June 2026 AI Recap: Local AI Became the Fallback Plan
▲ 7 r/ArtificialSingularity+2 crossposts

June 2026 AI Recap: Local AI Became the Fallback Plan

Overview

June was the month where the old AI story broke.

So far frontier models lived in the cloud, open models trailed behind, local AI was nice for privacy, and regulation was slow.

June did not fit that anymore.

The best cloud models were still the capability ceiling, but access suddenly became political. Anthropic launched Fable 5 and Mythos 5, then had to take them down. OpenAI previewed GPT-5.6, but not for everyone. Meanwhile, GLM-5.2 and MiniMax M3 made the open-weight world look much less like a toy category. Mistral OCR 4 showed that self-hosted AI can be boring in the best way: useful, private, and ready for real work.

If your whole workflow depends on one remote model staying cheap, available, legal, and politically acceptable, you do not own much.

References for this part: MiniMax M3, GLM-5.2, Anthropic Fable 5 and Mythos 5, OpenAI GPT-5.6, Mistral OCR 4.

Timeline: June 1 to June 30

  • June 1: MiniMax released M3, an open-weight model with 1M context, multimodal input, coding strength, and desktop operation.
  • June 1: Microsoft increased Github Copilot pricing by multiple magnitudes, making the worlds most affordable frontier coding Agent the worlds most expensive option.
  • June 1: Nvidia and Microsoft framed RTX Spark as a path toward local agents and frontier models on Windows PCs while strongly disappointing with very low memory bandwidth
  • June 2: Microsoft announced seven MAI models across coding, image, voice, speech, and reasoning - though their coding model is less competent than tiny open source models
  • June 2: Anthropic expanded Project Glasswing, saying partners had found more than 10,000 high or critical security flaws using Claude Mythos Preview.
  • June 2: The Trump government signed an Executive Order that the government must not interfere with AI development, launches but asked for voluntary 30 day compliance
  • June 5: Anthropic announced Fable 5, framed it as "significant risk", "misuse causing serious damage", "substantial risk to uplift malicious actors", "substantial bioweapon capabilities", "exploiting capabilities"
  • June 8: Apple announced Siri AI, next-gen Apple Intelligence, Xcode 27 agentic coding, and developer access to on-device foundation models. EU iPhone and iPad users did not get the full Siri AI path because of DMA issues.
  • June 9: Anthropic launched Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5, Fable 5 rejecting most prompts for safety reasons.
  • June 11: Ollama (a popular llama.cpp wrapper) updated its MLX engine for better Apple Silicon performance.
  • June 12: Anthropic suspended Fable 5 and Mythos 5 after a U.S. government directive banning non US citizens (including many of their core developers) from working with that model. Ironically violating the June 2nd Executive order.
  • June 16: Z ai released GLM-5.2 open weights under MIT license, with a 1M-token context window - a model that is on eye level with Opus 4.8 and GPT 5.5
  • June 18: OpenAI introduced Codex Record & Replay, turning recorded Mac workflows into reusable skills.
  • June 22: OpenAI launched Daybreak tools, including GPT-5.5-Cyber and Patch the Planet.
  • June 23: Mistral released OCR 4, a self-hostable OCR and document-intelligence model.
  • June 25: Domyn announced plans for a European open-source frontier model with over 400B parameters - given the AI Act and GDPR it appears very optimistic to say the least.
  • June 26: Reuters reported that OpenAI delayed broader GPT-5.6 access at the U.S. government’s request, while Anthropic’s Mythos access was partly restored to trusted U.S. organizations.
  • June 30: Anthropic launched Claude Sonnet 5, and said Fable 5 would return globally starting July 1 after export controls were lifted on June 30. Sonnet being received as very expensive while not performing remarkable.

Local AI and Open Weights

Local AI had its strongest month so far, but not in the clean consumer fantasy version.

MiniMax M3 was the headline because it combined things that used to be separate: open weights, 1M context, multimodal input, coding strength, and desktop operation. Since Qwen 3.6 we have competent local agentic models, M3 adds to the list.

GLM-5.2 was the bigger warning shot. It came with open weights (commercial usable), a 1M-token context window, and performance close enough to closed frontier models that the old "open models are always 6 months behind" argument looked broken. This is not going to run truly local yet but on your own owned or rented cluster it definitely does.

