Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

GLM 5.1 vs GLM 5.2 6 advanced HTML canvas challenges: 💧 Ink diffusing in water ⚔️ Energy-blade duel 📱 Slide to unlock 🅿️ 360° parking assist 🔥 Burning letter to ash 🏠 Build-a-house sequence Pure canvas, zero libraries.

347,708 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

Комментарии: 48

Фото профиля rijndael
rijndael3 месяцев назад

glm5.1 lightsaber duel is sweet

Фото профиля stevibe
stevibe3 месяцев назад

Yeah especially when they crossed!

Фото профиля Tom Turney
Tom Turney3 месяцев назад

dang dude great visuals and choreography.

Фото профиля stevibe
stevibe3 месяцев назад

Glad you liked the rhythms!

Фото профиля stevibe
stevibe3 месяцев назад

The prompt (1/2): 💧 Ink diffusing in water Create a single HTML file with a canvas animation of a single drop of black ink falling into a glass of clear water and diffusing. On impact the ink should bloom outward in turbulent, billowing plumes — fractal tendrils curling and branching as they spread and slowly disperse into faint clouds. Use real fluid-like motion (advection and diffusion), not simple expanding circles. The ink should have density variation, with dark dense cores and wispy translucent edges. Soft lighting from above. 60fps, no external libraries. ⚔️ Energy-blade duel Create a single HTML file with a canvas animation of a short, cinematic duel between two hooded warriors wielding glowing plasma blades — one blade blue, one red. Set it on a dark, atmospheric backdrop with drifting embers or mist. The warriors clash in a fast, choreographed exchange of swings and parries. The core effect: each blade leaves a smooth, motion-blurred light streak that traces its arc through the air, with a bright white-hot core, a colored glow, and a trail that fades over a few frames. Blades should cast dynamic colored light onto the fighters and the ground, and clashes throw off sparks. Fluid, weighty movement — no stiff robotic motion. 60fps, no external libraries. 📱 Slide to unlock Create a single HTML file with a canvas animation of a smartphone lock screen unlocking. Show a phone screen with a large clock and date over a soft gradient wallpaper, and a "slide to unlock" track at the bottom with a draggable handle. A shimmering light sweep should animate continuously across the "slide to unlock" text (a moving highlight gradient). Then animate the handle sliding all the way across; on completion, the lock screen smoothly slides/fades away to reveal a home screen — a grid of rounded app icons (original designs) that gently zoom and fade into place, with a subtle parallax on the wallpaper. Polished, fluid, Apple-grade easing throughout. 60fps, no external libraries. 🅿️ 360° parking assist Create a single HTML file with a canvas animation simulating a modern car's 360° surround-view parking assist as it parallel-parks into a tight roadside gap (the classic S-shaped maneuver). Layout: Split the screen into two panels. The left panel is the car's infotainment display showing a top-down bird's-eye ("around-view") composite — the car rendered from directly above in the center, the road surface and curb, and an empty parking gap bracketed by two parked cars. The right panel shows the steering wheel from the driver's seat, rotating in sync with the maneuver. Dynamic guidelines: Overlay predicted-path lines projecting from the car in the bird's-eye view — two curved trajectory lines marking the car's width, divided into colored distance bands (green = far, yellow = mid, red = close). These lines must bend left or right based on the current steering angle using correct steering geometry (sharper wheel angle → tighter turn radius), and they must update every single frame as the wheel turns and the car moves. Animation: Auto-play the full parallel-parking sequence — drive forward alongside the front car and stop, crank the wheel and reverse while curving in, then counter-steer and straighten as the rear end clears, and finally ease forward to center in the spot. The car body should trace a smooth, continuous S-path. Critical constraint: The steering wheel rotation, the curvature of the guidelines, and the car's actual path must stay perfectly consistent with one another at all times — turn the wheel left, the guidelines bend left, the car arcs left. Add subtle UI chrome (a distance readout, proximity warning arcs that flash red as the car nears the parked cars), soft shadows, and clean flat-design styling like a real car display. 60fps, no external libraries.

