正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

加载此视频时出现问题。这可能是由于临时网络问题，或视频可能不可用。

I tested Gemini 3.7 Flash vs Qwen 3.8 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro vs GLM 5.3 same prompt: a busy train interior, then leaving the station. Qwen 3.8 and GLM 5.3 look best to me. but Gemini did it in 1 min 45 secs lol, others took more than 7... show more

Bhavy☄️

7,027 subscribers

24,968 次观看 • 24 天前 •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

I tested again Gemini 3.7 Flash vs Qwen 3.8 vs Grok 4.6 vs GLM 5.3 same prompt: a family having lunch in 3D. Qwen 3.8 wins again for me on quality. but Gemini finished in under 2 mins, the others took 6+. Which one wins for you?

I tested again Gemini 3.7 Flash vs Qwen 3.8 vs Grok 4.6 vs GLM 5.3 same prompt: a family having lunch in 3D. Qwen 3.8 wins again for me on quality. but Gemini finished in under 2 mins, the others took 6+. Which one wins for you?

Bhavy☄️

71,444 次观看 • 25 天前

I tested Gemini 3.7 Flash vs Qwen 3.8 vs Grok 4.6 vs GLM 5.3 Same prompt, 2 scenes: a harvester and farmers working. honestly? Qwen 3.8 impressed me. it just did what I asked. Grok 4.6 failed on coloring. Qwen>GLM> Grok> Gemini which one did better for you?

I tested Gemini 3.7 Flash vs Qwen 3.8 vs Grok 4.6 vs GLM 5.3 Same prompt, 2 scenes: a harvester and farmers working. honestly? Qwen 3.8 impressed me. it just did what I asked. Grok 4.6 failed on coloring. Qwen>GLM> Grok> Gemini which one did better for you?

Bhavy☄️

110,316 次观看 • 26 天前

🚨Breaking: Ox Alpha is GLM 5.3 Flash by Z.ai! It's already available in Kilo, so we put it to the test. We gave the same prompt to both GLM 5.3 Flash and Gemini 3.7 Flash: Build a spectral audio visualizer. Costs: GLM 5.3 Flash: $0.01 Gemini 3.7 Flash: $0.17 17x cheaper for GLM 5.3 Flash. Who won on one-shot results?

🚨Breaking: Ox Alpha is GLM 5.3 Flash by Z.ai! It's already available in Kilo, so we put it to the test. We gave the same prompt to both GLM 5.3 Flash and Gemini 3.7 Flash: Build a spectral audio visualizer. Costs: GLM 5.3 Flash: $0.01 Gemini 3.7 Flash: $0.17 17x cheaper for GLM 5.3 Flash. Who won on one-shot results?

Kilo (acq. by Anaconda)

21,683 次观看 • 15 天前

STOP PAYING FOR APIS RIGHT NOW MASSIVE DROP ON APINEX😳 8 elite models 100% FREE to milk right now: -gemini 3.8 Flash -muse Spark 1.3 -GLM-5.3 Flash -gemini 3.1 Pro -deepseek V4 Flash -deepseek V4 Pro -GPT-5.6 Luna -qwen 3.8 MAX chose your free model register here: https:// get your api key: save this post before it disappears

STOP PAYING FOR APIS RIGHT NOW MASSIVE DROP ON APINEX😳 8 elite models 100% FREE to milk right now: -gemini 3.8 Flash -muse Spark 1.3 -GLM-5.3 Flash -gemini 3.1 Pro -deepseek V4 Flash -deepseek V4 Pro -GPT-5.6 Luna -qwen 3.8 MAX chose your free model register here: https:// get your api key: save this post before it disappears

Nahid

30,315 次观看 • 4 天前

free access to 8+ top AI models 😳 APInex is offering free models with 1M context - Gemini 3.8 Flash - Muse Spark 1.3 - GLM 5.3 Flash - Gemini 3.1 Pro - DeepSeek V4 Pro - GPT-5.6 Luna - Qwen 3.8 MAX - DeepSeek V4 Flash getting started: 1. go to 2. sign up with Gmail 3. create your API key 4. base url 5. choose a free model and start using free models, one API setup 👀

free access to 8+ top AI models 😳 APInex is offering free models with 1M context - Gemini 3.8 Flash - Muse Spark 1.3 - GLM 5.3 Flash - Gemini 3.1 Pro - DeepSeek V4 Pro - GPT-5.6 Luna - Qwen 3.8 MAX - DeepSeek V4 Flash getting started: 1. go to 2. sign up with Gmail 3. create your API key 4. base url 5. choose a free model and start using free models, one API setup 👀

K2S

26,585 次观看 • 4 天前

DeepSeek V4 Flash vs GPT-5.6 Luna tested both models with the same prompt on highest reasoning > luna one shotted everything in under 3 mins in devin > v4 Flash needed an extra prompt to fix the movement and took over 5 mins in aihubmix cli which one do you think won?

