Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash: the BEST Boeing benchmark result I’ve seen from an open-source model (by far). ✈️ It ran for hours with /goal. Where other models often stall quickly, it kept improving: inspect, spot a defect, zoom in, diagnose, fix, repeat. The video really shows how strong it is at sustaining...

64,648 views • 1 day ago •via X (Twitter)

33 Comments

Victor M's profile picture
Victor M1 day ago

more details because this is beautiful 🔥

Victor M's profile picture
Victor M1 day ago

extremely good, inspect the result here:

Offscript's profile picture
Offscript1 day ago

kept improving instead of stalling is the only benchmark that matters now. the rest is one shot theatre

Soft Axiom's profile picture
Soft Axiom1 day ago

"Until you are 100% satisfied" might be the most important part of the prompt. The model grading its own work is the benchmark now.

Myravyx's profile picture
Myravyx1 day ago

The hard part in a multi-hour run isn't the fixing. It's still being dissatisfied at hour three.

catman's profile picture
catman1 day ago

hours of /goal is a much harsher test than a one-shot render. what finally made it stop improving: a visual score, a fixed iteration limit, or its own judgment?

Umar Nasser's profile picture
Umar Nasser1 day ago

It seems better than opus 4.8 one right?

Shesaidmewakeup's profile picture
Shesaidmewakeup1 day ago

Open source running for hours in claude code and still improving. Benches don’t show that.

John Rood's profile picture
John Rood1 day ago

the thing that separates "keeps improving" from "stalls" isn't raw capability. it's whether the model can still see what it already tried 40 steps back. most stalls are it relitigating a fix it already ruled out because that context fell out of the window.

neal's profile picture
neal1 day ago

The impressive part is the loop, not the “god model” label: inspect → name a defect → fix → verify. That pattern is useful outside 3D work too—give any model explicit checks and a stop condition instead of asking for a one-shot answer.

OmniWired's profile picture
OmniWired1 day ago

I wonder if it be better on dsh

Surya Rajendhran's profile picture
Surya Rajendhran1 day ago

this is a great benchmark, where can I find more details? are there any common trends you’re seeing with how deepseek or open weight models handle 3D vs closed frontier models?

Victor M's profile picture
Victor M1 day ago

best way to see other results:

Chizzydigital's profile picture
Chizzydigital1 day ago

Next time just use a separate critic agent

veloX's profile picture
veloX1 day ago

this Boeing benchmark reminds me of the Red Queen Gödel Machine: continuous self-improvement against a moving target.

bbzz's profile picture
bbzz1 day ago

what'd it cost?

Elledyne Labs's profile picture
Elledyne Labs1 day ago

was the inspect→fix loop running on the same context window the whole time, or did /goal spawn fresh subagents? curious what context strategy kept it from rotting across hours

Krish Dasgupta's profile picture
Krish Dasgupta1 day ago

What really is marvellous- the precision shadow. The moment you move the pane around the plane, the direction also specifies the shadow. That’s something !

Wei佳's profile picture
Wei佳1 day ago

What Harness tool are you using?

Elledyne Labs's profile picture
Elledyne Labs1 day ago

the harness did the work, not the model. claude code gave it the loop and deepseek just refused to quit. how much of this is /goal's verifier vs deepseek's stamina?

اسلیم کلیک ها's profile picture
اسلیم کلیک ها1 day ago

Can you please crash it into a building next

Onur Solmaz's profile picture
Onur Solmaz1 day ago

did it reach the final version faster than astra before?

Steffan's profile picture
Steffan1 day ago

Looks like I am going to change harness, I was not really happy with deepseek results in opencode, maybe it’s a harness problem.

Victor M's profile picture
Victor M1 day ago

try it and tell me - I get really good results with CC with this setup:

FoodTruck Bench's profile picture
FoodTruck Bench1 day ago

DeepSeek 4.1 being this close to GPT-5.5 at this price point is actually illegal 💀

josip's profile picture
josip1 day ago

the impressive part isn't the boeing render, it's that it stayed in the inspect→diagnose→fix loop for hours instead of stalling after the first pretty output. long-horizon models start looking useful when the harness keeps them pointed at the next defect

Dev's profile picture
Dev1 day ago

bro chinese models r literally cooking the entire ai market rn distillation really leveled up chinese ai to the point it's outperforming everything ngl 😭🔥

kimodo_cloud's profile picture
kimodo_cloud1 day ago

cost ?

Preyforge's profile picture
Preyforge1 day ago

this is the satisfying version of a loop: inspect, diagnose, fix. i still make the deployed path prove the demo; screenshots can be charming little liars.

neo hodler's profile picture
neo hodler1 day ago

Interesting to see that it “ran for hours with /goal” without stalling. Long-horizon loops are where most “SOTA” models still quietly die.

Ibesh's profile picture
Ibesh1 day ago

boeing test is brutal lol. most open models stall after a few fixes, the fact it kept going for hours and kept improving is the real flex

keethesh's profile picture
keethesh1 day ago

Does it ever break something that was already working?