Фото профиля stevibe
stevibe3 месяцев назад

The prompt (2/2): 🔥 Burning letter to ash Create a single HTML file with a canvas animation of a handwritten letter burning. Show an aged, slightly yellowed sheet of paper with visible handwritten cursive text (procedurally drawn lines are fine) resting on a dark wooden desk. After 2 seconds, a flame ignites at the bottom-right corner and spreads organically across the page — the burn front should advance with an irregular, noisy edge, never a straight line. Just ahead of the flames, the paper should darken and brown (scorching), then char black, then disappear entirely, revealing the desk beneath. Render the fire with layered particles: a bright white-yellow core, orange mid-flame, and translucent red tips that flicker and lick upward. Glowing embers should detach from the burn edge and drift upward on turbulent air currents, fading from orange to gray. Add wisps of semi-transparent smoke rising and dispersing above the flames, and a warm flickering light that the fire casts onto the surrounding desk. The entire page should be consumed in roughly 15 seconds, leaving only a few glowing ash fragments that slowly dim. 60fps, no external libraries. 🏠 Build-a-house sequence Write a single HTML file with a full-page canvas, no libraries. Animate the construction of a simple 2D cartoon house in 7 stages over ~25 seconds against a pale blue sky with a green ground line: (1) foundation - a gray rectangular slab rises from underground, (2) walls - four vertical wall segments extend upward from the foundation corners, (3) wall fill - tan/beige siding fills in between the wall frames, (4) roof - two triangular roof panels slide in from above and meet at the peak, with red shingle texture appearing row by row, (5) door - a brown door fades in on the front wall with a small gold doorknob, (6) windows - two windows appear on either side of the door with visible cross-frames and blue glass, (7) details - a chimney extends up from the roof, a small puff of smoke begins rising from it, a path of stepping stones appears leading to the door, and a small tree grows beside the house. Each stage should have a brief caption at the top ("Laying foundation", "Raising walls", etc.). Between stages, pause for 0.5 seconds. Loop continuously.

Фото профиля Studio Zamudio One
Studio Zamudio One3 месяцев назад

I've started repeatedly prompting 5.2 the same prompt, and found wildly different results. I think we are getting to a point where we will have to start measuring with averages.

Фото профиля stevibe
stevibe3 месяцев назад

Maybe try lowering the temperature?

Фото профиля Studio Zamudio One
Studio Zamudio One3 месяцев назад

Depends on what I'm doing. It's nice to get examples to chose from. But I'm concerned with single comparisons between last and next model versions, without lots of repeat comparisons. That takes a lot of time. I guess I could just automate it. GLM is my main three.js llm.

Фото профиля 🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱
🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱3 месяцев назад

how is 5.1 better at pretty much everything

Фото профиля filipe
filipe3 месяцев назад

love the visualisations! im pretty sure i'd get a ticket if i parked like glm 5.2 tho

Фото профиля stevibe
stevibe3 месяцев назад

Appreciate it! Yep, two wheels on the pavement haha

Фото профиля Alan Palacio
Alan Palacio3 месяцев назад

I would think that 5.1 is actually 5.2; otherwise it seems like a regresion in some cases

Фото профиля Tom Davenport
Tom Davenport3 месяцев назад

I prefer 5.1 on most of these!

Фото профиля Canopy Wave
Canopy Wave3 месяцев назад

Honestly, GLM 5.1 remains one of the strongest open-source models for this kind of creative coding. Still love it.

Фото профиля ContextBaron
ContextBaron3 месяцев назад

that looks so cool for comparison

Фото профиля brock
brock3 месяцев назад

i feel like it lowkey did worse on the old iphone animation and the house building animation was super botched

Фото профиля keys 🧪
keys 🧪3 месяцев назад

Glm 5.1 seemed to be more more detailed in generated outcome may it be the tweaks they did to glm 5.2 for speed at sacrifice Over quality ?