DeepSeek V4 Flash vs GPT-5.6 Luna tested both models with the same prompt on highest reasoning > luna one shotted everything in under 3 mins in devin > v4 Flash needed an extra prompt to fix the movement and took over 5 mins in aihubmix cli which one do you think won?

J A Z I I

47,643 次观看 • 1 个月前

Salute to the Qwen team 🫡 We tested Qwen 3.7-Max, Gemini 3.5 Flash, GPT-5.5, and Claude Opus 4.7. The biggest shock came from Qwen. In less than a month (3.6 Max dropped April 20), Qwen went from the worst multimodal output on our sakura tree test, barely keeping up with Gemini, GPT, and Claude , to matching Gemini 3.5 Flash frame for frame on this soccer test, and outperforming GPT-5.5 and Claude Opus 4.7. It rendered a perfectly proportioned soccer player and the most lifelike ball in the entire test. Remarkable spatial reasoning. Also: Gemini 3.5 Flash is now faster than GPT-5.5, which used to be the fastest in our past tests.

Salute to the Qwen team 🫡 We tested Qwen 3.7-Max, Gemini 3.5 Flash, GPT-5.5, and Claude Opus 4.7. The biggest shock came from Qwen. In less than a month (3.6 Max dropped April 20), Qwen went from the worst multimodal output on our sakura tree test, barely keeping up with Gemini, GPT, and Claude , to matching Gemini 3.5 Flash frame for frame on this soccer test, and outperforming GPT-5.5 and Claude Opus 4.7. It rendered a perfectly proportioned soccer player and the most lifelike ball in the entire test. Remarkable spatial reasoning. Also: Gemini 3.5 Flash is now faster than GPT-5.5, which used to be the fastest in our past tests.

GMI Cloud

75,785 次观看 • 3 个月前

Qwen 3.8 Flash Next (125B A6B MoE) Vs Qwen 3.8 27B (dense) - Both Q4_K_XL - Reasoning Off Prompt: Create a very high quality realistic video like animation of the solar system. three.js via cdn. Let the camera revolve around. single html file. dont call any tools. dont need any controls. Qwen 3.8 27b focused on computational physics & geometry (inclinations, coordinate math, moon orbits). While Qwen 3.8 125B A6B focused on cinematography & visual UX (lighting contrast, atmospheric glow, framing, and HUD overlays). It also followed the camera instruction correctly and produced result thats visually more stunning. Both the models run on single RTX 3090/4090 (24 GB VRAM). the 27b will fit entirely in the VRAM, but you'd need 100-120GB RAM for the new 125B MoE (check out the previous post for complete inference benchmarks and llama.cpp setup) Qwen 3.8 Flash Next beats Qwen 3.8 27B in almost all the benchmarks. have dropped the intelligence benchmark comparison and unsloth quant huggingface links in the replies. Which one would u be running regularly on your hardware?

Qwen 3.8 Flash Next (125B A6B MoE) Vs Qwen 3.8 27B (dense) - Both Q4_K_XL - Reasoning Off Prompt: Create a very high quality realistic video like animation of the solar system. three.js via cdn. Let the camera revolve around. single html file. dont call any tools. dont need any controls. Qwen 3.8 27b focused on computational physics & geometry (inclinations, coordinate math, moon orbits). While Qwen 3.8 125B A6B focused on cinematography & visual UX (lighting contrast, atmospheric glow, framing, and HUD overlays). It also followed the camera instruction correctly and produced result thats visually more stunning. Both the models run on single RTX 3090/4090 (24 GB VRAM). the 27b will fit entirely in the VRAM, but you'd need 100-120GB RAM for the new 125B MoE (check out the previous post for complete inference benchmarks and llama.cpp setup) Qwen 3.8 Flash Next beats Qwen 3.8 27B in almost all the benchmarks. have dropped the intelligence benchmark comparison and unsloth quant huggingface links in the replies. Which one would u be running regularly on your hardware?

