so fast in this space, I wouldn't base my decision on a generation of models that's just a few months old.

Re: Qwen 3.6 27B is the sweet spot for local development

#365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My experience working in the open model space pretty deeply (both LLMs and diffusion models) for years now is that it is not quite as simple as that. In the open model space an insane amount of effort goes into getting more powerful models to run with the same or less RAM. For example in the diffusion world many things that could not be run on easily under 24GB of VRAM actually run much better today with much less VR…

> The biggest thing to watch out for is not just RAM/VRAM but memory bandwidth. You can try to "future proof" yourself with lots of RAM, but if it's 400 GB/S you're still constrained to smaller models. I'm thinking of getting a SoC machine with 128GB RAM but the bandwidth is limited to 256 GBps. Would you even consider such a machine a decent investment, or should I wait for the newer gen of chips? Thanks!

It depends on your use case. There's a lot of hype around machines like the DGX spark (I'm assuming this is the type of device you're referring to) because they look awesome, and are priced reasonably well. However all of these have notoriously low memory bandwidth despite the high ram.

These devices, especially the DGX line, are fantastic if you are interested in low-level CUDA programming. The DGX spark can be used to prototype CUDA code/libraries for GPUs that most of us couldn't think about affording. If you want to learn how to program for datacenter level GPUs then these are the best way to get that at home. Sure your code will run very slow compared to the real thing, but you can take that code and, theoretically, run it on the real thing. For anything else though, I feel there are better options.

If you're interested in pure inference I'm pretty partial to Apple devices. The M4 Max gets you 546 GB/s, the M5 MAX 614 GB/s, and the M3 ultra (you'd have to buy used at this point) 819 GB/s. Plus you have a very useful computer even if you realize you don't want a full time home inference server. Additionally these devices require very low power (if you're running high end consumer GPUs you do have to think about what your energy costs are per hour and how warm you like your room).

If you're interested inference and training, or already have a pretty beefy desktop PC, or simply demand the most token/s you can get, then GPUs are the way to go. The downside is they're still pretty memory restricted (but honestly the options for what you can run on any RTX N090 are pretty good). You'll get blazing inference and prefill speeds on these devices. The only down side is, if you are using them heavily, you will see it on your energy bill and feel it in your room.

The "should I wait" question is also potentially applicable. The world of consumer hardware is looking increasingly bleak (and expensive) but if Apple does release a new "Ultra" model we could be looking at inference speeds very close to GPUs (there's still limitations to these devices that makes training preferable on GPU)

Re: Qwen 3.6 27B is the sweet spot for local development

#366

I feel like I'm going insane seeing people buy these 128gb MBP for thousands of dollars to run models that are objectively much worse than SOTA and spending so much more. The amount spent on a 128gb M5 MAX can buy you a damned new car here. What the hell am I missing? Are developers in other countries living in such different worlds? (I'm aware the price is, in absolute terms, more expensive where I live compared to…

I also don't understand why people in this price bracket are buying Mac laptops instead of desktop computers with GPUs? Just to flex that it's portable?

(I'm not one of the people you're speaking of with a 128gb M5 but) if you want to run one of the medium-sized open-weights models (Qwen 27b, 35b, Gemma 4 26b, 31b) or larger, you get into an interesting optimisation space.

* yes, you can run it on an older/smaller GPU plus system RAM but performance will suffer

* if you want optimal GPU performance you need the model in VRAM plus context, so 24GB (3090, 4090) or 32GB (5090) cards, plus a system that's reasonable powerful to plug them in to. Ideally you'd have a multiple cards working together but for optimal performance this means either 2x 3090 or nvidia's workstation cards.

* you can go for a 128gb Strix Halo system, but the memory bandwidth isn't great and they're becoming increasingly more expensive (5.5k EUR for HP laptop, 3.9k EUR for GMKtec EVO-X2 mini PC)

* you can go for a 128gb DGX Spark (5k EUR+) which also has unspectacular memory bandwidth or RTX Spark (price unclear but probably not cheaper)

* or go for a Mac with a decent CPU and a good amount of RAM (bandwidth varies by model, but typically a bit better than Strix Halo/DGX Spark and worse than bespoke GPUs.

As usual with such questions, there are of course cheaper paths (if you want to accept the tradeoffs) but Macs are reasonable vs. competition for these workloads.

Re: Qwen 3.6 27B is the sweet spot for local development

#367

I love my MacBook Pro M5 128GB RAM and I love qwen3.6. BUT DO NOT buy this MacBook if you plan on doing serious coding using local LLMs with it. The reason is simple: your fingers will burn and your head will explode from the noise. Running any kind of sophisticated job on the very laptop you are using is just not viable. Sure you can use it in clamshell mode, but forget touching it while working with AI coding or ag…

Today the Mini tops out at 48GB. Gotta go to the Studio to get 64GB.

Re: Qwen 3.6 27B is the sweet spot for local development

#368
post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not sure I disagree, and I certainly don't mean to disagree very fervently. But I think if you want to really learn to ride well, understand horses well, there might be some benefit in learning how to shoe a horse. At some level it should never only be someone else's job.

At the same time, most people can drive without understanding how a car works.

Yes, and they're all the worse, more at the mercy of car companies and mechanics, and less aware of the world they live and operate in, for it...

Re: Qwen 3.6 27B is the sweet spot for local development

#369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can be ran on 32GB with 8GB VRAM. I don't think these will be on 16GB for a while. (35B MoE)

I have 32GB of RAM with 16GB VRAM and I haven't had a lot of luck running larger models like this. Are you able to expand on that?

use llama.cpp with cuda

Re: Qwen 3.6 27B is the sweet spot for local development

#370
post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if you need to ensure that, then just back up the model and buy hardware if the need arises

that's somewhere between saying "use Android, just switch to Graphene if/when they lock it down", and saying "just switch to postmarketOS/Ubuntu Touch/whatever flavor of Linux takes off". i've watched friends try that route; i've been through this before. taking a downgrade is never fun: if it's a thing you're likely to care about in the future, then sometimes it's better to place yourself in the right ecosystem earl…

I just don't see how with the whole open weight system this situation would happen or that it'd be likely enough to warrant this

in terms of privacy, yes that's a real application, but someone taking it all away? I don't see it happening.

it's not an OS or a device, it's just a box/thing that runs a model, it's really commodity stuff we're talking about

more realistic concern would be that the open labs wouldn't be able to compete in the future thus development ends, but that means you can't host models that don't come out so...

again maybe I misunderstood but I just don't see why this would be worth it just for that one concern

Post reply on HN