Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

MiniMax M3 is now available on AI/ML API! To test it, we asked several leading models to oneshot Doodle Jump from the scratch. The results ended up looking far closer than the price tags. MiniMax M3: $0.05 Qwen 3.7 Max: $0.08 DeepSeek V4 Pro: $0.10 GPT-5.5: $0.42 Curious which... show more

AI/ML API

2,645 subscribers

549,042 views • 2 months ago •via X (Twitter)

Gaming Education Science & Technology

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

Compared MiniMax M3 against three other frontier open-source models: DeepSeek V4, Qwen 3.7 Max, and MiMo 2.5 Pro MiniMax M3 crashed others on: 1. collision physics 2. 3D pinball generation It was the only model that produced a result for the 3D pinball test For human motion rendering and hexagon sketching, Qwen 3.7 Max still tops

Compared MiniMax M3 against three other frontier open-source models: DeepSeek V4, Qwen 3.7 Max, and MiMo 2.5 Pro MiniMax M3 crashed others on: 1. collision physics 2. 3D pinball generation It was the only model that produced a result for the 3D pinball test For human motion rendering and hexagon sketching, Qwen 3.7 Max still tops

GMI Cloud

51,116 views • 2 months ago

hy3 vs mimo-v2.5 vs deepseek v4 flash vs minimax m3 the four models on top of the openrouter leaderboard by tokens this week: #1 hy3 (Tencent Hy) – 7.5t #2 mimo-v2.5 (Xiaomi MiMo) – 6.56t #3 deepseek v4 flash (DeepSeek) – 5.24t #4 minimax m3 (MiniMax (official)) – 4.21t so we tested them. 3 prompts, single-file html, Three.js from a cdn, fully procedural, no external assets. all run via AI/ML API each prompt is a transparent cutaway machine that has to be mechanically correct, not decorative: • 4-stroke engine with full oil circulation – slider-crank kinematics, cam at 2:1, valve lift driven by lobes, oil loop from sump to gallery to big-end • watt walking-beam steam engine – four-bar vector-loop closure, eccentric-driven slide valve, steam events synced to real port position • francis reaction water turbine – 20 guide vanes on a regulating ring, 17 lofted runner blades, gpu particle advection, precessing vortex rope at part load the takeaway up front: none of the four cleared all three scenes on the first attempt. but the price spread between them is roughly 70x – hy3 fixed included costs less than two cents overall results (summed across all 3 scenes): cost #1 hy3 – $0.016 #2 deepseek v4 flash – $0.025 #3 mimo-v2.5 – $0.97 #4 minimax m3 – $1.17 tokens #1 hy3 – 19,326 #2 deepseek v4 flash – 63,126 #3 mimo-v2.5 – 322,523 #4 minimax m3 – 702,900 lines of code #1 hy3 – 1,047 #2 mimo-v2.5 – 2,759 #3 deepseek v4 flash – 3,273 #4 minimax m3 – 3,354 scenes needing a second attempt #1 hy3 – 1 (engine) #1 mimo-v2.5 – 1 (turbine) #1 minimax m3 – 1 (turbine) #4 deepseek v4 flash – 2 (steam engine, turbine) observations: 1. the token spread is the real story – minimax burns 36x hy3's tokens and lands in the same place, one retry, ~3.3k lines 2. hy3 is the outlier on density: 1,047 lines total, fewest tokens, cheapest run, and only one scene needed a second pass. deepseek is the opposite trade – near-hy3 pricing but the most retries 3. mimo and minimax seem to overthink instead of writing the code. minimax spent 359.1k tokens on the steam engine and produced 1,346 lines – the tokens are going somewhere other than the file 4. the francis turbine broke three of the four. the spec that separates them is the one with 20 linked guide vanes and gpu particle advection, not the one with the most parts overall impression: none of these models excelled at any of the tasks we gave them. but they were close, and they were extremely cheap. the gap that matters isn't quality anymore – it's that hy3 ran all three scenes for less than two cents while the frontier labs charge dollars for the same work right now you pick these because they're good for the zero price you pay. soon that's something openai and anthropic will have to think about follow thehype. for 24/7 ai news, analysis and breakdowns

