Live data from Hacker News

Qwen3.5 122B and 35B models offer Sonnet 4.5 performance on local computers

venturebeat.com

171–180 of 286 posts

Re: Qwen3.5 122B and 35B models offer Sonnet 4.5 performance on local computers

#171
post #53

I periodically try to run these models on my MBP M3 Max 128G (which I bought with a mind to run local AI). I have a certain deep research question (in a field that is deeply familiar to me) that I ask when I want to gauge model's knowledge. So far Opus 4.6 and Gemini Pro are very satisfactory, producing great answers fairly fast. Gemini is very fast at 30-50 sec, Opus is very detailed and comes at about 2-3 minutes.…

[dead]

Re: Qwen3.5 122B and 35B models offer Sonnet 4.5 performance on local computers

#173
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you could look into Minstral. There's also GPT-OSS but I'm not sure how well it stacks up. What's your problem with Chinese LLMs?

it’s not obvious to you why someone would want to avoid models created by our enemies?

As an European, I trust China more than America. China doesn't just start bombing other countries and causes regime changes.

Re: Qwen3.5 122B and 35B models offer Sonnet 4.5 performance on local computers

#174
post #65

Thinking about getting a new MBP M5 Max 128GB (assuming they are released next week). I know "future proofing" at this stage is near impossible, but for writing Rust code locally (likely using Qwen 3.5 for now on MLX), the AIs have convinced me this is probably my best choice for immediate with some level of longevity, while retaining portability (not strictly needed, but nice to have). Alternatively was considering…

Strix Halo machines are a good option too if you are at all price sensitive. AMD (with all the downsides of that for AI work) but people are getting decent performance from them.

Also Nvidia Spark.

Re: Qwen3.5 122B and 35B models offer Sonnet 4.5 performance on local computers

#175
post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Wonder what am I doing wrong? You're comparing 100b parameters open models running on a consumer laptop VS private models with at the very least 1t parameters running on racks of bleeding edge professional gpus Local agentic coding is closer to "shit me the boiler plate for an android app" not "deep research questions", especially on your machine

The hardware difference explains runtime performance differences, not task performance. Speculation is that the frontier models are all below 200B parameters but a 2x size difference wouldn’t fully explain task performance differences

He's running a 35B parameter model. Frontier models are well over a trillion parameters at this point. Parameters = smarts. There are 1T+ open source models (e.g. GLM5), and they're actually getting to the point of being comparable with the closed source models; but you cannot remotely run them on any hardware available to us.

Core speed/count and memory bandwidth determines your performance. Memory size determines your model size which determines your smarts. Broadly speaking.

Re: Qwen3.5 122B and 35B models offer Sonnet 4.5 performance on local computers

#176
One highly annoying facet of the hardware is that AND's support for the NPU under linux is currently non-existent. which abandons 50 of the 126 TOPS stated of AI capability. They seem to think that Windows support is good enough. Grrrrrr.

Re: Qwen3.5 122B and 35B models offer Sonnet 4.5 performance on local computers

#177
post #9

What kind of hardware does HN recommend or like to run these models?

The cheapest option is two 3060 12G cards. You'll be able to fit the Q4 of the 27B or 35B with an okay context window. If you want to spend twice as much for more speed, get a 3090/4090/5090. If you want long context, get two of them. If you have enough spare cash to buy a car, get an RTX Ada with 96G VRAM.

Thanks this is a great summary of the tradeoffs!

Re: Qwen3.5 122B and 35B models offer Sonnet 4.5 performance on local computers

#179
post #53

I periodically try to run these models on my MBP M3 Max 128G (which I bought with a mind to run local AI). I have a certain deep research question (in a field that is deeply familiar to me) that I ask when I want to gauge model's knowledge. So far Opus 4.6 and Gemini Pro are very satisfactory, producing great answers fairly fast. Gemini is very fast at 30-50 sec, Opus is very detailed and comes at about 2-3 minutes.…

I have the exact same hardware. Was going to do the same thing with the 122B model … I’ll just keep paying Anthropic and he models are just that good. Trying out Gemini too. But won’t pay OpenAI as they’re going to be helping Pete Kegseth to develop autonomous killing machines.

Re: Qwen3.5 122B and 35B models offer Sonnet 4.5 performance on local computers

#180
post #53

I periodically try to run these models on my MBP M3 Max 128G (which I bought with a mind to run local AI). I have a certain deep research question (in a field that is deeply familiar to me) that I ask when I want to gauge model's knowledge. So far Opus 4.6 and Gemini Pro are very satisfactory, producing great answers fairly fast. Gemini is very fast at 30-50 sec, Opus is very detailed and comes at about 2-3 minutes.…

I've seen reports of qwen3.5-35b-a3b spending a ton of time reasoning if the context window is nearly empty-- supposedly it reasons less if you provide a long system prompt or some file contents, like if you use it in a coding agent.

I'm too GPU-poor to run it, but r/LocalLLaMa is full of people using it.

Post reply on HN