Latest llama.cpp vs experimental MTP build: Qwen3.8 Flash Next coding task on M5 Max — 9m24s vs 5m18s
This story is from 2026-09-04. It is preserved in the archive; the latest stories are on the live feed.
This isn’t about discovering that MTP can be faster. It’s about the difference between the latest stock llama.cpp build I tested, which didn’t include this model’s MTP support, and an experimental build with that support added through PR #28243. Same Qwen3.8 Flash Next target GGUF, same coding task…
Read the full story at r/LocalLLM ↗
Timeline · 5 reports
- 2026-09-06 19:15 · r/LocalLLM
CPU only, 64 GB DDR5: Qwen3.8-Flash-Next UD-Q3_K_XL - 2026-09-05 19:53 · r/LocalLLM
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next workcase part 2: after the self-portrait, a painting and a map sheet, both unattended on a 3060 - 2026-09-05 12:52 · r/LocalLLaMA
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next (UD-Q4_K_XL) on a single RTX 3090 24GB + 128GB DDR4, is this config optimal? - 2026-09-05 08:08 · r/LocalLLM
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next drew a self-portrait site from one prompt on an RTX 3060, then signed it “Claude” - 2026-09-04 15:21 · r/LocalLLM
Latest llama.cpp vs experimental MTP build: Qwen3.8 Flash Next coding task on M5 Max — 9m24s vs 5m18s