6 ms·
Yea, No doubt Qwen 3.6 open weights are far more strong
by steveharing1 5mo ago
Yea, No doubt Qwen 3.6 open weights are far more strong
- rnadomvirlabe 5mo agoWhy no doubt?
- steveharing1 5mo agoBecause Qwen 3.6 pushes way above its weight. Granite 8B is impressive, but Qwen still wins on raw capability, especially for coding.
- actionfromafar 5mo agoWay above its weights.
- drittich 5mo agoNanobanana for scale.
- rnadomvirlabe 5mo agoYou just asserted the same thing again. Why do you say this is the case?
- steveharing1 5mo ago[dead]
- noodletheworld 5mo agoHaving tried it. Qwen is really good. Also, generally, it makes sense. 8B models are generally not very good^. That this 8B model is decent is impressive, but that it could perform on par with a good model 4 times as large is a daydream. ^ - To be polite. The small models + tool use for coding agents are almost universally ass. Proof: my personal experience. Ive tried many of them.
- irishcoffee 5mo agoSo it’s just like, your opinion, man? edit: It was a play on The Big Lebowski, folks.
- Terretta 5mo agoCollege SAT scores do not tell you how the dev applying for your open back end systems engineering job is going to do once they're in your workplace harness. Nor do class standings, nor hackerrank and the like. What will tell you is asking them to fix a thing in your codebase. Once you ask an LLM to do that, a dozen times, I'd argue it's no longer "just your opinion man", it's a context-engineered performance x applicability assessment. And it is very predictive. But it's also why someone doing well at job A isn't necessarily going to be great at B, or bad at A doesn't mean will necessarily be bad at B. I've often felt we should normalize a sort of mutual try-buy period where job-change seeker and company can spend a series of days without harming one's existing employment, to derisk the mutual learning. ESPECIALLY to derisk the career change for the applicant who only gets one timeline to manage, opposed to company that considers the applicant fungible. But back to the LLM, yeah, the only valid opinion on whether it works for you is not benchmark, it's an informed opinion from 'using it in anger'.
- robotmaxtron 5mo agothe (dead) internet is full of opinions exactly like this
- brazukadev 5mo agoyou tried qwen3.6 and you think it is not good?
- robotmaxtron 5mo agoI do not have high opinions of any ai model.
- noodletheworld 5mo ago
- 2ndorderthought 5mo agoQwen scores above sonnet in coding benchmarks. Runs locally. In personal use it's really good. Anecdotally others have used it to vibe code or agentic code successfully. Not toy problems. Not a toy model. Qwen3.6 raises the bar for models of its size. There really isn't a comparison in my opinion.
- albedoa 5mo agoMaybe you could tell him what you want instead of making him guess.
- locknitpicker 5mo ago[dead]
- captainbland 5mo agoNo comparison with competitor models other than the previous granite version strongly implies that it does not compete well with other comparable models. At least this is the most reasonable assumption until data comes out to the contrary
- 2ndorderthought 5mo agoQwen 36 is effectively a pocket sized frontier model. It's really surprising for me anyway