Alok

33,836 次观看 • 15 天前

Claude vs Gemini vs DeepSeek vs Grok PROMPT: Build a production-ready 3D flight visualizer in one HTML file. Use Three.js to render a rotatable Earth and simulate real-time aircraft positions using smooth interpolation. Include polished lighting, a starfield background, and make it responsive for mobile and desktop. Which tool is the best?

Claude vs Gemini vs DeepSeek vs Grok PROMPT: Build a production-ready 3D flight visualizer in one HTML file. Use Three.js to render a rotatable Earth and simulate real-time aircraft positions using smooth interpolation. Include polished lighting, a starfield background, and make it responsive for mobile and desktop. Which tool is the best?

Oleg Bilozor

72,608 次观看 • 5 个月前

Yup! Gemini 3.8 Flash made this in Antigravity.. It's exceptionally good in frontend tasks.. i was amazed to see this level of polished output.. It did take a few iterations to tweak specific animations and morphing but this result is unreal! Which one do you like more?

Yup! Gemini 3.8 Flash made this in Antigravity.. It's exceptionally good in frontend tasks.. i was amazed to see this level of polished output.. It did take a few iterations to tweak specific animations and morphing but this result is unreal! Which one do you like more?

Bee

27,501 次观看 • 4 天前

I tested Qwen 3.8 Max vs Kimi K3 Same scene, lighting, props, detail requirements. Qwen's output is decent, but it's not close to Kimi K3. Qwen's output came out messy, text handling was off, and the composition felt unorganized next to Kimi's version. In my opinion, Qwen isn't second to Fable 5 either, and it's also below GPT-5.6 Sol. It's a solid model, but not at that tier. Kimi K3 is still clearly ahead here.

I tested Qwen 3.8 Max vs Kimi K3 Same scene, lighting, props, detail requirements. Qwen's output is decent, but it's not close to Kimi K3. Qwen's output came out messy, text handling was off, and the composition felt unorganized next to Kimi's version. In my opinion, Qwen isn't second to Fable 5 either, and it's also below GPT-5.6 Sol. It's a solid model, but not at that tier. Kimi K3 is still clearly ahead here.

Bhavy☄️

34,045 次观看 • 1 个月前

I spent my Astra tokens trying to teach small Qwen3.5 (9B) to create lowpoly 3D rooms using Blender 🏡 you (or Astra) can take this challenge today here's what I learned: > you need to align geometry with deterministic rewards and VLM-as-a-judge (GLM-5.3-Flash which was a great judge) > I tried GEPA at first with various rewards, model learned to make valid rooms (but that's it) > after solving geometry you need the model to add more details, which is very hard > the stricter the reward function, less advantage you get because task is too hard. grpo didn't help > I tried passing image guidance to both policy (Qwen) and judge (GLM) it didn't improve > I tried tastemaxxing trick in this blog, truth is, flowers can be abstract, a house can't be shoutout to OpenEnv, environment is super simple what can you try? > experiment with different rewards or policy (teach a larger Qwen) > generate a dataset of 150-200 Blender render Bpy examples using Astra, fine-tune Qwen on it first and then try GEPA or GRPO > ???

I spent my Astra tokens trying to teach small Qwen3.5 (9B) to create lowpoly 3D rooms using Blender 🏡 you (or Astra) can take this challenge today here's what I learned: > you need to align geometry with deterministic rewards and VLM-as-a-judge (GLM-5.3-Flash which was a great judge) > I tried GEPA at first with various rewards, model learned to make valid rooms (but that's it) > after solving geometry you need the model to add more details, which is very hard > the stricter the reward function, less advantage you get because task is too hard. grpo didn't help > I tried passing image guidance to both policy (Qwen) and judge (GLM) it didn't improve > I tried tastemaxxing trick in this blog, truth is, flowers can be abstract, a house can't be shoutout to OpenEnv, environment is super simple what can you try? > experiment with different rewards or policy (teach a larger Qwen) > generate a dataset of 150-200 Blender render Bpy examples using Astra, fine-tune Qwen on it first and then try GEPA or GRPO > ???

