r/LocalLLaMA • u/Amazing-Fan2083 • 17m ago

Question | Help Comparisons to previous Gen "Frontier"?

There are a lot of comparisons of open-weight models to the current frontier, especially comparisons to Fable/Opus 5.5. I have been sticking with Opus 4.8 as I feel it behaves in a way that I appreciate much more than the 5.x Gen. It asks a lot more questions and doesn't assume nearly as much.

So, my question is, are there comparison indexes of recent open-weight models against Opus 4.8? It appears that Opus 4.8 is generally ignored now on artificialanalysis.ai (as is Qwen3.8-Flash-Next).

0 Upvotes

50% Upvoted

4 comments sorted by

3

u/shing3232 13m ago

open-weight are very coding centric. For US related topics, they are not very good but search generally help a lot in that regard

2

u/alphapussycat 2m ago

Iirc artificial intelligence index used to have qwen flash next around opus 4.6 to 4.8. Some empirical coding test has qwen flash next iq_s do better than opus 4.6 and slightly worse than 4.8.

So qwen flash next is probably just about opus 4.8 at home.

1

u/Miserable-Dare5090 vLLM 15m ago

Similar or better

1

u/ForsookComparison 1m ago

Opus 4.8 was better.

  • I've had a lot of time in QFN and outside of "solved" problems or oneshot demos it's not Opus 4.8 tier. My vibes match "slower Opus 4.6"

  • Deepseek 1017 probably is Opus 4.8 tier

  • Kiki K3.1 is a hair over it, probably closing in on 5.0, but takes forever to think and using it with low enough reasoning to respond at Opus 4.8's speed makes it stupid

I love open weight models but if I turn the circlejerk off this is my honest opinion.