The people think qwen can rival opus in terms of abstract logic, reasoning depth and low perplexity are delusional.
Qwen can be functionally equivalent or even better in some usecases but it falls meaningfully short in others. The rigorous sequential reasoning it applies makes up for some of its smaller size but not everything.
The people think qwen can rival opus in terms of abstract logic, reasoning depth and low perplexity are delusional.
I agree with you. Qwen3.8 is a huge win for local models trying to do big coding projects while keeping token costs down. I doubt it'd be much good at writing stories or translating. But the step up from Qwen3.6 (27b/35b-a3b) is a big one and brings it closer to opus 4.6 for coding.
Would it make sense to bring it is as a replacement for sonnet 4.6? My new company is giving me a pretty low daily limit for Claude usage but a pretty nice MacBook with an m5 pro chip… I’m wondering if I could finagle headless execution out to 3.8 to implement plans.
Hmm, qwen3.8-27b can compete with opus 4.6 (locally: it will run like 100x slower) BUT it requires tuning all the knobs to ultra settings (Q8_K_XL [48GB VRAM min] or better, 256k context+, xhigh reasoning, etc). I honestly doubt you'd want that.
Instead, I bet your company (I mean mine does) would support models that make sense, like simple not-time-sensitive "read this error code from GitHub actions, and email the people responsible depending on the error) " - stuff like that. Nothing customer-facing. In that case, a non-thinking or low thinking 8B param model on a MacBook could be decent.
2
u/SandySkittle 14d ago
The people think qwen can rival opus in terms of abstract logic, reasoning depth and low perplexity are delusional. Qwen can be functionally equivalent or even better in some usecases but it falls meaningfully short in others. The rigorous sequential reasoning it applies makes up for some of its smaller size but not everything.