DeepSeek V4: The Open-Source Model Frontier Labs Feared
1–10 of 36 posts
Re: DeepSeek V4: The Open-Source Model Frontier Labs Feared
#2[deleted]
Re: DeepSeek V4: The Open-Source Model Frontier Labs Feared
#3The cost angle is what most coverage misses. We're using Claude Haiku in
production for a small consumer app and the per-call cost is genuinely
fine, but the second you have any kind of multilingual fan-out the bill
grows non-linearly because the same query gets re-issued in N localized
contexts.
Open-weight models with strong multilingual support change the math because you can self-host at marginal cost once you have GPU capacity. DeepSeek's earlier versions already punched above their weight on non-English benchmarks (especially CJK and some Indic languages where the gap to GPT-4 was much narrower than English-only benchmarks suggested).
Two questions for anyone who's actually deployed V4 in production yet:
1. How does it handle Turkish / Slavic morphology compared to V3? In our tests V3 was solid for Russian and respectable for Turkish, but handled compound morphology in agglutinative languages a bit awkwardly.
2. Is the long-context window actually usable end-to-end or does quality degrade past ~64k like with most open models?
Re: DeepSeek V4: The Open-Source Model Frontier Labs Feared
#4In my personal experience, no model comes close to claude when it comes to coding performance. It does not matter what any of the benchmarks says.
Having said that I really hope this model of deepseek, performs significantly on par with the claude saunnet model.
Re: DeepSeek V4: The Open-Source Model Frontier Labs Feared
#5I think that is sale pricing at 75% discount till end of May only.
Re: DeepSeek V4: The Open-Source Model Frontier Labs Feared
#6I think that is sale pricing at 75% discount till end of May only.
still a lot cheaper, seems wild that it is basically like the price of Gemma 4
Re: DeepSeek V4: The Open-Source Model Frontier Labs Feared
#7In my personal experience, no model comes close to claude when it comes to coding performance. It does not matter what any of the benchmarks says. Having said that I really hope this model of deepseek, performs significantly on par with the claude saunnet model.
Codex is good now. I’m undecided which is better, but they’re definitely close enough that I feel comfortable recommending Claude-exclusive people in my circle to try codex.
Re: DeepSeek V4: The Open-Source Model Frontier Labs Feared
#8Do you know what kind of machine do I need to run the original DeepSeek v4 pro model with a good tok/s throughput?
Re: DeepSeek V4: The Open-Source Model Frontier Labs Feared
#9Do you know what kind of machine do I need to run the original DeepSeek v4 pro model with a good tok/s throughput?
It's not really plausible to host at home, unless you have deep pockets. What you/we win here is a model that doesn't suddenly become worse like the proprietary ones have been doing, and you can choose a provider from a competitive market.
Re: DeepSeek V4: The Open-Source Model Frontier Labs Feared
#10Do you know what kind of machine do I need to run the original DeepSeek v4 pro model with a good tok/s throughput?
DeepSeek v4 pro is still rather large, DeepSeek-V4-Flash[0] becomes relatively more reasonable with smaller quantizations and eventually will be able to effectively offload 'facts' to system RAM. See DwarfStar 4[1] for current sweet spots.