Фото профиля ESchwaa
ESchwaa3 месяцев назад

There are some aspects of 5.1 that I almost like better

Фото профиля Foreman Panda
Foreman Panda3 месяцев назад

Example tests cannot fully reflect the full picture; actual work tests are still needed.

Фото профиля GalacticMarch
GalacticMarch3 месяцев назад

@francoisfleuret

Фото профиля ✦ SK ✦
✦ SK ✦3 месяцев назад

I don't know but I like the taste of glm it feels the close to Claude type

Фото профиля dalu
dalu3 месяцев назад

those are all not 1shot results, because I've done the paper part and it didn't turn out like this

Фото профиля stevibe
stevibe3 месяцев назад

They are one shot, with the same prompt per model run 5 times, and the best result was selected for each model.

Фото профиля dalu
dalu3 месяцев назад

that explains it

Фото профиля Lee Penkman
Lee Penkman3 месяцев назад

super satisfying. one day it will plan out and build a real house project from the ground up :D then control the robots that actually build the house :D

Фото профиля Daniel Yurkin
Daniel Yurkin3 месяцев назад

love the ideas 🤩

Фото профиля amirmxt
amirmxt3 месяцев назад

so good

Фото профиля Farrux Hewson
Farrux Hewson3 месяцев назад

The improvements are subtle, but I like it

Фото профиля Saleh Abdulaziz
Saleh Abdulaziz3 месяцев назад

👍🏻👍🏻 Thanks

Фото профиля Jakove_HR
Jakove_HR3 месяцев назад

I love your test everytime Displays a Lot

Фото профиля Milind S
Milind S3 месяцев назад

Very interesting set of tests

Фото профиля H₀
H₀3 месяцев назад

GLM 5.2 is much better on the ink diffusing and burning letter IMO, otherwise not so much.

Фото профиля TJ Kennedy 🇺🇸
TJ Kennedy 🇺🇸3 месяцев назад

Thanks for this, great work!

Фото профиля Franjo
Franjo3 месяцев назад

Love this tests

Фото профиля Erman Eroglu
Erman Eroglu3 месяцев назад

Great visualizations thanks!

Фото профиля Hyce 🇵🇹🇩🇪🇪🇺
Hyce 🇵🇹🇩🇪🇪🇺3 месяцев назад

can you share the prompts?

Фото профиля stevibe
stevibe3 месяцев назад

Sure, I have added to this post as comments, please check.

Фото профиля Hyce 🇵🇹🇩🇪🇪🇺
Hyce 🇵🇹🇩🇪🇪🇺3 месяцев назад

awesome 🙌

Фото профиля Lim Tzu
Lim Tzu3 месяцев назад

Building AI Video Editor on GLM 5.2 from yesterday. 0 repos - everything from scratch.

Фото профиля stevibe
stevibe3 месяцев назад

Wow how was it?

Фото профиля Lim Tzu
Lim Tzu3 месяцев назад

I wish to plug this editor to AI camera I’m working on also.

Фото профиля John Shina
John Shina3 месяцев назад

Wow! GLM 5.1 is not outdated yet 😁

Фото профиля Gökcan AKALIN
Gökcan AKALIN3 месяцев назад

Software tasks are very small portion of all possible use cases. Consider tasks that are not easy to verify. You must enlarge your vision about model testing, if you want to distinguish yourself.

Фото профиля Marco Rodrigues 🔧
Marco Rodrigues 🔧3 месяцев назад

Not a real improvement 😅

Фото профиля Jimsta
Jimsta3 месяцев назад

Are you going to release your testing software that you use for all of these videos? Just curious

Фото профиля stevibe
stevibe3 месяцев назад

It's a simple web app that renders the result, I can add that to BenchLocal.

