logoalt Hacker News

onlyrealcuzzotoday at 5:18 PM28 repliesview on HN

I won't be surprised if the next gen frontier models are the last.

There's orders of magnitude of low hanging juice to squeeze out of smaller models.

It is almost guaranteed that a 60-90B model can outperform current SOTA in coding tasks within 2-3 years (design not certain, probably unlikely).

It is far less clear that a 1.2T model will be meaningfully better enough to justify training it.

As far as reasoning is concerned, with the recent GRAM release, there may be 4 orders of magnitude of reasoning to tack on to smaller models.

Think about that... Google, OpenAI, Anthropic could train a 30B GRAM-based model in days - and it could potentially have better local reasoning than the best model available today at >1T params... They could upgrade that to a ~600B MoE model in days to have general trivia knowledge rivaling the best models...

You just can't train a 1T+ parameter model that fast. It is a giant if how much GRAM turns out to improve things, but it's unlikely to be trivial or nothing.

Larger models can already sort of tell you anything. They're never going to get everything right unless they stop being LLMs.

There's just not a lot of juice left to squeeze for Gemini to tell you exactly how tall Ke$ha is or when the last time Brittney Spears went to jail was...


Replies

vlovich123today at 5:52 PM

Took me a while to find what you were referring to by gram. Arxiv paper from 9 days ago that's not properly indexed by search engines.

(G)enerative (R)ecursive re(A)soning (M)odels. They really wanted the acronym.

https://arxiv.org/html/2605.19376v1

show 7 replies
ACCount37today at 10:32 PM

GRAM is another one of those "stupid specific architectures" - same as HRMs, etc. It can sort of contest LLMs at specific puzzles. It demonstrated that much. It's not a general contender with LLMs at LLM tasks.

If you subscribe to things like "there are tasks LLMs are innately bad at due to insufficient depth and lack of recurrent capability", then GRAM might be another signal towards that.

But keep in mind: even ARC-AGIs have their frontiers dominated by LLMs. Even if "innately bad" is true, it clearly doesn't go all the way to "innately incapable".

show 1 reply
nbardytoday at 10:20 PM

There is endless returns to frontier intelligence, just because most people can't make use of it doesn't mean someone can't make a ton of money off of it.

Most software engineers will just need cheap tokens.

But things like physics and drug discovery have no foreseeable upper bound.

supern0vatoday at 5:26 PM

>It is almost guaranteed that a 60-90B model can outperform current SOTA in coding tasks within 2-3 years.

I don't disagree, but how much of this ends up being distillation? I can't help but imagine that 4.8 was probably trained in part by leveraging Mythos.

If the very large models turn out to be very expensive to run relative to the benefits, it's possible that they could end up still being trained, but ultimately used as a tool to create smaller models that are nearly as effective.

I'm curious if someone here with a stronger background in the space has a similar intuition or not.

show 4 replies
mrandishtoday at 8:11 PM

> Google, OpenAI, Anthropic could train a 30B GRAM-based model in days - and it could potentially have better local reasoning than the best model available today at >1T param

I agree but with their urgent IPO-driven need to keep increasing prices, the frontier vendors now have every incentive maintain the perception that frontier performance requires endless >$200K racks of unobtanium GPUs and RAM. While they'd love to reduce their actual costs, they'd only want to do it to the extent they are certain they can keep it secret. Otherwise, they can't maintain and keep increasing their prices. And post-IPO audited reporting makes keeping that secret even harder.

Game theory-wise they probably don't want their their armies of leading researchers optimizing frontier performance, at least in any way that would further accelerate the relative price/perf of smaller models or self/cloud-hosting. While they know the open source models will always improve, the still win as long as enough customers demand the latest frontier and the open source lag remains constant.

