Still very interesting though.
> Edge0-145B scores above comparable models with less than half the memory (29 GB vs ~70 GB) and runs on a 48GB laptop
So either they’re lying or confused or I’m confused.
Qwen 3.8 Flash Next utilizes this, with 40% of its parameters being offloaded to disk, making the effective memory requirements much lower.
My daily driver is this:
https://huggingface.co/ISTA-DASLab/Qwen3.8-Flash-Next-GSQ-RC...
It takes things a step further by simply chopping off that half of experts which isn't (or rarely is) activated in coding tasks.
End result is a somewhat competent [0] coding model which runs on a 64GB machine.
[0] it still occasionally does weird stuff like replacing an entire file with just one line from its answer when you ask it a question if you don't explicitly tell it to not change anything or loop itself if the KV Cache is quantised at below Q8_0.
I won't post my prompt here (I don't want it to get benchmaxxed), but I use a python programming question that used to be a common interview question 10-20 years ago to test models. It spent 8,000+ tokens at default thinking and never produced a coherent answer.
This is essentially a very clever concept that isn't really ready yet. Or perhaps the custom inference engine just doesn't play nice on my hardware yet. Either way, it's not something I'll be able to actually use in it's current state.
ModelTokenMemoryUsage [Bytes] = Parameters * (BitsPerParameter/8)
For a model with 145B parameters, this means:
You have roughly a factor 8 in memory usage from 32 bit down to 4 bit precision. That is quite some room already, but not new.It seems that they radically reduce the model information required per token via the sparse expert approach - 145B->10B parameters - and then use some other approaches I do not understand at that point to make effective use of loaded information.
Did anyone try the model?