Hacker News
IBM CEO says open weight models are now good and cheap on-prem(theregister.com)
427 points by Betelbuddy 4 days ago | 339 comments
[–] jacquesm 4 days ago
It's absolutely true. I have three different setups here, a rig with 8 gpus that I use in either one of two modes (all 8, very heavy model or just one much lighter) and two DGX sparks. I haven't used a paid model in months. Sure, they use a few more tokens and the results may be slightly less good (but this doesn't really matter because I'm still in the loop so it is easy to correct). But the fact that I'm not sharing my work with the paid providers is much more to my liking than having big brother looking over my shoulder at every step and occasionally giving me the 'I can't let you do that, Jacques' treatment.
[–] gorgoiler 4 days ago
Gaming used to be done in arcades for 25c a play*.

Over time NeoGeo realized they could sell you the hardware to play at home (“on-prem”) at arcade quality albeit at a price out of reach to most people. Alongside them, Nintendo and Atari gave you 80% of the fun at 20% of the cost. History will view games arcades as a flash in the pan compared to gaming at home.

Namco, Capcom, and Konami went into selling software instead of hardware but it feels hard to imagine buying a home copy of Fable** for $X,000 any time soon.

⸻

* That’s for video games. In fairground arcades you’d literally pay for tokens then use tokens for play. The analogy almost writes itself.

** The model, not the video game.

[–] asdf88990 4 days ago
If you think the idea of buying Fable like model is hard, you should really try some of the latest open models like Qwen 3.8. They’re getting there very fast.
[–] jacquesm 4 days ago
Qwen 3.8 and GLM 5.3 are my workhorses right now. Qwen for simpler stuff because it is wicked fast using 'ninfer', GLM 5.3 because it is very good a more complex stuff and less likely to get stuck so I can let it run for much longer without intervention.
[–] dekhn 3 days ago
I have Qwen 3.8 running under ninfer or Strata sized to fill my 5090.

From a fair bit of coding with the agent, my experience with Qwen 3.8 (Qwen3.8-Flash-Next-GSQ-RCO-IQ3_S-0 on Strata, Qwen 3.8 27B on ninfer). In my particular case, I was trying to clone a recent HN post which allowed you to visualize how out of tune your singing was relative to a song, but as a web app or portable native app.

My experience is that both those models will generate an enormous amount of noise (literally: it was running audible unit tests on my machine to test the note-detection algorithms) while coming to a solution, if they do find a solution- while Claude (whatever the latest model is) or ChatGPT (ditto) will do 1/10th the amount of work to get the right solution. I suspect if I had the resources to run GLM 5.3, it would probably be significantly faster to get to a working solution than Qwen-3.8 27B, but likely still somewhat inferior to Claude or ChatGPT solutions, and also would generate a much larger energy bill on my part.

[–] spwa4 4 days ago
How do you run GLM 5.3?
[–] morgoo 4 days ago
Their parent comment claims they have 8 GPUs and 2 DGX sparks.
[–] spwa4 4 days ago
Even 2 DGX sparks are limited to Q2 at best. As for GPUs, it of course depends, but anything under 50k just can't run it, not even Q2.

And at Q2, I think you're better of with Qwen3-coder-next on one DGX spark (or much better: on any apple silicon max, we are currently in the ridiculous situation that a second hand m1 max 64G will beat a DGX spark that's at least triple the price)

[–] wjnc 4 days ago
This being /u/jacquesm would imply it is kinder to assume him having that setup than claiming to have that setup.
[–] snarfy 3 days ago
I like this analogy a lot.

It reminds me that coin-op SF2 champion edition was like $6000 new, and you rented time with tokens. Eventually you could play a very good but more limited SNES version of SF2 at home for no tokens. And then PC hardware matured to the point where you can play the exact bits via emulator at better than original fidelity.

It will be very nice when AI gets to the emulator stage.

[–] doubled112 3 days ago
> It will be very nice when AI gets to the emulator stage.

Do you think we'll be longing for the nostalgia hit of LLM models from 2025 in 2050?

Maybe we will collectively miss being completely right and inappropriate em—dashes.

[–] JacobLeeCadLaw 2 days ago
I'm already nostalgic for very early Dall-e LSD-like art. Ref: "Sleeping Horses - Nov 2021."

Those early GAN image generators were so weird that they produced art that felt genuinely creative. I don't know that whatever people are using to create modern Tung-Tung-Tung-Sahur instagram reel slop is even capable of producing similar things.

[–] pipes 4 days ago
I'd say Nintendo gave you 10x the fun of neo geo. Yeah it looked cool, but mario and Zelda on the nes played like nothing else. And then we got street fighter 2 on snes which is better than any snk fighter I've played :)

(I'll run for cover now as I'm sure neogeo fans will disagree!)

[–] ASalazarMX 3 days ago
I'll agree, since arcades could never give the experience a JRPG could. No shop would allow a player to occupy a machine all day unless they spent a lot of quarters.
[–] MrBuddyCasino 4 days ago
2D action games peaked with Metal Slug.
[–] jonhohle 3 days ago
/SOtN entered the chat.

(I also adore MS)

[–] echelon 4 days ago
I'm stealing this analogy. This is good.

But also look at live service games and the shit modern game studios are doing to try to go back to the old world of rent seeking.

[–] senordevnyc 3 days ago
Daily reminder that this isn’t what rent seeking means.
[–] doctorwho42 3 days ago
> Rent-seeking is the act of growing one's existing wealth by manipulating public policy or economic conditions without creating new wealth.

Game industry has first manipulated the economic conditions by restricting access to game content (skins, modding capabilities, always online drm, etc.) that previously was included in the price (buy game, you own that game outright).

Manipulation of public policy was a more recent thing with the laws surrounding underage gambling via 'loot-boxes'.

So I think the onus is on you to show us why these behaviors, which increase the wealth the companies are able to extract per game, are not rent seeking behavior.

[–] senordevnyc 2 days ago
Changing how you sell your own products is not "manipulating economic conditions" whatsoever. If it was, that would mean that every business in the history of commerce has engaged in it.

As for the laws on underage gambling, countries all over the world are outlawing that, suing gaming companies, etc. The public is not in favor of underage gambling, and it's unclear to me how banning it increases the wealth of these companies? So I think the onus is on you to explain how this is an example of rent seeking.

[–] doctorwho42 2 days ago
Modern gaming companies can be considered rent seekers not because they charge money for their products, but because many increasingly rely on extracting additional revenue from consumers by exploiting market power, consumer lock-in, and artificial scarcity rather than creating proportionately greater value. In economics, rent seeking is the pursuit of economic gains through the exploitation of existing advantages rather than through productive activity. Developing a great game is productive; leveraging an established franchise or player community to extract additional money without providing equivalent value is rent seeking.

Consider the use of microtransactions, battle passes, paid progression, and downloadable content. These systems often exploit the time, money, and emotional investment players have already made in a game. By deliberately slowing progression, withholding content, or introducing artificial scarcity, companies can encourage consumers to spend more money not because they are receiving a better product, but because they want to avoid frustration or access something they already value. The company is monetizing the player's existing commitment rather than necessarily creating new value.

This does not mean every gaming company or microtransaction is inherently rent seeking. Selling meaningful new content is a legitimate business activity. The criticism is that parts of the modern gaming industry increasingly prioritize extracting revenue from an existing player base over developing better games. When companies use their control over popular franchises and digital ecosystems to extract additional money from consumers who have few alternatives, they exhibit the very characteristics of rent seeking that economists criticize in other industries.

[–] zahlman 3 days ago
Going to the arcade was about a lot more than just the games, though.
[–] behringer 3 days ago
You've stumbled on exactly why the big providers are lobbying for regulation and big claims that Ai is unsafe. They don't want you running these at home.
[–] fsckboy 3 days ago
>Gaming used to be done in arcades for 25c a play.

in the early days, 2 plays for a quarter was not unusual (but you couldn't buy one)

[–] LogicFailsMe 3 days ago
Arcades mostly failed to adapt to the advances of home consoles to provide experiences you couldn't get at home. That's on the dimwitted game suits of the 1990s who cared little about novel gameplay, networked gameplay, or better NPC AI and physics. Then mobile happened and there was a brief glorious Cambrian explosion of new ideas until the Zynga playbook and DLC. Evidence: lived through it as a small game studio developer trying to do original things. The fun experiment now and then is to break out your 1980s video game consoles and play through their libraries. Most of the games are objectively terrible but gems like Yar's Revenge are still gems today IMO.
[–] InsidiousWombat 4 days ago
It will take a while till prices drop to a level where affording 256GB card (even if it would be shared between few coworkers) will have any sense over buying tokens.

And the AI debt bubble price spike will probably stay there for a while.

[–] jauntywundrkind 3 days ago
Intel Crescent Lake is dropping. 1.4TB/s of LPDDR5X, up to 480GB. It's not going to be cheap but it's much better than trying to buy gddr based cards.

Still (as bit over) 1/2 the ram bus width of a single HBM4 stack though! (1280b vs 2048b).

[–] jacquesm 3 days ago
That's going to be pretty pricey though. And I really want to see some independent benchmarks, that all looks very good on paper but there are some complications (notably: chip count, run length of the traces).
[–] cyanydeez 4 days ago
Well, if thw ai bubble implodes, youll sudden be exposed to real costs. Thats when a real opinion will be formed.

Uber took a decade but eventually, the real cost of a taxi service went up for many use cases.