Фото профиля Jimsta
Jimsta3 месяцев назад

Awesome! I look forward to it, I want to do this testing with all my own wacky prompts

Похожие видео

Frontier Coding LLM Advanced Benchmark 🔥 - Kimi K3 Max - Qwen3.8 Xhigh - Opus 5 Max - GPT Sol 5.6 Ultra - GLM 5.2 Max - Grok 4.5 High Task: Modelden tek bir bağımsız HTML dosyasında, kum/su/ateş/duman gibi elementlerin hücresel otomat kurallarıyla etkileştiği etkileşimli bir "falling sand" simülasyonu üretmesi isteniyor; kütüphane yok, zero-shot, tek deneme. Kum yığın oluşturarak düşmeli, sıvılar seviye bulmalı, elementler yoğunluğa göre katmanlara ayrışmalı ve ateş-su-lava-asit gibi etkileşimler veri odaklı bir reaksiyon tablosundan yürümeli. Çıktı, on binlerce parçacığı ImageData ile 60 FPS'te çizebilecek performansta olmalı ve kum konisi ile bağlantılı kaplar gibi önceden tanımlı sahnelerle kendini doğrulayabilmeli. Task'ın Zorluğu: Bu görev basit bir parçacık animasyonu değil. Aynı anda dört farklı mühendislik problemini çözmek gerekiyor: - CA scheduling: Aşağı düşen hücre aynı step içinde tekrar işlenmemeli. Aksi hâlde kum tek frame’de tabana ışınlanıyor. - İstatistiksel simetri: Sol/sağ deneme sırası hücre başına randomize edilmezse kum konisi sistematik olarak bir tarafa yatıyor. - Çok-fazlı yoğunluk ve hidrostatik davranış: Yalnızca aşağı hareket ve yatay dispersion, dar taban kanallı gerçek bir U-kapta suyu karşı kola yükseltmeye yetmiyor. Basınç veya eşdeğer bir kütle transferi mekanizması gerekiyor. - Reaktif state machine: Yanıcı madde kimliği, burn lifetime, smoke/ash üretimi, gaz ömrü ve kimyasal reaksiyonlar birbirini bozmadan yürümeli. 🎉Kazanan: GPT Sol 5.6🎉 Final Puantaj ve Özet - GPT Sol 5.6 — 92.4/100 - Opus 5 — 66.1/100 - Kimi K3 — 62.1/100 - Qwen3.8 — 60.9/100 - GLM 5.2 — 55.3/100 - Grok 4.5 — 50.5/100 Sebep: GPT Sol 5.6, görevin üç klasik failure mode’unu birlikte geçen tek çıktı oldu. Kum ve duman tek step’te tam bir hücre hareket etti; iki seed’de kum konisi bias’ı en fazla %0.25 kaldı. Yoğunluk kuralı static olmayan tüm hedeflere genel olarak uygulanıyor; sand-water ve sand-ash testleri geçti. En önemlisi, connected liquid region’larındaki yüksek ve düşük yüzeyleri bulup aralarında kütle transferi yapan ayrı bir hydraulic-pressure pass’i var. Bu sayede dar açıklıklı standart U-kapta 1.24, kendi preset’inde 0.61 hücre yüzey farkına ulaştı. Density preset’i gerçekten karışık başlangıç üretiyor, chemistry’yi izole ediyor ve smoke için uzun test ömrü veriyor. 1200 step sonunda lava, water, oil ve smoke sayıları tamamen korundu; katman sıra skoru 0.906 oldu. Bu, diğer submission’ların çoğunda görülen “zaten doğru sırada dökme”, smoke’un sona ermesi veya oil’in lava tarafından yakılması problemlerini yaşamıyor. Runner-up Opus 5’in UI’si ve validator paneli daha kapsamlı; ancak çekirdek fizik açısından kritik iki iddiası çalışmıyor. Kendi U-kap preset’i 107.44 hücre farkla kaldı. Ayrıca density sahnesi reactionsEnabled=false yapsa da lava’nın ignition yolu reaction gate’inin dışında çalışıyor; burning update de gate kontrolünden önce water extinguish ve smoke/fire emission yapıyor. Sonuç olarak “chemistry off” sahnesinde water tamamen steam’e dönüştü. Bu iki hata, görsel ve ürün kalitesinin kazananı değiştirmesine izin vermeyecek kadar merkezi. Prompt uyumu — 8 puan - GPT Sol 5.6: 7.6/8 - Opus 5: 7.0/8 - Qwen3.8: 5.8/8 - Grok 4.5: 5.5/8 - Kimi K3: 5.3/8 - GLM 5.2: 4.6/8 Performans ve render pipeline - Kimi K3: 6.0/6 - Qwen3.8: 5.7/6 - Opus 5: 5.3/6 - GPT Sol 5.6: 5.0/6 - GLM 5.2: 4.8/6 - Grok 4.5: 3.2/6 Görsel kalite, UI ve resize - Opus 5: 5.0/5 - GPT Sol 5.6: 4.8/5 - Qwen3.8: 4.6/5 - Kimi K3: 3.6/5 - Grok 4.5: 3.2/5 - GLM 5.2: 3.0/5 Mimari ve test edilebilirlik - GPT Sol 5.6: 2.7/3 - Opus 5: 2.5/3 - Qwen3.8: 2.3/3 - Kimi K3: 2.2/3 - Grok 4.5: 1.9/3 - GLM 5.2: 1.0/3

