| ▲ | giancarlostoro 4 hours ago |
| Call me crazy but: VRAM & Memory Requirements by Precision • FP16 (Full Precision): Requires ~1,664 GB of VRAM (e.g., an 8x B300 288GB cluster). • INT8 Quantization: Requires ~832 GB of VRAM (e.g., 8x H200 141GB). • INT4 Quantization: Requires ~416 GB of VRAM (e.g., 8x A100 80GB) VRAM aint cheap, Sam Altman ruined the cost of memory, Nvidia doesnt make enough consumer GPUs letting the market go insane over them, I still have friends on 1070s or 1070 TIs because GPUs have been severely overpriced for too long. I remember when a gaming PC was only $1000. Even so why would anyone not sleep on a model they cannot run? |
|
| ▲ | kristopolous 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Seriously, if a single politician stepped forward and said "i'll bring down ram prices" they could then shoot a puppy and call me a slur and I'd still go out and doorknock for them. Memory companies have price fixed multiple times. They've paid hundreds of millions in fines. wikipedia even has a page on it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DRAM_industry_price_fixing. Look at the financials of these companies, they're all making obscene margins and do they plan to increase production? No. Micron is doing a stock buy back to pump the price of their share. The Micron CEO just recently said this is the exact plan
https://www.theregister.com/systems/2026/10/01/ram-supply-se... There's sanctions, tarrifs, and a DOJ who doesn't give a shit. Until we can fix that the insanity will continue. Phones will be unaffordable. Laptops will be obscene. Gaming consoles will be thousands of dollars. Desktops will be dead. If you're waiting for some David Ricardo equation to happen, tough cookies, it's not coming. The market is legally locked down and we're in hostage pricing mode. And what's the story? You can't afford electronics because we're using it to build robots to take your job? I mean ... Nobody is coming to save us. That's our job. |
| |
| ▲ | phil21 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > do they plan to increase production? No. Micron has 3 brand new fabs currently under construction, 2 Boise, 1 in New York as the first of 4 planned for a campus. Plus expanding other existing facilities. These things take ~3-5 years from breaking ground to full production. You'd have had to anticipate the current demand years before it happened in order to be bringing production on-line before 2030 or so. Samsung and HK Hynix also have fabs under construction and planned. CXMT started 11 years ago and only now is reaching any real volume. If they decided a year ago to react to the current demand cycle they'd be 6-7 years out. Not much you can really do to wish for more fabrication to exist on any timeline not measured in fractional decades. Could they do more and react quicker? Probably, but everything I've read on the subject seems to point to 3 years is absolute bare minimum if you happen to have a shovel ready project with the land bought, local permitting completed, infrastructure extended to the site, and a skilled workforce already in place. They could suspend buy-backs/dividends today and dump it all into building production and there would be no material impact until around 2030. > The Micron CEO just recently said this is the exact plan CEO simply stated the demand pressure will not go away through 2027, and supply will not increase until around 2028 when currently under construction fabs start shipping volume. The article does not support your statement. | | |
| ▲ | ttul 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Stanford tracks RAM prices in this nice little site: https://dam.stanford.edu/memory-prices.html Costs did go nuts, but there are signs of easing in the market of late. CXMT is starting to have an impact and priced will probably fall in 2027. | | | |
| ▲ | GeekyBear an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > CXMT started 11 years ago and only now is reaching any real volume. If they decided a year ago to react to the current demand cycle they'd be 6-7 years out. It's taken them this long to catch up to the DDR5 standard. They've only recently been through qualifications to be a DDR5 supplier for the big boys. > Every Major Motherboard Maker Now Validates CXMT DDR5 https://www.techtimes.com/articles/321572/20260725/every-maj... After their recent IPO, they have more than enough cash to ramp up in a major way. It's just a matter of time. | |
| ▲ | cogman10 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The second Micron boise fab hasn't even broken ground yet, they are still working on the first one. So don't expect these things to be completed in parallel. Some of my family is pretty happy, though, with the job security as they are pretty convinced these projects are all going to take much longer than what's being stated publicly. Micron is saying the first chip from the new fab will be in 2027... though they also predicted it'd be 2026. The date seems pretty slippy. | | |