Your argument is only solid if we are headed to the singularity.

[–] doctorwho42 3 days ago
> Your argument is only solid if we are headed to the singularity.

Perfect encapsulation of the problem. I may steal the wording you used for future conversations.

[–] otterley 4 days ago
How much did you shell out for this setup? What’s the TTFT and the output tokens/sec rate? How much electricity does it consume?
[–] jacquesm 4 days ago
Working on a blog post to document it all, but that will take a few more days. The short version: the big rig is probably $25K, ttft is dependent on how much prefill you have but typically a couple of seconds (2K prefill/sec in one setup, about 500 in the other), tgs 100 to 150 or so depending on what it is doing and how well the speculative decoder works with the current context. Electricity is pretty bad, full tilt it's about 2500W or so but I've power limited it to 1500 to keep it civil. It is not cheaper than using a frontier lab (or at least, I don't think it is), but the independence bit is the important part for me and I don't care if that carries a surcharge, even if it is a substantial one.
[–] glassresearch 4 days ago
I'm not saying your approach is wrong - but for my workloads, it makes a lot more sense to just pay for a decade (!!!) of Claude Code 20x Max.
[–] segmondy 4 days ago
My local model never says no. I never get banned. If I want to do security stuff, reverse engine, there it goes! Do I wanna chat about politics? No problem! Do I want it to analyze medical stuff? I don't get to hear that it's not a doctor and I should call 911. Do I want to explore legal docs, no problem! There are lots of things that cloud models will say no to! I read that don't even agree to help with advanced biology and chemistry topic much. I also never run out of tokens, no 5 hr limit. I can run it 24/7. I don't run out of tokens. I can run 16 sub agents at the same time, non stop! 1-4 billion tokens a month? No problem. Any agent harness I want! No restrictions. Privacy all day. My own true system prompt, not something someone has determined, no filters. Furthermore, there are many open weight cloud models that don't have equivalent online. For a while before cloud models got good at math, the best model at math was DeepSeekv2 Math and there was no API. The only way to use it was to run local. All sorts of audio models, image/video models, etc. No multiple subscription needed. Private UI for my family, kids included (I can guard what kids infer). Got a friend that really needs some tokens? I give em access through private VPN. Telling someone that they are paying for decades of Claude for local AI is like telling someone they are paying for decades of public transport when they buy a car. Sure, you are right, but ...
[–] Gareth321 4 days ago
Also no political censorship, and it doesn’t report you to the police when it suspects you did something illegal. That really happened, by the way.

Now I want a local LLM server :( $25k is just so much money.

[–] ThunderSizzle 4 days ago
If you already have a machine, throwing an r9700 in it is one of the cheapest ways to get qwen3.8 27B Q6 with 100k+ context working.

Sadly, the r9700 has gone up in price, but it's still the cheapest route. I use It on an old x99 Linux desktop and it achieves 50 tps decode and 1000+ tps prefill.

[–] Jnr 4 days ago
No political censorhip? Try asking Chinese models about Taiwan.

Some censorhip and bias towards certain ideology is baked into those models.

While it is not a problem for programming tasks, I would never use it for certain other tasks.

[–] _ache_ 4 days ago
I'm building a local LLM server myself. For about 8k€ you can have 170tps, ~6000 prefill.

A lot more with Haiku equivalents (Qwen3.8 27B) or gemini. It's not frontier, but not that far away.

[–] ali_chherawalla 1 day ago
You may not need $25k. Off Grid AI runs open models on the desktop/laptop you already have and picks ones that fit its memory, free and offline. Bigger ones run on your desktop and you can use them from your phone without any cloud servers in between. either your wifi or a tailnet like tailscale
[–] cft 4 days ago
MacBooks with large RAM and optimized for local models should be Apple's medium term goal.
[–] charcircuit 4 days ago
>and it doesn’t report you to the police when it suspects you did something illegal

This is an alignment issue. OpenClaw with a local LLM with an email you setup for it could contact the police.

[–] InsidiousWombat 4 days ago
renting GPU off cloud is also an option
[–] jacquesm 4 days ago
Exactly, that's the spirit. I pool the resources with some friends as well.
[–] Forgeties79 4 days ago
I think both of y’all glossed over the $25k of it all pretty quickly. This isn’t remotely an option for anyone.
[–] bityard 4 days ago
You see it as money spent, others might see it as an investment. OP doesn't necessarily say exactly what they use it for, but if education is the goal, $25k and spending your evenings learning about AI theory and tooling is way cheaper than a university degree and can easily result in millions more dollars in lifetime earnings given the current early state of the technology.

Besides, I regularly see people here in HN spend a LOT more than that on hobbies and depreciating assets. A few years back, people with coastal salaries and tech jobs were tripping over themselves to spend $100k on a certain brand of trendy electric car.

[–] solyin 4 days ago
AnyONE. But if you got some friends, and they got friends, then that $25k becomes smaller and stomachable. My favorite rumor out of LA is groups of friends with a Lamborghini Urus that they timeshare. No idea if it's true, but if car people can get together to buy/lease a car that's MSRP is $345k, I think $25k should be an option for anyone with friends. (Hypothetically. I've read a lot about this friend thing on the Internet!)
[–] segfaltnh 4 days ago
Its a drop in the bucket for many businesses though.
[–] dekhn 3 days ago
Anyone? I know many people in Silicon Valley, Boston, Seattle, New York, and elsewhere who would consider that a reasonable expense if it kept them viable in the job market for a few more years.

My entire career has been based on purchasing the most hardware I could afford at home and using it near its peak. I've given up other life pleasures (dinners out, nicer car/housing) several times to max out my computational capacity.

Also hardware like this, if chosen carefully, often has a viable lifetime over 5+ years

[–] elevation 3 days ago
> My local model never says no

In case a future user wants to know what a 2026 model would refuse to do, I needed to rotate dozens of passwords last night both on the server and on the clients. When it was time to verify that the rotated credentials worked, I asked for a script that would rate limit the credential checks. Claude/opus5 (opus!!) refused and stopped in its tracks.

In another instance, Claude was making great headway bringing a legacy Windows app up in WINE until it’s saw “auth” somewhere and shut down. In the shutdown state, Claude asked me to reword the prompt to see if I could get it to act on less dangerous instructions. But when I reworded my request, narrowed the scope to be clearly unthreatening, or even redirected the model, it’s still rejected me. I suspect Anthropic uses the less suspicious rephrasing as training material to increase their rejection rate.

[–] latentsea 4 days ago
> My local model never says no. I never get banned.

So much this. Plus everything else you mentioned. The freedom and control is real.

[–] dekhn 3 days ago
I agree the local models have many nice properties, but I would not be surprised if people start to recognize that Gemini pointing you at medical services instead of attempting to diagnose you is actually a good thing in many cases (and Gemini often does do some diagnosis anyway).
[–] ceejayoz 4 days ago
> My local model never says no.

> I don't get to hear that it's not a doctor and I should call 911.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_Awards

[–] mik1998 4 days ago
It's pretty easy for a reasonable person to determine when to call 911 and when to ask an LLM. Typically when I ask an LLM, it is for something I am not willing to escalate further at the moment.

Anthropic has a significant interest in reducing liability, which in this case means mostly blocking this use case.

[–] segmondy 3 days ago
Have you heard the cost of health insurance and seeing a doctor? Some people don't see going to hospital as an option. Better for them to have a local model than no options. But let me tell you how I use it for health, I take all my health records, lab results, every thing, I throw it in there for a second opinion, it explains things to me, it suggests questions I should ask on follow up, possible options, etc.
[–] JTbane 3 days ago
The security research is probably the biggest reason to use local models as it seems like the big service providers will ban you for life if you even hint at doing that.
[–] charcircuit 4 days ago
>I don't get to hear that it's not a doctor and I should call 911.

Local models can do this and with tool use they can even call emergency services for you on your behalf.

[–] sharmajai 3 days ago
A cloud model can also get neutered anytime and/or start using more tokens while charging you the same or more per token.
[–] jack_pp 4 days ago
isn't it the same using the same model you host locally but through a cloud provider? does the $ math favour a local setup then?
[–] segmondy 3 days ago
Cloud models sometimes get degraded. You can trust your local model and know what you are running.
[–] jacquesm 4 days ago
If I want to go out of business that is what I would do. Most of the data I have here could never be shipped to a service provider, I'd be in lawsuits for the next decade or so and die bankrupt.
[–] Asyakguen 4 days ago
That NDA case is the real argument, more than price. Token prices keep dropping anyway, but "this data can never leave the building" doesn't change with a price cut ;)
[–] greesil 4 days ago
Okay man I've got to ask, what kind of data are we talking about? Legal? Medical?

I've heard that there are legal software platforms like Clio that offer AI products, not sure what just eavesdropping on some lawyers at the bar.

[–] jacquesm 4 days ago
http://www.modularcompany.com/

Companies pretty much give us the full overview of what they have from a technical perspective (and often much more than that), we sign NDAs with investors that have serious teeth in them. The data they share with us would not be disclosed under any other circumstance and even our reports are shared only with the clients.

It's a nice little business. I'm not going to risk offending my customers for convenience or to save some money.

[–] tjwebbnorfolk 4 days ago
The bet we (self-hosters) are making is that once these companies IPO, they will be forced to do whatever they have to do to make money. i.e. price increases, more throttling of subscription non-usage-based accoutns, etc.