merve

22,484 次观看 • 3 天前

You can now use GPT 5.5, Gemini 3.7 Flash, Kimi K3 and 47 other AI models completely free😱 No subscription. No credit card. Even the API usage costs $0. AIHubMix just opened a free catalog with 50 AI models. Some of the available models: • Ox Alpha • Gemini 3.7 Flash • GLM 5.2 • Kimi K3 • MiniMax M3 • GPT 5.5 • 40+ more And you don’t need separate API keys for each model. Setup takes 2 minutes: > Step 1: Go to > Create an account using your email or OAuth. No card needed. Step 2: Create one API key > The same key works with every free and paid model. Step 3: Add it to any OpenAI-compatible tool Base URL: Then choose any model ending in -free, such as: coding-glm-5.2-free gpt-5.5-free That’s it. One API key. 50 AI models. $0 for both input and output. Save this. You might need a free multi-model setup later.

You can now use GPT 5.5, Gemini 3.7 Flash, Kimi K3 and 47 other AI models completely free😱 No subscription. No credit card. Even the API usage costs $0. AIHubMix just opened a free catalog with 50 AI models. Some of the available models: • Ox Alpha • Gemini 3.7 Flash • GLM 5.2 • Kimi K3 • MiniMax M3 • GPT 5.5 • 40+ more And you don’t need separate API keys for each model. Setup takes 2 minutes: > Step 1: Go to > Create an account using your email or OAuth. No card needed. Step 2: Create one API key > The same key works with every free and paid model. Step 3: Add it to any OpenAI-compatible tool Base URL: Then choose any model ending in -free, such as: coding-glm-5.2-free gpt-5.5-free That’s it. One API key. 50 AI models. $0 for both input and output. Save this. You might need a free multi-model setup later.

CDG

15,388 次观看 • 18 天前

Flappy Bird w/ DeepSeek V4 Pro vs GLM 5.2 vs Fable 5 I ran a small experiment: same game, same prompt, three different models. Test setup was simple: /𝚍𝚎𝚜𝚒𝚐𝚗 in Command Code. The thing I cared about was not UI. UI is now relatively easy for models to imitate. I cared more about UX: whether the model understands the interaction, the flow, the hierarchy, the little product decisions that make something feel usable. 𝙲𝚘𝚜𝚝𝚜: 𝙳𝚎𝚎𝚙𝚂𝚎𝚎𝚔 𝚟𝟺 𝙿𝚛𝚘: $𝟶.𝟶𝟶𝟶𝟾 𝙶𝙻𝙼 𝟻.𝟸: $𝟶.𝟶𝟺𝟾 𝙵𝚊𝚋𝚕𝚎 𝟻: $𝟶.𝟺𝟸 The surprising result was that Fable 5 did not produce a meaningfully better UX. It was good, but not good enough to justify the pricing delta for this kind of design task. Open-source models are getting very interesting here. They are much cheaper, competitive on UI, and increasingly good enough on UX. The gap is closing fast.

Flappy Bird w/ DeepSeek V4 Pro vs GLM 5.2 vs Fable 5 I ran a small experiment: same game, same prompt, three different models. Test setup was simple: /𝚍𝚎𝚜𝚒𝚐𝚗 in Command Code. The thing I cared about was not UI. UI is now relatively easy for models to imitate. I cared more about UX: whether the model understands the interaction, the flow, the hierarchy, the little product decisions that make something feel usable. 𝙲𝚘𝚜𝚝𝚜: 𝙳𝚎𝚎𝚙𝚂𝚎𝚎𝚔 𝚟𝟺 𝙿𝚛𝚘: $𝟶.𝟶𝟶𝟶𝟾 𝙶𝙻𝙼 𝟻.𝟸: $𝟶.𝟶𝟺𝟾 𝙵𝚊𝚋𝚕𝚎 𝟻: $𝟶.𝟺𝟸 The surprising result was that Fable 5 did not produce a meaningfully better UX. It was good, but not good enough to justify the pricing delta for this kind of design task. Open-source models are getting very interesting here. They are much cheaper, competitive on UI, and increasingly good enough on UX. The gap is closing fast.

