Remix.run Logo
Cerebras CS4(cerebras.ai)
48 points by sunils34 2 hours ago | 27 comments
reilly3000 a minute ago | parent | next [-]

> CS-4 delivers more than 1,000 tokens per second on models exceeding 10 trillion parameters

Oops did they just out GPT-5.6 sol’s parameter count?

sreekanth850 6 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

AMD along with cerebras may probably compete with NVIDIA monopoly in near future. Also, NVIDIA will have competition form multiple companies. Just my prediction.

syntaxing 24 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I think the fun takeaway from this is that GPT 5.4 is probably 45B active parameters and GPT 5.6 Sol is closer to 50B.

anonymous_user9 30 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Conspicuously missing: power consumption figures

wmf 22 minutes ago | parent [-]

162 kW

xattt 18 minutes ago | parent [-]

I presume per rack?

Can you imagine something radiating that much energy into a space in your home?

wmf 9 minutes ago | parent [-]

I guess because I have actually set foot in a data center I don't imagine literally every product in my home.

gpm 18 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Is it just me or is it bizarre that they're advertising old open-weight models.

GLM 4.7 (December 2025) not 5 (Feb) 5.1 (April) or 5.2 (June). 5.3 (4 days ago) is, to be fair, not open weights yet... but there's a lot since 4.7.

Kimi K2.7 (April) not K2.7-code (June) or K3 (July).

Gemma 4 (April), Llama (April), and gpt-oss (August 2025) are up to date, but old (for models).

Meanwhile the closed source GPT 5.6 sol is up to date (June)...

Should potential purchasers take away from this that they're not going to be able to run recent models unless they front the cost of developing software or something?

eli 13 minutes ago | parent [-]

I think they run whatever models they get paid to run. But mostly from enterprise. They are clearly not interested in consumer dollars.

gpm 9 minutes ago | parent [-]

I mean the product is a server rack and while there's no advertised price I would assume it's six figures. So yes, an enterprise product.

But even an enterprise is going to care about the difference between "we can run the model we want with support from the manufacturer" and "we have to purchase the product, and then spend another 6 figure sum having developers port a recent model to the product to use it".

WarmWash 5 minutes ago | parent [-]

I feel like 6-figures would be the clearance price on it...

9cb14c1ec0 40 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Just a reminder for everyone that we are only several years and 3 or 4 iterations into hardware being optimized for LLMs. We should all expect orders of magnitude improvement in speed and/or cost over the next 5 years. Then we can have fun conversations about "unlimited" "intelligence" and about what the price wars and profit margins of consumer AI products are when your average ChatGPT user costs the company $0.10 per month.

> CS-4 delivers more than 1,000 tokens per second on models exceeding 10 trillion parameters

Wow!

SwellJoe 28 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

And, the software side isn't finished being optimized, either. We've seen with Qwen 3.8 27B and DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 and GLM 5.3 that quite small models can pack a punch. Intelligence density will improve, efficiency of kernels will improve, efficiency of KV caching and MTP will improve, algorithms for splitting workloads across compute units will improve.

It'll all be as cheap as DeepSeek was before the price hike. And, it'll become more and more realistic to run near-frontier intelligence on personal devices.

rvz 18 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Congratulations! You have just realized that the AI data center build out is a total scam, built on both the insurmountable trillions of debt, and the assumption that only GPUs are all we need to continue scaling.

There exist other AI accelerators (TPUs, ASICs) that perfectly exceed the throughput that LLMs need to scale as well. But the true solution is more software optimizations. There's a tiny handful of them but more needs to be discovered so that we can reduce building hundreds of more data centers as the alternatives mature.

As better software becomes more useful for the alternative AI hardware for developers with LLMs running efficiently you then would have more choices of hardware to run your LLMs on rather than just only GPUs.

blovescoffee a minute ago | parent [-]

TPUs and ASICs run in data centers too. Your argument only holds true if there's some satisfied limit to demand for inference. If not, data centers will continue to spring up to host more and more agents. Even if agents were running on hardware and software as efficient as the human brain, its conceivable we want trillions of them running at any given time which would require data center scale.

api 31 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

This is part of why I think the data center build-out is a bubble. We've barely scratched the surface when it comes to hardware optimization. We'll see exponential improvements in energy efficiency and speed over the next decade. Exponential, not linear.

GPUs really aren't that great for AI. They just happen to be the best chips we have in mass production right now for this work load, and it takes time to field new designs. Basically every chip engineer on the planet is working on this right now.

mindwok 26 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Whether it's a bubble or not depends on how much the demand for compute and the type of workload keeps growing, though.

If AI tends to be something used mainly in ideation and development, which is how a lot of people use it today, then once consumer hardware gets good enough you could see a bunch of the current data centre workloads move onto consumer devices.

But if AI starts being used more in repeatable, operational workloads I think it makes sense to have significant cloud infrastructure for it. TBH I haven't seen much of this, and I've been skeptical about people using agents for much of anything when it can be done with just software. But we are starting to see more of this kind of workload, like the taggable Claude in your slack etc that people seem to really love.

winrid 30 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

On the plus side, lots of cheap servers to swoop up :)

sroussey 15 minutes ago | parent [-]

But power hungry.

In that 5+ year timeline, the compute per watt could change by three orders of magnitude.

GPUs are to LLMs what CPUs are to gaming — not a good fit.

4k0hz 27 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Introducing the all new Cerebras CS-4, a revolutionary rack-scale solution that delivers upto 30x faster inference compared to GPUs, enhanced economics, and a simple path todeploy [sic] hyperscale capacity.

Did nobody proofread this?

algoth1 18 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

If they had ask Claude it would probably look like this: Introducing the all new Cerebras CS-4, a revolutionary rack-scale solution that delivers up to 30x faster inference compared to GPUs, enhanced economics, and a simple path to load-bearing hyper scale capacity.

jm4 13 minutes ago | parent [-]

That's unusually honest and the sharpest thing in this thread.

SoMomentary 12 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Sometimes I wonder if mistakes are now used to indicate the possibility that a human actually wrote it.

geodel 23 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Maybe it is just part of their "compact design".

dpkirchner 18 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

An error no frontier LLM would make, eh

OutOfHere 29 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Five years from now, I don't know why anyone will still be using Nvidia for inference. Note that Cerebras is for inference only, not for training.

wmf 18 minutes ago | parent [-]

Cerebras is only claiming ~2x the performance of Groqvidia which usually isn't enough for people to switch.