Mistral OCR 4 was the quiet useful release. Self-hosted OCR with document structure, bounding boxes, confidence scores, and 170-language support is the kind of model that companies can actually deploy without sending every contract, invoice, scan, and archive to a cloud model or deal with uncertainties around multimodal LLM hallucinations.

Links: MiniMax M3 GLM-5.2

Cloud models, regulation and political pressure

The cloud model story was messier.

Anthropic had the most chaotic launch cycle of the month. Fable 5 and Mythos 5 arrived while being branded as the most dangerous software in the world, and quickly got suspended after a U.S. export-control directive targeting foreign-national access. Because Anthropic could not verify nationality cleanly in real time, the models were disabled broadly.
A frontier model can go from launch to unavailable in days, not because of a technical failure, but because of politics and risk control - Artificial Intelligence is becoming a political tool in the US.

OpenAI moved more carefully, but ended up inside the same pattern. GPT-5.6 appeared as Sol, Terra, and Luna, but access stayed limited to trusted partners after the same U.S. government pressure of "voluntary compliance".
OpenAI's message was basically: this should not become the normal way frontier models ship. Still, the result was the same for normal users: the model exists, but you probably cannot use it yet.

Claude Sonnet 5 was the more normal end-of-month release. Better agentic work, pricing not convincing in comparison to more capable models, and certainly not the kind of leap that changes the whole conversation.

Following up on the fiasco of Fable-5 marketing, Anthropic CEO now shifted on condemning Open Source AI as "dangerous". It certainly is very dangerous to future Anthropic growth and profit margins - but whatever is announced in such a fashion is also followed up with tens of millions in lobby and marketing campaigns. The war against Open AI might have just been announced as a sideline.

Links: Anthropic Fable and Mythos access statement OpenAI GPT-5.6 limited rollout

Science, papers, and the real "singularity" signal

The most serious science story was HemaGuide.

This was not another chatbot demo. It was a locally deployable LLM agent for hematological malignancies. It converts unstructured clinical documents into structured cases, routes them into decision modes, and grounds recommendations in guidelines plus more than 2,000 real tumor-board cases. Local AI trumps to deal with sensitive data, expert workflows, and a need for traceability.

Qwen-AgentWorld and Qwen-RobotWorld pointed at the next layer. Agents need simulated environments before they can safely act in real ones. Robots need world models before they can generalize outside clean demos. These papers point at the rapidly approaching robotic agentic future.

The Codex usage paper was maybe the most grounded signal. People are not just asking AI questions anymore. They are running multiple agents, handing over longer tasks, and changing workflows and creating "loops" to achieve a goal. That is a better singularity signal than most benchmark charts.

A notable science story was the "zebra finch" work. Machine learning helped decode bird vocalisations and pushed two-way animal communication a little closer. Small, strange, and actually beautiful.

Links: HemaGuide in Nature MedicineThe Shift to Agentic AI: Evidence from Codex

Regulation, sovereignty, and control

June made AI regulation feel very real - with the US in negative spotlight

The Trump administration’s June 2 order promised to avoid hard licensing while creating a voluntary 30-day pre-release review path for powerful models. Then Anthropic’s Fable and Mythos shutdown showed the practical truth: even without formal licensing, national-security pressure can still interrupt launches. Though Anthropic has asked for this hundreds of times.

The proposed AI Incident Reporting Act pushed in the same direction. Critical AI incidents would need to be reported to Commerce within seven days, with the most severe cases reaching Congress within 48 hours. This is not abstract ethics talk anymore. It is operational control and lingers like a dark shadow stiffling progress early on. Those regulations threaten small brilliant developers much more than the big mega-corps.

Europe’s story was split. The EUROPA consortium was selected to build an open-source frontier model across all 24 official EU languages. That sounds good on paper. But with the AI Act, GDPR, fragmented compute, language politics, and procurement reality, calling it "frontier" before it exists feels very optimistic. Under current extreme EU regulations the best outcome to expect is another Mistral-large - not a model that people will find useful.

Apple’s Siri AI delay in the EU was the clearest user-facing example. Regulation did not just shape compliance work. It changed which AI feature European users get.
Geo-blocks are appearing on tens of thousands of websites, Codex "agentic computer use" is banned in EU as well.

Links: White House AI executive orderEUROPA consortium announcement

Money, chips, and power

The money moved from model hype into infrastructure.

