M4 Pro vs. M5 Pro (24GB): Qwen 3.8 Flash Next at 374 Tok/S Prefill with MoEShift
davidetroiani
12 points
1 comment
November 09, 2026
Related Discussions
Found 5 related stories in 121.1ms across 12,324 title embeddings via pgvector HNSW
- MiniMax M3.1 Flash jtg · 428 pts · October 19, 2026 · 54% similar
- Show HN: Running 104GB Qwen3.8-Flash-Next on 48GB Mac with at ~12 tok/s carloslfu · 187 pts · September 01, 2026 · 53% similar
- Run Qwen 3.8 Flash Next (125B) on consumer hardware (RTX 4090) at 100T/s snehesht · 696 pts · October 04, 2026 · 53% similar
- Running Qwen3.8-Flash-Next NVFP4 at 184 tok/s on a single RTX 6000 Pro matteohorvath · 14 pts · October 26, 2026 · 52% similar
- M-Chips: M7 with up to 1.5 TB – and why Apple is skipping the M6 danboarder · 20 pts · July 19, 2026 · 51% similar
Discussion Highlights (1 comments)
davidetroiani
Today I benchmarked Qwen 3.8 Flash Next IQ3 XXS on M4 Pro and M5 Pro (both 24GB unified memory) using the same configuration on MoEShift. Results (M4 Pro vs M5 Pro): - Short prompt decode: 9.84 vs 14.69 tok/s (+49%) - Long prompt prefill (6,060 tokens): 199 vs 374 tok/s (+88%) - Long prompt decode: 9.57 vs 13.14 tok/s (+37%) - Long prompt inference time: 83.9 vs 55.1 seconds - Peak RAM process footprint: 8.5GB on both Macs The major difference is the prefill speed thanks to the higher SSD throughput of the M5 Pro, which directly impacts the expert streaming. What impresses me the most is running Flash Next at these speeds on so low a RAM budget, leaving memory also for other apps which is the reason for this project. For reproduction, I ran the benchmark using the stock benchmark runner included in the repo: https://github.com/davide-troiani/moeshift