alt Hacker NewsIs „frontier“ overused? I thought frontier models were the best-of-the-best such as Fable right now. I assume you can’t host these models yourself since you would need many GB of RAM and expensive GPU of is my thinking of „frontier models“ wrong?
Replies
The frontier is a multidimensional space defined by the “best” combination of traits a model can have in multiple dimensions: parameter size [smaller is better], various task metrics, and relative token generation speed on like hardware [faster is better], and active memory requirements [smaller is better] are all possible dimensions, and a model on the frontier of the current options space is one where getting better on one of those measures cannot be done without getting worse on at least one of the others.
I don't know that I agree with this specific use of frontier because it is confusable as you say.
But (off on a tangent) I do think that there are multiple frontiers generally — and I also think the open weights, small local model frontier is by far the most important and exciting one.
I keep mucking about with what Gemma 4 12B can do and every time I do I find myself thinking that all the energies in the AI world are going in entirely the wrong direction, because it is small, clever, efficient and remarkable.
If all of that research money were to be spent on improving AI models that fit inside a 16GB RAM machine with unified memory, I think really important progress could be made.
I enjoy using the Qwen 3.6 models (and BottleCap's new fine tune of the 27B) but the small Gemma 4 models are impressive in a way that I think is going quite unreported.
So while I don't think this website should use the word "frontier" here, even referring to Qwen 3.6 27B which is weirdly close, I think it could.
The frontier is a curve. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_front
Had the same though. The gap between open-source and the frontier is closing in, especially with Kimi K3, but that is like >2T parameters. The Gemma 4 and other models you can actually run on an average Mac, is not in the same league.
It might be overused elsewhere but I don't think its use here is inappropriate given it's qualified: it doesn't say "frontier models", it says "frontier open models".
No, your thinking is 100% correct. It's called clickbait.
+1 came here to say this, I opened the link expecting some technical breakthrough. Misleading click bait title.
I was confused too, but I believe that it refers to the Pareto Frontier: the best set of solutions to a multi-objective problem.
Look it up, it’s a bit difficult to explain concisely in words but it is intuitive visually.
If we are thinking of intelligence and price, a model will be in the Pareto Frontier if there’s no cheaper model of the same or higher intelligence. Or if there’s no more intelligent model for that price or lower.
EDIT: See this chart from Artificial Analysis: https://artificialanalysis.ai/#intelligence-comparison-tabs
So for example DeepSeek V4 Pro can be considered a frontier model because there's no cheaper model that is as intelligent.
For any solution in the Pareto Frontier, there no "no-brainer" alternative, in the sense that there's no other option that is better in some way without giving up something else. It's the best of its "weight-class".