Alican Kiraz

15,979 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

I designed a new test specifically for multimodal models: fill out a paper form. And it's much harder than it sounds. This isn't typing into an electronic field that captures your text. The form is just an image. The model has to place each form element: text, checkmarks — at the correct pixel position on the canvas itself. Results: 🟢 Kimi K2.6 → done in 3:45, 16.7k output tokens 🟡 Step 3.7 Flash → half the fields, 57k output tokens 🔴 Gemini 3.5 Flash → 489k output tokens, never finished. I had to kill it. Gemini burned ~29x more output tokens than Kimi on the exact same task, and Kimi's was the only form that actually looked filled out. The test, a mocked application form, contains some challenging parts, such as one-character-per-box fields. I provided every model the same set of tools: > get canvas size > drop probe markers to find coordinates > add text > add checkmarks > move elements > take a screenshot anytime to check their own work > ... etc So it's vision + spatial reasoning + tool use + long context, all at once. Small models (Qwen, Gemma) can't really complete this test, so I skipped them. What happened: > Kimi nailed name, DOB, ID, gender, marital status, nationality, email, phone, address, postal code — placement slightly loose, but content correct. 15 turns. Clean. > Step got maybe half right — fields dropped, "United States" landed in the email line, data floating outside boxes. Burned 1.24M input tokens doing it (81 turns of re-reading the canvas). > Gemini almost got there visually... then spiraled. By turn 40 it was issuing a delete_elements call wiping element IDs 365–425, basically erasing its own work. 31 minutes, 489k output tokens, still streaming. Terminated. The takeaway isn't "Gemini bad." This test is indeed difficult. But token efficiency is capability now. A model that needs 30x the tokens and still can't converge is going to be 30x the cost in production. Kimi K2.6 just quietly did the thing.

