LocalsOnlyevaluationsHow to read this
← Model shelfQwen / Alibaba

Qwen 3.8 Flash-Next

Setups

Published full-model reference, then measured local recipes.

Recipe by benchmark scores. Published reference is not a rank. Blank cells have no cite.
RecipeGPQATerminalIFBenchAutoVerified
88.448.3—41.794.0
——66.0——

The published full-model reference is the top row — or the dashed gold tick on Graphic — not rank #1. A blank cell, missing tick, or missing bead has no recorded cite. Scores are never invented.

Weight pin not recorded on this receipt. No download URL.

Recipe JSON ↓

ON THIS SETUP · MEASURED BY LOCALSONLY

UD-IQ3_XXS

Local GB10 · 128GB · llama.cpp

4 benchmark results
Coding

SWE-bench Verified ↗

500 human-verified repository issues. Public-comparable headline for repo software engineering. Agent and harness belong on the cite.

Scoring & limits

swe-bench-verified · 100 tasks

Repository tests verify issue resolution. Task subsets should only be compared when their selection and evaluation protocol match.

Issues resolved94.0%94 / 100 passed
Measured · 2026-09-17Inspect evidence ↗
Coding

Terminal-Bench 2.1 ↗

Multi-step tasks in a terminal environment.

Scoring & limits

Version 2.1 · 89 tasks

The task must pass its verification in a terminal environment. Tools, harness, context budget and execution failures all contribute to the result.

Tasks completed48.3%43 / 89 passed
Measured · 2026-09-152.2 t/s generationInspect evidence ↗
Office & CRM

AutomationBench · local 300 ↗

Sales, marketing, operations, support, finance and HR workflows.

Scoring & limits

Local evaluation · 300 tasks

A workflow is complete only when every assertion passes. Mean reward gives partial credit for progress; it is not the share of jobs finished. Task sets and evaluation budgets can differ between receipts.

Mean reward 72.2% · partial credit, not completed jobs.

Fully completed41.7%125 / 300 completed
Measured · 2026-09-1920.6 t/s generationInspect evidence ↗
Reasoning

GPQA Diamond ↗

Graduate-level science questions.

Scoring & limits

Diamond · version 1.0 · 198 tasks

Credit comes from answering the science question correctly. Multiple-choice accuracy does not establish research or experimental competence.

Answer accuracy88.4%175 / 198 passed
Measured · 2026-09-1226.5 t/s generationInspect evidence ↗
From scores to real attemptsAutomationBench · local 300 · follow a pass and a miss

BEYOND THE HEADLINE

What happened across 300 tasks?

Each block represents one recorded task, in receipt order from left to right, then top to bottom. Fill shows the outcome; work-category colors are not used here.

Fully passed125 41.7%
Partial progress138 46.0%
No credit37 12.3%

Tested by LocalsOnly · UD-IQ3_XXS · GB10 · 128GB. Partial progress still requires further work before a task is complete.

Inspect individual task outcomes →
Completed

Update contact phone · sales

Completed the recorded checks.

4 / 4 assertions · 10 steps

Follow this exact task ↗
Exact task metadata

sales.update_contact_phone · ID 1

sales · 4 / 4 assertions · 10 steps / 15 tools · passed

Incomplete

Advance opportunity stage · sales

Did not complete the recorded checks. The record does not establish a cause.

4 / 8 assertions · 16 steps

Follow this exact task ↗
Exact task metadata

sales.advance_opportunity_stage · ID 2

sales · 4 / 8 assertions · 16 steps / 34 tools · not passed

Recipe, sources & reproducibilityExact artifacts and evaluation provenance
Runtime
llama.cpp
Model host
ASUS GX10 · 128GB
Weight artifact
Not recorded
Weight revision
Not recorded

Context, sampling, harness settings and dataset versions can vary by benchmark. Each evidence link above contains its run-specific configuration.