41–50 of 1001 posts
For those who didn't check the page yet, it just links to the API docs being updated with the upcoming models, not the actual model release.
My submission here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47885014 done at the same time was to the weights. dang, probably the two should be merged and that be the link
History doesn't always repeat itself. But if it does, then in the following week we'll see DeepSeek4 floods every AI-related online space. Thousands of posts swearing how it's better than the latest models OpenAI/Anthropic/Google have but only costs pennies. Then a few weeks later it'll be forgotten by most.
There's something heartwarming about the developer docs being released before the flashy press release.
Edit: it seems "open source" was edited out of the parent comment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The thing is, it doesnt need to beat 4.7. it just needs to do somewhat well against it. This is free... as in you can download it, run it on your systems and finetune it to be the way you want it to be.
What's the hardware cost to running it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it honestly better than Opus 4.6 or just benchmaxxed? Have you done any coding with an agent harness using it? If its coding abilities are better than Claude Code with Opus 4.6 then I will definitely be switching to this model.
Their Chinese announcement says that, based on internal employee testing, it is not as good as Opus 4.6 Thinking, but is slightly better than Opus 4.6 without Thinking enabled.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does it compare to Opus 4.7? I've been immersed in 4.7 all week participating in the Anthropic Opus 4.7 hackathon and it's pretty impressive even if it's ravenous from a token perspective compared to 4.6
The thing is, it doesnt need to beat 4.7. it just needs to do somewhat well against it. This is free... as in you can download it, run it on your systems and finetune it to be the way you want it to be.
History doesn't always repeat itself. But if it does, then in the following week we'll see DeepSeek4 floods every AI-related online space. Thousands of posts swearing how it's better than the latest models OpenAI/Anthropic/Google have but only costs pennies. Then a few weeks later it'll be forgotten by most.
It's difficult because even if the underlying model is very good, not having a pre-built harness like Claude Code makes it very un-sticky for most devs. Even at equal quality, the friction (or at least perceived friction) is higher than the mainstream models.
If one finds it difficult to set up OpenCode to use whatever providers they want, I won't call them 'dev'.
The only real friction (if the model is actually as good as SOTA) is to convince your employer to pay for it. But again if it really provides the same value at a fraction of the cost, it'll eventually cease to be an issue.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The thing is, it doesnt need to beat 4.7. it just needs to do somewhat well against it. This is free... as in you can download it, run it on your systems and finetune it to be the way you want it to be.
What's the hardware cost to running it?