Top
Best
New

Posted by Philpax 16 hours ago

GLM-5.3-Flash(z.ai)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49450353
943 points | 474 commentspage 2
cootsnuck 15 hours ago|
If we fast forward say 5 years, I don't see how we don't end up in world where people (and enterprises) are more savvy with how they use LLMs. Meaning, more models, smaller models, weirder models, more specialized models, etc. And all of it running on a variety of hardware (edge devices, personal computers, on-demand cloud compute).

I don't see how NVIDIA can keep their spot as belle of the ball. If LLMs and friends are truly to become as useful and ubiquitous as everyone thinks they will, then commoditization is the only option.

drob518 14 hours ago||
We need to figure out what the real pricing is for a going concern. Right now, everyone is subsidizing and discounting to grow (or maintain) market share. The big question is whether the steady state, market derived inference pricing is above or below what we’re seeing today. I honestly don’t know. Anthropic had said that inference is profitable, but they’re clearly not yet profitable overall with training and buildouts still happening.
apitman 11 hours ago||
Has nobody from any of the companies hosting open weights models released detailed information on how much it really costs?
drob518 6 hours ago||
I’m sure someone does, but I’ve never seen anything other than vague statements like Anthropic’s “inference is profitable” comment. I suspect everyone is playing everything close to the vest because they aren’t yet public and they want to control the information flow to the street.
bigyabai 13 hours ago||
> I don't see how NVIDIA can keep their spot as belle of the ball.

FWIW, people were saying "ASICs will kill CUDA demand!" since the crypto mining boom. Then a few months later, CUDA found another niche application in LLM applications.

With the mounting demand for robotics, surveillance and autonomous weapons, I don't see how Nvidia couldn't keep their spot. They have their pick of the litter with hundreds of market segments, and unlike the rest of FAANG they're not afraid to branch out.

XCSme 12 hours ago||
Nice, finally they fixed the huge reasoning tokens count.

Now it's similar cost to DeepSeek v4 flash, but smarter.

My tests: https://aibenchy.com/compare/z-ai-glm-5-3-flash-max/deepseek...

pietz 14 hours ago||
With tiny models surpassing huge, 6 months old models on benchmarks, does anybody have some smart words to share on how these still "feel" different?

Artificial Analysis ranks GPT 5.6 Luna similar to GPT 5.4, but that never matches my real world experience. AA seems to do a good job making a single number as representative as possible but there is still so much benchmarks don't communicate.

Kungfuturtle 7 hours ago||
One term of art that's emerged for this "feel" is "big model smell", first coined by @aidan_mclau. [0]

To my surprise I couldn't find any proper explainers of the term in a quick search, despite grokking it after seeing it in various contexts on Twitter, but Fable 5 offered a useful analogy: "A student who memorized worked solutions and one who understands the subject score the same on the test; you can only tell them apart by asking a question the test didn't. Real-world use is nothing but those questions, which is why a single AA number feels right and wrong at the same time."

In other words, big model smell is related to the underlying ability to "understand" when tasks are underspecified or out-of-distribution. This ability can be mimicked to parity by smaller, distilled models according to the density of the training data for particular tasks, but neural scaling laws still hold for generalized reasoning ability.

More recently with these smaller models, there's a separate but related "RL-fried" phenomenon, where they rely on CoT to "grind toward a checkable answer even in contexts (open dialogue, taste, ambiguity) where there is no checkable answer, and you get the tell: over-hedged, over-structured, relentlessly on-task, deaf to the subtext."

There are some other insights and caveats in the (short) conversation that I feel you may appreciate reading. [1]

[0] https://x.com/aidan_mclau/status/1807843014104211855 [1] https://claude.ai/share/d511a348-7c36-432f-a6d5-9deab2802615

pietz 6 hours ago||
Appreciate you taking the time. That fable analogy is well put. Almost obvious once you know it.
KptMarchewa 13 hours ago||
I agree. They are definitely good - no issues with instruction following for example - but they miss the "intelligence" larger models have.