stevibe

25,494 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

sonnet 5 vs sonnet 4.6 vs opus 4.8 vs glm 5.2 – frontend tasks dropped sonnet 5 into a quick test today. same three prompts to all four models, single-shot html/canvas, no edits: • objects falling on a trampoline • rockets playing tennis • a slingshot breaking bottles ranked by speed (total across the 3 tasks): 1. opus 4.8 – 15m 09s 2. sonnet 5 – 16m 05s 3. glm 5.2 – 27m 18s 4. sonnet 4.6 – 35m 06s ranked by code shortness (total loc): 1. sonnet 5 – 1794 2. opus 4.8 – 2063 3. sonnet 4.6 – 2182 4. glm 5.2 – 3285 sonnet 5 came out on top here – leanest code overall and a near-tie for fastest it was also the most creative. in every task it added something none of the others did: – kept the trampoline vibrating after the objects landed – drew a +1 next to the rocket that scored the point – turned the slingshot to face the next bottle before each shot opus 4.8 evaluated the code sonnet 5 produced. four things stood out: • the sphere is a fake, and that's the smart move. the cube and star are real 3d meshes with proper culling and shading, but the ball is just a flat shaded circle. a lit sphere looks identical from every angle, so building it in 3d would burn compute for zero visible payoff. knowing where not to bother is its own kind of skill • weight actually means something on the trampoline. the star is heavy, so it barely bounces and dents the mat hard. the ball is light, so it's lively and leaves a shallow dip. the three objects aren't just different shapes – they have different temperaments, and the physics is what gives them that • the slingshot is framed like a shot, not just drawn. the handle is anchored below the bottom of the screen and runs off-frame, so it reads as something you're holding rather than a sprite parked in the scene. that's a staging instinct, not a rendering one • the paddle ai forward-simulates the ball to predict where it'll land, then adds a deliberate error bias (roughly 1 in 5 shots is a real miss). that's why scoring looks natural instead of robotic – plus four distinct fault types with a catch-all so a rally never hangs without a result bottom line: sonnet 5 does more with less. fastest tier, leanest code, and the only one that added small touches nobody asked for follow thehype. for 24/7 ai news, analysis and breakdowns

thehype.

14,518 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

I built a macOS app for benchmarking local LLMs. 6 test suites. Multiple providers. One workspace. Open source. There are hundreds of local models now. New ones every week. How do you actually pick one? Leaderboards test for general ability. But if you're building an agent that chains tool calls, or a pipeline that extracts structured data, or a code assistant that needs to debug Rust, you need to know if the model handles that specific thing. Not in theory. On your hardware. With your prompts. The benchmarks that exist are either locked behind papers, too abstract to map to real failures, or impossible to extend. You can't add your own test cases. You can't test what matters to your use case. That's what BenchLocal is for. It's a benchmark platform where every test is practical, deterministic, and built around real-world tasks. And you can build your own tests. It ships with 6 Bench Packs TODAY: → ToolCall-15 — tool-use accuracy → BugFind-15 — debugging capabilities → DataExtract-15 — structured data extraction → InstructFollow-15 — constraint-heavy instruction following → ReasonMath-15 — practical reasoning and math → StructOutput-15 — validator-backed structured output Every pack has 15 fixed scenarios. Every score is deterministic and verifiable. Some of you saw ToolCall-15 and BugFind-15 — the individual test packs I open-sourced over the past few weeks. People ran them, filed issues, sent PRs. But managing separate repos, separate scripts, separate results doesn't scale. BenchLocal puts everything in one place. What the app does: > Workspace with tabs — run BugFind-15 in one tab, ToolCall-15 in another. > Any provider — Ollama, llama.cpp, OpenRouter, any OpenAI-compatible endpoint. Local and cloud, same interface. > Run modes — serial, batch per model, batch per test case, or fully parallel. > Test histories — every run saved. Compare any previous session. But the part I'm most excited about isn't the app. It's the ecosystem. BenchLocal is a platform. Each Bench Pack is a plugin. I'm shipping an SDK so anyone can build their own — test what matters to you, package it, share it. Install and uninstall packs right inside the app, same way you'd manage extensions in VS Code. The registry is GitHub-based, fully public. I built 6 packs. I want the community to build the next 60. Theme system built in too — because if I'm staring at benchmark results for hours, it should at least look good. v0.1.0 is macOS only. Windows and Linux are coming. MIT licensed. Everything — the app, the bench packs, the SDK — is open. PRs welcome. Bench Packs even more welcome.

stevibe

50,584 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад