If it's ~30% bigger and not as good as GLM 5.2, why would I tinker with this model?

Maybe for the multi modal?

Aurornis 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> If it's ~30% bigger and not as good as GLM 5.2, why would I tinker with this model?

The benchmarks never tell the full story. Some of the open weights models have been benchmaxxed for a while. Their utility on real work can be different than the benchmark number.

The multimodal input is also a big deal. Having vision input is really helpful for a lot of tasks.

▲

speedping 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I second that. Gemini 3.5 Flash rocks the benchmark charts but is terrible as an agent. Horrible instruction adherence and makes WAY too many tool calls

▲

luckydata 3 hours ago | parent [-]

which cheap models have you found work best as agents?

	▲	verdverm an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Most of the bigger open weight models are pretty good. You can get them per-token from companies like Fireworks or OpenCode

▲

buremba 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Then why are they publishing the benchmarks which makes them look worse than GLM 5.2?

	▲	godelski 3 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Because it's still informative
	▲	buremba 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		I'm not sure why I'm being downvoted but I didn't mean it in a negative way. For such announcement, I would expect them to give me clues on when I should use this model and in which cases it's the best one. The benchmarks that they share doesn't indicate that it's cheaper to run than other models, or can fit in my local machine, or excels in a specific vertical. After reading the comments here and X, I can see it being the top-3 multi-modal open-source model though.
	▲	verdverm 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		being close is still impressive, especially for their first (released) model gives me hope that the training moat is even smaller than we thought

▲

gkapur 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If they have a really seamless fine-tuning experience and maybe can help you extract the data you need to FT (which is one of the big challenges in actually getting fine-tuning democratized), maybe you would use it because "Tinker" defaults to it.

The model could also be more flexible for non-coding use-cases (they show the results for reasoning being strong) so maybe the argument is to use it for non-coding use-cases to drive relatively deterministic conclusions for non-coding agents (they have also done some determinism work on kernels, which could be useful in pulling on that thread of deterministic models that are fine-tuned for everything that is not writing code.)

That said, I'm not sure how much all the work they have done actually synergizes or if the market size (at least in the short to medium term) is big enough for a huge outcome from the company's current valuation with those bets as the enterprise agent estate is taking a while to evolve. Hence companies like Anthropic and OpenAI are throwing tons of consulting money at the problem.

▲

Flux159 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There's also an Inkling-Small that is 276B, 12B active that is much smaller than GLM 5.2 and still multimodal. Not released yet, but in the announcement link they mention that they're testing Inkling-Small & will release as open weight after testing. That one may be interesting as a Deepseek V4 Flash replacement.

▲

pizlonator 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> Maybe for the multi modal?

Yeah