For implementation tasks, where I have the problem already defined and researched, or just simple task, I'd definitely use something like Luna xhigh or max. If the task is vague, or involves planning, I'd rather use Sol medium, even though it's theoretically worse on benchmarks.

fridder 10 hours ago||
Could do a "Big model for architecture and planning and smaller model (or local model) for implementation" sort of thing
TaLiTr 15 hours ago||
> it outperforms GLM-5.2 across benchmarks and real-world workloads at one-tenth the price, while approaching Claude Opus 4.8 on coding and agentic benchmarks.

From a biased source, but would be big if true. I've had great results with GLM 5.2.

From their subscription page, the smallest plan gives you about 97M tokens weekly for 5.3 but 292M for 5.3 Flash. Not exactly 10x the limit.

wolttam 15 hours ago||
The recent and slightly smaller DSv4 Flash is also GLM 5.2 equivalent (or close enough)
tokai 14 hours ago||
DSv4 hallucinates much more than GLM-5.2 though.
re-thc 15 hours ago||
> From a biased source, but would be big if true. I've had great results with GLM 5.2.

It's at least close (even if not better) from the Ox Alpha runs. For the price it's definitely great.

packetlost 15 hours ago||
For those who didn't read, this is the identity of the mysterious "Ox Alpha" model
Bluestein 15 hours ago||
They even give this over the API now:

│ https://openrouter.ai/api/v1/chat/completions model: stealth/ox-alpha auth: OPENROUTER_API_KEY status: 404 Not Found response: {"error":{"message":"Thank you for participating in the Stealth Ox Alpha testing period. This model was ZAI's GLM-5.3 Flash.

│ Use it now: https://openrouter.ai/z-ai/glm-5.3-flash","code":404},"user_...":"}

AbsurdCensor 15 hours ago||
Yeah, made me suspicious of how well the Ox Alpha was performing that it wasn't some 'new group' making the model.
BrucecarlL 1 hour ago||
It is bench maxed during the stealth testing. And it can’t beat DS flash on speed
lxe 14 hours ago||
Is the actual Z.AI ecosystem good enough to replace the main drivers like Codex and Claude? Because it looks like Z Code is just a Codex fork. Just like the Kimi Code one is.

What irks me about this is that the harnesses seem to be just an afterthought here.

Don't get me wrong, I love messing around with installing Pi, getting it hooked up with OpenRouter, and just trying all kinds of different stuff, local models, etc... but when it comes to literally just setting up a productivity environment and trusting my entire machine with it, I just run Codex.

I have heard from anecdotes where people have indeed replaced their main drivers with DeepSek V4 Flash or GLM and state that "it's almost as good as... [claude/gpt]" but I never hear anyone say "yeah, this is the model/harness that I now run on my machine and don't mess with it"

Bluestein 14 hours ago||
> "yeah, this is the model/harness that I now run on my machine and don't mess with it"

* me raises hand.-

Havoc 13 hours ago|||
Their list of allowed tools is extensive so just use whatever you want within that list

Think z code gives a token bonus though

mongrelion 8 hours ago|||
I think my inexperience using Claude Code or Codex makes a difference but what would you expect to be different here as opposed to using pi or opencode? Pi is my main driver so switching between all these models is a no brainer. No matter what the model is, my harness stays the same: same workflow, same skills, etc.
computerex 9 hours ago|||
I use my own harness: https://github.com/computerex/z

Have been using it as my primary harness for personal work for I'd say 6 months. I recommend everyone create their own harness at least to learn. There are a lot of practical benefits.

