Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: Smarter, Sharper, Still Evolving

qwen.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 400 posts

Re: Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: Smarter, Sharper, Still Evolving

#261

Post by mikenew »

alex7o wrote: post #71

Ok I find it funny that people compare models and are like, opus 4.7 is SOTA and is much better etc, but I have used glm 5.1 (I assume this comes form them training on both opus and codex) for things opus couldn't do and have seen it make better code, haven't tried the qwen max series but I have seen the local 122b model do smarter more correct things based on docs than opus so yes benchmarks are one thing but realit…

GLM 5.1 was the model that made me feel like the Chinese models had truly caught up. I cancelled my Claude Max subscription and genuinely have not missed it at all.

Some people seem to agree and some don't, but I think that indicates we're just down to your specific domain and usage patterns rather than the SOTA models being objectively better like they clearly used to be.

Re: Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: Smarter, Sharper, Still Evolving

#262

Post by operatingthetan »

mikenew wrote: post #261
alex7o wrote: post #71

Ok I find it funny that people compare models and are like, opus 4.7 is SOTA and is much better etc, but I have used glm 5.1 (I assume this comes form them training on both opus and codex) for things opus couldn't do and have seen it make better code, haven't tried the qwen max series but I have seen the local 122b model do smarter more correct things based on docs than opus so yes benchmarks are one thing but realit…

GLM 5.1 was the model that made me feel like the Chinese models had truly caught up. I cancelled my Claude Max subscription and genuinely have not missed it at all. Some people seem to agree and some don't, but I think that indicates we're just down to your specific domain and usage patterns rather than the SOTA models being objectively better like they clearly used to be.

It seems like people can't even agree which SOTA model is best at any given moment anymore, so yeah I think it's just subjective at this point.

Re: Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: Smarter, Sharper, Still Evolving

#264

Post by andai »

koen_hendriks wrote: post #250
dymk wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You give it command line access in a VM...

You mean a VM like the one that contains a 0day that can escape the sandbox that gets found every year at pwn2own?

I run mine as a separate unprivileged user. (No VM.) Am I pwned?

Re: Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: Smarter, Sharper, Still Evolving

#265

Post by try-working »

ninjahawk1 wrote: post #29

The way to develop in this space seems to be to give away free stuff, get your name out there, then make everything proprietary. I hope they still continue releasing open weights. The day no one releases open weights is a sad day for humanity. Normal people won’t own their own compute if that ever happens.

Exactly. Open source is a commercial strategy for Chinese labs. They have no other effective way of marketing their models and inference services: https://try.works/writing-1#why-chinese-ai-labs-went-open-an...

Re: Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: Smarter, Sharper, Still Evolving

#266

Post by try-working »

qalmakka wrote: post #105
BobbyJo wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At a consistent amount of usage, datacenters are at least an order of magnitude more hardware efficient. I'm sure Nvidia and AMD would be fine fighting for B2C if it meant volume would be 10+x. Now, given they can't satisfy current volume, they are forced to settle for just having crazy margins.

The problem with B2C is that you need to have leverage of some kind (more demanding applications, planned obsolescence, ...) in order to get people to keep on buying your product. The average consumer may simply consider themselves satisfied with their old product they already own and only replace it when it breaks down. On the contrary, with the cloud you can keep people hooked on getting the latest product whether…

Future upgrade cycles on phones and laptops, PCs, will be driven by SOCs that embed some type of ASIC that run a specific model. Every 6 months there will be a new, better version to upgrade to, which will require a new device. This is how Apple will be able to reduce cycles from 3 years to 6-12 months.

Re: Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: Smarter, Sharper, Still Evolving

#267

Post by 0xbadcafebee »

Aurornis wrote: post #43
0xbadcafebee wrote: post #21

Everybody's out here chasing SOTA, meanwhile I'm getting all my coding done with MiniMax M2.5 in multiple parallel sessions for $10/month and never running into limits.

For serious work, the difference between spending $10/month and $100/month is not even worth considering for most professional developers. There are exceptions like students and people in very low income countries, but I’m always confused by developers with in careers where six figure salaries are normal who are going cheap on tools. I find even the SOTA models to be far away from trustworthy for anything beyond thro…

You don't magically get better results by spending 10x more on a model. If your prompt is crap and harness is crap, you get crap results, regardless of model. And if you run into limits, you aren't working at all.

Buying the most expensive circular saw doesn't get you the best woodworking, but it is the most expensive woodworking.

Re: Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: Smarter, Sharper, Still Evolving

#268

Post by fwipsy »

operatingthetan wrote: post #262
mikenew wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GLM 5.1 was the model that made me feel like the Chinese models had truly caught up. I cancelled my Claude Max subscription and genuinely have not missed it at all. Some people seem to agree and some don't, but I think that indicates we're just down to your specific domain and usage patterns rather than the SOTA models being objectively better like they clearly used to be.

It seems like people can't even agree which SOTA model is best at any given moment anymore, so yeah I think it's just subjective at this point.

Perhaps not even necessarily subjective, just performance is highly task-dependent and even variable within tasks. People get objectively different experiences, and assume one or another is better, but it's basically random.

Re: Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: Smarter, Sharper, Still Evolving

#269

Post by 0xbadcafebee »

chatmasta wrote: post #144
0xbadcafebee wrote: post #21

Everybody's out here chasing SOTA, meanwhile I'm getting all my coding done with MiniMax M2.5 in multiple parallel sessions for $10/month and never running into limits.

Who are you paying $10/month? OpenRouter?

OpenCode Go, BlackBox, Chutes. https://codeberg.org/mutablecc/calculate-ai-cost/src/branch/...

Re: Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: Smarter, Sharper, Still Evolving

#270

Post by 0xbadcafebee »

xutopia wrote: post #193
0xbadcafebee wrote: post #21

Everybody's out here chasing SOTA, meanwhile I'm getting all my coding done with MiniMax M2.5 in multiple parallel sessions for $10/month and never running into limits.

How do you use this? Do you use opencode or another frontend?

yep, OpenCode with a few plugins (context management, memory, a few MCPs)
Post reply on HN