Qwen3.6-27B: Flagship-Level Coding in a 27B Dense Model

Re:Qwen3.6-27B: Flagship-Level Coding in a 27B Dense Model by datadrivenangel on Wednesday April 22, 2026 @05:47PM (#47869701)

Gemma4 feels the most "claude-like" of all the models I've run locally on my M5 mbp.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Qwen3.6-27B: Flagship-Level Coding in a 27B Dense Model by chr15m on Wednesday April 22, 2026 @06:49PM (#47870313)

I found on coding tasks that Qwen 3.5 can actually do the thing whereas Gemma 4 went off the rails frequently. Will try this new 3.6 release today.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Qwen3.6-27B: Flagship-Level Coding in a 27B Dense Model by verdverm on Wednesday April 22, 2026 @08:05PM (#47870833)

There was a qwen-3.6 MoE six days ago that I thought was better than Gemma 4. Today's is a dense model. (gemma release both a 26B MoE and a 31B dense at the same time)

I have intention to evaluate all four on some evals I have, as long as I don't get squirrelled again.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Qwen3.6-27B: Flagship-Level Coding in a 27B Dense Model by da-x on Thursday April 23, 2026 @08:23AM (#47874910)

I use Qwen 3.5 122B on an RTX PRO 6000 with open code, and very pleased. I don't feel a need for using a closed model any more. The result after answering questions in Plan mode is almost always what I want, with very few occasional bugs. It does a lot of effort to see how the code I am working on is written now while extending it in the same style.

If they release a Qwen 3.6 that also makes good use of the card, may move to it.

[ Parent | on HN ]