| ▲ | dboreham 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Anyone who has been around the semiconductor industry since the last century will remember various huge fabs e.g. in Arizona that were partially built but never finished due to oversupply by the time the walls and roof were done. |
| |
| ▲ | BizarroLand 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Yeah, but why would they make consumer memory when HBM for GPUs is much more profitable? | | |
| ▲ | kristopolous 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Capitalism eats itself this way. Second and third order effects will collapse the demand. You need to keep the market healthy, not some insane Bitcoin style HODL pump - that's how you get wrecked. I mean I'm not a neoclassicalist but I've read all of them. I'm in consensus with them here. There's a bunch of theories on what a healthy market is but what we're currently seeing matches none of them. It's short term profitable but long term disastrous, especially in a world where new mathematics and techniques could literally collapse the demand overnight. Imagine if some paper hits arxiv and the 256 GB requirement for some model now becomes 64. Woops! Some clever trick about how attention heads and context Windows work could potentially slash a bunch of requirements by giant margins and all they're doing is firing the starting gun at that global race with every obscenely priced unit they sell. But if prices were reasonable, this wouldn't be an apocalypse. It'd be fine. Consumers wouldn't rush to 64GB, they'd say " Cool I can multitask now at 256" or " great I can do horizontal scalability' or something else. But no they created the market conditions so now what would happen is the consumer will immediately flip the 192GB they don't need on eBay, hoping to snatch a profit before the prices tank and the second hand market will be flooded the rug will be pulled out from the luxury pricing and everyone will get screwed. This has happened in electronics markets before. Many times. When Engels talked about the grave diggers of capitalism they were looking at it through a 19th century labor/manufacturing lens but arguably this same dynamic is at play here. | | |
| ▲ | usefulcat 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > Imagine if some paper hits arxiv and the 256 GB requirement for some model now becomes 64. Woops! If you were a DRAM manufacturer, isn't this exactly the kind of thing that would make you think twice about investing years and $billions in new fab construction? | |
| ▲ | Analemma_ 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | What "second- and third-order effects" do you suppose will collapse the demand for RAM? The people complaining most loudly about RAM costs are the people who want to run local models; if that becomes popular it will supercharge RAM demand, because locally-hosted models can't parallelize runs from many users the way cloud-hosted ones can. I don't see any slackening in RAM demand at any point in the foreseeable future, even if the big AI companies all go bust. | | |
| ▲ | kristopolous 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | This is all hypothetical and debating hypotheticals isn't productive so let's roll back to markets. Let's say ram used to cost $100 and now that same unit costs $1000. You paid say $500x1,000 for that unit during the price increase or some price where you can currently flip for profit. You have a very expensive data center and you're in debt financed on the premise that you have these special computers. Now a new technique comes out and it turns out you only need 1 memory unit for something that used to require 8 or 4 or some meaningful multiplier. This stuff happens all the time. It's why we don't use BMP files on websites or serve giant MOV files on YouTube. It's why postgres queries are faster now than they were 10 and 20 years ago. You rent out your machines. You need to service your debt.. Demand may 8x overnight to accommodate but you have a monthly bill to pay and that's unlikely. It's likely going to drop. Think about it. Your customers are paying maybe $10,000 a month and serving their customers. Now they can drop that to $1,250. On market if you were to sell some of that ram you have 100% profit right now but not for long. Jevons paradox assumes unlimited capitalization, zero debt servicing, infinite time horizons... We live in the real world so what do you do? Historically the answer has been "sell that shit" There's an aphorism for this "stairs on the way up elevator on the way down" If we had a healthy market with sane prices where you can't flip the thing you bought for 100% profit the answer would be "create more value." | | |
