Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would they pay 2/3 of the price for something with 1/5 of ram? The whole point of spending that much money for them is to run massive models, like the full R1, which the Pro 6000 cant
Because waiting forever for initial prompt processing with realistic number of MCP tools enabled on a prompt is going to suck without the most bandwidth possible And you are never going to sit around waiting for anything larger than the 96+gb of ram that the RTX pro has. If you’re using it for background tasks and not coding it’s a different story
MCP in LM Studio
101–110 of 156 posts
Re: MCP in LM Studio
#102MCP terminology is already super confusing, but this seems to just introduce "MCP Host" randomly in a way that makes no sense to me at all. > "MCP Host": applications (like LM Studio or Claude Desktop) that can connect to MCP servers, and make their resources available to models. I think everyone else is calling this an "MCP Client", so I'm not sure why they would want to call themselves a host - makes it sound like…
It's confusing but you just have to read the official docs
https://modelcontextprotocol.io/specification/2025-03-26/arc...
Re: MCP in LM Studio
#103Just ordered a $12k mac studio w/ 512GB of integrated RAM. Can't wait for it to arrive and crank up LM Studio. It's literally the first install. I'm going to download it with safari. LM Studio is newish, and it's not a perfect interface yet, but it's fantastic at what it does which is bring local LLMs to the masses w/o them having to know much. There is another project that people should be aware of: https://github.c…
If the rumors about splitting CPU/GPU in new Macs are true, your MacStudio will be the last one capable of running DeepSeek R1 671B Q4. It looks like Apple had an accidental winner that will go away with the end of unified RAM.
Re: MCP in LM Studio
#104Just ordered a $12k mac studio w/ 512GB of integrated RAM. Can't wait for it to arrive and crank up LM Studio. It's literally the first install. I'm going to download it with safari. LM Studio is newish, and it's not a perfect interface yet, but it's fantastic at what it does which is bring local LLMs to the masses w/o them having to know much. There is another project that people should be aware of: https://github.c…
I love LM studio but I’d never waste 12k like that. The memory bandwidth is too low trust me. Get the RTX Pro 6000 for 8.5k with double the bandwidth. It will be way better
RTX Pro 6000 can't do DeepSeek R1 671B Q4, you'd need 5-6 of them, which makes it way more expensive. Moreover, MacStudio will do it at 150W whereas Pro 6000 would start at 1500W.
Re: MCP in LM Studio
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would they pay 2/3 of the price for something with 1/5 of ram? The whole point of spending that much money for them is to run massive models, like the full R1, which the Pro 6000 cant
Because waiting forever for initial prompt processing with realistic number of MCP tools enabled on a prompt is going to suck without the most bandwidth possible And you are never going to sit around waiting for anything larger than the 96+gb of ram that the RTX pro has. If you’re using it for background tasks and not coding it’s a different story
M3 Ultra GPU is around 3070-3080 for the initial token processing. Not great, not terrible.
Re: MCP in LM Studio
#106Earlier quoted context omitted.
MCP Host is terminology from the spec. It's the software that makes llm calls, build prompts, interprets tool call requests and performs them etc.
So it is, I stand corrected. I googled mcp host and the lmstudio link was the first result. Some more discussion on the confusion here https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/modelcontextprotocol... where they acknowledge that most people call it a client and that that's ok unless the distinction is important. I think host is a bad term for it though as it makes more intuitive sense for the host to host the server an…
I'm with you on the confusion, it makes no sense at all to call it a host. MCP host should host the MCP server (yes, I know - that is yet a separate term).
The MCP standard seems a mess, e.g take this paragraph from here[1]
> In the Streamable HTTP transport, the server operates as an independent process that can handle multiple client connections.
Yes, obviously, that is what servers do. Also, what is "Streamable HTTP"? Comet, HTTP2, or even websockets? SSE could be a candidate, but it isn't as it says "Streamable HTTP" replaces SSE.
> This transport uses HTTP POST and GET requests.
Guys, POST and GET are verbs for HTTP protocol, TCP is the transport. I guess they could say that they use HTTP protocol, which only uses POST and GET verbs (if that is the case).
> Server can optionally make use of Server-Sent Events (SSE) to stream multiple server messages.
This would make sense if there weren't the note "This replaces the HTTP+SSE transport" right below the title.
> This permits basic MCP servers, as well as more feature-rich servers supporting streaming and server-to-client notifications and requests.
Again, how is streaming implemented (what is "Streaming HTTP")?. Also, "server-to-client .. requests"? SSE is unidirectional, so those requests are happening over secondary HTTP requests?
--
And then the 2.0.1 Security Warning seems like a blob of words on security, no reference to maybe same-origin. Also, "for local servers bind to localhost and then implement proper authentication" - are both of those together ever required? Is it worth it to even say that servers should implement proper authentication?
Anyway, reading the entire documentation one might be able to put a charitable version of the MCP puzzle together that might actually make sense. But it does seem that it isn't written by engineers, in which case I don't understand why or to whom is this written for.
[1] https://modelcontextprotocol.io/specification/draft/basic/tr...
Re: MCP in LM Studio
#107Earlier quoted context omitted.
Still, you need to install and run the AppImage at least once to enable the "lms" cli which can later be used. Would be nice with a completely GUI-less installation/use method too.
The UI is the product. If you just want the engine, use mlx-omni-server (for MLX) or llama-swap (for GGUF) and huggingface-cli (for model downloads).
Those don't offer the same features as LM Studio itself does, even when you don't consider the UI. If there was a "LM Engine" CLI I could install, then yeah, but there isn't, hence the need to run the UI once to get "the engine".
Re: MCP in LM Studio
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
I love LM studio but I’d never waste 12k like that. The memory bandwidth is too low trust me. Get the RTX Pro 6000 for 8.5k with double the bandwidth. It will be way better
RTX Pro 6000 can't do DeepSeek R1 671B Q4, you'd need 5-6 of them, which makes it way more expensive. Moreover, MacStudio will do it at 150W whereas Pro 6000 would start at 1500W.
> Moreover, MacStudio will do it at 150W whereas Pro 6000 would start at 1500W.
No, Pro 6000 pulls max 600W, not sure where you get 1500W from, that's more than double the specification.
Besides, what is the token/second or second/token, and prompt processing speed for running DeepSeek R1 671B on a Mac Studio with Q4? Curious about those numbers, because I have a feeling they're very far off each other.
Re: MCP in LM Studio
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
But 8GB of Apple RAM is 16GB of normal RAM. https://www.pcgamer.com/apple-vp-says-8gb-ram-on-a-macbook-p...
I concur. I just upgraded from m1 air with 8gb to m4 with 24gb. Excited to run bigger models.
> m4 with 24gb
Wow, that is probably analogous to 48GB on other systems then, if we were to ask an Apple VP?
Re: MCP in LM Studio
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
i recently tried openwebui but it was so painful to get it to run with local model. that "first run experience" of lm studio is pretty fire in comparison. can't really talk about actually working with it though, still waiting for the 8GB download
Interesting. I run my local llms through ollama and it's zero trouble to get that working in openwebui as long as the ollama server is running.
I think that's the thing. Compared to LM Studio, just running Ollama (fiddling around with terminals) is more complicated than the full E2E of chatting with LM Studio.
Of course, for folks used to terminals, daemons and so on it makes sense from the get go, but for others it seemingly doesn't, and it doesn't help that Ollama refuses to communicate what people should understand before trying to use it.