OpenAI and Anthropic both moved toward public markets. DeepSeek raised over $7 billion - deviating from their previous private funding. Baseten hit a $13 billion valuation for inference infrastructure. Running models is becoming as important as training them.

OpenAI and Broadcom’s Jalapeño chip, a high density ASIC, was another hardware signal. It is built for inference, not just training. That matters because the next bottleneck is not only "who has the smartest model." It is "who can afford to run agents for millions of users all day." It will be interesting to compare the ASIC to Cerebras massive wafer-scale chips. In the end - both are affiliated with OpenAI.

Power also became part of the AI story. Data centers, chips, memory bandwidth, and energy deals are no longer background details. They are the product. If inference gets expensive enough, local models and smaller specialized models become more attractive by default.
Though Power or Water use for Datacenters are mostly populist topics - outside of Europe Power can be provided without much difficulty using on-premise generators. And water is a pure hype, datacenters barely need any in comparison to real water consumers.

Links: OpenAI and Anthropic IPO reportingOpenAI and Broadcom Jalapeño chip

Summary and outlook

June 2026 was not one big AI leap. It was mixed.

Cloud AI became stronger, more expensive, and more politically controlled.
Local AI became more credible, but also exposed the limits of consumer hardware. Open weights moved close enough to make closed labs very uncomfortable.
US Regulation moved from theory into product access.
Money moved into chips, inference, energy, and deployment.

The next months will show:

  • Whether GPT-5.6 gets broad access or in what way it stays gated.
  • Whether Anthropic can relaunch Fable 5 cleanly, they announced it for "non coding" tasks
  • Whether GLM-5.2 forces a faster Western open-weight response.
  • Whether Europe’s 400B EUROPA model can even scratch Qwen 3.6 27B outside language tasks
  • Whether local AI tooling improves faster than cloud pricing gets worse.
  • If the US regulation attack on Anthropic was a political hit or a broad anti-AI swipe
  • Wheter Qwen 3.7 is open source launched or Alibaba lost their drive

My read is cautiously positive.
The US turns AI into a political pressure tool but with a soft approach, Europe is talking about having AI while actually forbidding it, Chinese labs provide a benefit to the worlds progression that's starting to paint the authoritarian country in a positive light for the first time in a century.

u/Lirezh — 5 days ago
▲ 114 r/LocalAIStack+2 crossposts

Running Qwen3.6 27B / 35B locally with llama.cpp + Vscode Insiders + copilot as the harness - highest performance, quality and best usage while fitting on your GPU

I have been benchmarking Qwen3.6-27B and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B locally through llama.cpp, with GitHub Copilot Chat (Vscode Insiders needed) used as the frontend harness.

I am using Claude Opus, GPT 5.5 and Qwen 3.6 (27B) a lot in the past weeks.
The reason for Qwen is proprietary code areas where remote inference is not an option as it would leak the code out. And as long as you don't task it to write a complex cuda graph, it performs well.
Qwen 27.B is at Sonnet 4.6 if you combine it with a high value system prompt - or between Sonnet 4.5 and Sonnet 4.6 without.

Copilot Chat is an excellent harness for this kind of setup. You get the IDE integration, agent flow, tool calling UI, file context, and normal coding workflow, while the actual model is your own local llama-server endpoint.
All of this works while being LOGGED OUT of the Github Copilot account - as that is not affordable in pricing anymore.

This is a practical configuration guide for people already comfortable with llama.cpp, GGUFs, VRAM budgeting, and long-context local inference.

Models tested

Main focus:

  • unsloth/Qwen3.6-27B-GGUF
  • unsloth/Qwen3.6-27B-MTP-GGUF (same model but with MTP draft tensors)
  • unsloth/Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-GGUF

Recommended GGUFs:

27B:
Qwen3.6-27B-UD-Q4_K_XL.gguf
or
Qwen3.6-27B-MTP-GGUF:UD-Q4_K_XL

35B-A3B:
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-GGUF:UD-Q4_K_M

If memory is tight on the 35B-A3B model, drop to a smaller Unsloth Dynamic quant:

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-GGUF:UD-Q3_K_XL

If even that is tight, use UD-Q3_K_M or UD-Q3_K_S.

For the 35B model I do not recommend KV-cache quantization. Run the normal cache and keep the context sane. the 35B model is MoE and very low on kv-cache

For the 27B model, I do highly recommend:

--cache-type-k q4_0
--cache-type-v q4_0

Recent llama.cpp KV-cache improvements make q4_0 much more usable here. The 27B model handles q4_0 KV cache very well in my testing - almost identical to FP in evaluation results.