| ▲ | charcircuit 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | >Your customers are paying maybe $10,000 a month and serving their customers. Now they can drop that to $1,250. Or they could stay at $10,000 per month since they are willing to pay that much already.m, so they just use AI more and in more places. |
| |
| ▲ | lxgr 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > locally-hosted models can't parallelize runs from many users the way cloud-hosted ones can Why not? Unlike many other workloads, LLM inference actually seems pretty suitable for decentralization (effectively stateless means no availability concerns; bandwidth and latency are relatively forgiving too). | | |
| ▲ | Analemma_ 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | I think locally-hosted models at the org level will definitely be somewhat popular, but you seem to be talking about decentralizing for people's personal, non-business use, and I just don't think that's going to happen to any real degree. People who say they want local runs really mean it: they want local runs on hardware in their room, not on some decentralized system which, if it existed, would almost certainly just be a worse, less-reliable version of cloud hosting. I'm not saying nobody would use it, but it sounds a lot like things like IPFS, which have also completely failed to displace either cloud storage or buying a bunch of disks for your own private use. |
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | hn_acc1 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | >Seriously, if a single politician stepped forward and said "i'll bring down ram prices" they could then shoot a puppy and call me a slur and I'd still go out and doorknock for them. How many people, outside of tech geeks and megacorps care about RAM prices? And how gullible would you be to BELIEVE the politician they could actually make it happen, and even if they did, that it would extend to the average person, and not JUST megacorps/megadonors? | | |
| ▲ | Aerroon 26 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Phone companies have been differentiating their models based on RAM for a decade. As have laptop and desktop sellers. The reason your router sometimes randomly crashes could very well be a result of not enough memory. The reason it takes such a long time to launch some programs repeatedly is because you don't have enough memory to cache it. Swapped from your browser to an app on your phone, but when you go back to the browser the site has reset and you lost everything you were working on? Not enough memory. Etc. I think a lot of people care about the downstream effects of memory prices, but I agree with you that they may not realize that they happen because of memory prices. |
| |
| ▲ | ashdksnndck 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | RAM manufacturers are bidding against NVIDIA and everyone else for the same constrained supply of EUV machines. And it takes years to build more fabs. Micron has multiple fabs coming online in 2027 and 2028. | | | |
| ▲ | m463 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > "i'll bring down ram prices" wonder what voting would be like? gamer vote ++ datacenter hater vote -- datacenter lobby ++ micron lobby -- | | |
| ▲ | rezonant 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Yep, that's all the voting blocs. | |
| ▲ | mwambua 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Wouldn’t cheaper memory make it easier to bring compute out of data centers and onto consumer hardware? | | |
| ▲ | TeMPOraL 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Datacenter haters will read this as "that's still evil AI", and everyone else hopefully can count and understands it'll be worse for environment. |
|
| |
| ▲ | an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | bob1029 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | If we take some time to understand how HBM memory is manufactured (with particular focus on yield risk for final packaging steps), we will hopefully learn that the current capacity crisis is not bullshit. I guarantee Micron & friends are not intentionally orchestrating their business such that they would suffer a massively reduced chance of yielding on a per-die basis. Unless someone is actually buying HBM devices, they are not going to be making them. These are not a commodity that can be speculatively manufactured in any economically rational way. | |
| ▲ | neya 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > they could then shoot a puppy and call me a slur I know it's just a figure of speech, but damn. I laughed out aloud in public just reading this. | |
| ▲ | fhn 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | How many people would you allow them to kill? | |
| ▲ | xyzsparetimexyz 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Neither political party cares at all about memory pieces get real lol | | |
| ▲ | Aerroon an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | I don't really understand why. Memory is a critical component of every computational device. | | |