They profit most in a world where a few frontier labs stay far in front, drag-racing each other and expending vast capital. It keeps their customers reliant and paying top dollar while keeping low-cost alternatives farther back. They probably much prefer competing with a couple other frontier labs who have similar astronomical costs and biz models, than a world where self or cloud-hosted open-source models start closing the gap enough to start commoditizing their business.

show 2 replies
sometimelurkertoday at 6:20 PM

I looked into this "GRAM" stuff a sibling comment links further to, and just to say:

- this gets reinvented/rediscovered constantly under different names

- it cant be trained very well (right now, will change)

- massive theoretical improvements over current models (log_2(vocabsize)=17, residual stream dim is thousands of dimensions, recursivity means more information bandwidth by ~3 OoM)

- BUT it cant be interpreted or aligned <- this is why no one uses it and no one talks about it. the idea is 100% obvious to all the frontier labs and there is a good reason why it isn't used

I follow this stuff closely, I think I know what I'm talking about (edited for formating)

show 2 replies
nbardytoday at 10:20 PM

There is endless returns to frontier intelligence, just because most people can't make use of it doesn't mean someone can't make a ton of money off of it.

Most software engineers will just need cheap tokens.

But things like physics and drug discovery have no forseeable upper bound.

show 2 replies
qurrentoday at 9:49 PM

> It is almost guaranteed that a 60-90B model can outperform current SOTA in coding tasks

The benchmarks need to change. The current coding benchmarks don't capture the realities of software engineering.

I had a bunch of images that got masked by some logic, I had to evaluate something on the original images, Claude 4.7 decided to inpaint the masked images instead of just fetching the actual unmasked images from upstream.

I had another model once that decided that because it couldn't figure out how to fill out a form to log into HuggingFace to download weights for some open source model that it was going to instantiate the model with random weights and run inference on a thousand images.

Its coding was fine, but the solution was not the right one.

redox99today at 9:54 PM

Small models don't have enough parameters to memorize the entire internet. For very common prompts you don't notice that, but when you rely on some niche knowledge that might only appear once in the entire web, a single blogpost, a single github issue, a single pdf, you need to be lucky enough that the agent runs a web search AND it returns what you need.

Even as humans there's so much knowledge out there that exists but it's very hard to surface unless you know exactly what you're looking for beforehand.

jruztoday at 5:39 PM

Absolutely that’s why they’re rushing to IPO now to squeeze the last drop of the bubble they know this is a dead end.

show 3 replies
hellohello2today at 6:02 PM

"It is almost guaranteed that a 60-90B model can outperform current SOTA in coding tasks within 2-3 years"

What insight do you have to make this claim?

show 3 replies
mucle6today at 5:24 PM

> I won't be surprised if the next gen frontier models are the last.

the last?!? I'm excited to see :) I'll take the other side of that since llms are so new

show 1 reply
slashdavetoday at 5:49 PM

I think you are assuming training from scratch, which I doubt is happening here. Fine-tuning and RL, especially based on synthetic feedback (coding skill, in particular) can be ongoing and is where these models obtain truly useful abilities.

merlindrutoday at 5:21 PM

surely training also gets cheaper so justifying it becomes easier?

i think it'll be more like we get 1-10T models and then distill those down into smaller models, though

It seems like the best small models today are all distilled from bigger models

Moreover, I hypothesize Claude Opus 4.7 and now 4.8 are a distillation of Claude Mythos

mickdarlingtoday at 7:35 PM

I effectively distill the frontier models by building whole sets of skills, personas, and other artifacts that I can then run on smaller models and get 10% even 20% improvements on models like haiku or local models.

There's a lot of room for improving the smaller models at many levels of the stack.

dbbktoday at 8:01 PM

I'm frankly surprised the focus is still on these enormous "know everything in the world" models. I would think you could create an incredibly lean and smart "just React and React Native" model.

show 3 replies
ishurand4today at 7:28 PM

And anyway, with quantum, there will be no need for frontier companies as you might be able to even run a 1T param model on a consumer quantum computer.

show 2 replies
yomismoaquitoday at 5:33 PM

Let's hope that hitting a scaling wall and less money to spend will begin redirecting efforts to optimize inference and get the same results with less compute.

Boomer comparison, but I remember the 8 bit computer era when the hardware was what it was so the later games of that era used hardware better than previous ones.

firebirdn99today at 5:54 PM

you just need to look at Mythos to see the jump in performance from a 10T(?) model. As they scale, they get more capable. We might have an yearly release, but I believe the releases will continue, as long as scaling laws are in tact, and there's huge problems still need solving. (think cancer)

show 3 replies
Forgeties79today at 5:51 PM

> I won't be surprised if the next gen frontier models are the last.

