Live data from Hacker News

DeepSeek-v3.2: Pushing the frontier of open large language models [pdf]

huggingface.co

51–60 of 485 posts

Re: DeepSeek-v3.2: Pushing the frontier of open large language models [pdf]

#51
Disclaimer: I did not test this yet.

I don't want to make big generalizations. But one thing I noticed with chinese models, especially Kimi, is that it does very well on benchmarks, but fails on vibe testing. It feels a little bit over-fitting to the benchmark and less to the use cases.

I hope it's not the same here.

Re: DeepSeek-v3.2: Pushing the frontier of open large language models [pdf]

#52
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's all about the hardware and infrastructure. If you check OpenRouter, no provider offers a SOTA chinese model matching the speed of Claude, GPT or Gemini. The chinese models may benchmark close on paper, but real-world deployment is different. So you either buy your own hardware in order to run a chinese model at 150-200tps or give up an use one of the Big 3. The US labs aren't just selling models, they're selling…

> If you check OpenRouter, no provider offers a SOTA chinese model matching the speed of Claude, GPT or Gemini. I think GLM 4.6 offered by Cerebras is much faster than any US model.

You're right, I forgot about that one.

Re: DeepSeek-v3.2: Pushing the frontier of open large language models [pdf]

#53
post #16

Well props to them for continuing to improve, winning on cost-effectiveness, and continuing to publicly share their improvements. Hard not to root for them as a force to prevent an AI corporate monopoly/duopoly.

How could we judge if anyone is "winning" on cost-effectiveness, when we don't know what everyones profits/losses are?

I believe this was a statement on cost per token to us as consumers of the service

Re: DeepSeek-v3.2: Pushing the frontier of open large language models [pdf]

#54
post #5

I genuinely do not understand the evaluations of the US AI industry. The chinese models are so close and far cheaper

Two aspects to consider: 1. Chinese models typically focus on text. US and EU models also bear the cross of handling image, often voice and video. Supporting all those is additional training costs not spent on further reasoning, tying one hand in your back to be more generally useful. 2. The gap seems small, because so many benchmarks get saturated so fast. But towards the top, every 1% increase in benchmarks is sign…

> video

Most of AI-generated videos we see on social media now are made with Chinese models.

Re: DeepSeek-v3.2: Pushing the frontier of open large language models [pdf]

#55
post #9

It's awesome that stuff like this is open source, but even if you have a basement rig with 4 NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 graphic cards ($15-20k machine), can it even run with any reasonable context window that isn't like a crawling 10/tps? Frontier models are far exceeding even the most hardcore consumer hobbyist requirements. This is even further

You can run at ~20 tokens/second on a 512GB Mac Studio M3 Ultra: https://youtu.be/ufXZI6aqOU8?si=YGowQ3cSzHDpgv4z&t=197

IIRC the 512GB mac studio is about $10k

Re: DeepSeek-v3.2: Pushing the frontier of open large language models [pdf]

#56
post #5

I genuinely do not understand the evaluations of the US AI industry. The chinese models are so close and far cheaper

Two aspects to consider: 1. Chinese models typically focus on text. US and EU models also bear the cross of handling image, often voice and video. Supporting all those is additional training costs not spent on further reasoning, tying one hand in your back to be more generally useful. 2. The gap seems small, because so many benchmarks get saturated so fast. But towards the top, every 1% increase in benchmarks is sign…

Nothing you said helps with the issue of valuation. Yes, the US models may be better by a few percentage points, but how can they justify being so costly, both operationally as well as in investment costs? Over the long run, this is a business and you don't make money being the first, you have to be more profitable overall.

Re: DeepSeek-v3.2: Pushing the frontier of open large language models [pdf]

#57
post #51

Disclaimer: I did not test this yet. I don't want to make big generalizations. But one thing I noticed with chinese models, especially Kimi, is that it does very well on benchmarks, but fails on vibe testing. It feels a little bit over-fitting to the benchmark and less to the use cases. I hope it's not the same here.

This used to happen with bench marks on phones, manufacturers would tweak android so benchmarks ran faster.

I guess that’s kinda how it is for any system that’s trained to do well on benchmarks, it does well but rubbish at everything else.

Re: DeepSeek-v3.2: Pushing the frontier of open large language models [pdf]

#58
post #51

Disclaimer: I did not test this yet. I don't want to make big generalizations. But one thing I noticed with chinese models, especially Kimi, is that it does very well on benchmarks, but fails on vibe testing. It feels a little bit over-fitting to the benchmark and less to the use cases. I hope it's not the same here.

I would assume that huge amount is spent in frontier models just making the models nicer to interact with, as it is likely one of the main things that drives user engagement.

Re: DeepSeek-v3.2: Pushing the frontier of open large language models [pdf]

#59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two aspects to consider: 1. Chinese models typically focus on text. US and EU models also bear the cross of handling image, often voice and video. Supporting all those is additional training costs not spent on further reasoning, tying one hand in your back to be more generally useful. 2. The gap seems small, because so many benchmarks get saturated so fast. But towards the top, every 1% increase in benchmarks is sign…

forgive me for bringing politics into it, are chinese LLM more prone to censorship bias than US ones ?

Being open source, I believe Chinese models are less prone to censorship, since the US corporations can add censorship in several ways just by being a closed model that they control.

Re: DeepSeek-v3.2: Pushing the frontier of open large language models [pdf]

#60
post #46
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or perhaps a 512GB Mac Studio. 671B Q4 of R1 runs on it.

I wouldn’t say runs. More of a gentle stroll.

I run it all the time, token generation is pretty good. Just large contexts are slow but you can hook a DGX Spark via Exo Labs stack and outsource token prefill to it. Upcoming M5 Ultra should be faster than Spark in token prefill as well.
Post reply on HN