hy3 vs mimo-v2.5 vs deepseek v4 flash vs minimax m3 the four models on top of the openrouter leaderboard by tokens this week: #1 hy3 (Tencent Hy) – 7.5t #2 mimo-v2.5 (Xiaomi MiMo) – 6.56t #3 deepseek v4 flash (DeepSeek) – 5.24t #4 minimax m3 (MiniMax (official)) – 4.21t so we tested them. 3 prompts, single-file html, Three.js from a cdn, fully procedural, no external assets. all run via AI/ML API each prompt is a transparent cutaway machine that has to be mechanically correct, not decorative: • 4-stroke engine with full oil circulation – slider-crank kinematics, cam at 2:1, valve lift driven by lobes, oil loop from sump to gallery to big-end • watt walking-beam steam engine – four-bar vector-loop closure, eccentric-driven slide valve, steam events synced to real port position • francis reaction water turbine – 20 guide vanes on a regulating ring, 17 lofted runner blades, gpu particle advection, precessing vortex rope at part load the takeaway up front: none of the four cleared all three scenes on the first attempt. but the price spread between them is roughly 70x – hy3 fixed included costs less than two cents overall results (summed across all 3 scenes): cost #1 hy3 – $0.016 #2 deepseek v4 flash – $0.025 #3 mimo-v2.5 – $0.97 #4 minimax m3 – $1.17 tokens #1 hy3 – 19,326 #2 deepseek v4 flash – 63,126 #3 mimo-v2.5 – 322,523 #4 minimax m3 – 702,900 lines of code #1 hy3 – 1,047 #2 mimo-v2.5 – 2,759 #3 deepseek v4 flash – 3,273 #4 minimax m3 – 3,354 scenes needing a second attempt #1 hy3 – 1 (engine) #1 mimo-v2.5 – 1 (turbine) #1 minimax m3 – 1 (turbine) #4 deepseek v4 flash – 2 (steam engine, turbine) observations: 1. the token spread is the real story – minimax burns 36x hy3's tokens and lands in the same place, one retry, ~3.3k lines 2. hy3 is the outlier on density: 1,047 lines total, fewest tokens, cheapest run, and only one scene needed a second pass. deepseek is the opposite trade – near-hy3 pricing but the most retries 3. mimo and minimax seem to overthink instead of writing the code. minimax spent 359.1k tokens on the steam engine and produced 1,346 lines – the tokens are going somewhere other than the file 4. the francis turbine broke three of the four. the spec that separates them is the one with 20 linked guide vanes and gpu particle advection, not the one with the most parts overall impression: none of these models excelled at any of the tasks we gave them. but they were close, and they were extremely cheap. the gap that matters isn't quality anymore – it's that hy3 ran all three scenes for less than two cents while the frontier labs charge dollars for the same work right now you pick these because they're good for the zero price you pay. soon that's something openai and anthropic will have to think about follow thehype. for 24/7 ai news, analysis and breakdowns

thehype.

17,145 views • 28 days ago

NVIDIA IS HOSTING 100+ FRONTIER MODELS FOR FREE AND MOST PEOPLE STILL HAVEN'T NOTICED Everyone building agents is paying $50-200 a month for API access, and this key costs nothing and does not expire. I set it up and had GLM 5.2 answering in under five minutes. Getting the key: > Go to and register, phone verification and no card. > Copy the nvapi- key, you only see it once. Plugging it in anywhere that speaks OpenAI, including Cursor: > base_url = " > api_key = "nvapi-xxxxxxxxxxxx" What is sitting in the catalog: > GLM 5.2, landed two weeks after release. > Kimi K2.7, MiniMax M3, DeepSeek V4 Pro. > NVIDIA's own Nemotron line, and 100 more. The limit is around 40 requests a minute, which is plenty for one person and nothing for production -- that is the whole trade. It is also the fastest way to test which model actually fits your agent before you commit to a paid provider. Save & Try it ↓

NVIDIA IS HOSTING 100+ FRONTIER MODELS FOR FREE AND MOST PEOPLE STILL HAVEN'T NOTICED Everyone building agents is paying $50-200 a month for API access, and this key costs nothing and does not expire. I set it up and had GLM 5.2 answering in under five minutes. Getting the key: > Go to and register, phone verification and no card. > Copy the nvapi- key, you only see it once. Plugging it in anywhere that speaks OpenAI, including Cursor: > base_url = " > api_key = "nvapi-xxxxxxxxxxxx" What is sitting in the catalog: > GLM 5.2, landed two weeks after release. > Kimi K2.7, MiniMax M3, DeepSeek V4 Pro. > NVIDIA's own Nemotron line, and 100 more. The limit is around 40 requests a minute, which is plenty for one person and nothing for production -- that is the whole trade. It is also the fastest way to test which model actually fits your agent before you commit to a paid provider. Save & Try it ↓