Ahmad Awais

26,918 次观看 • 2 个月前

There are way too many AI 3D models claiming to be the best. So we’re testing them head-to-head. Tripo P1 vs Meshy V6 vs Hunyuan V3.1 Pro vs Rodin 2.5 Same image. Same prompt. No cherry-picking, only 1 generation. This week’s test: a shiny metal helmet. reflections, materials, geometry, and texture accuracy. Next up: characters, objects, environments, and more. By the end, we want one answer: Which AI 3D model should you actually use for your next game, website, or project?

There are way too many AI 3D models claiming to be the best. So we’re testing them head-to-head. Tripo P1 vs Meshy V6 vs Hunyuan V3.1 Pro vs Rodin 2.5 Same image. Same prompt. No cherry-picking, only 1 generation. This week’s test: a shiny metal helmet. reflections, materials, geometry, and texture accuracy. Next up: characters, objects, environments, and more. By the end, we want one answer: Which AI 3D model should you actually use for your next game, website, or project?

mint

20,963 次观看 • 28 天前

you don't need Seedance 2.5, here's cheaper and more efficient workflow we made this entire game shooting scene in one shot for $1.97 with DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 + MiniMax H3 we use DeepSeek to code the raw Three.js scene first: exact camera movement, character motion, timing, everything. keep tweaking it there for basically pennies. then feed the final footage into H3 and let it cook the realism 48 mins, $1.97 total, one H3 generation way cheaper than rerolling a video model 10 times

you don't need Seedance 2.5, here's cheaper and more efficient workflow we made this entire game shooting scene in one shot for $1.97 with DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 + MiniMax H3 we use DeepSeek to code the raw Three.js scene first: exact camera movement, character motion, timing, everything. keep tweaking it there for basically pennies. then feed the final footage into H3 and let it cook the realism 48 mins, $1.97 total, one H3 generation way cheaper than rerolling a video model 10 times

GMI Cloud

157,773 次观看 • 1 个月前

GPT-6 Astra vs Fable 5.1 vs Kimi K3 vs Sol Astra: Took 11 minutes. This is from a follow-up after the first attempt had rendering and UI bugs. The smoke feels a little off. I expected more detail, but it did a good job understanding the intent. Cost: $12.85. Fable 5.1: Took 18 minutes to complete the same test with high detailing. Cost: $12.60. Kimi K3: Took 10 minutes with a similar level of output and cost only $6.95. SOL: Took 7 minutes, but the output seemed messy. Cost: $5.78. Personally, I like Kimi K3 for delivering similar quality with better token efficiency, followed by fable 5.1 for realism. What about you? I’ll do a couple more tests before coming to a conclusion.

GPT-6 Astra vs Fable 5.1 vs Kimi K3 vs Sol Astra: Took 11 minutes. This is from a follow-up after the first attempt had rendering and UI bugs. The smoke feels a little off. I expected more detail, but it did a good job understanding the intent. Cost: $12.85. Fable 5.1: Took 18 minutes to complete the same test with high detailing. Cost: $12.60. Kimi K3: Took 10 minutes with a similar level of output and cost only $6.95. SOL: Took 7 minutes, but the output seemed messy. Cost: $5.78. Personally, I like Kimi K3 for delivering similar quality with better token efficiency, followed by fable 5.1 for realism. What about you? I’ll do a couple more tests before coming to a conclusion.

Bhavy☄️

76,377 次观看 • 6 天前

Holy moly: GLM-5.3 got much better in cybersecurity since our pre-release evaluation with Z.ai. It now matches GPT-5.6-Sol on our cybersecurity benchmark at 0.4x the cost 🤯 - At pass@1: it went from 60.4% to 65.6% CVEs rediscovered, crushing every other open model on one-shot tasks - At pass@3: it did 75% -> 78.1%, matching GPT-5.6-Sol - Its precision remained stable, reporting fewer false positives than DeepSeek models The performance increase comes from a behavioral change: the new version is more persistent. It tends to run longer, and had a ~43% reasoning tokens increase. But the performance upgrade is worth that additional cost. 1/3 🧵

Holy moly: GLM-5.3 got much better in cybersecurity since our pre-release evaluation with Z.ai. It now matches GPT-5.6-Sol on our cybersecurity benchmark at 0.4x the cost 🤯 - At pass@1: it went from 60.4% to 65.6% CVEs rediscovered, crushing every other open model on one-shot tasks - At pass@3: it did 75% -> 78.1%, matching GPT-5.6-Sol - Its precision remained stable, reporting fewer false positives than DeepSeek models The performance increase comes from a behavioral change: the new version is more persistent. It tends to run longer, and had a ~43% reasoning tokens increase. But the performance upgrade is worth that additional cost. 1/3 🧵

pilvar (Philippe Dourassov)

