all 2 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 7 points 3 months ago

Intelligence is not the word I would use to describe the plagiarism bots

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    Which is a great thing.

  • source
  • 54 comments in c/technology@lemmy.ml view that post
    [–] 66 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Which one of them made these overlapping bar labels?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 27 points 3 months ago* (10 children)

    It’s a bit misleading.

    Qwen 27B has way less “world knowledge” than GPT-5. Ask it random trivia without internet search access, and GPT would know waaay more.

    This is generally true of small vs large models.

    …But honestly, Qwen 27B is better at tool use or agentic stuff. It’s hyper optimized for just that and coding assistance, basically.

    This is often true of old vs new. Most newer models have hyper focused on agents/coding, often to the detriment of other use cases.


    Quantization for practically running Qwen 27B also has an impact. A off-the-shelf Q4_K_M is not the same as the unquantized weights in real-world use, or even an “optimized” quantization like a custom exl3.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] [S] 18 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    I mean baking knowledge into a model isn't really all that useful to begin with. Just download wikipedia locally and have it access it through tool use, it's way more efficient and more accurate. And yeah, I find Q6 tends to be the sweet spot where it's close enough to full 16 bit in performance, but doesn't chew up too much memory.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago

    If you run it with RAG (retrieval augmented generation), where the model includes web search, you get pretty decent results. I often include the phrase "search the web extensively for up to date information" in my prompts.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    What version do you use and how do you run Qwen3.6? I've played around a bit with the Q4 version in LM studio +Zed, but I was not happy with the results. It looses track very often and often enters infinite loops or just stops...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago* (1 child)

    I use an exl3, with 4 bit MLPs but higher bit depth attention layers. And I force some custom sampling so I can lower the temperature a bit while keeping it out of loops.

    This won’t work in LM Studio though. You have to run such a thing in TabbyAPI or some other backend that supports exllamav3.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    That's why you couple it with your own, self-hosted yacy or searxng instance. Embedded world knowledge does not help a model if it becomes outdated. I just let my agent research, embed that knowledge to a little Qdrant server, so other servers are not bothered again and pull the information from there when needed again. With a little RAG you can have GPT at home.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 3 months ago (12 children)
  • [–] 11 points 3 months ago (11 children)

    This is for qwen 3.5, not 3.6, but the vram requirements are a little out there for most:

    https://willitrunai.com/blog/qwen-3-5-27b-vram-requirements

    16 to 55GB...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    I mean that's high but not unreasonable, especially with unified ram machines

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    I bought two RTX 3060 with 12 Gb each for a total of 24Gb VRAM. Sionce the cards are not top shelf anymore for gaming, they can be had used in the 200€ range, so my setup was 400€ over the cost of my existing PC. My PC, while not last gen was already pretty beefy, with a Ryzen 9 and 64 Gb RAM. I think 400€ to have a pretty good local AI setup is not bad at all.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (2 children)

    I very much regret getting a 3070, with only 8GB of ram... Only reason I am hesitant about 3060s is that dual cards will use more power, and the economics are already pretty dicey when the hosted models are being sold below cost.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    I learnt a few years back that the most important driver in GPU. or any other non upgradable memory device obsolescence, is RAM. I got a banger of a deal a few years on a RX 480, but it was 4Gb, adequate at the time. The card was obsolete way faster than the 8GB. As for the power draw, are you planning to have your AI setup running 24/7? Nvtop (linux GPU monitoring app) reports 50-80% of the cards top power draw. There is also the fact that my data doesn't leave my setup.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    At the time, it wasn't clear that VRAM beyond 8GB was beneficial. Most cards at the time had basically capped at 8 for ages, and I wanted performance for ray tracing. In hindsight it was a bad call, but for gaming it made sense.

    Not 24/7, I'd just start my PC when I need it, but its still more power than I'd like.

    Keeping data local does make sense, which is why I have been toying with it. I can run relatively stepped on gemma4 models in 8GB, so for now, I'm happy, but im definitely looking at a Nvidia P40 as a second card.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (3 children)

    I can run both the 27B and 35B version of Qwen3.6 on my 10GB VRAM 3080, and they run ok. You don't need to put the entire model in VRAM, even if it's probably beneficial.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

    Full quantisation? I've only got a 8GB 3070, but I'll give it a go

    Edit: Tried the unsloth/qwen3.6 with llama.CPP, and it failed to allocate a 26GB Vulcan buffer and died. Dunno what magic your using, no luck for me though :(

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 3 months ago

    This seems like a great time to mention what I built and hosted months ago. https://masland.tech/ai-efficiency-index/

    The AI Efficiency Index tracks the cost/intelligence mix. Low intelligence is useless. Capability scales exponentially. Expensive ≠ better value. MiMo-V2.5 is the leader.

    If you have any questions feel free to ask. This uses the Artificial Analysis leaderboard. They have "cost per task" which I think is weird.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    Those models are for general use. If you have business use case and data related to it you can finetune model for specific use that will outperform all of frontier models and run at fraction of cost.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    How can you run a local model for better coding support than fable/opus?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (2 children)

    How do you get into this? Any articles you can share? OP says you can run on your desktop... How? Doesn't this stuff require huge data centers?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago* (1 child)

    Running model that is good at everything require huge amount of energy and huge data center. Those models are mixture of experts. Latest Kimi K3 have 896 experts. Imagine you have company with 896 employees. Each question involves 16 employees to figure out what to do in what area of your business. Like a brainstorm to solve problem. Now if you know exactly what you want and in which area you actually need only 1-5 people. Like an agile team instead of all those people that you have. So you can hire just couple Kimi K3 experts. 16 experts are 100B parameters so roughly 1 expert in frontier open source model is 6B parameters. 5 experts is 30B parameters. You can run 27B Qwen 3.6 quantized into int4 on your computer like other people are doing right now.