| ▲ | Exoristos an hour ago | parent [-] | | That's tautological, but I think you would need to explain how it extends their and their backers' influence to get party attention. |
| |
| ▲ | kristopolous 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | wait until holiday shopping...it affects the price of almost everything with a battery or power cord. | | |
| ▲ | xyzsparetimexyz 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | What do you think they'll do? Neither repubs nor dems will touch ai companies in a meaningful way. Anything China does wrt memory fabs week be more significant | |
| ▲ | 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
|
| |
| ▲ | gchamonlive 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | Analemma_ 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I don't think RAM vendors have formed a cartel and I think this is knee-jerk anger without any thought. RAM is a commodity product with massive upfront capex costs, and those always have boom-and-bust cycles. At various points in the 2010s and 2020s RAM vendors were getting eaten alive by a supply glut, this would not have happened if they were a cartel. Is it really so hard to believe that RAM prices are up because demand is simply exceeding supply, especially in a market where additional supply takes years and billions of dollars to come online? There's no need to posit cartel behavior and a fair amount of evidence that there is none. | | |
| ▲ | boustrophedon 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The RAM vendors have formed cartels previously and been convicted, so although demand is exceeding supply it is not that crazy to at least consider. | |
| ▲ | 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | kristopolous 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The AI boom started in 2022. Prices rose THREE years later after 2025 sanction and tariff style legislation to protect the market during a price hike. I got a 4090 in 2023 for 1600, a 5090 in 2025 for 2000 with 256 DDR5 for about $1,000 ... and then, after some protectionist legislation passed, these prices quickly shot to the moon. Connect the dots. | | |
| ▲ | Analemma_ 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Man I think you're just spewing word salad and a lot of what you've written is either wrong or not even wrong. The AI hype really got started in 2022, but hype on social media doesn't mean anything for RAM prices, only real buildouts do that. They rose pretty steadily until OpenAI revealed their shenanigans re: locking up a ton of supply from two different vendors with secret contracts, and that's when the takeoff really started. This is definitely scummy behavior from OpenAI (big surprise), and I actually think they arguably should see an antitrust investigation for that (not that that will ever happen), but OpenAI is a buyer; that's not the same thing as the vendors forming a cartel. You can't say "connect the dots" at the end of a raving, mostly-incorrect post and act like you've made an ironclad argument. | | |
| ▲ | hn_acc1 an hour ago | parent [-] | | I mean, just because OpenAI started it doesn't mean the vendors didn't form a cartel afterwards (or conspire together) to ensure maximum profits in a "crazy high demand" situation.. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
|
|
|
| ▲ | petu 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| There's no BF16, original full quality weights are quantized already and 510GB. Then good portion of those weights are n-grams (~200GB) that don't need to be in VRAM. Then KV cache of that model is super lightweight at ~1GB per 1M tokens. If HBF succeeds, then accelerator with 16GB of VRAM and 1TB HBF/NAND is probably all you need (?). |
|
| ▲ | wren6991 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Are you counting the n-gram/PLE as part of the model weights there? They can go in host memory. Would be good to show your working. Also the released weights are pre-quantised and presumably QATed, so your "Full Precision" and INT8 are simply not a version of the model that actually exists. Edit: I went and checked for you. The LM backbone is 307.2 GB (286.1 GiB), straight from DeepSeek's upload. The n-gram table is 203.1 GB (189.1 GiB), which goes in host RAM. Note the embeddings are higher precision than the expert tensors, so it's a larger fraction of the bytes than it is of the parameters. So, > Call me crazy but: You're crazy. :-) |
|
| ▲ | mrinterweb 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Projects like DwarfStar https://github.com/antirez/ds4 really lower the hardware bar a lot so Deepseek 4.1 flash and other mixture of expert models can run on consumer hardware. There are also other inference providers who make their money serving openweight models. Services like OpenRouter make it all too easy to utilize these models. Access to these models isn't hard. The hardware moat is becoming pretty easy to bridge. |
