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

Qwen3-Coder-Next

qwen.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 443 posts

Re: Qwen3-Coder-Next

#51

Post by ttoinou »

dust42 wrote: post #44
simonw wrote: post #3

This GGUF is 48.4GB - https://huggingface.co/Qwen/Qwen3-Coder-Next-GGUF/tree/main/... - which should be usable on higher end laptops. I still haven't experienced a local model that fits on my 64GB MacBook Pro and can run a coding agent like Codex CLI or Claude code well enough to be useful. Maybe this will be the one? This Unsloth guide from a sibling comment suggests it might be: https://unsloth.ai/docs/models/qwen3…

Unfortunately Qwen3-next is not well supported on Apple silicon, it seems the Qwen team doesn't really care about Apple. On M1 64GB Q4KM on llama.cpp gives only 20Tok/s while on MLX it is more than twice as fast. However, MLX has problems with kv cache consistency and especially with branching. So while in theory it is twice as fast as llama.cpp it often does the PP all over again which completely trashes performance…

I can run nightmedia/qwen3-next-80b-a3b-instruct-mlx at 60-74 tps using LM Studio. What did you try ? What benefit do you get from KV Caching ?

Re: Qwen3-Coder-Next

#53

Post by yorwba »

gordonhart wrote: post #21
throwaw12 wrote: post #18

We are getting there, as a next step please release something to outperform Opus 4.5 and GPT 5.2 in coding tasks

By the time that happens, Opus 5 and GPT-5.5 will be out. At that point will a GPT-5.2 tier open-weights model feel "good enough"? Based on my experience with frontier models, once you get a taste of the latest and greatest it's very hard to go back to a less capable model, even if that less capable model would have been SOTA 9 months ago.

When Alibaba succeeds at producing a GPT-5.2-equivalent model, they won't be releasing the weights. They'll only offer API access, like for the previous models in the Qwen Max series.

Don't forget that they want to make money in the end. They release small models for free because the publicity is worth more than they could charge for them, but they won't just give away models that are good enough that people would pay significant amounts of money to use them.

Re: Qwen3-Coder-Next

#54

Post by solumunus »

markab21 wrote: post #20
vessenes wrote: post #4

3B active parameters, and slightly worse than GLM 4.7. On benchmarks. That's pretty amazing! With better orchestration tools being deployed, I've been wondering if faster, dumber coding agents paired with wise orchestrators might be overall faster than using the say opus 4.5 on the bottom for coding. At least we might want to deploy to these guys for simple tasks.

It's getting a lot easier to do this using sub-agents with tools in Claude. I have a fleet of Mastra agents (TypeScript). I use those agents inside my project as CLI tools to do repetitive tasks that gobble tokens such as scanning code, web search, library search, and even SourceGraph traversal. Overall, it's allowed me to maintain more consistent workflows as I'm less dependent on Opus. Now that Mastra has introduce…

Are you just exposing mastra cli commands to Claude Code in md context? I’d love you to elaborate on this if you have time.

Re: Qwen3-Coder-Next

#55

Post by tomashubelbauer »

cedws wrote: post #41

I kind of lost interest in local models. Then Anthropic started saying I’m not allowed to use my Claude Code subscription with my preferred tools and it reminded me why we need to support open tools and models. I’ve cancelled my CC subscription, I’m not paying to support anticompetitive behaviour.

Anthropic banned my account when I whipped up a solution to control Claude Code running on my Mac from my phone when I'm out and about. No commercial angle, just a tool I made for myself since they wouldn't ship this feature (and still haven't). I wasn't their biggest fanboy to begin with, but it gave me the kick in the butt needed to go and explore alternatives until local models get good enough that I don't need to use hosted models altogether.

Re: Qwen3-Coder-Next

#56

Post by gessha »

orliesaurus wrote: post #34

how can anyone keep up with all these releases... what's next? Sonnet 5?

Tune it out, come back in 6 months, the world is not going to end. In 6 months, you’re going to change your API endpoint and/or your subscription and then spend a day or two adjusting. Off to the races you go.

Re: Qwen3-Coder-Next

#57

Post by bheadmaster »

rustyhancock wrote: post #48
wahnfrieden wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OpenAI committed to allowing it btw. I don't know why Anthropic gets so much love here

Cause they make the best coding model. It's that simple. Everyone else is trying to compete in other ways and Anthropic are pushing for dominate the market. They'll eventually lose their performance edge and suddenly they will back to being cute and fluffy I've cancelled a clause sub, but still have one.

Agreed.

I've tried all of the models available right now, and Claude Opus is by far the most capable.

I had an assertion failure triggered in a fairly complex open-source C library I was using, and Claude Opus not only found the cause, but wrote a self-contained reproduction code I could add to a GitHub issue. And it also added tests for that issue, and fixed the underlying issue.

I am sincerely impressed by the capabilities of Claude Opus. Too bad its usage is so expensive.

Re: Qwen3-Coder-Next

#59

Post by [deleted] »

tomashubelbauer wrote: post #55
cedws wrote: post #41

I kind of lost interest in local models. Then Anthropic started saying I’m not allowed to use my Claude Code subscription with my preferred tools and it reminded me why we need to support open tools and models. I’ve cancelled my CC subscription, I’m not paying to support anticompetitive behaviour.

Anthropic banned my account when I whipped up a solution to control Claude Code running on my Mac from my phone when I'm out and about. No commercial angle, just a tool I made for myself since they wouldn't ship this feature (and still haven't). I wasn't their biggest fanboy to begin with, but it gave me the kick in the butt needed to go and explore alternatives until local models get good enough that I don't need to…

[deleted]

Re: Qwen3-Coder-Next

#60

Post by CamperBob2 »

danielhanchen wrote: post #14
ranger_danger wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the difference between the UD and non-UD files?

UD stands for "Unsloth-Dynamic" which upcasts important layers to higher bits. Non UD is just standard llama.cpp quants. Both still use our calibration dataset.

Please consider authoring a single, straightforward introductory-level page somewhere that explains what all the filename components mean, and who should use which variants.

The green/yellow/red indicators for different levels of hardware support are really helpful, but far from enough IMO.

Post reply on HN