They are subsidizing all of us to the tune of $billions in losses per month. That can't go on for a decade. Probably not even for another 18 months.

I still use all the tokens Claude will give me on the max plan. But I also run deepseek v4 locally for overflow and for... contingencies.

[–] lelanthran 4 days ago
> The bet we (self-hosters) are making is that once these companies IPO, they will be forced to do whatever they have to do to make money. i.e. price increases, more throttling of subscription non-usage-based accoutns, etc.

But, there is no need to make that bet - when prices increase, I'd look into renting a previous-gen GPU on a cloud provider. If the online GPU providers raise prices, then I would look into purchasing for on-site.

Until that happens, I'm not making any bets, because if all the token providers go bust GPU rentals are going to fall in price, and if they don't go bust after raising prices, I can still get years of GPUs for self-hosting at the price of a self-owned rig.

[–] tjwebbnorfolk 3 days ago
Well there are risks to being part of a crowd that's all compelled to make the same decision at the same time. Certain risks can only be transferred, not reduced in absolute terms.

It's not economical today to run my own hardware, but the insurance is worth it to me in the sense that if my bet is wrong, I'm still okay with paying extra for the protection.

[–] calmingsolitude 4 days ago
LLM subscriptions are heavily subsidized. I’d be surprised if Claude 20x costed the same after a decade.
[–] distances 4 days ago
Inference prices are going only down. It could be that some top subscription costs more in a decade, but I fully believe a full array of competent models will be extremely cheap.
[–] Gareth321 4 days ago
The inference is profitable. It’s the training which is really expensive and not being reflected in the subscription prices.
[–] latentsea 4 days ago
Doesn't deepseek make $38 per GPU-hour? As in they can actually serve profitably?
[–] petu 4 days ago
Deepseek doesn't have subscriptions, you can only pay per token / API prices.
[–] MarcusE1W 4 days ago
Keep in mind that the prices of the big AI companies are currently mostly loss makers. Their plan is to get sufficient market saturation and dependency of their clients and if they achieve that, they will hike up the prices quite a bit.

(Of course this all depends on if their plans work out, but if not then the smaller local models will probably play a big role in the failure of their plan)

[–] murderfs 4 days ago
People keep repeating this, but it is only remotely close to true for the literal free plans and the small subset of consumers maxing out the pro plans.

At API pricing (i.e. what all enterprise customers are paying), inference is profitable, even if they're paying usurious rates on cost of capital for capex. Where the frontier labs are getting screwed is that they're in a Red Queen's race with each other, spending tens of billions of dollars per year training the next frontier model, and not being able to recoup the investment on that model before it's obsolete.

That's why you see the CEOs calling for government intervention to "pace the frontier": it lets them reduce investment on training without risking that their competitors keep going and make them obsolete. Unfortunately for them, the Chinese labs exist, and would love nothing more than to take the frontier, so they're in a bit of a pickle.

[–] roca 4 days ago
The people I personally know who signed the "pacing the frontier" petition (including me), or who called for it in other ways, are sincere in their concerns that things are moving too fast for safety.
[–] root_axis 4 days ago
> inference is profitable

People keep repeating this, but it is only remotely close to true if you evaluate inference in a vacuum without any of the other supporting costs to facilitate that capability.

Just a few years ago people were saying the same thing about WeWork: "leasing is profitable, the unit economics of individual locations is net positive", and yet...

[–] m4rtink 4 days ago
But what if you become unable to pay for it ? What if:

- they raise the prices 10x

- go bankrupt

- ban you or your country

- decide not to help you with what you want to do for opaque reasons

- you are in jail because the model halucinated something and the company promptly reported you to the police

Better avoid all off these and go local IMHO.

[–] pixl97 3 days ago
>you are in jail because the model halucinated something and the company promptly reported you to the police

Just note that your local model can 100% do this itself.

[–] ffsm8 4 days ago
If you compare to API prices the value difference is not as big.

The anthropic sub is likely still subventioned with VC money. So this may not even be available in 2 years.

But yeah, with current sub prices/budget... It's hard to go with anyone else unless you're rich.

[–] ffsm8 4 days ago
If you compare to API prices the value difference is not as big.

The anthropic sub is likely still subventioned with VC money. So this may not even be available in 2 years.

But yeah, with current sub prices/budget... It'd stick with it too

[–] reacharavindh 4 days ago
I was thinking the economics of it the same way.. if the AI companies are burning debt and VC money to give me cheaper tokens why not take them for it? I can always rent a GPU server for those personal, private AI needs.. heck even run a decision model to route them to the rented GPU servers either on demand or scheduled for few hours in a day…

It doesn’t have to be black or white…

For my toy projects, adventures, learning exercises, and throwaway MVPs I will prefer the subscription plans… they are cheap for what they offer today.

[–] thaanpaa 4 days ago
From this article alone it should be obvious that the long-repeated myth about frontier inference being subsidized is just that: a myth.

It's training and tuning new models that cost them money. And that's why they are trying to scare people into thinking AI will kill us all in the next 5 years; they want bans on the open-weight models because they know they won't be able to compete with them.

[–] pimeys 4 days ago
A few days ago we got the news that DeepSeek makes 38 dollars profit per card with their off peak pricing (in the inference server release discussion).

If that is true, either the American labs are not optimizing correctly or they make a ton of money with inference.

[–] tourmalinetaco 4 days ago
Yeah, the way I see it short term is take the free/subsidized tokens while we can and the further out we go the cheaper compute will get for local setups.
[–] cgio 4 days ago
Do you take into account the token allowance? For a heavy user this would be the equivalent of many subscriptions and they add up.
[–] windexh8er 4 days ago
This trope minimizes so many downsides of "frontier" models. When you can't do what you need to with a model it really isn't valuable - which is why subscriptions still exist. As soon as you're forced to pay actual token costs people who keep saying this will likely wish they had invested in something else earlier.

It's also very clear that providers are running variants of models, especially at the SotA levels. I wouldn't be surprised to find out at some point that 1-2 months after release OAI and Anthropic just run "good enough" quants to save themselves on inference (since they're losing money hand over fist). Another upside of local models is that I don't need to worry about model degradation at any given point.

[–] benoau 4 days ago
If you know you will pay Claude a few thousand bucks a year a decade adds up too, owning the hardware could just as well end up cheaper because you can sell it or as others have alluded the price to rent could get much worse.
[–] dylan604 4 days ago
Would you really expect to be using the same hardware over the course of that decade? One of the biggest drawbacks to using on-prem hardware is keeping up with the upgrades. Leasing upgrade cycles are a thing for businesses, but for someone at home it seems like later in the decade the local system will be showing its age.
[–] jacquesm 4 days ago
The 3090's I have would sell for more than new today... for the next couple of years or so it will be pretty bad on the hardware front. Until there is more RAM manufacturing capacity and NV has a credible competitor I don't think it will get better.
[–] jacquesm 4 days ago
Heh, the hardware I bought I could easily sell for 2x so you may actually end up making money. Though I hope that that won't last.
[–] gr_norm 4 days ago
The benefit of the agent working firstly for you rather than for Anthropic or OpenAI will become increasingly apparent. We're already seeing signs: remember when Anthropic openly promised to have Claude sabotage people using it to create competitors? And OpenAI is looking for revenue opportunities from advertising, which can't end well for their users.

Just think of how user-hostile other online services have gotten, and imagine how acutely painful the proprietary LLM providers could make theirs. Thankfully, open models provide some counterbalance.

[–] selcuka 4 days ago
> It is not cheaper than using a frontier lab

Are you comparing to subscription prices or API prices? Because if it's the former it won't last forever.

[–] jacquesm 4 days ago
True, they're subsidized, I'm not. But I don't have their utilization so I figure it would always be more expensive to run this locally.
[–] pllbnk 4 days ago
Would you use hosted models if they promised anonymity and no log retention and servers were physically located inside jurisdictions that respect privacy (Switzerland, Norway or similar, I'm not into law) if that meant better price/performance ratio than your current rig?
[–] e12e 3 days ago
Thank you so much for sharing your insight - it's not much serious discussion out there on sane reasons for self hosting (that I've seen).

You say the big rig is 25k - and then the two sparks are about 1k each?

Electricity is for "just" the big rig?

[–] DanielHB 4 days ago
Did you get insurance on all this stuff? I imagine home insurance would not qualify for a bespoke home-datacenter.
[–] bitexploder 4 days ago
I mean, I just have 4xV100S GPU and a Macbook Pro w/48GB of RAM and I find it kind of amazing.

My server can run Qwen Flash Next at 500 t/s aggregate (about 200 t/s single user). It's pretty great. I use it for local coding and all my worker agents. It is about as reliable as Sonnet 5 for agentic coding. I make 3D models, keep the home network and server updated, fully built ansible files.

You do NOT need 20K in hardware to run these models reliably. I built my own inference engine from scratch for fun. You can run Strata on 16-32GB cards at very respectable token rates if you have the standard RAM to go with it. I strongly encourage people to go use this model on OpenRouter and try it out for tasks.

I also have a somewhat lobotimized quant of GLM Flash 5.3 working and it's pretty decent too.

[–] jacquesm 4 days ago
V100S is a very good card for some workloads. And they were cheap as well.

I have 240G VRAM total which is a good reason why that rig cost as much as it does, and if I were to build it at today's prices it would be even more expensive.