| |
| ▲ | contingencies 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | More concretely DwarfStar M5 128GB Deepseek 4.1 flash 1K tokens @ 29s, 5K tokens + reasoning @ 147s, 10k token prompt @ 463 tokens/s = 22s. Hardware buy-in USD$7K / AUD$8.5K / EUR€6.8K. At typical workloads, ROI is still poor vs. current-era subsidies, but owning hardware is good for privacy/longevity/connectivity independence. Whether you actually consider Apple hardware 'owned' is a valid and thought provoking question. | | |
| ▲ | onlyrealcuzzo 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Still gonna take 2-3 years to get DeepSeek V4.1 Flash quality at decent speeds on reasonably priced hardware. Hardware update cycles are 2-3 years even on the high end, so it's still a ways away before "good enough" and "local" belong in the same sentence for the average person. And by then, DeepSeek V6 Flash will be too cheap to meter, 5x faster, and 10x better, so... You'd still need to go out of your way. Most people are spending most of their time on their phones anyway. .. | | |
|
|
|
| ▲ | girvo 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Not quite: not all of this needs to be in VRAM It has a set of n-gram tables which you can stream from system RAM or even NVMe That said it’s still quite big! I can’t fit it on my DGX Spark, though I believe you can if you have two? |
| |
| ▲ | jonsoft 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It needs 3-4 Sparks to run well (at an acceptable quantization and sufficient KV cache): https://github.com/christopherowen/spark-ds41f | | |
| ▲ | girvo 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Ah that’s a shame. GLM 5.3 Flash is honestly as good IMO and can run on two pretty successfully from what I understand. I’m quite spoiled with how good Qwen 3.8 Flash Next is on a single spark though: shocking how good local models are getting on attainable-ish hardware | | |
| |
| ▲ | rsolva 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I have access to two and will explore this the coming weeks. | | |
| ▲ | girvo 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Also give GLM 5.3 Flash a try: it’s shockingly good too in my testing, and I believe eugr has a TP=2 recipe to use for sparkrun |
|
|
|
| ▲ | ct520 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| "1070s or 1070 TIs because GPUs have been severely overpriced for too long" ... ." 1070ti launch MSRP was $450 ish.
5070 could be had in the last year for 5xx-6xx range easily. All things considered - (inflation being about 30%~ (guess)) between these two timelines. You are looking at 300% performance difference at a cost dollar for dollar that is cheaper then when they purchased their cards. Might be a bit of a stretch blaming it on "severely overpriced for too long..." |
|
| ▲ | ManuelKiessling 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Thanks for the data! Allow a question from someone who’s only got a very vague idea of how this kind of stuff works behind the scenes: say I rent usage of this model through one of the many LLM hosting providers out there, and let‘s assume I use it extensively through something like Pi or OpenCode and vibe code away all the time, keeping the hosted model occupied as much as I can, happily burning my credits. Does that mean that there is a hardware cluster as described by you above that is crunching away just for me? So at FP16, I alone keep a 1,664 GiB system occupied all the time? |
| |
| ▲ | DrammBA 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | No, a cluster can server multiple users at the same time, providers cap the tok/s so that one cluster can run inference on multiple inputs at the same time. OpenAI with their new ultrafast mode is probably reserving the whole cluster or prioritizing requests of ultrafast users above others with a higher tok/s hence the high price and high speed. There's many other knobs providers tweak that they don't show the users, for example I doubt many providers are hosting the full FP16 version. | |
| ▲ | rnxrx 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | It depends hugely on what "rent usage of this model through one of the many LLM hosting providers" means. If you're asking them to host the model privately then yes, all of that 1.6T of RAM is likely in use holding weights, activations and KV cache by an inference engine that's only getting/answering requests from you alone. When you aren't actively using the model the hosting process is still active and waiting with all of that memory still wired to it. As background: For the most part VRAM oversubscription/paging/swapping isn't a thing in the same way that RAM for a VM often is. There are some approaches to it, but (to my knowledge) not at that sort of scale. There are some systemic reasons for this, but very broadly speaking the GPU vendors are building toward the highest bandwidth and lowest latency possible, and the overhead/complexity of something like protected memory modes serves neither of those priorities. |