34,484 次观看 • 20 天前

Fable 5 totally crushed our new contest, but it cost 6x more than Opus 4.8! We gave 4 models the same prompt: build three self-contained HTML5 canvas scenes with real physics demos Prompts: — A train derailing off a broken bridge into the water — Two cars jumping off ramps and colliding mid-air over a canyon — A monster truck crushing a row of parked cars Outputs: Fable 5: 62,158 tokens, $3.12 GPT 5.5: 37,753 tokens, $1.14 Opus 4.8: 22,280 tokens, $0.56 GLM 5.2: 36,246 tokens, $0.08 Fable 5 did all three scenes at A+. The crashes looked real, things fell and broke the right way, and nothing went through the ground or floated. GPT 5.5 was the closest to Fable. In the Bigfoot show, we think GPT was even a little better. GLM 5.2 did not win any scene, but it was the cheapest by far. Fable is the best pick for quality, but you pay more for it.

Fable 5 totally crushed our new contest, but it cost 6x more than Opus 4.8! We gave 4 models the same prompt: build three self-contained HTML5 canvas scenes with real physics demos Prompts: — A train derailing off a broken bridge into the water — Two cars jumping off ramps and colliding mid-air over a canyon — A monster truck crushing a row of parked cars Outputs: Fable 5: 62,158 tokens, $3.12 GPT 5.5: 37,753 tokens, $1.14 Opus 4.8: 22,280 tokens, $0.56 GLM 5.2: 36,246 tokens, $0.08 Fable 5 did all three scenes at A+. The crashes looked real, things fell and broke the right way, and nothing went through the ground or floated. GPT 5.5 was the closest to Fable. In the Bigfoot show, we think GPT was even a little better. GLM 5.2 did not win any scene, but it was the cheapest by far. Fable is the best pick for quality, but you pay more for it.

atomic.chat

2,840,529 次观看 • 2 个月前

THREE 3090s ON ONE BOARD GIVE YOU 72GB OF VRAM AND KILL YOUR $200 CLAUDE CODE AND $200 OPENAI BILL people are pulling three used 3090s off ebay for around $2,100 total and stacking them in one tower to build a dedicated ai rig. that pools 72gb of vram for less than what a single rtx 5090 retails for alibaba shipped qwen 3.6 27b in april under apache 2.0. on realworldqa vision it scores 84.1 against claude 4.5 opus at 77.0. on ifbench instructions it lands at 76.5 against claude's 58.0 a single 3090 already runs qwen 3.6 27b with eight gigs of headroom. three of them in parallel handle larger models like deepseek r1 70b and qwen 235b without breaking a sweat a heavy ai user pays $200 claude code, $200 chatgpt pro plus $40 cursor and gemini. that's $5,280 a year and the rig pays itself off before month nine on $8 a month in electricity setup is one shell command for ollama, one to pull the model, one environment variable to point claude code at localhost. cli stays identical, nothing leaves the network, requests stop costing money bookmark this and read the article below

THREE 3090s ON ONE BOARD GIVE YOU 72GB OF VRAM AND KILL YOUR $200 CLAUDE CODE AND $200 OPENAI BILL people are pulling three used 3090s off ebay for around $2,100 total and stacking them in one tower to build a dedicated ai rig. that pools 72gb of vram for less than what a single rtx 5090 retails for alibaba shipped qwen 3.6 27b in april under apache 2.0. on realworldqa vision it scores 84.1 against claude 4.5 opus at 77.0. on ifbench instructions it lands at 76.5 against claude's 58.0 a single 3090 already runs qwen 3.6 27b with eight gigs of headroom. three of them in parallel handle larger models like deepseek r1 70b and qwen 235b without breaking a sweat a heavy ai user pays $200 claude code, $200 chatgpt pro plus $40 cursor and gemini. that's $5,280 a year and the rig pays itself off before month nine on $8 a month in electricity setup is one shell command for ollama, one to pull the model, one environment variable to point claude code at localhost. cli stays identical, nothing leaves the network, requests stop costing money bookmark this and read the article below

starmex

16,719 次观看 • 2 个月前