TurboQuant VS LM Studio Llama3.3 70b Q4_K_M

Reddit r/LocalLLaMA / 3/28/2026

💬 OpinionDeveloper Stack & InfrastructureSignals & Early TrendsTools & Practical Usage

Key Points

  • The post compares TurboQuant versus LM Studio running Llama 3.3 70B Q4_K_M on dual RTX 3090s, using a quick test at ~16k context.
  • Overall benchmark-style results show LM Studio performed slightly better (e.g., objective recall 85/85 vs Turbo 79/85), but TurboQuant still achieved strong accuracy across multiple recall and trap/distraction tests.
  • For performance, TurboQuant was a bit slower in throughput (tokens/sec) while TTFT (time to first token) stayed essentially unchanged.
  • The author notes context limitations on the dual 3090s (LM Studio couldn’t fit beyond 16k for their head-to-head) and suggests the trade-off depends on the user’s use case.
  • They invite others to try TurboQuant and share whether they see similar results on comparable hardware.

I did a quick and dirty test at 16k and it was pretty interesting.

Running on dual 3090's

Context Vram: Turbo 1.8gb -- LM 5.4gb

Turbo -- LM
12 fact recall: 8 / 8 -- 8 / 8

Instruction discipline : 1 rule violation -- 0 violations

Mid prompt recall trap: 5 / 5 -- 5 / 5

A1 to A20 item recall: 6 / 6 -- 6 / 6

Archive Loaded stress: 15 / 20 -- 20 / 20

Vault Sealed heavy distraction: 19 / 20 -- 20 / 20

Deep Vault Sealed near limit: 26 / 26 -- 26 / 26

Objective recall total: 79 / 85 -- 85 / 85

So LM did win, but Turbo did very well considering.

Tok/s was a tad slower with turboquant.

TTFT didn't change.

Super cool tech, thought I didn't check to see how large I could get the context. For head to head testing I couldn't fit more than 16k on the dual 3090's with LM, so I stopped there.

I think it's a fair trade off depending on your use case.

Anyone playing around with turboquant and seeing similar results?

submitted by /u/TimSawyer25
[link] [comments]