Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GLM 5.2 beats Claude in our benchmarks

semgrep.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 559 posts

Re: GLM 5.2 beats Claude in our benchmarks

#161

Post by smcleod »

horsawlarway wrote: post #147
Aditya_Garg wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Im really curious about this. Why pay API pricing? I burn 1000s of dollars a month of api according to claude usage but only pay the $100 subscription

My increasing frustration with these plans is the harness lock in. Anthropic won't even let you run "claude -p [prompt]" any more... They bill it at api rates. So if you're trying to automate the ai (and seriously, that's the point) the subsidized plans are crippled.

They canned the moved to make -p commands API billable.

Re: GLM 5.2 beats Claude in our benchmarks

#162

Post by addandsubtract »

skissane wrote: post #110
bardak wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They could ban payment processors from processing payments to any hosts of GML 5.2, despite the open weights the vast majority of people will be using cloud providers to get access since it is to heavy to host for 99% of people. This would be extremely heavy handed and probably end up accelerating the loss of the virtual US monopoly of payment network. The reast of the world isn't going to let the US dictate that onl…

> They could ban payment processors from processing payments to any hosts of GML 5.2 Can they actually though? Do they have legal authority to tell a payment processor that it has to block transactions of a legal US company, just because the company is hosting a Chinese-developed open source model? I’m sceptical And what about companies (e.g. AWS) that let you “bring your own model”?

Label AI as porn and the payment processors will cut their ties automatically.

Re: GLM 5.2 beats Claude in our benchmarks

#163

Post by computerex »

sroerick wrote: post #157
horsawlarway wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My increasing frustration with these plans is the harness lock in. Anthropic won't even let you run "claude -p [prompt]" any more... They bill it at api rates. So if you're trying to automate the ai (and seriously, that's the point) the subsidized plans are crippled.

I'm using synthetic.new and Neuralwatt with pi and its good and also cheap

I have had bad experience with neuralwatt GLM 5.2. Seems like they may be using quantized version of the model.

Re: GLM 5.2 beats Claude in our benchmarks

#164

Post by tiahura »

Sanzig wrote: post #143
CamperBob2 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can run the NV4FP quant with 8x RTX6000 cards at 50-75 tps output, but not (practically speaking) the OEM FP8 version. You will learn more about PCIe than you ever wanted to know. The real gangstas are running 16x RTX6000s. Too rich for my blood, and the NV4FP quant doesn't seem to be that much worse.

Anyone done any benchmarks on the NV4FP quant? Seriously considering pitching an 8 x RTX 6000 Pro box at work to run GLM-5.2 in an air gapped environment.

Good luck. I’m in the legal field, and even there, selling airgapped is tough.

Re: GLM 5.2 beats Claude in our benchmarks

#166

Post by theteapot »

jliptzin wrote: post #150
8note wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you can however, have fun with it. oil workers buy 100k trucks they do not-much with. why not a 100k in computer?

Yea as far has hobbies go, I feel like this is on the low end. I know people who collect watches and corvettes, that's way more expensive and functionally you can't really do anything special with them.

The difference is watches and corvettes typically appreciate in value, where as computer hardware typically drops like a rock.

Re: GLM 5.2 beats Claude in our benchmarks

#168

Post by singpolyma3 »

lenerdenator wrote: post #117
aussiegreenie wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Americans may ban the use of the Chinese models in America. But like the Chinese car ban, everyone else will use them.

That's not necessarily a good thing for everyone else, mind. Yes, you get your free model, but the cost of this is not developing your own capability and tying your fate to a country which may or may not have your best interests as a nation in mind. This is just the deindustrialization that occurred in my home region (the American Midwest) playing out on a global scale in different sectors. It was originally driven b…

It's not really the same because we already have the model. If China stopped letting us have it tomorrow I'd doesn't matter because... We have it already

Re: GLM 5.2 beats Claude in our benchmarks

#169

Post by throwawayffffas »

horsawlarway wrote: post #147
Aditya_Garg wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Im really curious about this. Why pay API pricing? I burn 1000s of dollars a month of api according to claude usage but only pay the $100 subscription

My increasing frustration with these plans is the harness lock in. Anthropic won't even let you run "claude -p [prompt]" any more... They bill it at api rates. So if you're trying to automate the ai (and seriously, that's the point) the subsidized plans are crippled.

Z.ai does not lock you in to any harness.

Re: GLM 5.2 beats Claude in our benchmarks

#170

Post by dom96 »

pimeys wrote: post #59

I have taken another look on these open models after the fiasco of Fable and GPT 5.6 this weekend and... GLM-5.2 truly is a good workhorse model for daily programming. I consider myself a heavy user of LLMs and a seasoned developer. A typical session for me with GPT is usually over a hundred dollars... This weekend I programmed a matrix bot with encryption and a Rust agent with some tools. Because I need one and Open…

Twenty dollars?

How are you comfortable spending that much to write something as simple as a matrix bot?

Are people doing this kind of thing just super rich or am I missing something?

Post reply on HN