>What changed: llama.cpp added something like Hadamard rotation to kv-cache which shuffles the tensor distribution in a higher dimensionality and allows quantization superblocks to function.

Why Copilot Chat?

Because Copilot is a very good harness - beating Codex, Cursor, Claude in my opinion
Vscode Insiders is needed to get the openAI compatible endpoint (to interface the model)

You get:

  • IDE-native chat
  • agentic file/code workflows
  • very good tool calling
  • project context
  • local model backend
  • OpenAI-compatible endpoint wiring

The important part is that Copilot Chat is only the harness. The model is served locally through llama-server.

Why llama-server and not lm-studio,ollama etc ?

It allows MUCH more control over settings, we do not just use MTP drafting. We use a combination of context and MTP drafting which can lead to 300+ tokens/sec on the 27B model. MTP is a medium speedup (1.5x) but once the model is paraphrasing source code from thinking or prefill the ngram draft speedup can reach 6x or more.

So the stack is:

VS Code Insiders
        ↓
custom OpenAI-compatible model config
        ↓
llama.cpp llama-server
        ↓
local Qwen3.6 GGUF

Copilot chatLanguageModels.json

This is the shape I used for VSCode Insiders:

[
  {
    "name": "WSL",
    "vendor": "customoai",
    "models": [
      {
        "id": "qwen3.6-27b",
        "name": "QWEN-27B-WSL",
        "url": "http://172.27.211.123:1234/v1/chat/completions",
        "toolCalling": true,
        "vision": true,
        "thinking": true,
        "maxInputTokens": 165000,
        "maxOutputTokens": 15000
      }
    ]
  }
]

Adjust the URL to your own llama-server host, in WSL you'll see it by entering ipconfig or ifconfig. port you can choose of course.
The input and output tokens need to be adapted to your context setting.
The id must match the llama-server id.

For local-only setups this is usually one of:

http://127.0.0.1:1234/v1/chat/completions
http://localhost:1234/v1/chat/completions
http://<WSL-IP>:1234/v1/chat/completions

If your Copilot Insiders build expects the newer custom endpoint shape, use the same model block but switch the provider shape accordingly. The key fields are the endpoint URL, model id, tool calling, thinking, and max token limits.

27B command: long context + q4_0 KV cache + MTP-ngram drafting

This is the 27B style I recommend.

CTX=150000
PARALLEL=1
HOST=0.0.0.0
PORT=1234
MODEL=/models/Qwen3.6-27B-UD-Q4_K_XL.gguf

/usr/src/llama.cpp/build/bin/llama-server \
  -m "$MODEL" \
  --ctx-size "$CTX" \
  --flash-attn on \
  --batch-size 1024 \
  --ubatch-size 1024 \
  --parallel "$PARALLEL" \
  --host "$HOST" \
  --port "$PORT" \
  -ngl 99 \
  --threads 8 \
  --threads-batch 8 \
  --cache-type-k q4_0 \
  --cache-type-v q4_0 \
  --temp 0.6 \
  --top-p 0.95 \
  --top-k 20 \
  --min-p 0.00 \
  --presence-penalty 0.00 \
  --jinja \
  --chat-template-kwargs '{"preserve_thinking": true}' \
  --reasoning-format none \
  --reasoning-budget 16000 \
  --slot-save-path /kv_cache/ \
  --props \
  --metrics \
  --checkpoint-every-n-tokens 1024 \
  --ctx-checkpoints 64 \
  --perf \
  --spec-default \
  --spec-type draft-mtp \
  --spec-type ngram-map-k4v \
  --spec-ngram-map-k4v-size-n 16 \
  --spec-ngram-map-k4v-size-m 24 \
  --spec-ngram-map-k4v-min-hits 1

For the MTP-specific Unsloth repo, use:

MODEL=/models/Qwen3.6-27B-MTP-UD-Q4_K_XL.gguf

or the HF shorthand if your build supports it:

-hf unsloth/Qwen3.6-27B-MTP-GGUF:UD-Q4_K_XL

The important part is the drafting chain:

--spec-default
--spec-type draft-mtp
--spec-type ngram-map-k4v
--spec-ngram-map-k4v-size-n 16
--spec-ngram-map-k4v-size-m 24
--spec-ngram-map-k4v-min-hits 1

MTP gives useful speedup, but leave VRAM headroom. In practice I budget roughly +1 to +2 GB VRAM headroom for the MTP/drafting path and related buffers. If you are right on the edge, reduce context before blaming the model.

