내 노트북에서 실행한 Qwen3.6-35B-A3B가 Claude Opus 4.7보다 더 나은 펠리컨을 그려줬다

Source: Hacker News

16th April 2026

Qwen 3.6‑35B‑A3B

Generated using the 20.9 GB Qwen3.6‑35B‑A3B‑UD‑Q4_K_S.gguf quantized model by Unsloth, running on a MacBook Pro M5 via LM Studio (and the llm‑lmstudio plugin).
Transcript

Claude Opus 4.7

Generated with Anthropic’s brand‑new Claude Opus 4.7.
Transcript

I’m giving this one to Qwen 3.6. Opus managed to mess up the bicycle frame!

Opus with thinking_level: max

A second attempt with thinking_level: max didn’t improve the result much.
Transcript

I don’t think Qwen are cheating

A lot of people are convinced that the labs train for my stupid benchmark. I don’t think they do, but honestly this result gave me a little glint of suspicion. So I’m burning one of my secret backup tests—here’s what I got from Qwen 3.6‑35B‑A3B and Opus 4.7 for “Generate an SVG of a flamingo riding a unicycle”. I’m giving this one to Qwen too, partly for the excellent “ SVG comment.

What can we learn from this?

The pelican benchmark has always been meant as a joke—it’s mainly a statement on how obtuse and absurd the task of comparing these models is.

The weird thing about that joke is that, for the most part, there has been a direct correlation between the quality of the pelicans produced and the general usefulness of the models. Those first pelicans from October 2024 were junk. The more recent entries have generally been much, much better—to the point that Gemini 3.1 Pro produces illustrations you could actually use somewhere, provided you had a pressing need to illustrate a pelican riding a bicycle.

Today, even that loose connection to utility has been broken. I have enormous respect for Qwen, but I very much doubt that a 21 GB quantized version of their latest model is more powerful or useful than Anthropic’s latest proprietary release.

If the thing you need is an SVG illustration of a pelican riding a bicycle, right now Qwen 3.6‑35B‑A3B running on a laptop is a better bet than Opus 4.7!