| ▲ | LaurensBER 2 hours ago |
| I've been using it extensively since the release and the best summary I can give is that it's good enough to use it for (almost) everything and cheap enough that the cost are irrelevant. I'm running it in Oh My Pi with a second instance running as "advisor" and even with 5-6 active sessions (effectively 12 streams) I'm struggling to spend more than 5 bucks per day. OpenCode Go even has double limits temporarily so for 10 USD you effectively get 140 USD of tokens to spend. It would impress me if someone could burn that amount with "normal" usage. Even when running multiple sessions. I have a Claude Max subscription but I've barely touched it, it just feels like a step back to have to think about limits and usage even though the models are stronger. The beauty of intelligence at this cost (even if it's not SOTA) is that it opens a whole bunch of new use cases. Test failure in CI? Have the bot automatically propose a fix, its cheap enough that you can discard it w/h issues. Test coverage too low? Auto generate tests on CI for every pull-requests! Monitoring server logs, continuous security audits and investigating every received exception now becomes possible. I'm thinking about having it automatically filter and re-rank my social media feeds so I can steer the algorithm instead of the other way around. Perhaps other people (with enormous budgets) were already doing all of the above but for us this is a really exciting release! |
|
| ▲ | paxys a few seconds ago | parent | next [-] |
| How is $5/day irrelevant? In the $150/mo range you can get effectively unlimited usage of GPT 5.6 Sol (Pro plan). |
|
| ▲ | amelius 23 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > it's good enough to use it for (almost) everything which in your case is? |
| |
| ▲ | rpdillon 4 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | I've posted a few times about my project that's a collection of 30k-250k webapps that are served from a WebDAV server. The apps know how to write updated copies of themselves back to the server. My family uses it. I have gallery apps (yearbooks for each year are a lot of fun!) of us on trips and just living, an outlining app that's a mesh of Workflowy and Org Mode (it's called Fluxtral), a markdown-backed app (it uses marked.min.js, and is called Dextral) that offers documents, logs, calendars, and kanban boards, all parsed from markdown. I have a List app for gear, trips, shopping, etc. that we all can contribute to. There are utilities (world clock, calendar) and games (an oracle for RPGs, a KenKen implementation), and apps (a diagram editor that exports to SVG, a web-launcher that uses pneumonics, a Scheme-based hacking environment, and a spreadsheet that does most of what you'd expect aside from Solver and Pivot tables). I started these projects before AI, and made slow progress over the years, but the modern versions of all this stuff have been built with Deepseek V4 Flash. I've also used Gemini in the very early days, and Kimi K2.6 later on, but these days, since I can now host Deepseek v4 Flash 0731 in a 2-bit quant on my Strix Halo box (128GB, but only about 250GB/s of memory bandwidth, so 15t/s), I used Deepseek with omp for almost everything. It's a very capable model, and I'm amazed I can run it locally and get good results. It's really revolutionary for my (small) use cases. | |
| ▲ | throwaway27448 3 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Trying to figure out which hospital school or orphanage is most worth hitting with a JDAM | |
| ▲ | dan_q 15 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | > which in your case is? oh, they're mad. |
|
|
| ▲ | Aeolun 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| But DeepSeek now has a warning they’re going to sharply increase their API pricing sometime in the future. |
| |
| ▲ | LaurensBER 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Dax (from Opencode) has tweeted that they can replicate or beat the price with rented GPUs. Deepseeks secret sauce is the incredibly cheap caching (magnitude cheaper than other providers). vLLM has recently released a similar approach. It's not as effective as what DeepSeek does but still an interesting development. I have no doubt that in due time other providers will match or perhaps even beat the current DeepSeek prices. | | |
| ▲ | minraws an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | As someone who recently tried it on some blackwell cards, it's possible to match the prices especially the input can be even cheaper and output can match the costs so you can easily build a net 20-30% margin business even at current GPU prices. The entire issue is caching, I tried to write some custom to dump to disk kv-caching using some ideas from their papers and my experience with snapshots and vm checkpoint systems, I must say they must have really squeezed that lemon it's hard. Atleast me with Sol couldn't figure it out over a couple days, a few hours each day, which isn't much but I did feel a bit stuck with existing solutions and felt like I might have to write something from scratch. But if you are willing to put in the effort into the infra I do think it's doable. But it will be really hard to pull it off. My congrats to anyone who manages to pull it off, they might be able to kill off most AI labs. Assuming they can find the compute, Deepseek really has killed all models for me other than Sol/Fable/Opus/K3 tier stuff. | |
| ▲ | twotwotwo an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | One read is 1) they're getting a lot of traffic for Flash, 2) they've said they're updating Pro soon and expect that to lead to a traffic spike for Pro, but 3) that would leave them overloaded, so 4) they're going to raise prices to avoid it. It's interesting that most open models adding 1M context did it in a way that reduces KV cache size (though DeepSeek was the most aggressive, using compressed attention on all layers), but only a couple providers turned it into a discount on cache reads. | |
| ▲ | _aavaa_ 19 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I'll believe it when I see it. Their prices are still much higher than deepseek, especially the caching. | |
| ▲ | NorwegianDude an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Eh, what are you guys even talking about? Deepseek is not cheapest provider as is, and it's MIT. So deepseek making it more expensive to use is just nonsense, they can only change their own pricing. It's the beauty of MIT license and open weights. If anything, these models are some of the safest in the world to use if you worry about a rug pull. | | |
| ▲ | akman an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | 90%+ cache hit rate is common, and so you'll see on places like openrouter that Deepseek cache cost is indeed a magnitude cheaper than the rest. | | |
| ▲ | greenavocado 12 minutes ago | parent [-] | | My usage thus far from api.deepseek.com - input_cache_hit_tokens: 1,265,646,976 x 0.0000000028 = $3.5438115328
