Stop the presses! πŸ›‘

#9
by McG-221 - opened

This... this is it! Consign the others to the flames and: RELEASE. THIS. CRACKER!

You don't like the newer releases?

L has been the best in my testing/benchmarking. Excellent work!

You don't like the newer releases?

L has been the best in my testing/benchmarking. Excellent work!

Hey everybody, so I did an in-depth A/B test between v1h and v1l, both tested in Q8_0. Imho, v1h surpasses the first-party Google release in quality, both in language diversity (no corporate boilerplate speech), as well as in nuance, all while maintaining reasoning capabilities (which broke for me on v1n, for example; it still reasons, but the results are wrong, that's what I meant to say).
v1l: shorter, less nuanced answers, missing text layouts (headers, attributes like star ratings or ratings in general, text dividers).

Use cases vary from person to person, but I firmly continue to stand with v1h βœŒοΈπŸ€ πŸš€

I've tested this model in Q5. Llama.cpp backend.

I must say I can't see what's going on with it. This is definitely not 'it' for me. The prose is good, sure, but from my tests in thinking mode, I've had many failures to end the thinking tag correctly, and many refusals over 'safe_rules'.
Even when the model generated correctly, it had the same profile I could find on other Gemma 4 fine-tunes, namely a gain in vocabulary and prose compared to the abliterated/uncensored base but a loss of instruction and detail tracking.

So far, I've tested many fine-tunes, and I have yet to find something that comes close in terms of balance between prose and attention to sophosympatheia/Glistening-Gem-31B-v1.0. I don't know what's going on in that merge but I would recommend taking a look at it.
Ironically, it seems to have some this model in the merge as well.

This is of course just my own experience with it, and my personal opinion.

Sign up or log in to comment