I’d be surprised tbh. Investors don’t want to hear “everyone else is still training models and seeing improvements, but we don’t want to participate in the arms race anymore.” They want monumental leaps every quarter or two because they have sunk unholy amounts of money into these companies/products.

The whole idea of “hyper scale” doesn’t jive with caution and or otherwise slowing down.

show 1 reply
Gomotonotoday at 6:50 PM

I don't think this is true at all. It might feel like this because we are used to a very very fast release cycle but we are only in this topic for a few years.

We have so many ways of optimizing:

- continusly creating more and better training data

- increasing parameters to 20/50/100TB

- We still wait for Mythos access

- We still wait for Mythos distilation (i haven't heard any rumors or so that there is a distilled version of Mythos out)

- Reinforcment learning and evolutionary algortihm only started to appear

- If a small 30GB Model can do stuff, these models can also be used as teachers for the big ones

- We have not seen yet specialized models at all. Like a coding java german expert model. Why? Even with MoE architecture, you still need to have these layers around

- Research for Diffusion and other models is still in progress

- Nvidia just announced/showed a 7x speedup on inferencing for Nemotron

- Multitoken prediction became available just a few weeks ago

- Compute gets only in a range were they can do a lot more and cheaper experiments (see Google IO 2026 announcement)

- World models are showing great progress and we do not know yet what they will bring to the table

- They are probably not finetuning/fixing all areas in parallel. I would argue that Anthropic focuses most of its efforts into coding and agentic. Google for sure does subagent and agentic optimizations too. Plenty of areas are just not touched i would say because they don't have the capacity

- We see more and more mulit modal models (these also consume compute)

- N-Gram paper and co i have not seen all of these things in chinese open models

- We don't even know yet what Meta is doing, but we do know they restarted their efforts again

- Anthropics models got a lot better benchmark wise for dening non sense asks. They do learn how to get rid or reduce hallucinations

- We are in the middle of the biggest Reinforcement loop whith all the training data we give them day to day and its not clear at all if they already use these models in thir training and at what stage.

- We do expect bigger models to be able to comprehend deeper concepts / broader code bases. Big companies with huge code bases probably are waiting for this

- Thre will be also continues progress in harnesses which in it alone is not part of the LLM progress (fair) but these harnesses do get better when you finetune a model to be optimized for a harness

- ChatGPTs Image model 2.0 got relevant better and came out just a month ago

I suspect, based on hardware requirements and progress on hardware infrastructure alone, that the industry wants to go to 100t models and we do not know yet what this will mean. I could see that we might skip normal transformer and find relevant other architectures.

Just a week ago there was a research paper about parallel input and output streams which has not been explored enough.

There was also a research paper were they showed that a LLM can compute things. This will take time to see were this leads to.

I don't think the focus on GRAM and facts is so relevant. Its about context and context handling not just some facts.

show 1 reply
guluartetoday at 6:26 PM

I think the future will be enterprise clients will train their own models based on their needs and data.

show 3 replies
fnord77today at 7:34 PM

So, then I guess the big three are never going to make their money back.

wahnfriedentoday at 6:00 PM

I would be shocked if 5.5 is the last new pre-train from OpenAI. Your comment is nonsense.

show 1 reply
YetAnotherNicktoday at 5:34 PM

> It is almost guaranteed that a 60-90B model can outperform current SOTA in coding tasks within 2-3 years.

I am ready to bet against this. Knowledge benchmark like SimpleQA isn't increasing for small models.

> It is far less clear that a 1.2T model will be meaningfully better enough to justify training it.

Well for one, we know for certain there is Mythos which is meaningfully better. And I think there is a lot of juice left to squeeze for Mythos class model.

show 2 replies
michaelchisaritoday at 6:15 PM

| a 60-90B model can outperform current SOTA

My conspiracy theory is that Apple recognizes this.

show 4 replies
frankesttoday at 9:12 PM

[dead]

lichenwarptoday at 7:30 PM

O R D E R s O f m a g N I T U D E

They said the words!!!!!