Comment by mosselman

Comment by mosselman 2 days ago

Back when deepseek came out and people were tripping over themselves shouting it was so much better than what was out there, it just wasn’t good.

It might be this model is super good, I haven’t tried it, but to say the Chinese models are better is just not true.

What I really love though is that I can run them (open models) on my own machine. The other day I categorised images locally using Qwen, what a time to be alive.

Further even than local hardware, open models make it possible to run on providers of choice, such as European ones. Which is great!

So I love everything about the competitive nature of this.

CamperBob2 2 days ago

If you thought DeepSeek "just wasn't good," there's a good chance you were running it wrong.

For instance, a lot of people thought they were running "DeepSeek" when they were really running some random distillation on ollama.

Reply View 2 replies

bjourne 2 days ago

WDYM? Isn't https://chat.deepseek.com/ the real DeepSeek?

Reply View | 1 reply
- CamperBob2 2 days ago
  
  Good point, I was assuming the GP was running local for some reason. Hard to argue when it's the official providers who are being compared.
  I ran the 1.58-bit Unsloth quant locally at the time it came out, and even at such low precision, it was super rare for it to get something wrong that o1 and GPT4 got right. I have never actually used a hosted version of the full DS.
  
  Reply View | 0 replies