[–] bitexploder 4 days ago
I got mine just a few weeks ago for about $750 each. I am a decent programmer and have Opus optimizing the inference engine. I know enough to keep it on track, but GPU programming is something I have literally never done, before, but now I know enough about Volta and how to optimize it to be dangerous.

Kind of ironic, but it's the only way. I just really like this as an option. For a household LLM I have the IQ4_K_XL quant and plenty of capacity for everything you could want in a household LLM and it is trustworthy enough to not rm -rf /, etc.

And yeah that is a really nice amount! You can run and compose a lot of interesting models, vision capabilities. IDK. Plus this level of model is far more interactive in the sense that it can implement a well scoped ticket or unit of work but its not going to magically just figure some things out without guidance or a spec :)

[–] jacquesm 4 days ago
You got lucky :)

I tried getting some 170's when I first heard about that unlock but they were already unobtanium by then. That would have been a nice way to add a lot of VRAM.

GLM 5.3 runs pretty comfortably on this rig, even with large context.

[–] tepmoc 4 days ago
Not OP. But I’ve done some calculation here https://localaicost.com/
[–] hotelsacher 4 days ago
I envy you. If I only had the money for that sweet hardware. And the electricity bill.
[–] bradknowles 3 days ago
You mean, the Chinese models, right? Like the ones that stole all the weights from ChatGPT and Claude, just like those companies stole all the IP from the rest of the world, right?

I’ve always wondered about those models. Are we just sending all of our data over to China, instead of ChatGPT or Claude? Can we trust them any more than we do ChatGPT or Claude?

[–] bathtub365 3 days ago
They didn’t steal them, they copied them, similar to how Anthropic and OpenAI copied the materials they used to train their models to begin with.
[–] raven12345 3 days ago
No need to send data away. Local open models keep everything on your device.
[–] jamesfinlayson 4 days ago
At work two different departments have it on their radar to do - apparently there are GPUs waiting to be used for something like it.
[–] jacquesm 4 days ago
Smart move to get them bought ahead of time.
[–] jamesfinlayson 3 days ago
Might have been bought 12 months ago? Not sure when exactly but the impression I got was that they weren't too old.
[–] Betelbuddy 4 days ago
Would it make more sense to just rent the infra from a Cloud provider just for amortization purposes? While...and this depending on the the Cloud provider...getting the same guarantees of governance and personal sovereignty?
[–] Shorel 4 days ago
You may get the same guarantees on paper, but at this point there's absolutely no reason to trust any AI provider.

At best they get a fine, and it will not make a dent in their cash reserves.

[–] Betelbuddy 4 days ago
Bedrock guarantees neither your inputs are shared with the LLM providers, neither your data will be used to train the next model. I dont think AWS loves AI that much...to break their business model with a violation of terms and conditions.

But I was not even suggesting that, just run your local LLM on Cloud infra. Do you really believe they are ready to risk their Cloud business just to spy on your prompts?

[–] dmantis 4 days ago
Antrophic works with an ex-deputy of the CIA (David S. Cohen). OpenAI has an ex-director of the NSA (Paul Nakasone) in the board. Literally.
[–] Betelbuddy 3 days ago
The Bedrock models are hosted at AWS.
[–] dmantis 3 days ago
I'm sure these gentlemen will figure it out.
[–] tannertech 4 days ago
8 gpus is cheap now?
[–] jacquesm 4 days ago
Well... that's a tricky one. I bought a lot of these second hand. I can sell them for more than they originally cost new, so indeed, it is not 'cheap'.

Then again, I run a business and for the business it is absolutely manageable, it is roughly the price of a single job. Privately this would be a different matter but I assume that if you would do this privately you'd simply get a single (but powerful) GPU second hand and offload to RAM. Not as fast but with llama.cpp, 'ninfer', DwarfStar and various other clones of those two you can get some pretty decent performance out of single GPUs.

I've been buying powerful hardware since the 90's, starting with SGI and then ever larger Linux boxes. I make my living with them so it's never been a huge decision to invest some of the proceeds back into the tools. But on an absolute scale, yes, it is a lot of money.

[–] Eridrus 3 days ago
Whether this idea is economically largely depends on how much utilization you can get and how much you can get GPUs for.
[–] larodi 4 days ago
What he does not say, but imply is that IBM's open models are also good. And they are.
[–] AndrewKemendo 3 days ago
Yup

I’m running local models more and more and starting to move to just tailscaling into everything

[–] lp92 3 days ago
It really depends on usecase i guess. I've tried a few open models, they don't hold a candle Argon/Opus/Sonnet when it comes to my current major use case which revolves around CAD and aero simulation development work.

What's your use case where the open models are working well?

[–] sjdh76 4 days ago
Depends on context of what people build.

I mean IBM already has a track record of building gigantic amounts of garbage and over charging large corps and govts for it coasting on their brand name and networks to get deals. So using some cheap ass model fits their MO. Having used their shit mountain called websphere, what an IBM CEO says is not something I take too seriously.

[–] jacquesm 4 days ago
IBM has two faces. Their consultancy arm is the exact opposite of what I would call a good company, even so, they make a good bit of money. The hardware side of the business is still quite impressive, yes, it is too expensive but their power rack boxes are effectively a little mainframe (check the IO stats on those things) and the performance is - I have to admit - impressive. That said I would never buy it because I can get much better value elsewhere. Even so I think they could do this if they really wanted to.
[–] sjdh76 4 days ago
They do have big advantanges because many large corps have become totally dependent on them having outsourced everything and lost internal knowledge. That internal ops knowledge is very crucial/useful to take full advatange of what AI offers. In the coming years much of it will leak into frontier models. After which corps might not need IBM/TCS etc and just rebuild internal teams to handle ops like they once did.
[–] amelius 3 days ago
Another benefit is that you're not helping the AI labs get better at what you do.
[–] dansquizsoft 4 days ago
> Sure, they use a few more tokens and the results may be slightly less good (but this doesn't really matter because I'm still in the loop so it is easy to correct)

I can't wait to use models that are 'slightly less good' when I am at work instead of something like Fable that lets me focus on the problem at hand as much as possible rather than also spending additional effort correcting for the tool I am using...

[–] sp527 4 days ago
You need to reread what was written. No one is proposing to take away your right to leak proprietary edge to the rapacious frontier labs that need to eat most of the economy in order to survive.
[–] Frannky 4 days ago
You can try open models via OpenRouter and omp without having to buy or rent any GPU. I routinely try open models to see where they are. GLM 5.3 with DSFV4.1 as advisor via omp feels Opus 4.6 level, i.e. totally able to ship stuff.

I do use Anthropic and OpenAI mostly because it costs me 1/40 and 1/50 of the api prices, which is way cheaper than Chinese subscriptions, but I’m ready to jump ship when they pull the plug. Fortunately they have nothing that forces me to keep paying them, and I don’t pay the crazy enterprise subscription costs, just the personal account prices.

I also die to be able to run the OSS setup locally to stop being spied on all the time.

For context, I averaged 10 hours a day prompting LLMs from when ChatGPT came out. At the start it was just function generation, then single file modules, then modules, and now I reason, design, implement and test with them.

An interesting thing is that with omp you can plan with a smart model and then implement with a dumber one. So for example, plan with Kimi 3.1 via OpenRouter and then implement with DSFV4 with zero data retention active, sorted by cheapest, and minimal tps accepted.

I get the people who are pissed about their cushy jobs evaporating, but if you know how to use these technologies it’s very freeing because it’s like having a company of people working for you, except they are not human so they’re not wasting their life working for you instead of using it for themselves.

You can make them do pretty much everything that is fuzzy-verifiable, you don’t have to worry about their feelings or that they won’t do what you asked them to do or stop, and you can activate them when you want at scale in parallel or not use them at all for days.

For me it’s a dream honestly. I never felt so much empowered in my life while being enabled to unlock my creativity with almost no boundaries.

[–] lsvg 4 days ago
I fall into the people pissed about losing jobs camp, can you explain how you keep a cheery attitude like you do?

I geniuinely don't see what I could make with this new tech, my brain immediately goes to "this app idea is worthless, anybody can make it now".

[–] mattlondon 4 days ago
As the OP said really. It is very very freeing to just be able to give a task that in ye olden days you knew was going to be a pain in the arse to do, and it will do it without you. Amazing.

It's like having extra copies of yourself that you can just fork and get stuff done. E.g. the other day I was in a meeting and there were some heavy discussions about a few gnarly issues. I fired off a few prompts in parallel while the AI researches options, approaches, made a prototype etc all while I was present and paying attention still in the face to face meeting. I am so much so much more efficient as an engineer now - getting better feedback, more bonuses etc. It's never been better - I handle thinking about the requirements, the computer science and software engineering big picture etc, and the AI handles the syntax trivia for implementation.

The models are really really good now.

The only downside is that as a result of more stuff getting done, we need to have more meetings to discuss what actually needs to be worked on.

[–] stemlord 3 days ago
You didn't really answer the question though, how are you not nervous about your job security and how do you still see any value in software that you make with almost 0 effort?
[–] mancerayder 3 days ago
People at work are cutting and pasting Claude output for use in routine messages on Teams, troubleshooting suggestions, and proposed architecture designs, and honestly it's some of the dumbest shit I've ever seen. I have to tell people to reword it in their own words, and I believe they often can't.

I've seen developers use Claude to make suggestions for infrastructure design that made absolutely no sense and did not consider our environment. I've seen people write English that grammatically made sense but logically did not.