At q4_0 KV cache, every extra 1 GB of free VRAM is roughly another 13k tokens of 27B context, before runtime overhead.
If you are tight in vram, remove only the MTP part as ngram drafting is free.
You can also just use `mod-ngram` as an alternative to the more complex k4v map.

Thinking settings

This part matters.

I use:

--jinja
--chat-template-kwargs '{"preserve_thinking": true}'
--reasoning-format none
--reasoning-budget 16000

The reasoning-format none is important for Qwen3.6 because it avoids bad stop behavior and broken multi-turn thinking state during long coding sessions.
Copilot Chat was created to hide thinking from you (proprietary GPT models) but you want to see the thinking usually. So this solves both issues.

I also keep:

--reasoning-budget 16000

This gives the model room to think, but avoids runaway reasoning loops eating the whole session.

35B-A3B command: no KV-cache quantization

For 35B-A3B, I recommend being more conservative.

CTX=100000
PARALLEL=1
HOST=0.0.0.0
PORT=1234
MODEL=/models/Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-UD-Q4_K_M.gguf

/usr/src/llama.cpp/build/bin/llama-server \
  -m "$MODEL" \
  --ctx-size "$CTX" \
  --flash-attn on \
  --batch-size 1024 \
  --ubatch-size 1024 \
  --parallel "$PARALLEL" \
  --host "$HOST" \
  --port "$PORT" \
  -ngl 99 \
  --threads 8 \
  --threads-batch 8 \
  --temp 0.6 \
  --top-p 0.95 \
  --top-k 20 \
  --min-p 0.00 \
  --presence-penalty 0.00 \
  --jinja \
  --chat-template-kwargs '{"preserve_thinking": true}' \
  --reasoning-format none \
  --reasoning-budget 16000 \
  --slot-save-path /kv_cache/ \
  --props \
  --metrics \
  --checkpoint-every-n-tokens 1024 \
  --ctx-checkpoints 64 \
  --perf

No q4_0 KV cache here - the sub 4B active parameters need barely any VRAM anyway.

I recommend keeping 35B-A3B below roughly:

110k context

The model can be pushed past 200k context, but in my testing it becomes more likely to fall into reasoning loops. Once that happens, the session usually does not recover cleanly. Start a fresh session.
The upside of the 35B model is extreme performance, as in hundreds of tokens without any drafting enabled.
You CAN use drafting on top, mod-ngram, MTP and other drafting can be added for more speed but those will need a careful balance (that I have not tested yet)

So my practical 35B rule is:

35B-A3B: stay below 110k if you want stable coding behavior.
27B: can go as high as it fits, but below 150k is where it feels strongest.

LM Studio as local server

Using LM Studio is possible but you need to use a few tricks and it won't achieve the same top-tier performance.
LM Studio does not support our chained drafting, but it supports MTP.

  1. Go to your Qwen 3.6 model, enable Flash attention and the quantization needed for kv cache. Go to the Inference tab, disable the button for "Reasoning Section Parsing"
  2. Go to Developer, Server Settings and set the port, serve on local network if needed, no auth, enable CORS, consider disabling just-in-time loading.
  3. Start the local server and then use the "clipboard copy" icon to get the precise Server ID which you use in the vscode json config.

Everything else is similar to llama-server, you'll not have the same max performance but it works well.
You can always just install the latest llama release binaries, and use the commandline to load the model from the lmstudio models directory.

