Hacker News Reader

Comment by BoorishBears | Hacker News Reader

No, I've deployed a lot of open weight models and the gap between closed source is there even at larger sizes.

I'm running a 400B parameter model at FP8 and it still took a lot of post-training to get an even somewhat comparable performance

I think a lot of people implicitly bake in some grace because the models are open weights, and that's not unreasonable because of the flexibility... but in terms of raw performance it's not even close.

GPT-3.5 has better world knowledge than some 70B models, and a few even larger.

View on HN

The big "frontier" models are expert systems built on top of the LLM. That's the reason for the massive payouts to scientists. It's not about some ML secret sauce, it's about all the symbolic logic they bring to the table.

Without constantly refreshing the underlying LLM and the expert system layer, these models would be outdated in months. Language and underlying reality would shift from under their representations and they would rot quick.

That's my reasoning for considering this a bubble. There has been zero indication that the R&D can be frozen. They are stuck burning increasing amouts of cash for as long as they want these models to be relevant and useful.

you're killing my dream of blowing $50-100k on a desktop supercomputer next year and being able to do everything locally ;)

"the hacker news dream" - a house, 2 kids, and a desktop supercomputer that can run a 700B model.

Take a look at: https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/products/workstations/dgx-spark... . IIRC, it was about ~$4K.

An M4 Max twice the memory bandwidth (which is typically the limiting factor)

I'll say neither of them will do anything for you if you're currently using SOTA closed models in anger and expect that performance to hold.

I'm on a 128GB M4 Max, and running models locally is a curiosity at best given the relative performance.

It will be sort of decent on a 4bit 70B parameter model, like here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ktS0aG3SMc (deepseek-r1:70b Q4_K_M). But yeah, not great.

I'm running an M4 Max as well and I found that using project goose works decently well with qwen3 coder loaded on LM Studio (Ollama doesn't do MLX yet unless you build it yourself I think) and configured as an openai model as the api is compatible. Goose adds a bunch of tools and plugins that make the model more effective.

Given that for a non quantized 700B monolithic model with let's say a 1M token context, you would need around 20TB of memory, I doubt your spark or M4 will get very far.

I'm not saying those machines can't be usefull or fun, but it's not in the range of the 'fantasy' thing you're responding to.

I regularly use Gemini CLI and Claude Code, and I'm convinced that Gemini's enormous context window isn't that helpful in many situations. I think the more you put into context, the more likely the model is to go off into on a tangent and you end up with "context rot" or get confused and start working on an older no longer relevant context. You definitely need to manage and clear your context window and the only time I would want such a large context window is when the source data is really that large.

Context quality and relevance is indeed a major factor. But large size is not the core issue, although in unmaintained or poor relevance context situations a smaller window is going to blissfully forget the bad, and the good, sooner.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com