91–100 of 297 posts
Mark Zuckerberg must be in crisis. Microsoft releasing models that compete with Claude's models. Meanwhile the only thing anyone knows about Mark's models is that they help you get hacked more easily.
Here Microsoft is comparing against Claude Haiku, the smallest and least capable model from Anthropic.
Does anyone actually uses these smaller models for coding? If so, how? I usually Opus everything. Is the play to plan/design/architect with a heavier model than delegate structured tasks to these smaller ones? Would appreciate to hear someone's opinion on having done and tested both paths.
Does anyone actually uses these smaller models for coding? If so, how? I usually Opus everything. Is the play to plan/design/architect with a heavier model than delegate structured tasks to these smaller ones? Would appreciate to hear someone's opinion on having done and tested both paths.
I was wondering the same. I guess it makes sense to use a heavy weight model to make the entire design and split the work so that smaller models (possibly local one?) would then do the coding... But how would I even do that? I'm using Claude Code. Would I need support for this within the harness ?
It's a start and I welcome competition but I don't think I ever used small cloud models like Haiku 4.5. They are cute but for serious coding they tend to waste your expensive time. And this certainly wont bring me back to GitHub Copilot which I cancelled yesterday. GitHub Copilot had competitive pricing until yesterday when they changed from per-request to one of the most expensive per-token quotas. Seriously, take a…
Small models are more than enough for the majority of tasks these days. Plan and review with the bigger ones, let the little ones explore and implement.
OpenCode Go is $10/month for the open weight models with nice quotas: https://opencode.ai/go
not open weight or at least I did not find anything indicating open weight
I was hoping Microsoft would make it open weights, as they have done for years with the Phi models.
The era of big tech releasing models into the wild might be over, which IMO is counter-productive, as we are shifting from "the model is the product" to "the harness is the product"
Huh, according to that model card this is a 137B total parameter model. Performance doesn't seem that good: - MAI-Code-1-Flash (137B-A5B) = 51% on SWE-bench pro - Qwen3.6-35B-A3B = 49.5% on SWE-bench pro ( https://huggingface.co/Qwen/Qwen3.6-35B-A3B ) They benchmark against Claude Haiku but Haiku is not good, it's worse than tiny open models you can run locally or via API at 10% the cost.
The take away is that this model is a smaller model that competes with Haiku, I would hope they come out with a "Sonnet" competing model, then Opus. I have been wondering why Microsoft is kind of "sleeping" on offering models they themselves have made on Copilot, maybe it was part of their deal with OpenAI? Not sure.
Qwen-3.6-27b is closer to Claude Opus 4.7 than it is to Haiku 4.5 in a lot of benchmarks - and it's way smaller than Microsoft's new model.
Sure, it competes with Haiku, but it shows how far Microsoft is behind lots of other small models that are available.
I'd really like to get back to an autocomplete flow, ideally with some shared and optimized context with the relationship with my larger agent models. But it seems like, by and large, even the faster models are now aimed at longer-running agentic flows and not sub-1s autocomplete. Or am I wrong about that?
What's with the lack of Microsoft design language on the website? It's painfully obvious they're trying to emulate Anthropic's style here and it looks tacky.