Live data from Hacker News

Qwen 3.8 27B

huggingface.co

81–90 of 848 posts

Re: Qwen 3.8 27B

#81
post #14
post #8

Beats Opus 4.7 Max (w/ Claude Code) on DeepSWE (42.2 vs 40). Looks like Qwen's 27B models continue to pack some punch. Unsloth's GGUF quants are up: https://huggingface.co/unsloth/Qwen3.8-27B-GGUF

Is there any advantage to using the model from Unsloth compared with https://huggingface.co/Qwen/Qwen3.8-27B-FP8 ?

We also made NVFP4 ones if that helps! https://huggingface.co/unsloth/Qwen3.8-27B-NVFP4

Re: Qwen 3.8 27B

#82
One thing a lot of people don't seem to factor when hyping Qwen is how much models like this tend to 'overthink' with seemingly endless 'second guessing'. 3.8 seems no different from what I've tried thus far.

As capable as it is, it's hard to justify using it when a competing model (e.g. Gemma4:26b-a3b) can consistently achieve the same or similar response with only 1/10th as many 'thinking' tokens, achieve much higher tokens/second, and take a small fraction of the time. I suppose 'YMMV' depending on your use case.

Also, I haven't used it enough yet to see if it's prone to infinite looping, but its predecessors sure were.

Re: Qwen 3.8 27B

#83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'd gladly take A5B or A8B or even A10B as a sort of middle ground. Whats up with focusing on the active param count? Do yall fiddle with the weights or something?

You can run these on CPUs at a somewhat reasonable speed.

Or (somewhat) low TDP GPUs for that matter, like workstation ones, that might have enough total VRAM but not the best bandwidth/compute.

Re: Qwen 3.8 27B

#84

People will claim it's not comparable to Opus despite it beating the score. I'm not sure I disagree, but I'm also unsure whether I care. Most new models nowadays are "good enough". I cannot complain because I'd rather spend that time improving my prompts and docs. Opus might be a _slight bit better_ at picking up vague hints, but it's also extremely expensive, and I hit the 5 hour limit way too quick. I care a lot ab…

I'm convinced a lot of the anti-open-weight model comments at this point are inorganic traffic - there's trillions in investor money riding on a world where these models aren't cheap commodities. Having actually used things like the recent GLM, Kimi, and Qwen I think any edge the labs have is marginal at most and actually prefer the open weight models in most day to day usage.

Anthropic's recent releases are wordy to the point of exhaustion. Every time I use opus recently I find myself wanting to yell "GET TO THE POINT" at a terminal, which is exacerbated by it being slow.

Re: Qwen 3.8 27B

#85

Any tips on the best approach at running this at an M4 Max 128GB? Token throughput was a bit slow with the last 27B one (MLX), ended up using the A3B variant but if I could get this one to reasonable speed I'd much prefer it.

Wait for the MTP variants that will likely be out within days. I'm on a 128GB Strix Halo box and for 3.6-27B 8bits I was getting about 9tok/sec (not great). With MTP that gets closer to 18 tok/sec (kind'a usable).

Re: Qwen 3.8 27B

#87
post #82

One thing a lot of people don't seem to factor when hyping Qwen is how much models like this tend to 'overthink' with seemingly endless 'second guessing'. 3.8 seems no different from what I've tried thus far. As capable as it is, it's hard to justify using it when a competing model (e.g. Gemma4:26b-a3b) can consistently achieve the same or similar response with only 1/10th as many 'thinking' tokens, achieve much high…

Use 3.6 27b as a daily driver for months with charmbracelet crush. Gemma 26b-A3b is not even remotely comparable in terms of coding for me. YMMV depending on how you work, what harness you use, etc I suppose.

Re: Qwen 3.8 27B

#88
post #46
post #7

27b dense model at Opus 4.6 level Opus at home I hope there also will be a new ~10b variant

can you tell me ideas of usecases of 9 or 10B language models ? I cant find any usecases other than training a lora on them to give good bash commands for example

9B Qwen models are good and fast for local python coding tasks.

Re: Qwen 3.8 27B

#89

People will claim it's not comparable to Opus despite it beating the score. I'm not sure I disagree, but I'm also unsure whether I care. Most new models nowadays are "good enough". I cannot complain because I'd rather spend that time improving my prompts and docs. Opus might be a _slight bit better_ at picking up vague hints, but it's also extremely expensive, and I hit the 5 hour limit way too quick. I care a lot ab…

i think you will like luna if you haven't tried it yet

Re: Qwen 3.8 27B

#90
Architecture thread! Afaict they continue to use gated attention + delta net, which was also adopted+adapted by K3, but im surprised theres no improvements to the residual stream (deepseek are using manifold hyper-connections, kimi have attention residuals) ?

Perf improvements seem to all come from training?

Post reply on HN