Here is the pricing per M tokens. https://docs.z.ai/guides/overview/pricing
Why is GLM 5 more expensive than GLM 4.7 even when using sparse attention?
There is also a GLM 5-code model.
GLM-5: Targeting complex systems engineering and long-horizon agentic tasks
171–180 of 540 posts
Re: GLM-5: Targeting complex systems engineering and long-horizon agentic tasks
#172It's looking like we'll have Chinese OSS to thank for being able to host our own intelligence, free from the whims of proprietary megacorps. I know it doesn't make financial sense to self-host given how cheap OSS inference APIs are now, but it's comforting not being beholden to anyone or requiring a persistent internet connection for on-premise intelligence. Didn't expect to go back to macOS but they're basically the…
Yeah that sounds great until it's running as an autonomous moltbot in a distributed network semi-offline with access to your entire digital life, and China sneaks in some hidden training so these agents turn into an army of sleeper agents.
exactly, we all need to use CIA/NSA approved models to stay safe.
very smart idea!
Re: GLM-5: Targeting complex systems engineering and long-horizon agentic tasks
#173Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Didn't expect to go back to macOS but their basically the only feasible consumer option for running large models locally. I presume here you are referring to running on the device in your lap. How about a headless linux inference box in the closet / basement? Return of the home network!
Apple devices have high memory bandwidth necessary to run LLMs at reasonable rates. It’s possible to build a Linux box that does the same but you’ll be spending a lot more to get there. With Apple, a $500 Mac Mini has memory bandwidth that you just can’t get anywhere else for the price.
Only the M4 Pro Mac Minis have faster RAM than you’ll get in an off-the-shelf Intel/AMD laptop. The M4 Pros start at $1399.
You want the M4 Max (or Ultra) in the Mac Studios to get the real stuff.
Re: GLM-5: Targeting complex systems engineering and long-horizon agentic tasks
#174Really impressive benchmarks. It was commonly stated that open source models were lagging 6 months behind state of the art, but they are likely even closer now.
Re: GLM-5: Targeting complex systems engineering and long-horizon agentic tasks
#175Here is the pricing per M tokens. https://docs.z.ai/guides/overview/pricing Why is GLM 5 more expensive than GLM 4.7 even when using sparse attention? There is also a GLM 5-code model.
I think it's likely more expensive because they have more activated parameters, which kind of outweighs the benefits of DSA?
Re: GLM-5: Targeting complex systems engineering and long-horizon agentic tasks
#176I'd say that they're super confident about the GLM-5 release, since they're directly comparing it with Opus 4.5 and don't mention Sonnet 4.5 at all. I am still waiting if they'd launch GLM-5 Air series,which would run on consumer hardware.
Qwen and GLM both promise the stars in the sky every single release and the results are always firmly in the "whatever" range
Re: GLM-5: Targeting complex systems engineering and long-horizon agentic tasks
#177Been using GLM-4.7 for a couple weeks now. Anecdotally, it’s comparable to sonnet, but requires a little bit more instruction and clarity to get things right. For bigger complex changes I still use anthropic’s family, but for very concise and well defined smaller tasks the price of GLM-4.7 is hard to beat.
Re: GLM-5: Targeting complex systems engineering and long-horizon agentic tasks
#178Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's just whataboutism. Why shouldn't people talk about the various ideological stances embedded in different LLMs?
Why do we hear censorship concerns only when it comes Chinese models? Why don't we hear similar stances when Claude or OpenAI releases models? We either set the bar and judge both, or don't complain about censorship
I think more people should spend time talking about this with American models, yeah. If you're interested in that then maybe that can be you. It doesn't have to be the same exact people talking about everything, that's the nice thing about forums. Find your own topic that American models consistently lie or freeze on that Chinese models don't and post about it.
Re: GLM-5: Targeting complex systems engineering and long-horizon agentic tasks
#179why don't they publish at ARC-AGI ? too expensive?
Arc agi was never a good benchmark that tested spatial understanding more than reasoning. I'm glad it's no longer popular
Re: GLM-5: Targeting complex systems engineering and long-horizon agentic tasks
#180Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not going to call $30/mo for a github copilot subscription "cheap". More like "extortionary".
Yeah it's funny how the needle has moved on this kind of thing. Two years ago people scoffed at buying a personal license for e.g. JetBrains IDEs which netted out to $120 USD or something a year; VS Code etc took off because they were "free" But now they're dumping monthly subs to OpenAI and Anthropic that work out to the same as their car insurance payments. It's not sustainable.
There's also zero incentive for individual companies to care: if I only want to use opus in VS code (and why would I use anything else, it's so much better at the job) I can either pay for copilot, which has excellent VS Code integration (because it has to), or I can pay Claude specifically and then use their extension which has the absolute worst experience because not only is the chat "whimsical, to make AI fun!", its interface is pat of the sidebar, so it's mutually exclusive with your file browser, search, etc.
So whether you pay Claude or GitHub, Claude gets paid the same. So the consumer ends up footing a bill that has no reason to exist, and has no real competition because open source models can't run at the scale of an Opus or ChatGPT.
(not unless the EU decides it's time for a "European Open AI Initiative" where any EU citizen gets free access to an EU wide datacenter backed large scale system that AI companies can pay to be part of, instead of getting paid to connect to)