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 ?
Qwen 3.8 27B
81–90 of 848 posts
Re: Qwen 3.8 27B
#82As 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
#83Earlier 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.
Re: Qwen 3.8 27B
#84People 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…
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
#85Any 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.
Re: Qwen 3.8 27B
#8627b dense model at Opus 4.6 level Opus at home I hope there also will be a new ~10b variant
Re: Qwen 3.8 27B
#87One 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…
Re: Qwen 3.8 27B
#8827b 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
Re: Qwen 3.8 27B
#89People 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…
Re: Qwen 3.8 27B
#90Perf improvements seem to all come from training?