    I posted link below to example where they fine tuned model ( take it like a employee training ) for specific task.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago*

    An important caveat to that explanation is that the mixture of experts gets re-evaluated for every single token in the input sequence and not for high level tasks as in the example. There will be certain "experts" for looking at indentation tokens, or ones that look at specific word beginnings/prefixes etc.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    what kinda hardware do you need to "run this on your desktop"?

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] [S] 5 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    You need a GPU with around 16gb vram at a minimum to run qunatized version.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    I run Qwen 3.6 27B quantized down to Q4_K_M or even a variant Q5_K_S on my 8gb VRAM entry level AMD GPU, with support of my CPU and 32gb system RAM. Yes, I also limit the Context Length heavily to something like 18k. It's slow. But the point is, you don't need necessarily 16gb VRAM.

    But it's better to use faster models for this type of hardware anyway. The MoE type of models (such as 26B A4B, or 35B A3B) are vastly, vastly faster for normal usage, but they are a bit worse in some cases. Also Googles QAT trained model versions also have less RAM requirements without losing much quality.

    I'm just saying that, so others are not discouraged too much. It's not the same experience as the full version off course, but you can use them with some tricks on weak hardware too.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] [S] 2 points 3 months ago

    I'm fairly optimistic that people will figure out how to optimize the models a lot further going forward. One obvious path is to try and separate the reasoning network from the trivia that gets baked into the model, and some work is being done in this area. If you could have a context free reasoning engine and then feed the facts it needs to know on the fly based on the context you're running it in, then you could likely have a much smaller model that's very capable.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

    A P40 with 24GB is ~150€, a V100 (32GB) is ~600€. Both of these fit Qwen3.6 27B (The P40 is about 3x slower though). The V100 even fits 400k context with a Q4 KV-Cache , which means you can have two slots for parallel processing (llama-cpp). You don't even have to use system memory. One of my inference servers is running with 8gb of DDR3 and a 2nd Gen i7, so my old hardware has a good use again.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    thanks, good stuff! sadly, got none of these locally available.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago

    I had to get mine from ebay and wait a couple weeks as they came from China too. Also I recommend having a 3D-Printer and some Blower-Fans on hand as you will either have to buy or print your own fan shroud for these server cards.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago* (3 children)

    according to performance on standard benchmark. somewhat covered by the controversy surrounding the term: benchmaxing.
    if you see all benefit as a linear one dimensional height on a bar graph..
    its almost like you assume that the previous model gave the same exact answer(same style) and the new mode gave the same exact answer PLUS additional useful information.
    it might be convenient if measuring progress was so simple. but unfortunately/fortunately , it is not so simple . the most important benchmark are the comparison of outcomes on the problems that YOU have & prompts that YOU can(will) write. nothing else matters for YOU.

    • i admit benchmarks are well designed to objectively measure competence on challenging problems that require skill and really need only ONE correct answer.
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 3 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Sure, a benchmark doesn't capture all the subtleties and different use cases, but it does give a general idea of the capabilities of a model. Obviously, you have to run the model and see if it does what you need. But the chart isn't really about the nuance, it's showing how drastically the efficiency of the models has improved in just a year. The fact that we can even reasonably compare a model you can run on a desktop to one that needed a data center just a year ago is phenomenal.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    i see what your saying. i didnt mean to discredit standard benchmarks entirely.
    i guess its obvious that it measures capability regardless of imprecision.
    2 major proposed changes:
    **first, i dont really know. aside from saying "benchmark your own prompt+usecase"
    a proposed plan:

    • approach one: pay attention and credit new or improved architecture designs and research.
    • approach two: spend more attention on benchmarks. especially specific benchmarks ( that are not focused with industrial domain tasks.) **domain task pursuit, is useful!.. but it depends on if your interest align to popular domains.
    • approach three: if willing to utilize remotely hosted models. rating should also take in consideration.. tools and everything else: websearch performance, RAG performance, smooth interface, pref/balance between speed vs comprehensiveness, cost (if relevant), etc.. .
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] [S] 1 point 3 months ago

    Honestly, I think the most reasonable approach is just to see what other people's experience is like and which models are well regarded, then try them out and see which one is the best fit for what you're doing. You might not even need the top performing one necessarily, and speed or lower resource usage might be a bigger factor.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    Kimi is better. Waiting for it to appear on Ollama Cloud.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    🙄

    Is it still telling people to put glue on their pizza and convincing teenagers to kill themselves?

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago* (3 children)

    Ok, but all of them are far too inefficient for what they deliver.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 4 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Ok, but that's a completely nonsensical statement. If you ever used Qwen in an agentic loop, you'd know that it delivers working code, and it takes about same resources as playing a modern game, and I don't see anybody whinging that game are too inefficient for what they deliver.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 child)

    Sure they are. Especially with moores law dead. And especially since 2020; the more million dollars behind it, the more they run like one from a inexperienced single-dev on itch.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] [S] 5 points 3 months ago

    Not sure what Moore's law has to do with anything here to be honest. The models you can run locally on a consumer desktop can do real work, and their resource usage is no different from any other software like games that you'd run.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    So which one tried to cheat its way into the test?

    Llama is one for sure

  • source