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.
Qwen 3.8
151–160 of 793 posts
Re: Qwen 3.8
#152I predict that no one will use this and everyone will use Kimi K3.
Re: Qwen 3.8
#153Re: Qwen 3.8
#154So 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.
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
#155Earlier 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.
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
#156Earlier 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.
Re: Qwen 3.8
#157in 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.
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
#158So 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.
Re: Qwen 3.8
#159Earlier 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…