Sphax 11 hours ago|||
Both can be true though. I had the max coding plan since january and I kept using with Pi since then, even though it wasn’t as good as opus until glm 5.3. It definitely can be a daily driver if you don’t want to use Anthropic or OpenAI. It’s going to be even better with native vision now available. And i’m not messing with my setup either.
ygouzerh 12 hours ago||
You can use OpenRouter directly in Claude Code as well, it's quite nice!
claudeIsDown 14 hours ago||
On OpenRouter the pricing is: Input $0,075/M - Output $0,25/M - Cache Read $0,015 /M

How is the business model of Anthropic/OpenAI will sustain?

vatsachak 11 hours ago||
I think anthropic is behind but Luna on a Jalapeno seems profitable
dakolli 14 hours ago|||
They're obviously in a pickle, nobody is going to continue to pay $15-50 a mm tokens here soon. There's a reason OpenAI stopped training large models last week, and it's not because of "saftey" or "alignment" they know these gigantic models are not worth the squeeze.
polski-g 12 hours ago||
This is a bad model. Worse than Luna in every way; slower, dumber.
pphysch 11 hours ago||
OAI/Anthropic shareholder? Speed and intelligence are not "every way". Cost is essential. Hence the Pareto boundary illustrated in TFA.
polski-g 9 hours ago||
It literally cannot complete tasks that Luna can do easily. It doesn't matter how cheap it is.
freakynit 1 hour ago||
It actually can. I have been using it regularly for past 4 days. It is on sol-low level. I deliberately tested it on a moderately complex task. glm-5.3-flash one-shotted it correctly. Luna max couldn't achieve parity even after 3 total attempts.

It was creating java bindings for this project: https://github.com/jeffhajewski/latticedb

And here is the binding one-shotted by glm-5.3-flash: https://github.com/jeffhajewski/latticedb/pull/5

yipinwong 15 hours ago||
When reading this type of announcements, always have keen eyes on graphs.

e.g. "Agent Coding Performance by Effort Level" cuts Y-axis from 0~20.

- This makes it as if GLM-5.3-Flash made a bigger jump than it claimed as the Y-axis does not increase much (stupid trick used in biz reports)

I did mention that ox was working ok for me, and having an open-weight comparable to close to SOTA makes it very compelling for me to try it out locally (well, only if I got more VRAM)

nchmy 15 hours ago|
they also conspicuously omitted GPT 5.6 Luna from comparison. It scores lower, but is also cheaper. MiMo 2.5 is not a valid comp at this point

edit: nevermind. it is there in the artifical analysis scatter plot, but is greyed-out.

MUCH more interesting is that in that chart, their cost is WAY off. The actual chart shows GLM 5.3 Flash at $0.09, but their chart shows $0.045...

mrtesthah 15 hours ago||
The web page says 5.3 flash is discounted right now.
drob518 14 hours ago||
Seems disingenuous to draw frontier graphs with starter pricing.
seaal 14 hours ago||
Well, Luna debuted with 5x higher pricing than is currently available. With the pace of recent development these models might not be relevant by Thanksgiving.
drob518 13 hours ago||
Of course. Pricing is always changing, but typically it goes down over time, not up. So, if you're showing artificially low pricing from the start based on a teaser rate, IMO, you shouldn't be using that to show where you appear on a frontier graph. Place yourself on the graph based on your expected long-term pricing. Then, over time, adjust your position based on your standard rate, whatever that might be. Games are always being played for things like this, but this seems excessive.
yipinwong 13 hours ago||
I don't know if that's the standard pricing for US models to go down overtime, while Chinese ones go up (start cheap but pay more).

I don't have enough metrics to compare those costs but still Chinese models have been cheaper except against Luna for me.

FWIW, Luna does everything so well, I just keep using it for all my agents by default.

drob518 13 hours ago||
I haven't noticed the Chinese models going up in price for the same model. They do release new versions of the models with different prices that are higher. But everybody is doing that. One fine point is that deepseek-v4-flash-0731 is really a different model than deepseek-v4-flash and it's priced higher.
singularity2001 14 hours ago|
At the current 50%-off GLM-5.3-Flash price ($0.075/M input, $0.25/M output; cached input $0.015/M), surprisingly, roughly $400–900/month would buy token throughput comparable to fully exhausting Claude Max 20×
arizen 9 hours ago|
Probably apples to apples would be to compare z.ai subscription plans vs API pricing
More comments...