Qwen-Next seems worse to me then 3.8 27b for coding, but I feel like I must be missing something?
Summary
A user shares their experience comparing Qwen-Next and 3.8 27b models for coding, finding the 3.8 27b stronger on harder tasks, and wonders if they're missing something.
Similar Articles
I can't get Qwen3.6 27B to outperform Qwen-Coder-Next and I'm not sure why
A user reports that Qwen-Coder-Next outperforms Qwen3.6 27B in both real-world tests and synthetic benchmarks, despite others praising 27B, and seeks advice on possible setup issues.
Tested in Coding: Q8_K_XL Qwen3.8 27B vs BF16 Qwen3.6 27B
A user's detailed comparison of Qwen3.8 and Qwen3.6 models in coding tasks, highlighting improvements in instruction following and tracing for Qwen3.8, but with inefficiencies in reasoning.
Qwen 3.8 27b is strong even at Q3_xxs
The user finds Qwen 3.8 27b in Q3 quantization highly effective for coding tasks with fast inference speeds, outperforming previous models, despite minor issues in general conversations.
Qwen3.8-27B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next smaller quant?
A user compares Qwen3.8-27B and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next models for intelligence and coding performance with 128GB RAM, seeking advice on which is better.
Are you running Qwen 3.8 27b or Qwen Flash Next?
The user discusses preferences between Qwen 3.8 27b and Qwen Flash Next models on Apple hardware, comparing speeds, and inquires about improving performance with MLX and harnesses without reasoning.