I don't see enough complaints about this and it can't be just my company.

Is anyone else seeing really severe Dunning-Kruger?

I always check what AI says to me, and I use my own words. I think the average engineer is not.

[–] mattlondon 3 days ago
> I don't see enough complaints about this and it can't be just my company.

They call this "slop" - I think it is well known at this point?

[–] mancerayder 3 days ago
That it exists? Sure.

That it's a degradation in some environments? There's not a lot being said about this. The laments are usually developers sad that they're prompting instead of coding. My lament isn't about the art of it, it's the human reasoning that seems to have gone away in my workplace when it comes to engineers.

[–] Sammi 4 days ago
Think bigger. Don't think in features. Think in business workflows.

You are a consumer, so you naturally think like the consumer you are. But consumers want cheap stuff and only big big businesses are able to provide cheap stuff at massive scale. So stop thinking in b2c. For us little businesses the money is in b2b. Businesses pay lots of money to have problems solved. They want to focus on their core business and outsource the rest.

Consumers hate paying subscriptions. Businesses love paying subscriptions. Because then they can make their problems someone else's problem and focus on what their actual business is.

[–] motionlessveloc 4 days ago
Making an app has always been approximately 1% of the work involved in turning an idea into a business.
[–] dannyw 4 days ago
That’s not true in my opinion.

Maybe it’s 1% or 10% today, but a decade ago, having/assembling the technical chops to know how to build something was a huge part of the meat / barrier to entry.

[–] smodo 4 days ago
It can still be true though, because entry is nothing without sales and a continued search for product market fit. I don’t know about 1% but if you say ‘for every 100 apps launched in 2015-2020 only 1 turned into a sustainable business’ I’d say that’s in the ballpark.

If code becomes cheaper that may change the business fundamentals but it also means capturing customers becomes way harder.

[–] senordevnyc 3 days ago
In a former life I was a freelancer who built first version mobile apps for seed and pre-seed startups. I’m a decent dev, so what I built was always good enough. Virtually none of these startups survived, and there were dozens of them.
[–] vinibrito 3 days ago
What did you move into next?
[–] CuriouslyC 4 days ago
Even a decade ago marketing/growth was the massive lion's share. IMO just building something has been near meaningless since at least post-Ruby on Rails. The app stores have been inundated since the late 2010s.
[–] nemo44x 3 days ago
I’d challenge that and say that the opportunity cost was massive. So you needed to be super precise and confident in what to spend the time doing.

Now that opportunity cost is much lower so experimentation is more practical than before.

[–] robotmay 4 days ago
I've hit a weird point myself. I'm not overly interested in building software for other people now. What I'm able to do is build all my stupid hobby project ideas for my very specific use cases and not have to worry about making them profitable in order to justify the time spent on them. I just built my own point of sale system because nothing on the market meets my needs, and my needs are extremely niche.
[–] senordevnyc 3 days ago
Very interesting! What kind of business is your POS for?
[–] robotmay 3 days ago
I sell vintage cameras in an antiques centre, but only 3 days a week. I’d like to sell online too but I have no ability to put aside stock for that, and similarly I only have access to the stock a few days a week, which makes shipping awkward. Pretty much every item is unique and needs listing separately, which is a pain. This is probably doable on some existing POS but it’s almost certainly much more expensive than just building my own (I think Shopify starts around £40 per month for what I’d need, then still require a lot of customisation). A major aspect of my business is buying stuff in the stall and tracking its eventual sale price, which tends to be a pain on other systems when it’s all one-off unique items.

I also do repairs and so I recently added a job management system into the POS, which has been really useful so far. Next step is to sort out the online store/eBay integration aspect!

[–] mopsi 4 days ago
Take your time to set up the tools and just build something small. Create a personal website, or a calendar that helps to track friends' birthdays, or something else of that sort. It's a good way to calm yourself down, because it will give you a good picture of both the capabilities and the limitations of AI.

I've found it very liberating that I can handle some of the tedious parts of a project to AI. In the end, I spend perhaps the same amount of time on a project, but more of it goes to important work and less gets wasted on plumbing.

[–] lsvg 4 days ago
Thanks for the advice. I will try to repeat this, as I have already used the new tech and found it useful.

I am however worried that for the kind of work that the majority of the worlds tech workers do, this is a direct replacement for.

I guess we'll have to live to see.

[–] texruska 4 days ago
Ideas have always been worthless though, the alpha is still in making something good + useful
[–] senordevnyc 3 days ago
Upvote for what sounds like genuine curiosity!
[–] deno 4 days ago
In OMP just setting the "task" role (which controls the default subagent model choice) to some cheap Flash model like Deepseek or Gemini goes a long way towards making better use of your quota.

Sol and Opus both are quite eager to use subagents and since the subagent tasks are often well specified and then verified by the main model there's hardly any advantage to using anything better for the subagent anyway, so IMO it's a no-brainer.

For me switching the main model to Kimi K3.1 Pro would put me towards 100% open, but I don't know if it uses subagents effectively. Any other open models I noticed just don't utilize them very much.

[–] DanielHB 4 days ago
People are underestimating the lock-in of Claude Code and Codex. Most companies are not buying a model, they are buying the ecosystem.

But the lock-in is not _that_ big that a big co could not pull off a migration, but it would be like migrating from Teams to Slack, not like migrating away from Adobe.

[–] lisplist 3 days ago
Small nitpick, but you can use any model you want with Claude Code and Codex - doesn't have to come from Anthropic or OpenAI
[–] unrented7977 3 days ago
This is exactly how I got people at work onboarded to our local models. Everyone was comfortable with Claude or codex CLI so i gave them prebaked config files to use them with our local models. Ezpz
[–] redanddead 4 days ago
People regularly switch
[–] DanielHB 3 days ago
Companies don't switch lightly.
[–] nemo44x 3 days ago
They do when they see the cost savings and ROI. It’s the one reliable thing that makes a company switch from any tech to another one.

Looking at our AI spend today vs 1 year ago we have massive changes. Anything that can bring this under control and potentially save millions a year is being explored.

We will probably end up with a combo of open weight models for most work and frontier models for key projects. For now. Who knows what the landscape looks like in 1 year.

[–] redanddead 3 days ago
Yup. Hard to stop individual devs as well… I can plug chatgpt into claude code and vice versa or any configuration I want, there’s no lock in
[–] DanielHB 3 days ago
The lock-in is that the subscriptions plans only allow you to use their own harness.
[–] rstuart4133 3 days ago
> which is way cheaper than Chinese subscriptions

Cheaper than the API prices you pay on openrouter. But not cheaper than this:

https://www.alibabacloud.com/help/en/model-studio/token-plan...

[–] jains99 4 days ago
But hardware to run them is conveniently something IBM would be happy to sell you.
[–] mbreese 4 days ago
I didn't think that IBM had gear that mortals would want to run. If you're not running a mainframe, what do they have to sell you? They still sell Power servers and it looks like they have an AI card that can be used on both. But, if we're talking about the IBM CEO talking about on-premises, what are they really talking about hardware-wise? It's not something they would sell, is it?

This is more of a statement for their consulting customers, right?

[–] jhickok 3 days ago
My guess is if you want to run AI on prem and do it with IBM gear it would be via their x86 servers + OpenShift AI via IBM Fusion HCI.
[–] mbreese 3 days ago
I didn’t think they still sold x86 servers.

I can picture that they’d have the software side sorted out with RedHat. But I don’t know what hardware they’d push to support local on-premises models. It looks like when you buy Fusion HCI, you can choose from Dell or Lenovo as the underlying hardware supplier.

[–] jacquesm 4 days ago
If IBM would ship a piece of affordable hardware that can run large LLMs efficiently I'd be lining up.
[–] solyin 4 days ago
"Affordable" and "IBM" don't belong in the same sentence together, but they're happy to sell you their inference-capable hardware if you've got the wallet for it.
[–] jacquesm 4 days ago
I don't agree with that. They made the PC revolution possible by making hardware that was at least affordable enough to be bought by a large number of businesses and individuals. It also set the stage for the clone market. I'm pretty sure that if IBM really set their mind to it that they could do this.

That doesn't detract from your overall point that they tend to make overpriced stuff, but I don't think they have to do that. Besides, what's overpriced? NVidia's GB300 workstation sells for 95K euros, a single RTX 6000 is now 20K. Surely even IBM can compete at that level.

[–] rnd0 4 days ago
That was completely accidental and they themselves tried to close the barn door with the PS/2 line in 1987 but at that point it was too late.
[–] jacquesm 4 days ago
True, even so: They still make some pretty impressive hardware. They have access to fab capacity, they know how to make chips. They have the capital. If they really wanted they could do it.
[–] Shocka1 2 days ago
As someone who worked for the big blue not that long ago I would agree that they have the capability. The top heavy C-suite might have to get over themselves and their buzzwords and actually try to create something besides an arbitrary EPS though. I wouldn't recommend holding one's breath.
[–] solyin 4 days ago
In what way is the IBM Spyre not what you're asking for?
[–] exac 4 days ago
Respectfully, those people don't work at IBM anymore. The organizational memory doesn't last that long.
[–] jacquesm 4 days ago
You'd think that with a 250K workforce and an active line of hardware including an AI accelerator that those people are still working there. I could be wrong, but someone has to be doing that work unless IBM in turn outsources it.
[–] quailfarmer 4 days ago
They haven’t been _that_ IBM for decades
[–] jacquesm 4 days ago
I know. But: they have gobs of money, they still have some talent, they still have a hardware department that I'm pretty sure would jump at a chance to give NV a run for their money. This would require a massive long term investment and a commitment that I'm not sure they would have the stomach for.
[–] alienbaby 4 days ago
"they have gobs of money, "

They do? They are a spec in the ocean relative to big players offering inference and training their own models. Pretty sure one thing they are struggling with is the money to compete successfully in the ai game this time around.

