Qwen 3.6 is much slower than Qwen 3.5 for the same quatization: UD-Q4_K_XL

#8
by adr-insc - opened

Has anybody else experienced this? For the same task (analyzing a feature) Qwen 3.5 finishes in under 1 minute while Qwen 3.6 crunches tens of minutes not finishing.

Unsloth AI org

Has anybody else experienced this? For the same task (analyzing a feature) Qwen 3.5 finishes in under 1 minute while Qwen 3.6 crunches tens of minutes not finishing.

Q4_K_XL is now bigger so it might not fit in your device, try a smaller quant and compare

Q4_K_XL is now bigger so it might not fit in your device, try a smaller quant and compare

Actually, I've tried with UD-Q2_K_XL as well, and it was still slower. However, it wasn't a RAM/VRAM issue. 3.6 used the same resources as 3.5. I use it with llama-server, with these args:

    .arg("-cmoe") 
    .arg("--ctx-size")
    .arg("24000") 
    .arg("-n")
    .arg("20000")
    .arg("--temp")
    .arg("0.6")
    .arg("--top-p")
    .arg("0.95")
    .arg("--top-k")
    .arg("20")
    .arg("-ngl")
    .arg("45")
    .arg("-fa")
    .arg("on")
    .arg("--jinja")

...However, it wasn't a RAM/VRAM issue.

What hardware resources do you use, and on what comparable task could we benchmark the models?

What hardware resources do you use, and on what comparable task could we benchmark the models?

My system is quite modest: Laptop Dell Precision 5530, Intel Core i7 8850H 2.6 GHz up to 4.3 GHz, nVidia Quadro P1000 4 GB GDDR5

The use case is for a coding agent. An example task: Test a "web access" tool just implemented ( basically a http client tool ). Qwen 3.5 did it in under 2 minutes, while Qwen 3.6 variants crunched more than 20 minutes without finishing. They ran with the same resources/parameters, as in my previous post.
Thank you.

I had this problem too.Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-Q4_K_XL is even slower than Qwen3.5-122B-A10B-IQ4_XS,got only 5tokens/s,it seems like a Dense Model.But I got more than 30tokens/s with Qwen3.5-35B-A3B-Q4_K_XL.

I had this problem too.Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-Q4_K_XL is even slower than Qwen3.5-122B-A10B-IQ4_XS,got only 5tokens/s,it seems like a Dense Model.But I got more than 30tokens/s with Qwen3.5-35B-A3B-Q4_K_XL.

I have updated my llama.cpp,then it got 35tokens/s.My mistake.

UD-Q4_K_XL is extremely fast on RTX5090 - Over 200 tok/s

I have updated my llama.cpp,then it got 35tokens/s.My mistake.

You mean you installed a new version of llama.cpp?

If anyone encounters the same problem, I solved it by adding --reasoning-budget 1000 to llama-server args.
The problem was not that Qwen 3.6 was slower than Qwen 3.5 at token/seconds generation. It was slower solving the task, It kept thinking and thinking without actually solving it.
Capping the reasoning budget made it much more responsive - usable, actually.

I personally wouldn't set a thinking budget for this model :/ But in case you did so because generation speed was too slow, I discovered quite recently how llama.cpp was handling MOE models, here are some tips to get higher throughput and aiming higher quants by letting llama.cpp doing its auto-optimization: https://huggingface.co/Qwen/Qwen3.6-35B-A3B/discussions/37#69e551731f2a0505a679d501
Hope this will help some users!

Sign up or log in to comment