I'm not sure what people are on in the comments. It doesn't beat the other models, but it sure competes despite its size. GLM 5.1 is an excellent model, but even at Q4 you're looking at ~400GB. Kimi K2.5 is really good too, and at Q4 quantization you're looking at almost ~600GB. This model? You can run it at Q4 with 70GB of VRAM. This is approaching consumer level territory (you can get a Mac Studio with 128GB of RAM…
Mistral Medium 3.5
141–150 of 248 posts
Re: Mistral Medium 3.5
#142I'm not sure what people are on in the comments. It doesn't beat the other models, but it sure competes despite its size. GLM 5.1 is an excellent model, but even at Q4 you're looking at ~400GB. Kimi K2.5 is really good too, and at Q4 quantization you're looking at almost ~600GB. This model? You can run it at Q4 with 70GB of VRAM. This is approaching consumer level territory (you can get a Mac Studio with 128GB of RAM…
Sad to see all the non Chinese open source models being at least one generation behind.
Re: Mistral Medium 3.5
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cloud hardware is not inherently more "proper" than what's being proposed here, there's nothing wrong per se about targeting slower inference speeds in an on prem single-user context.
> Cloud hardware is not inherently more "proper" than what's being proposed here Cloud hardware can run the original model. Quantization will reduce quality. The quality drop to Q4 is not trivial. Cloud hardware is also massively faster in time to first token and token generation speed. > there's nothing wrong per se about targeting slower inference speeds in a local single-user context. If that's what the user wants…
New models are often being released in quantized format to begin with. This is true of both Kimi and the new DeepSeek V4 series. There is no "original model", the model is generated using Quantization Aware Training (QAT).
Re: Mistral Medium 3.5
#144As always, rooting for these guys — model and national diversity is great. This looks like a solid foundation to build on; hopefully the 3.6/3.7 will dial in more gains. It looks like maybe from the computer use benchmarks that their vision pipeline could use improvement, but that’s just speculation. The different results on some benchmarks vibes as if this is truly an independently trained model, not just exfiltrate…
Re: Mistral Medium 3.5
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the bar for Europe, huh?
Where are the competitive models from Singapore, Japan, Taiwan, Korea, Russia, Canada, India, the UK? From anywhere that isn't China or the US? There are none. Mistral Small 4 is pareto-competitive in its pricing bracket at $0.15/$0.60, at worst it's second to Gemma 4 26B A4B. The above countries have never had a model that is even close to being so. This particular Mistral Medium looks to be uncompetitive at that pr…
Re: Mistral Medium 3.5
#146This is a very interesting strategy that might pay off. This model is a very good option for enterprise self host. I would argue a lot of companies are VRAM constrained rather than compute constrained. You could fit 4-5 running instances on one H100 cluster where you can only fit 1-2 Kimi K2 or GLM5.
Re: Mistral Medium 3.5
#147I'm not sure what people are on in the comments. It doesn't beat the other models, but it sure competes despite its size. GLM 5.1 is an excellent model, but even at Q4 you're looking at ~400GB. Kimi K2.5 is really good too, and at Q4 quantization you're looking at almost ~600GB. This model? You can run it at Q4 with 70GB of VRAM. This is approaching consumer level territory (you can get a Mac Studio with 128GB of RAM…
>This model? You can run it at Q4 with 70GB of VRAM. >This beats the latest Sonnet while running locally Not sure it will beat Sonet at Q4. >This is approaching consumer level territory (you can get a Mac Studio with 128GB of RAM for ~3500 USD). For $3500 I can get 7-8 years of GLM using coding plans, have a faster model and much better code quality.
Very valid. Importance-weighted quantization and TurboQuant on model weights can reduce loss a lot compared to "traditional" Q4 so one can be hopeful.
> For $3500 I can get 7-8 years of GLM using coding plans, have a faster model and much better code quality
But you will own no computer, and that's also assuming prices stay what they are. Anyway my point was not whether or not it makes financial sense for everyone. A lot of people are very happy not owning their movies, software, games, cars or house. I'm just happy there is a future where the people can own and locally run the tech that was trained on their stolen data.
Re: Mistral Medium 3.5
#148This release Mistral really reminds you of the gap between the frontier labs and everyone else. Pre-agent, there wasn't always an obvious difference between models. Various models had their charms. Nowadays, I don't want to entertain anything less than the frontier models. The difference in capability is enormous and choosing anything less has a real cost in terms of productivity. I've been a big fan of the smaller l…
Re: Mistral Medium 3.5
#149I'm not sure what people are on in the comments. It doesn't beat the other models, but it sure competes despite its size. GLM 5.1 is an excellent model, but even at Q4 you're looking at ~400GB. Kimi K2.5 is really good too, and at Q4 quantization you're looking at almost ~600GB. This model? You can run it at Q4 with 70GB of VRAM. This is approaching consumer level territory (you can get a Mac Studio with 128GB of RAM…
Isn't Kimi K2.6 natively INT4?
Re: Mistral Medium 3.5
#150I'm not sure what people are on in the comments. It doesn't beat the other models, but it sure competes despite its size. GLM 5.1 is an excellent model, but even at Q4 you're looking at ~400GB. Kimi K2.5 is really good too, and at Q4 quantization you're looking at almost ~600GB. This model? You can run it at Q4 with 70GB of VRAM. This is approaching consumer level territory (you can get a Mac Studio with 128GB of RAM…
I would love to be able to run frontier locally, but I think the larger importance of open weight models is price accountability. In the US with our broken system of capitalism, it’s the only way we can tether these companies to reality. Left to their own devices, I’m not convinced they would actually compete with each other on price. Buy nobody like to talk about how “moat” building is fundamentally anti-competitive…