[–] j16sdiz 4 days ago
It's the "PC-compatible" hardware make those affordable, not PC.
[–] dansquizsoft 4 days ago
> They made the PC revolution possible

Yeah they were only half a decade late to the PC revolution back in the day...

[–] wmf 4 days ago
They weren't really late. In many people's minds IBM validated the concept of the PC.
[–] jacquesm 4 days ago
When that happened I'd been working at Tandy (EU version of Radio Shack) for a while and even though we sold computers they were not taken serious until IBM came along and then suddenly we couldn't supply them fast enough.
[–] numpad0 4 days ago
Yes but unironically? IBM should be what NVIDIA would be competing with their NVL72 and DGX products. It doesn't make sense that IBM is just watching NVIDIA take its lunch.
[–] verdverm 4 days ago
> It doesn't make sense that IBM is just watching NVIDIA take its lunch.

If you have ever worked at IBM, it makes total sense. Completely dysfunctional middle management and on up.

[–] jacquesm 4 days ago
I think they will need a far more aggressive management before such a thing could happen. But I can dream about it.
[–] anukin 4 days ago
Not till Jensen buys his next leather jacket.
[–] andy_ppp 4 days ago
I just can't believe the price of hardware these days, a 3090, a graphics card released in September 2020, can still be worth £1500 or more. Honestly everywhere is sold out below around £1800. Can you really trust them not to have been rinsed on eBay and have an extremely short usage - they are still around £1150 used there!
[–] PaulKeeble 4 days ago
We need a step change in the amount of silicon chips produced. This situation has been going on now for over 2 decades, initially bitcoin but ever since various high compute scenarios keep causing GPU shortages and now RAM and storage as well. This one isn't likely to go away anytime soon so we need a drastic increase in production to bring pricing down to reasonable levels.
[–] DanielHB 4 days ago
It is not going away any time soon, but when it does it will be sudden and have a massive drop in demand.

It was pure coincidence that the AI-craze neatly followed the crypto-craze (many neo-clouds in the AI space were originally crypto miners).

[–] montagg 4 days ago
Not exactly a coincidence. You don’t get an AI craze without wide availability of GPUs for training. Not for a much longer time.
[–] DanielHB 3 days ago
I dunno, I always thought the AI craze started from ChatGPT which, in turn, was mostly driven by Google research papers.

Yes it would have costed them more to train the first few versions of ChatGPT if it wasn't for the crypto mayham, but it would still happen. The hardware was always available and still improving regardless of crypto or not.

[–] aquentinn 3 days ago
Yeah of course it would have eventually happened but the GPU demand in crypto speeded it up, that's from Sergey Brin himself: https://www.trustnodes.com/2018/04/29/googles-founder-says-t...
[–] jillesvangurp 4 days ago
It's going to boil down to cost of the hardware vs. pay per use cloud models. I'm on the 100$/month chatgpt plan (~88euro). With all the resets, credits, and all the rest I typically don't run out of tokens. This is fine for me. I might go to the 200$/month plan at some point.

In comparison, my highend mac book pro costs 105 euro per month (leasing cost). That's not quite enough to run the bigger models and besides running the GPU on a laptop constantly makes it a bit hostile for my lap. And the model I would need a lot more memory for the bigger models. It's nice for experimenting though.

If you get your own GPUs in some kind of server form, you could run those locally or in a data center. Or you just get hardware resources from your favorite cloud provider. Hetzner (one of the more affordable ones) GPU servers start at around 200 euro per month. I know some people that use that with open weight models. Works fine, especially if you can share the resources between multiple users.

At which point of course you are doing the same as cloud based providers are doing. But probably with a bit worse economics. It all boils down to whether you are actually saving money or paying for a lot of underutilized hardware that's running 24x7 when your people actually only show up about 8x5.

I don't think most companies should be doing that. It sounds like they'd end up with a lot of idling over capacity at a premium. The only valid reasons to do this would be securing access to GPUs or some very urgent need to keep things on premise (which a lot of companies insist is true for them until they realize how much they are going to pay).

[–] aleph_minus_one 4 days ago
> It's going to boil down to cost of the hardware vs. pay per use cloud models. I'm on the 100$/month chatgpt plan (~88euro). With all the resets, credits, and all the rest I typically don't run out of tokens. This is fine for me. I might go to the 200$/month plan at some point.

It's also about "insurance protection" against the AI company raising the prices or changing their terms (e.g. becoming more frugal with respect to token drops).

[–] kevmo314 4 days ago
If they raise their prices you can switch pretty quickly, insurance isn’t worth much.
[–] jillesvangurp 3 days ago
The speed at which you can switch is probably proportional to your dependence. But the thing with insuring against risk is that you need to cover all of them and not just cherry pick them.

If you are running your own models on your own hardware you take a bunch of risk as well. Is your hardware capable enough to run your models? Do you have enough of it and access to more when you need to? And is the stuff that you picked still going to be good enough in six months? And can you trust those model providers that you picked to keep up with the rest of the industry or are they going to fall behind and leave you stuck with obsolete but still very expensive technology.

Of course, this is an article about IBM who are in the business of selling consulting and services at a premium. They would probably love companies to self host their models on infrastructure that IBM supplies and consults on (for obvious reasons). The question is, should you buy what they are selling or can you do better? My simple observation here is that if companies like IBM are getting excited it's probably because they are looking to separate a lot of companies from some pretty significant cash. So, I'd be wary to buy what they are selling. But that's just me.

In a rapidly evolving market with extreme levels of uncertainty around tech and what will happen next, being reluctant to get pinned down on the wrong solutions is probably a good instinct. The biggest risk here is making the wrong bets. And you need to look at what it's going to cost you if you get it wrong and what it's going to cost you to fix it.

[–] aleph_minus_one 4 days ago
This depends a lot on how deeply integrated you and your workflows are into the idiosyncrasies of some specific LLM or class of LLMs.
[–] awesan 4 days ago
In this context yes, but for example at my job we are using LLMs to evaluate some outputs of cheaper/simpler models and to add context to them. This gets expensive very quickly with per-token pricing and would pin our entire business on the whims of one or two providers. With self-hosted open-weight LLMs we can just operate like we always have, it's a different kind of processing but otherwise we are free to do as we please wrt compute.

So it matters a lot that these open-weight models are good enough; we would likely not be rolling out this new processing if it was fully dependent on Anthropic and OpenAI.

[–] mattlondon 4 days ago
I think, despite the desperate attempt at IBM to remain relevant (and in business), their CEO has a point here that do you really need SOTA models for everything?

I had a really nice time with GLM5.2 for a month or two - it was, in my experience, approx Opus 4.5ish level of capability when I think Opus 4.8 was the new hotness

Even today, I use Gemini 3.8 Flash as my daily driver for most coding. Its fast and good, even if it is not the absolute SOTA at coding benchmarks it really is very good. Yes I have tried Opus 5.5 and 4 Argon etc and yes the are better, but do I need that?

I think that we are going to be at the stage soon-enough where models are "good enough" for 99% of people's needs. The SOTA will keep on marching ever-onwards I am sure, but I would not be surprised if people stick with previous-gen/previous-previous-gen/etc models because why upgrade?

If this does play out like this, I do wonder how that works out for the frontier labs (specifically OpenAI and Anthropic, less so Meta & Google) - if open models or even just cheaper Sonnet-level models from a few generations ago are good enough for basically everyone's daily work, where is the revenue? how can you justify pumping billions and billions into new generation models and datacenters etc when there is no driving need to use them?

[–] roncesvalles 4 days ago
>do you really need SOTA models for everything?

For work in which you are in the loop, absolutely. Do people not value their own time or something? Why in the world would you use less than the best LLM available to you? You're not going to run out of the $20 plan even if you use Opus 5.5 at xhigh and code 8 hours/day (assuming you're doing it piecewise using a Claude product) so what exactly are you conserving by using something inferior?

For large continuous volumes of programmatically submitted LLM tasks, sure.

[–] hhh 4 days ago
I have single sentence prompts in one of my legacy codebases that it takes Opus 5.5 over $1000 in API spend to return an answer correctly on. I am not getting by with a $20 plan.
[–] roncesvalles 4 days ago
That's ~41 million tokens. Your codebase better be the size of the entire MySQL codebase.
[–] hhh 3 days ago
Similar size.
[–] mattlondon 4 days ago
That's my point - do you need the best available to you? What if tomorrow your employer said no more 5.5, or Anthropic IPOs and suddenly investors want to see a profit and that 20USD a month for Opus 5.5 becomes 20USD per-day or even per-hour? We're already seeing corps restrict their employees token usage.

Could your survive on say Opus 4.8? Or GLM 5.3?

I bet you could if you had to.

I think it's the same argument about cars. Why wouldn't you want a Ferrari? Do you not value your time? Why not go as fast as physically possible?! You need the absolute fastest, most-capable, best-handling car for every single journey you take! Or... Back in reality not every journey you take is trying to lap the track as quickly as possible and just any reasonable car will get you where you need to go.

