About tests

#1
by timik28 - opened

I used this model and immediately noticed that it responded very poorly, sometimes even displaying completely incomprehensible symbols.
Then, using claude fableI, created a complex architectural test task for software development and ran the test three times on the same GGUF model Q4, and this FLM model.
The GGUF received a total of 79 points.
This FLM maximum is 52 points.
The model lags significantly behind the GGUF model.
Why?

Were you testing both models with active thinking? I was trying them in lemonade gui, and thinking is not available with the flm model.

Flm does have thinking, you have to pass something like think: True in the request. It still is worse quality than other quants though

Yes, it does, but it’s not enabled by default in flm/lemonade. What were the test execution details?

My biggest issue right now is that the NPU model uses 88% of my 32GB of RAM with FastFlowLM, while the GGUF variant only takes 53% with llama.cpp-vulkan.

Yes, it does, but it’s not enabled by default in flm/lemonade. What were the test execution details?

I used the "think" mode. Lemonade outputs a maximum of 4096 tokens and then truncates the result, and I ran it through a Python script. I couldn't increase the output tokens any other way.

PROMPT_FILE = "test_v12"
MODEL = "qwen3.6-moe-35b-a3b-FLM"
API = "http://localhost:13305/api/v1/chat/completions"
RUNS = 3
prompt = pathlib.Path(PROMPT_FILE).read_text(encoding="utf-8")
for i in range(1, RUNS + 1):
body = json.dumps({
"model": MODEL,
"messages": [{"role": "user", "content": prompt}],
"max_tokens": 32768,
"temperature": 1.0,
"top_p": 0.95,
"top_k": 20,
"presence_penalty": 0.0,
"think": True,
"stream": False
}).encode()

Sign up or log in to comment