东倒西六条's profile picture
东倒西六条1 day ago

你炒股吗?如果你炒股的话马上删了,否则对今晚美国股市有冲击!能设计外形,就可以对飞机内部进行设计。直接冲击了美国高端制造业

Related Videos

AI AGENTS 101 (58 minute free masterclass) send this to anyone who wants to understand ai agents, claude skills, md files, how to get the most out of AI etc in plain english: 1. chat vs agents - chat models answer questions in a back and forth while agents take a goal, figure out the steps, and deliver a result 2. agents don’t stop after one response. they keep running until the task is actually finishedno babysitting required 3. everything runs on a loop. they gather context, decide what to do, take an action, then repeat until done 4. the loop is the system. they look at files, tools, and the internet. decide the next step. execute and then feed that back into the next step. over and over until completion 5. the model is just one piece. gpt, claude, gemini are the reasoning layer. the key is model + loop + tools + context 6. mcp is how agents use tools. it connects things like browser, code, apis, and your internal software. once connected, the agent decides when to use them to get the job done 7. context beats prompt all day. you don't need to write perfect prompts. load your agent with context about your business, style, and goals and then simple instructions work 8. claude.md or agents.md is the onboarding doc it tells the agent who it is, how to behave, what it knows, and what tools it can use. this gets loaded every time before it starts 9. memory.md is how it improves. agents don’t remember by default. this file stores preferences, corrections, and patterns you tell the agent to update it, and it gets better over time 10. skills + harnesses make it usable. skills are reusable tasks like writing, research, analysis the harness is the environment like claude code or openclaw that runs everything. basiclaly, different interfaces, same system underneath this episode with remy on The Startup Ideas Podcast (SIP) 🧃 was one of the clearest ways of understanding a lot of the core concepts of ai agents could be the best beginners course for ai agents 58 mins. all free. no advertisers. i just want to see you build cool stuff. im rooting for you. send to a friend watch

GREG ISENBERG

377,138 views • 5 months ago

CLAUDE CODE JUST SHIPPED THE FEATURE THAT SOLVES THE BIGGEST PROBLEM EVERY BUILDER HAS WITH AI AGENTS. The problem: Claude starts a task, gets distracted by a sub-problem, goes down a rabbit hole, and never finishes the original thing you asked for. The solution: /goal One command. You set the goal at the start of the session. Claude now has a north star it checks against every action it takes. Not just at the beginning. Throughout the entire session. Every time Claude is about to do something it asks: does this action move me toward the goal the user set or am I drifting? If it is drifting it corrects. If it completes a sub-task it returns to the primary goal. If it hits a blocker it reports back instead of spending 45 minutes solving the wrong problem. This sounds like a small feature. It is not. The reason most people do not trust Claude Code for long autonomous runs is not capability. It is reliability. A Claude Code session that reliably finishes what it started is worth 10 times more than one that is more capable but wanders. /goal is the feature that makes long autonomous sessions reliable. Set the goal. Let it run. Come back to a finished result. Not a result that got 70% done before Claude decided the sub-problem was more interesting. Done. The builders running overnight agent sessions are going to use this command on everything from today forward. Bookmark this. Follow CyrilXBT for every Claude Code feature the moment it ships.

CyrilXBT

19,586 views • 4 months ago

Sam Altman made the case for open-source harnesses in July. a month later, someone shipped it, and it's more efficient than most managed harnesses. here is the problem it was aimed at: a large share of your agent's token bill is the model rereading things it already read. that isn't the model's doing. the runtime around it decides what goes into every prompt and how often the model gets called. for example, an agent queries a CRM at step four and gets back 400 rows. those rows get piled up in the conversation history. by step nineteen, the model has to read those rows fifteen times unnecessarily, and every token read is billed at input rates. it happened because your harness assembled that prompt on every turn and kept the rows in it. that gives you two levers: how much context the harness carries forward, and how often it calls the model. there are four practical ways to keep the prompt from growing unnecessarily: → load tool schemas on demand. a server with 100 tools doesn't need to put all 100 into every prompt when the agent only calls two. → offload large results to disk. turn a large response into a short preview and a file path instead of replaying the entire result on every turn. → delegate to subagents. let a subagent spend thirty tool calls in its own context and return one summary to the root agent. → run toolchains in code. one script calls three tools, joins the results, and returns a table instead of three turns each dragging a full response. but reducing context is only half the job. you also need to control how often the model gets called. a good harness should avoid unnecessary planning, verification, and reflection when the work can be completed in fewer steps. TrueFoundry's open-source agent harness, TrueForge, is built around both of those controls. it sits between the model and the tools, deciding what goes into every prompt and when another model call is actually needed. it also breaks token usage down across the harness, skills, instructions, tools, and messages. DevRev's Enterprise-Bench is where this gets tested, on multi-step tasks of the kind where an agent pulls records from one system and reconciles them against another. TrueFoundry ran TrueForge there against Claude Managed Agents, both on the same model, and both finished the same number of tasks. the tie is the part that matters, because it means the gap underneath is not a quality tradeoff. TrueForge reached that score on close to a third of the tokens, with roughly 40% fewer trips back to the model. for the same result, that comes out around 2.7x cheaper than Claude Managed Agents. swapping in an open model made it sharper still. TrueForge with GLM-5.2 scored a little higher than either setup above, and the entire benchmark run cost about $3 at list prices. being open source matters beyond the license here. the model underneath can be swapped without rewriting the agent, and the whole thing can run inside your own environment when the data cannot leave it. all of this comes down to the runtime around the model, the context it carries, the tools it exposes, and how many times it goes back to the model. that is what a production harness actually owns. the full task list, the per-run numbers, and the MIT-licensed code are on GitHub: (don't forget to star 🌟) you can read more about the same in the article quoted below. thanks to the TrueForge team for working with me on this one.

Akshay 🚀

76,552 views • 24 days ago