This is my point. Will Anthropic and OpenAI continue to exist selling Ferraris when actually people realise they can get by with a Toyota Corolla 99% of the time? Ferrari exists in the car world so I guess there is an argument for "yes". I am not sure myself - Ferraris are after all rare and exotic cars ... I suspect that even if we are not there now, we are already seeing current SOTA models that are mostly equivalent/better than the average engineer - another generation or two they'll be waaaaay better than the average engineer. How much more car do you need, and how much are you prepared to pay for it?

At least for me, I don't like using Opus or Fable because I don't like the way it talks to me (talking down to me, refusals, moral high-grounding, overly pomposity etc). 3.8 Flash is currently my favourite model due to how it communicates and works with me and the speed is much better suited for rapid iteration. So put me in the comfortable, reliable, use-it-every-day-to-get-shit-done-with-no-fuss Toyota Corolla camp. Its good enough for me and I don't get any benefits in my day to day life by using Opus 5.5 and it's sanctimonious personality.

[–] ecshafer 4 days ago
Currently the difference in my work between the best models and okay models is pretty night and day to the point its not worth using the older models. Now I haven't used the newest top open source models. But if I give the same code base to say Qwen 3.6 and GPT 5.6, Qwen will analyze the source of the problems wrong, provide actually wrong solutions, write code that takes 100x as long to run. Its not even worth it outside of querying for snippets of code. GPT 5.6 will help actually root cause the problems.
[–] mattlondon 2 days ago
Ah but if the price is 10x - as the IBM CEO suggests - your employer might just ask you to use that, and then expect you to make up the gap between the cheap and expensive models using your own brain instead of just pissing money up the wall on high token costs AND your salary. You know, like the old days when we actually had to do the work ourselves.

I think this is a very high likelihood scenario.

[–] EasyMark 3 days ago
I think the point is that you are not everyone. Not everyone has your requirements, sounds like paying the premium is worth it for you, but others simply don't need it.
[–] jaccola 4 days ago
I love 3.8 Flash, if only it weren’t unusably flaky. Sometimes simple responses take minutes or I get rate limited after sending a single message (I guess it’s a shared pool rate limit). Have you not experienced this (would love to know if there’s a way to actually use it reliably!)
[–] jhrmnn 4 days ago
I've personally experienced three big jumps in LLM capability: o3, opus 4.6, and opus 5.5. I could go back to opus 4.6, but it did require way more involvement from my end.
[–] spwa4 4 days ago
What subscription do you use for Gemini 3.8 flash and how much usage do you get?
[–] hypfer 4 days ago
Of course IBM - the guys that sell you mainframes - would be saying this.

This is a win though. But not for the reasons people might think it is.

It is a win because it's a massive player now countering the new (temporary) behemoths. With all the leverage, budget and connections.

And contrary to the AI Labs, IBM isn't just that one SV rockstar dude, but a whole org with tons of people. Meaning that they're going to be far closer to the baseline of sane humans just from averaging alone.

[–] ggeorgovassilis 4 days ago
The guy that sells mainframes also gives away the Granite models for free. I've found them to be quite capable in content retrieval and long-running workflows, even (or especially?) the small ones.
[–] le-mark 4 days ago
> And contrary to the AI Labs, IBM isn't just that one SV rockstar dude, but a whole org with tons of people

IBM of today is a hallow corpse of what it was. The hardware business remains but they’ve mastered extracting rent from imprisoned customers long ago. No sane person should willing go into business with them, same as Oracle.

[–] hypfer 4 days ago
Yes, but that was not the point I was making.

They are many people and none of them are in some sort of AI death cult like the EA polycule.

They're not suddenly good guys. They're just sane

[–] djelu 4 days ago
Considering the disclosed numbers for DeepInfer and the usefulness/popularity of DeepSeek 4.1 Flash, I expect it is inevitable that more companies are going to consider the self-hosting option seriously, and perhaps play with the idea of offering inference as a vendor.
[–] wanqing_street 4 days ago
Worth putting DeepSeek's own pricing rule next to that, because it sets the floor for self-hosting. In a closed-door investor meeting in May 2026, Liang Wenfeng said the API is priced so that "we go to the market and buy a batch of equipment, and recoup the cost in ten months" - that being, in his words, a reasonable profit. He adds that maximizing profit would mean charging more, but demand is inelastic in that band (he cut one model's price to a quarter and the team was delighted). I translated the excerpts, since the transcript only circulates in Chinese: https://telegra.ph/Liang-Wenfeng-on-DeepSeek-cost-restraint-...

If the vendor price is calibrated to a ten-month hardware payback, then at equal utilization there is no arbitrage in self-hosting: the crossover is roughly whether your sustained API spend exceeds the hardware plus that ten months. DeepSeek's own disclosed numbers give the benchmark to beat: 226.75 H800 nodes averaged over a day (~1,814 GPUs), 608B input tokens/day of which 56.3% hit the KV cache, 168B output tokens/day, ~73.7k tok/s input per node while prefilling and ~14.8k tok/s output while decoding.

That utilization is the hard part, and it is roughly what the IBM CEO is pointing at with "where are my kernel engineers". Self-hosting open weights on two or three racks is not the problem; amortizing them at a frontier lab's duty cycle is.

[–] rglover 4 days ago
"Cheap" is up for debate, but the models themselves are great. Kimi K3 (and now 3.1 Pro) was the first open model I played with and didn't think to switch back to a frontier model. Now it's my daily driver and I have zero complaints.

The frontier labs are in a tough spot. It's hard to justify their cost when you can get something that's easily as good for cheaper (and anecdotally, more reliable/accessible). I do HITL so my perspective will be different than a fully-agentic setup, but as soon as I started using open stuff regularly, I realized that any moat the US labs had built is drying up.

[–] vorticalbox 4 days ago
been playing with LFM2.5-24B-A2B on my m4 mac, 700-900 prefill and 60 t/s in generation, its doing pretty well writing some python scripts for me.
[–] dofm 3 days ago
That’s not a bad little model! Way more impressive than I expected. I am still messing about with it, but I think it’s a keeper for general discussions.

Though if you have the room for it, Muse Glimmer is better in practice on low reasoning strength, and while its token generation is slow, it actually gets to answers pretty quickly.

[–] vorticalbox 3 days ago
I downloaded Muse today actually to try too. Seem it said a few times on here that’s it’s good.
[–] dofm 3 days ago
Probably mostly me and one or two others to be fair ;-)

"There are dozens of us!"

The thing you need to know about Muse is that you control its reasoning/thinking depth in the system prompt (low/medium/high/xhigh):

  Reasoning strength: low
… is pretty responsive and I've found its time to first answer to be surprisingly good.

It is broadly comparable to Qwen 3.8 27B on "low" thinking, though it is weaker on very long context, one-shot stuff, but I dunno… I just like it more as a developer companion.

(I'm using Unsloth's version)

[–] vorticalbox 21 hours ago
not sure if you will see this but i see what you mean. i have been using it the last few days there is just something about thats just "nice". its not the fastest on my m4.
[–] nemo44x 4 days ago
Everyone I know is either starting to or planning to switch to open weight models. Cost savings are just too good.

This is what will cook frontier AI and probably prevent the investment scale to happen for AGI. Humans + good enough cheap AI is just more economic and unbelievably productive. Like why we fly on jet technology from the 1960s still with incremental improvements.

It’s why Anthropic is desperate for capital and trying to get to a scale where AGI appears. But I’m afraid they won’t get there in time and the money to build the bigger model will have dried up.

[–] matt3210 4 days ago
RIP frontier AI, the top customers can easily self host
[–] IncreasePosts 4 days ago
What happens when their competitors decide to pay for a more intelligent frontier model?
[–] selcuka 4 days ago
What happens when your competitors invest in better and more expensive tools or materials in general? They (potentially) make better products, but those products also cost more. It's turtles all the way down.
[–] notbeststillric 4 days ago
Cool! That's when you pay the difference in marketing and auto-win your sector! People don't actually buy the best, they buy what they think is.
[–] dopa42365 4 days ago
Ford vs. Ferrari, except that the Ford is actually a few months old Ferrari.

Does Ferrari have any moat if it can't convince the government to ban Ford?

[–] EagnaIonat 4 days ago
The target audience is likely those who can't or won't use frontier models unless they are on-premise.
[–] gscott 4 days ago
You buy the competitor and kill their culture from the inside, ruin them and take a tax loss on the company.
[–] verdverm 4 days ago
depends on the economics and much more, the best Ai cannot do a lot of things, 90% of human tasks by some reports

we technologists tend to extend what we see and think to other realms where it doesn't make sense

[–] fg137 4 days ago
I once overheard someone in a coffee shop saying that she needed GPU to run inference. But gaming laptops are too heavy with short battery life, while MacBooks are expensive.

I really wanted to tell her -- what she needed was compute, not hardware. Her best bet was to rent GPU which is easily available from many services. If she was paid to run inference, cost is not a concern. If she did it for her own work, she wouldn't need to shell out a ton of money initially and then be left with hardware that she no longer needs when the work is done. In any case, she wouldn't need to worry about purchasing hardware or battery life. ssh to a remote machine is simply way superior than running inference on a laptop she carries around by any means except in a few rare occasions (e.g. no Internet access).

Same thing for a company. Why would any company who has a business to run get themselves burned in acquiring GPUs, setting up racks, load balancing etc when Bedrock/Azure Foundry etc is right there with tons of both open and closed models and ZDR? And then see hardware depreciate in just a few years?

