> Write me a coherent paragraph in French, without ever using the letter "e".
> Voilà une phrase claire et concise : "Le village est situé dans les montagnes. Le soleil est haut. Il y a des animaux dans le village. Il pleut dans les montagnes."
I suppose this is just a demo of how fast an LLM can be, I wonder if there are tradeoffs with larger/smarter models. Also, for a human usage, at what point are tokens generated fast enough that it's pretty much instant? My bet is below 1000 tps
I asked it to translate your sentence to English and it did fine. In less than a fraction of a second.
[dead]
The Quant iQ4 of this model loads, then, in ~60GB of vram, and on disk it's 85GB.
So if you could etch it, you'd need a ~25GB ssd chip and 60GB of vram.
The vram costs likely contributed to these things being out of reach of the current economic cycle.
I'm pretty convinced the pathway to local models will be MoE, especially if they can find a way to keep tweasing out things like PLE into the slow bandwidth lanes.
MoE models are the path to local models with traditional system architectures, but they are antithetical to what Taalas was doing. If you spent all the money to etch 125B weights into silicon, you'd want to activate them all for each token, instead of only touching 6B. You cannot match the 125B sparse model with a 27B dense one, but you might be able to match it with a 60B or so one.
[deleted]
[deleted]
I've used it on a few for fun projects and its decent but the speed is crazy to watch.
[0] https://www.cerebras.ai/blog/cerebras-kimi-k2-Enterprise
But it can apparently also run 5.6 Sol
I have it retry on failure, but you should do that with any LLM really.
So what he’s saying is correct, there is no separate cache pricing, which by normal standards should be 10% of the cost, which can become exceedingly expensive for anything other than single turn. The way they are stating this is of course strange..
Such a tiny model at that t/s is less impressive than it would have been four months ago.
I genuinly only see these speeds being useful for customer service/transactional workflows. Of which much smaller models can do the job (but those dont make tons of money for companies like Cerebras that need to pay off massive amounts of debt).
Nobody needs to code at 600 words per second. Using a 100tps model for an hour or so will leave you with 4-8hrs of code review and revision work.
And when things go south, you blame AI?
I would be very curious to see how you explain it to your customers.
Is it going to sound similar to this?
> You see, our well-meaning AI-generated code has caused all your data to be permanently deleted. In case you are confused as to who to blame, we would like to clarify that we did not write, nor review the code. So we cannot possibly bear any responsibility for its mistakes. The responsibility lies with the LLMs, not us. We have already fired the LLM which did the coding and the review. And we are already using their main competitors. Hopefully that settles your concern with the quality of our service and we are looking to have you on board of our next products.
This seems to work well enough for people who deploy cloud instances without redundancy to us-east-1 then blame AWS when there's an outage. I say this somewhat unironically because if one pushes the "move fast and break things" slider all the way to the right then they're necessarily assuming that type of risk. Of course some people will try to have their cake and eat it too [1] as regards velocity and quality but that's a separate discussion.
[1] I've never understood this idiom because if one isn't in possession of their cake before eating it then they're eating stolen cake which is a decidedly anti-social activity and orthogonal to the point of the saying. It should be "eat their cake and keep it too" or something.
I do. I used to use haiku for the speed. Now its just as slow as the rest. Speed is my #1 ranking of how good a model is
What is your workflow?
https://kamilstanuch.github.io/LLM-token-generation-simulato...
I really really wanted to use this because it offers incredible speeds and pricing combinations. But nop.. I still am not using it.. not even for basic tasks.
I am trying to keep an open mind with AI, but I also have little understanding of control theory, trying to learn.
So, as always: it depends on the use case.
[deleted]
It's telling that frontier labs like Google toyed around with it but didn't invest further even for their most speed and cost sensitive small models
Still unclear for what, if any use cases this is pareto frontier
It sounds like there might be opportunities for local models (not open weight, but actually locally run) to use diffusion for faster responses on weaker hardware that doesn’t need to be shared.
But yea, it’s still a red-ish flag that big labs haven’t invested much in it. I could see Google/Apple getting value of this sort of local model, but maybe there’s enough research behind traditional models that it’s not worth the distraction at this point in time.
Not sure how the Chinese labs pull it off though using autoregressive models. The secret sauce is probably going to be in the training data.
The main reason Google hasn't switched over to DiffusionGemma is because serving at larger batch sizes loses the speed gains you get from diffusion, and most of the primary use case is serving many users at once off a single device with a large batch size.
If you were to move to on-device low latency... like say in a robot or something, then the story might be different...
K2-Horizon-7B has a diffusion and non-diffusion variant, and they claim the same level of intelligence from both models.
[dead]
Well priced when compared to other models of similar price, eh?
Are we allowed to call this slop, even if the output is not directly from an LLM?
[dead]
[dead]