- input_cache_miss_tokens: 18,208,088 x 0.00000014 = $2.54913232
- output_tokens: 9,615,178 x 0.00000028 = $2.69224984
- request_count: 10,837 (no price)
Total cost: $8.7851936928 (approximately $8.79)Cache: - Hit: 1,265,646,976
- Miss: 18,208,088
- Total input tokens: 1,283,855,064
Hit rate: 98.582% (1,265,646,976 / 1,283,855,064) |
| |
| ▲ | LaurensBER an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | There's more to inference than just the input/output token cost. Caching has a massive impact. Deepseek charges $0.0028 per cache read on Openrouter. The next cheapest is $0.018. That's a massive difference and quickly adds up on coding sessions (which often hit 95%+ cached tokens). | |
| ▲ | hagen8 34 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | Cached input tokens are what drives most costs. |
| |
| ▲ | retinaros an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | any link to this caching tech? | | |
| ▲ | LaurensBER an hour ago | parent [-] | | [Feat][Core] Add disk offloading support to SimpleCPUOffloadConnector — #49644
https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm/pull/49644 This adds disk as a tier in the HBM → CPU → Disk KV cache hierarchy. There's also a cluster of related KV-offload FS PRs: #49225 (read/write batching, still open) and #49152 (batch store/load in C, merged Jul 28). It's hard to say if these are similar to the approach DeepSeek takes but they definitely seem very interesting. |
| |
| ▲ | onlyrealcuzzo an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | > Deepseeks secret sauce is the incredibly cheap caching (magnitude cheaper than other providers). Can anyone working at one of the main US labs (Google, OpenAI, Anthropic) comment on WTF they haven't even tried MLA - despite the obvious massive advantages? I know enough to know they aren't completely incompetent. So there must be a quite good reason. But it remains a mystery to me. DeepSeek's MLA is like almost 2 years old at this time. They've got thousands of people working on this stuff. They clearly have the ability to at least try it... | | |
| ▲ | aabdi 20 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | They already are? There’s a measurable performance tradeoff versus gqa so there’s reluctance. For the most part though the new deepseek v4 tech is hca and mhc and people are still catching on like with moe and rl. Wait for 6 12 months, minimum time for next pre train. | |
| ▲ | ronsor an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | Are they not? The big US labs are opaque and don't publish much of any technical details anymore. We don't know what they are or aren't doing, honestly. |
|
| |
| ▲ | ms8 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Yes, there is warning, but also there are many providers on OpenRouter[0], hosting open weight model with similar pricing. The question is Will they go up as well? [0] https://openrouter.ai/deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731#provid... | |
| ▲ | 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | eli an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I assume/hope this is about prices going up for the next release of Pro | |
| ▲ | HSO an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | even if they double it it`s from such a low base it is still supercheap | |
| ▲ | metadat 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Source? | | |
|
|
| ▲ | anramon 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| >even if it's not SOTA And, probably 99.99% of people using LLM probably don't even need SOTA anyway. |
| |
| ▲ | swiftcoder an hour ago | parent [-] | | At least on these benchmarks, it seems to be pretty handily scoring up with the SOTA from 6 months ago? |
|
|
| ▲ | meetingthrower 27 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| What's the best harness to use with it? |
| |
|
| ▲ | dominotw 25 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > Auto generate tests on CI for every pull-requests! this seems like such a bad idea |
| |
| ▲ | EchoVoicy a minute ago | parent [-] | | Depends on the prompt I think. If it's just "Generate tests plz" then I agree, but if its "If this PR adds any new endpoints, ensure that there are functional and integration tests. If there are not, please investigate the feasibility and appropriateness, and create functional tests using the guide found on our wiki for guidance https://www.ourdevwiki.site/how-to-make-functional-tests" then maybe it could add some value. But that very much depends on the specific system. Some tests are obvious, some not so much. |
|
|
| ▲ | jmyeet an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > I'm thinking about having it automatically filter and re-rank my social media feeds so I can steer the algorithm instead of the other way around. I hadn't really thought about this but AI may well be the technology that disrupts and ultimately destroys social media. The value proposition of something like FB or IG is, as we know, the network effect. The platform gets to extract value from user generated content. I believe that users should own the platform, a bit like the Wikimedia Foundation, because they're the ones that create value. Federation is a popular belief on HN and I've come to believe that's simply the wrong solution to the right problem. Anyway, how these social media companies make money is by optimizing the feed for engagement. People know it too so you see people trying to build an audience by rage baiting. And then more time spent equals more advertising revenue. But what happens when the AI can simply slurp all the posts and then filter and rank them? It destroys the engagement and advertising model. And I'm not opposed to that, honestly. It may be on eof the few good thing sto come out of AI. |
|
| ▲ | an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [deleted] |
|
| ▲ | catigula 38 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| >Test coverage too low? Auto generate tests on CI for every pull-requests! Terrible use-case. |
| |
|
| ▲ | _s_a_m_ 20 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] |
| These posts have to be Chinese bots, these models are all trash. Used it via OpenCode for an hour, cost me one hour of my life. It is for anything complete trash. |
| |
| ▲ | dan_q 15 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | You're mad. | |
| ▲ | greenavocado 17 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | (1) you used opencode
(2) what provider did you use. openrouter is trash because they shit up the model serving. no max effort and horrific cache utilization, on the order of 50-75%, absolutely garbage. beware | | |
| ▲ | alex0015 6 minutes ago | parent [-] | | What should we be running deepseek on besides opencode? I chose it because I heard good things. Also provider is directly through deepseek credits. | | |
|
|