[–] luis_valerio 3 days ago
Is anyone using onprem open weigh models for programming? If so what models, gpus and feedback?
[–] tesnorindian 4 days ago
How good will be the business of dealing with 2nd hand GPUs for open weights model in the future? What will the AI labs do with their GPUs once they are beyond their EOL? Can somebody please advise?

I was able to get this related article

https://rcrtech.com/semiconductor-news/what-happens-to-old-a...

[–] Hasz 3 days ago
He has a lot riding on this particular idea, and I think HN will generally be receptive.

I am not a believer in winner-take-all mechanics for models (even for AGI -- look no further than the natural world for many examples), and a large F50 company committing money/strategy to something outside the frontier labs is a great thing for the ecosystem.

[–] fatihserhattura 4 days ago
If the focus is on models tailored for specific tasks, then I think that’s absolutely true. I’ve built a desktop app that uses Whisper and Demucs myself. Sure, it’s almost 2 GB and uses quite a bit of the device’s resources, but it’s free, runs fully offline and does what it’s supposed to do. I think that’s what really matters
[–] robrenaud 4 days ago
Are there inference products focused on say, optimizing frequently used internal contexts, so that they are compact in the kv cache? Perhaps there rep could be optimized over hundreds+ of distinct real use cases?

Maybe your law firm doesn't want your data going outside your business. But you obviously want high quality analysis.

[–] dofm 3 days ago
I think this is correct in the general sense.

In the IBM-specific sense, the most unintentionally hilarious LLM interaction I have ever had was asking Granite’s 4.2 30B reasoning variant the car wash question.

Reams and reams of corporatese about why it wasn’t wrong when it was.

[–] Havoc 4 days ago
> something that’s 10 percent of the cost

Is it though? You’re likely paying more on prem per unit of electricity and the racks of NVIDIA cards also aren’t exactly cheap.

I don’t see how that leads to 10%. I can see it being a good pitch if you’re in the biz of selling on prem servers though

[–] echelon 4 days ago
So you'd like your Windows IIS sever instead of the Linux one?

Happy to sell you some Oracle too.

[–] mancerayder 4 days ago
Any tips to get started with just one rig? A 4070 ti on a two year old Fedora workstation desktop?

What are the tools to look at first for usable models at that thin compute capacity and how do you go about exploring training for hobby and learning purposes?

[–] ActionHank 4 days ago
This is true, but also, beware the shovel sellers telling you how great shovels are.
[–] collinmcnulty 4 days ago
Can we please stop giving weight to CEOs talking their book? Like of course IBM wants you to think this, it would be great for them if it’s true. And maybe it is true! But IBM’s CEO saying it’s true tells me just as much as if a frontier lab said it’s not: nothing.
[–] nvme0n1p1 4 days ago
[–] lordgrenville 4 days ago
Great term. Plus the related "Politician Said a Thing!" journalism
[–] verdverm 4 days ago
thank you, I was trying to re-find this the other day
[–] epsteingpt 4 days ago
But you know - it would be funny if somehow Open Weights are the thing that completely save IBM
[–] SoftTalker 4 days ago
Linux already served as a life-preserver for them also.
[–] slashtrends 4 days ago
It was a brilliant move at the time for IBM, and has helped them shift their business more into providing services and support.

I imagine they are panicking a little with LLMs reducing the reliance on external companies for software support, so they are really hoping to shift it to on-prem AI, which is where the bias in his statement comes from.

[–] SoftTalker 3 days ago
I think AI could very well support a return to on-prem computing.
[–] MattDamonSpace 4 days ago
It’s a conversation point off which a discussion can be had
[–] gjvc 4 days ago
the only credible "conversation" is "well he would say that, wouldn't he?"
[–] gjvc 4 days ago
"we are delighted..." said a spokesman
[–] trollbridge 4 days ago

  While he thinks most businesses can build useful AI infrastructure in just two or three racks, he feels many will struggle to get it running.

  “The question becomes: how do you do that?” he said. “The question that the enterprise struggles with is: ‘Where are my kernel engineers? Where are the people who worry about the underlying network? Who can make sure that the model is clustered on GPUs that are close to each other in network proximity? Who can make sure that you’re doing the right caching of results so you get an incredible response?’”
Has he heard of “agentic AI”? You simply fire up Claude or ChatGPT and ask it how to do all of the above.
[–] liorn 4 days ago
It's not a one time thing though - onprem inference requires continuous monitoring and tuning to get the most out of your GPUs. Looking at 25-50% performance benefits. Today, it does require dedicated Inference Engineers...
[–] trollbridge 4 days ago
That sounds like a task that can be automated.
[–] liorn 4 days ago
It's not that easy.

The optimal inference configuration varies according to the model, the specific traffic (which changes in time), and the specific hardware it's running to. The "knowledge" for it doesn't exist yet.

Usually in similar scenarios an agent will try to experiment with various configurations and get to a good result. However, you can't have an agent test out different inference serving configurations/architectures, since every experiment might involves 10-60 minutes of spinning up a model (on very expensive GPUs)...

[–] trollbridge 4 days ago
That sounds like a task LLMs will soon be able to take over.
[–] LoganDark 4 days ago
Do not do that if you can't prompt it correctly. It is a potential disaster waiting to happen. LLMs are likely to pull things off the shelf without real defense in depth and that's a problem. Maybe slightly less if it's only in an internal network, but still.
[–] trollbridge 4 days ago
The whole point of this was for internal usage.
[–] LoganDark 3 days ago
It can be very dangerous to let people loose with such advice, FWIW. They don't necessarily know what "internal usage" actually means, or how important it is to keep it that way as long as you don't have a real expert to at least help direct the LLMs.
[–] Buttons840 4 days ago
That's based on the idea that humans can learn and adapt and solve problems, and that's not what companies want to think about when they're seeking a profitable transaction such as hiring.
[–] wg0 4 days ago
Anyone in disagreement hasn't tried open weight models for sure.

DeepSeek v4.1 Flash or GLM 3 are already very very capable models.

Only bottleneck at the moment is the hardware prices.

[–] zoobab 4 days ago
Qwen 3.8 Flash with Strata here, the problem with Strata is that you cannot easily share the server as the performance will collapse outside of a single user.
[–] chakintosh 4 days ago
Easy to say when you have your own hardware.
[–] throwaway270925 3 days ago
This on the Front Page the same time as Anthropics S-1, fun times!
[–] nottorp 3 days ago
Good and cheap if you have the budget to buy IBM?
[–] bwfan123 4 days ago
There was another comment in the IBM earnings call on enterprise AI spend [1]. Specifically, concerns around ROI for AI experiments in the enterprise and difficulty incorporating AI into enterprise workflows. This was surprising given the hype around AI, and it came across as a negative indicator.

[1] - https://www.ibm.com/downloads/documents/us-en/17f55bd310d5fd...

[–] mr_toad 3 days ago
Buying your own car works out cheaper than taxis - according to the car dealer.
[–] hotelsacher 4 days ago
IBM fucks sam and dario. Priceless.
[–] SV_BubbleTime 4 days ago
I’ve been in tech for a long time… I have no idea what IBM does. Now, I get that I’m not the customer, that their customer is “business” but not my business… no… bigger business. The biggest of businesses I assume. I think it must either be a club I’m not in, or IBM is three half racks in a trenchcoat submitting invoices for millions to companies where people just pay it because “it’s IBM, it must be important”.
[–] bob1029 4 days ago
Review the specifications for the latest Telum II chip if you need a hint. 5.5ghz base clock.

If you absolutely need to scale something vertically, IBM Z is the final stop on the line.

X86 is great at hosting an entire farm of applications. You would never want to install salesforce or gitlab on a mainframe. That would completely defeat its purpose. If you've never encountered an appropriate workload, IBM might never make intuitive sense.

Also, the roadmap:

https://newsroom.ibm.com/2026-08-24-ibm-unveils-next-generat...

[–] zombot 3 days ago
> an appropriate workload

Honest question: What would such a workload look like? Why would Salesforce or GitLab not make sense on a mainframe?

[–] jamesfinlayson 4 days ago
Ironically one of the smaller places I've worked at tried to use an IBM product once - I'm still not clear on what it was meant to do or how it was better than any cheaper alternative, so I assume someone in leadership was fooled by a very impressive pitch.

Lots of work went into integration and it never went live.

[–] andsoitis 4 days ago
> I have no idea what IBM does

For one thing, amongst many, IBM mainframes process 70% of global transactions on a value basis

[–] le-mark 4 days ago
Transaction can be a nebulous term; think of credit card transactions, ach and wire transfers, mutual fund buy/sells, bank deposits and withdrawals, etc.
[–] CookieCrisp 4 days ago
Good enough for the old world, but I'm not so sure it's good enough for what's coming.
[–] tomrod 4 days ago
What do you think is coming that isn't already in the old world?

Cerebras with Claude 8?

[–] LoganDark 4 days ago
OpenAI most likely pushed Cerebras into a contractual agreement not to do business with Anthropic through 2030. ("Most likely" because the names of the companies Cerebras is contractually obligated not to sell to are redacted in public filings)
[–] desolate_muffin 4 days ago
Imagine a regulatory framework so weak that a company feels comfortable to do something this anti-competitive
[–] actionfromafar 3 days ago
Maybe bribes is the framework? It's hard to tell these days.