Show HN: Run an 80B Qwen in 4.3 GB of RAM on a Mac, and a 35B on an iPhone
Thread
Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.
Show HN: Run an 80B Qwen in 4.3 GB of RAM on a Mac, and a 35B on an iPhone
Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.
dghlsakjg · · focus · HN ↗
People will keep plugging away at this and figure out how to avoid wearing the hard drive, how to make it run faster, custom hardware buses etc.
Keep going! I personally can't wait for the day when a 1t param model runs off a $200 SSD instead of a $50k rack of Nvidia chips.
gpt5 · · focus · HN ↗
In addition, LLMs, small or large, are highly parallelizable. This means that running on the same machine/GPUs many requests in parallel is significantly more efficient, and the sum of tok/s will far outweight any single user use case.
Those two combined means that unless LLMs reach the state of 'good enough' (TBD), I fully expect the economics and people's interest to align with 99%+ of LLM usage would be in centralized servers. (not dismissing the fact that there are use cases for local LLMs, and that the progress matters).
anon373839 · · focus · HN ↗
zozbot234 · · focus · HN ↗
The economics of real-time, low-latency inference of very large near-SOTA models will heavily favor a centralized setup. But if you can afford to wait for your answer - be it a day, a week, or even more at the extreme low end (or if you just stick to leaner models for your relatively quick replies) the economics start to shift in a very clear way. A slow-going local inference setup relying on cheap SSD offload does not need the high power input of a datacenter rack, and the cooling load is outright trivial - even when working on many requests in parallel, which (in a SSD offload context) is what maximizes throughput even for local inference. These are serious problems for centralized inference that will probably limit the scale at which it can be applied.