"When a vendor offered 2000 tokens per second (TPS) of Qwen3-Coder-480B-A35B-Instruct (aka Qwen3 Coder) for $50 ( Cerebras Code Pro) or $200 ( Cerebras Code Max), I, like many, was spellbound. However, the offer was sold out almost instantaneously. When the next window opened up, I grabbed a Max plan immediately. Not shockingly, the 2k TPS claim is basically a lie."
"When you see speeds of up to 2000 tokens per second, what do you think you should get? Would you be happy with 1000, 500, 200, 100, 50, 25? Okay, at what point is this true? I've run a bunch of tests in different applications, hitting the API, and not once did I hit 2000 tokens per second. In fact, not once on any particular long test did I ever hit 500 tokens per second."
"I don't work like most developers who use large language models. My goal is autonomous code generation. I don't really sit there and tell the LLM to 'ok now write this.' Instead, I create detailed plans up front and have the model execute them. The recent spate of Claude Max limitations directly affected me. Suddenly, it wasn't even four-hour windows of generation; it was two, and Anthropic has promised to lower my weekly and monthly intake as well."
A vendor marketed Qwen3 Coder with a 2000 tokens-per-second claim and tiered pricing, but the offering sold out quickly and the advertised throughput proved false. Independent tests reported by a reviewer showed no sustained 2000 TPS and often under 500 TPS, sometimes below 100 TPS on smaller tasks. The author uses LLMs for autonomous code generation with detailed upfront plans, and recent Claude Max limitations created urgency for an alternative. Qwen3 Coder appeared promising as an outsized-capacity option, yet its performance remains inconsistent and does not reliably match higher-tier Claude models.
Read at InfoWorld
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]