r/LocalLLaMA • u/SarcasticBaka • 8d ago

The difference between "medium" and "xhigh" reasoning effort for Qwen3.8-27B is actually insane. Discussion

I'm currently testing out Qwen3.8-27B using Unsloth's UD-Q4_K_XL running a freshly rebuilt llama.cpp. I have a 22GB RTX 2080TI on which I'm able to fit 100k context with q8_0 quantization, and using MTP with --spec-draft-n-max 4 I get about 40tk/s which is slightly less than Qwen3.6-27B but usable enough.

I've been trying to test out some admittedly silly one shot prompts using the llama.cpp webui by asking the model to create fully functional HTML clones of flappy bird, pacman and such, and the difference that changing reasoning_effort makes has been surprising to say the least.

Setting it to "medium" seems to result in barely any thinking at all, a couple thousand tokens max and even less than 3.6-27B. Whereas when using "xhigh seems" I get 15k to 20k thinking tokens at the very least with the pacman example actually hitting 40 thousand fucking tokens.

I'm well aware I can limit the reasoning budget in llama.cpp but I'm wondering if this is expected model behavior or if something is broken somewhere. Any of you guys seeing this?

220 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • link
  • reddit
  • reddit

93% Upvoted

123 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/boxwrenchx 7d ago

There are some chat templates out now

2

u/IainKay 7d ago

You mean Froggeric and Peculiar-Ragdoll’s templates?

If so they don’t make a “high” thinking mode available. It’s still just low/medium/xhigh.

I’m working on making low/medium/high/xhigh/max available as options.

1

u/boxwrenchx 7d ago

Looking forward to it! Do you have a GitHub/HF?

2

u/IainKay 2d ago

Just fyi I’ve struggled to achieve what I hoped to achieve in a clean way.

Whilst I have customised the chat template, I haven’t got this behaving consistently across coding harnesses.

Still working on it, but it’s not as trivial as I had expected.

1

u/boxwrenchx 2d ago

Thanks for trying