← Back to context

Comment by Winfred-zz

2 hours ago

I just ran a set of benchmarks, ninfer-3090-qwen3.8-27b (so mix of Q4 and Q5) vs strata-qwen3.8-flash-next-iq3_xxs (so Q3):

│------------------- │ Ninfer-3090 │ Strata

│ Code generation │ 52/78 (66.7%) │ 70/78 (89.7%)

│ Code completion │ 40/50 (80.0%) │ 44/50 (88.0%)

│ Total------------- │ 92/128 (71.9%) │ 114/128 (89.1%)

│ API failures------ │ 10 │ 5

- Ninfer generation: ~122 min total.

- Strata generation: ~142 min total.

So strata is a little slower, but keep in mind that ninfer-3090 is very optimized for a Qwen 3.8. Standard Qwen 3.8 runs at 20 t/s, this modified version can do 50 t/s (but it's extremely long in it's thinking, it just goes on and on.

This is on a 3090 that will crash unless power capped, with a Zen 2 CPU, 64GB DDR4 with a PCIe that refuses to go higher than 8x (basically pretty crappy all in all).

Yet with some tweaking and optimizing I still manage to get strata to run at 40 to 60 t/s.

That strata has been optimized on my Oh My Pi conversations. So when I'm using it, it's probably faster and closer to ninfer in speed than during those unoptimized benchmark tests.

Anecdotally, I've found that 27B at 4bit hallucinates a lot more than QFN at 3_xxs, particularly for less technical reasoning.

I've tried to use both for online comparison shopping. QFN not only seemed less delusional but also made useful observations and problem solved ways around many different website access issues.