logoalt Hacker News

zxspectrum1982yesterday at 10:45 PM4 repliesview on HN

I'd gladly pay for a Claude Opus 4.6 Thinking High in silicon and use it for 1-2 years. It's good enough for many coding tasks.


Replies

subroutineyesterday at 11:48 PM

But Claude Opus 4.6 is not really practical. Taalas' process seems targeted for edge models. Their proof of concept model, for example, is a heavily quantized version of Llama 3.1 8B and even then they acknowledge their custom 3-bit/6-bit representation causes model quality degradation.

Taalas is going to have a tough time putting a trillion-parameter model on one conventional die. Their HC1 die is already near the maximum size that conventional lithography can expose. They claim they could partition the model across many chips, but I'm not sure if they have tested this process or what it means for compute. The basic storage arithmetic is unforgiving: for a one trillion parameters model at four bits it will take 50–100 chips. To service a sizable customer base will take thousands of 100-chip fabs.

That all said, I'm bullish on this technology, and look forward to seeing it evolve.

show 1 reply
andixtoday at 12:20 AM

With thousands of token per second output it would be an enormous waste of resources. Such chips are clearly made to process thousands of conversations simultaneously. Not necessarily in parallel. All LLM workflows are turn based right now, there are often seconds between turns until tool calls finish or users type the next message.

If the LLM response only takes a few milliseconds, the chip can process hundreds of other requests until the first conversation becomes active again.

NiloCKtoday at 2:55 AM

Not so long ago, I was good enough for many coding tasks. But I found that things can change in a hurry.

Yes, a cheap and fast Opus4.6 can drive a lot of value in current context. But if we continue to craft bigger-and-bigger balls of mud, Opus 4.6 may end up hitting its conceptual ceiling and unable to contribute.

Winding the clock back on your statement gives:

> I'd gladly pay for a Claude Sonnet 3.5 in silicon and use it for 1-2 years.

Man, I dunno.

show 1 reply
Gigachadyesterday at 11:09 PM

It costs something like $300,000 for the hardware to run a model of that size. You'd pay that for a single model for 1-2 years? Not even the AI companies can justify that kind of spend which is why they keep extending the expected lifespan on their hardware in the accounting.

show 2 replies