|
|
| ▲ | keammo1 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The article isn't just about running locally though. The author is saying it's super cheap to run the model through Opencode Go (and presumably OpenRouter etc.) Personally I'm always most excited by models I can actually run locally, but even these huge open source models open up the competitive landscape for companies to let you call models via an API or just lease compute. And they don't have to charge you to offset research, training, huge staffs of the best minds in the world, crazy PR etc. I think that's a big win for customers and buts competitive pressure on the frontier labs as well. |
|
| ▲ | ByteAtATime 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I think, considering the size of this model, it's closer to a Pro than a Flash on everything other than speed |
|
| ▲ | crossroadsguy 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I did somet math and completely gave up on the idea of trying any worthwhile local model and figured I'd rather pay the 15-30 USD per month via subscription and/or API key combos for years than buying a local setup which might go out of date very fast, if it doesn't goes kaput just out of warranty. I won't be surprised if RAM scarcity is an concerted effort to herd people towards the remote models :) |
|
| ▲ | apitman 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > Even so why would anyone not sleep on a model they cannot run? Because it's an open model so providers compete on price. |
|
| ▲ | cookiengineer 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It's dangerous to go alone. Take this: [1] I reimplemented most of the features of the Deepseek v4.1 flash paper (apart from quantization aware training which doesn't make sense because my implementation uses float32 precision anyways) I'm currently learning how to distill reasoning traces (check my other github repositories) but I think that a locally selfhostable deepseek is possible with my mixture of experts sharding mechanism. I decided to optimize everything for CPU parallelization, with the idea that the KV cache and meta model have to run from CPU RAM anyways, so the experts can also be loaded/unloaded at runtime if needbe, to save more RAM. My assumption is that the KV cache optimizations in combination with the CED and compressed attention features are the reason why v4.1 flash has so few hallucination problems and such a strong self-lookup/thinking behavior. But that's more a gut feeling, need to evaluate and test this more thoroughly. Anyways, would love to see someone train this on their own datasets. Currently my pipeline is kinda optimized for parquet and zim files. [1] https://github.com/cookiengineer/gonano |
|
| ▲ | anvuong 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I just un-retire my pair of 1080Ti for some small models development because the current GPU prices literally make me sad. |
|
| ▲ | nullc 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The bulk of its weights are natively MXFP4. And engram values don't need to be in vram. |
|
| ▲ | functionmouse 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| one can make a fine gaming pc for ~$350 1660 ti, 4790k, 16gb ddr3 |
|
| ▲ | holoduke 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| He doesn't ruin the cost of memory. Advances in memory size and speed are now in full speed mode. Expect drastic increase in the upcoming years. Big factories are in the making and planned. Gigalab in the US and many others in the east.
Since 2010 we have computers with 16gb as being normal. Finally we are moving into a new era where the standard will be 64gb next year and 128 in 2028. Hopefully we reach 1tb in 2030. |
| |
|
| ▲ | CamperBob2 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| You can run it locally for the price of a decent car, or run it (hopefully) privately on somebody else's hardware at vast.ai or a similar provider for much less. What's not to like? No, you won't get frontier-level intelligence on a 1070Ti. Yes, it should be illegal to do what Altman did. Since we clearly don't live in the best of all possible worlds, we need to settle, and DS4.1 Flash is a good place to do that. For tasks that don't require vision I personally like the NVFP4 quant of GLM 5.3 from Local Inference Lab better than DS4.1F, but they are both well beyond awesome. |
|
| ▲ | liuliu 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| What are you talking about? The model is native NVFP4, why you run it at any precision higher than that? |
|
| ▲ | jauer 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| This “blame sama for memory prices” meme is so tired. He gave demand signal so many times years ago and was mocked for it and now we have the consequences of industry not taking him seriously. |