VRAM planning

These are practical planning numbers, not hard guarantees. Actual fit depends on:

  • exact GGUF
  • CUDA/ROCm/Metal/backend
  • batch/ubatch
  • -ngl
  • whether the desktop is using the same GPU
  • whether MTP/speculative decoding is enabled
  • whether you are using full GPU offload or spilling to CPU RAM

Qwen3.6-27B UD-Q4_K_XL, q4_0 KV cache

Recommended cards:

24 GB: RTX 3090, RTX 4090, RTX A5000, RTX 4500 Ada, RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell, A10
32 GB: RTX 5090, RTX 5000 Ada, Tesla V100 32GB

Approximate context fit with full GPU offload:

VRAM Example NVIDIA cards Practical context
16 GB RTX 4060 Ti 16GB, RTX 4080 Laptop 16GB, RTX 5080 16GB, RTX 5070 Ti 16GB, RTX A4000 16GB Not recommended for full 27B UD-Q4_K_XL offload. Use smaller quant or partial CPU offload.
24 GB RTX 3090, RTX 4090, RTX A5000, RTX 4500 Ada, RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell, A10 ~45k-60k with MTP, ~60k-75k without MTP
32 GB RTX 5090, RTX 5000 Ada, Tesla V100 32GB ~140k-160k with MTP, ~160k-180k without MTP

For 27B, q4_0 KV cache is the difference between normal local context and huge local context. It is the main reason this setup is viable.
On a 5090 you have enough VRAM to supply 2 sessions in parallel with both model types.
Or you could run one fast model for context summarization and 27B for code.

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B UD-Q4_K_M, normal KV cache

Recommended cards:

24 GB minimum for useful GPU-resident contexts
32 GB strongly preferred

Approximate context fit:

VRAM Example NVIDIA cards Practical context
16 GB RTX 4060 Ti 16GB, RTX 4080 Laptop 16GB, RTX 5080 16GB, RTX 5070 Ti 16GB, RTX A4000 16GB Not recommended for full 35B-A3B Q4. Use Q3 or partial offload.
24 GB RTX 3090, RTX 4090, RTX A5000, RTX 4500 Ada, RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell, A10 ~40k-50k
32 GB RTX 5090, RTX 5000 Ada, Tesla V100 32GB ~100k-110k recommended; more will fit but stability drops

The 35B-A3B model is very good, but I would not treat it as a “just max the context” model. Keep it tighter.
If you have the VRAM: Instead of large context, consider multiple sessions with limited context, so you can have 2 or 3 chats simultaneously.

Quick test: Linux

Once llama-server is running:

curl -s http://127.0.0.1:1234/v1/chat/completions \
  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{"model":"qwen3.6-27b","messages":[{"role":"user","content":"Reply with exactly: local ai works"}],"max_tokens":16}' \
  | jq -r '.choices[0].message.content'

Expected output:

the model responds to your input

If your server is inside WSL or another host, replace 127.0.0.1 with the server IP.

Quick test: Windows PowerShell

(Invoke-RestMethod `
  -Uri "http://127.0.0.1:1234/v1/chat/completions" `
  -Method Post `
  -ContentType "application/json" `
  -Body '{"model":"qwen3.6-27b","messages":[{"role":"user","content":"Reply with exactly: local ai works"}],"max_tokens":16}'
).choices[0].message.content

Expected output:

local ai works

Notes from benchmarking

My current practical ranking:

27B:
Best long-context local coding model in this setup that is close to Sonnet 4.6
Use q4_0 KV cache.
Use MTP if you have the headroom.
Strongest below 150k context, but can go much higher if memory allows.

35B-A3B:
Excellent quality but will fail on hard tasks
Do not use KV-cache quantization.
Keep below ~110k context for best stability.
Can go above 200k, but reasoning loops become more likely.
If it loops, start a new session.

For Copilot usage, I prefer exposing a conservative maxInputTokens in the JSON, even if the server can technically run higher. For example:

"maxInputTokens": 165000,
"maxOutputTokens": 15000

If you set wrong context here you'll get issues serverside, so make sure that matches.
I had cases where the server went OOC (out of context) when getting too close to the max context so I'd leave a little room. copilot seems to not follow this very strictly.

Final recommendation

If you want the most practical Copilot-local setup:

Use Qwen3.6-27B UD-Q4_K_XL
Use llama.cpp server
Use q4_0 KV cache
Use preserve_thinking
Use reasoning budget
Use Copilot Insiders as the harness
Use MTP only when you have VRAM headroom

If you want the stronger but more conservative model:

Use Qwen3.6-35B-A3B UD-Q4_K_M
Do not quantize KV cache
Stay below ~110k context
Drop to UD-Q3_K_XL if memory is tight

This is the first local setup I have used where Copilot feels like a serious frontend for a fully local long-context coding model instead of just a toy endpoint test.

I have tested this on terminal use, debugging, and massive codebase development - it works just like Sonnet 4.6.

reddit.com
u/Lirezh — 12 days ago