Live data from Hacker News

Qwen 3.8

twitter.com

151–160 of 793 posts

Re: Qwen 3.8

#151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been playing around with K3 a bunch, but the verbosity of the reasoning makes complete e2e agent work basically cost the same as other smaller models, and I'm not seeing a huge difference in quality, just a way longer e2e completion time.

Same problem with every chinese model currently, they overthink way too much and take too much tokens and time.

A consequence of aggressive distillation?

Re: Qwen 3.8

#153
post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If by Opus you mean Opus 4 and not Opus 4.8, then sure.

> If by Opus you mean Opus 4 and not Opus 4.8, then sure I meant Opus 4.8 which is rather dumb and ineffective in coding harness, especially with higher thinking levels.

[deleted]

Re: Qwen 3.8

#154
post #109

So are locally-runnable models frozen at Qwen 3.6 now :/

Is qwen 3.6 27b the best model you can run locally at the moment? Not that I have the VRAM for it, but just curious.

I have been running 3.6 27b on a dual AMD r9700 setup using Opencode and Matt Pocock's skills workflow for writing Golang CLIs. It's decent, but won't win any awards on code architecture. I guess you can try to AGENTS.md the deficits but I am just exploring its raw Opencode experience right now. Much slower than an API but still 3x times faster than I can read. Tuning it in with a community chat template and a specific penalty for repeats was the sauce needed to get it to work. I can probably start loop daddying it now over the tickets Matt's flow creates.

So yeah, it's the best local model I've seen. I am going to try the Qwopus 3.6 fine tune soon with the same spec and tickets and compare the output of both.

Re: Qwen 3.8

#155
post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would rather see them releasing 3.7-27B, 3.7-122B or their 3.8 versions. Qwen/QwQ were always about the best available local inference at home.

I know this is a bit cliche but I wonder how much headroom there is in the lower parameter count range. Is there any good reason to believe there is a lot of headroom or there is not? I suppose I'm just wondering if this wave of nearly Fable class models will be runnable on ~$10k worth of hardware at reasonable speeds in the near future.

There is a ton of headroom (or room for improvement) in smaller locally runnable models. Some of the Gemma 4 models were re-released this week with better tool support and the improvement in using it with pi for a local coding harness is very noticeable.

I have had my 32G mac mini for 2 1/2 years and I have enjoyed watching one technology advance after another improve the quality of work I can do locally. I bet that what I will be able to do in one year on my old hardware will be even more awesome.

Re: Qwen 3.8

#156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been playing around with K3 a bunch, but the verbosity of the reasoning makes complete e2e agent work basically cost the same as other smaller models, and I'm not seeing a huge difference in quality, just a way longer e2e completion time.

Same problem with every chinese model currently, they overthink way too much and take too much tokens and time.

More or less, yeah. I've found mild success with deepseek-v4-flash though, and also Qwen3.5-122B-A10B-NVFP4 running locally, especially in terms of "doesn't overthink every single prompt" and somewhat reasonable quality. Really wishing for a 3.8 update of the 122B variant, that'd be really competitive (for local usage) :)

Re: Qwen 3.8

#157

in my experience of 1 month daily use, Qwen 3.7 Pro is just unusable. wastes too much time, goes off track, useless stuck loops, cannot debug at all. Deepseek V4 Pro is night-and-day compare to Qwen. actually Qwen models seems the worst SWE experience so far. and it is super expensive compare to Deepseek. cannot delegate anything to it, cannot use it real-time low-level tasks either. totally unusable.

Can you tell me more about deepseek?

I paid $2 for deepseek api, put the key in void editor and made a crypto tool in html.

It turned out to be around 67kb. I used sample files in CSV that were a few hundred lines.

It spent around $1.8 in the hour or two or light coding and follow up bugs.

Is it really really this much?

I can't imagine spending a month using it for a day job, it would cost more than the salary so what gives?

I understand the local ai and all that but do cloud providers cost this much?

Earlier I thought "billion tokens" but now not sure

Re: Qwen 3.8

#158
post #109

So are locally-runnable models frozen at Qwen 3.6 now :/

Is qwen 3.6 27b the best model you can run locally at the moment? Not that I have the VRAM for it, but just curious.

Yes it's between this and Gemma 4 31B which is much slower, but looks like it won't ever get an upgrade. I have to conclude that the MoE variants are unreliable, and MTP sometimes just can't get tricky formatting right.

Re: Qwen 3.8

#159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does this explain open weights? They could easily take the same closed route like their American friends

> How does this explain open weights? They could easily take the same closed route like their American friends Because they are playing the Americans at their own game. What is the first thing an American company would do ? Spread the old American classic FUD ... "you can't used this closed tool because its run by the communists", right ? So you release it as open weights which is a win-win. Global adoption of the mo…

Alibaba isn’t really the Chinese government though, or are you saying Americans will think that ever since Jack Ma was harmonized?
Post reply on HN