slash1s

29,867 views • 11 days ago

I plugged MiniMax (official) M3 into Claude Code in under 5 minutes and gave it a real task. most models need hand-holding every few steps. M3 ran 147 iterations on its own. what it actually did: → took a broken CUDA kernel → ran it for 24 hours, autonomously → pushed hardware efficiency from 7.6% to 71.3% → shipped a 9.4x speedup I didn't touch it once across that whole window. the rest of the spec sheet: → 1M token context window → native multimodal from day one → fully open weights pricing: → $20/month for 1.7B tokens → $50/month for 5.1B tokens → text, image, speech, and music all share one pool usually with this kind of capability the bill catches up fast. M3 keeps both lines low at the same time. that's the part that surprised me. and if this is what M3 does at launch, the full rollout is going to be one to watch. what would you build with 1M context? #MiniMax #MiniMaxM3 #ClaudeCode #LLM

I plugged MiniMax (official) M3 into Claude Code in under 5 minutes and gave it a real task. most models need hand-holding every few steps. M3 ran 147 iterations on its own. what it actually did: → took a broken CUDA kernel → ran it for 24 hours, autonomously → pushed hardware efficiency from 7.6% to 71.3% → shipped a 9.4x speedup I didn't touch it once across that whole window. the rest of the spec sheet: → 1M token context window → native multimodal from day one → fully open weights pricing: → $20/month for 1.7B tokens → $50/month for 5.1B tokens → text, image, speech, and music all share one pool usually with this kind of capability the bill catches up fast. M3 keeps both lines low at the same time. that's the part that surprised me. and if this is what M3 does at launch, the full rollout is going to be one to watch. what would you build with 1M context? #MiniMax #MiniMaxM3 #ClaudeCode #LLM

Nelly;

17,576 views • 2 months ago

GPT-5.6 vs GPT-5.5 on my custom spaceship prompt. I gave both models the exact same custom prompt. This is also the same prompt I previously gave to Fable 5. For context, GPT-5.6 Pro worked for 87 minutes, while GPT-5.5 Extra High worked for 34 minutes and 42 seconds. As I’ve said before, based on great authority GPT-5.6 will be an incremental/soldi improvement over GPT-5.5, not a “Fable killer.” My rough expectation has been that it would trade blows with Fable 5 on some benchmarks, maybe win around half depending on the category, but not clearly surpass it overall. And again fable five will have bigger model smell, but this was expected. After testing this coding output, that view feels pretty accurate. GPT-5.6 is clearly better than GPT-5.5 in several visual areas. The lighting, shading, chairs, object details, and exterior of the spaceship looked noticeably stronger. The scene was also easier to test. I do want to give GPT-5.5 credit though. It built out the rooms much much better and the planets looked better than GPT-5.6’s. It was also interesting that both GPT-5.5 and GPT-5.6 produced better-looking planets than Fable 5 in this specific test. The downside with GPT-5.5 was stability. The game was much glitchier and harder to test compared to GPT-5.6. But when it comes to the core of the demo, which is the spaceship itself, Fable 5 still beat both models pretty comfortably. GPT-5.6 is impressive, but from this test, it looks exactly like what I expected which was a meaningful incremental improvement over GPT-5.5, at least for indie game demos, but not something that replaces Fable 5. In collaboration with Chetaslua

GPT-5.6 vs GPT-5.5 on my custom spaceship prompt. I gave both models the exact same custom prompt. This is also the same prompt I previously gave to Fable 5. For context, GPT-5.6 Pro worked for 87 minutes, while GPT-5.5 Extra High worked for 34 minutes and 42 seconds. As I’ve said before, based on great authority GPT-5.6 will be an incremental/soldi improvement over GPT-5.5, not a “Fable killer.” My rough expectation has been that it would trade blows with Fable 5 on some benchmarks, maybe win around half depending on the category, but not clearly surpass it overall. And again fable five will have bigger model smell, but this was expected. After testing this coding output, that view feels pretty accurate. GPT-5.6 is clearly better than GPT-5.5 in several visual areas. The lighting, shading, chairs, object details, and exterior of the spaceship looked noticeably stronger. The scene was also easier to test. I do want to give GPT-5.5 credit though. It built out the rooms much much better and the planets looked better than GPT-5.6’s. It was also interesting that both GPT-5.5 and GPT-5.6 produced better-looking planets than Fable 5 in this specific test. The downside with GPT-5.5 was stability. The game was much glitchier and harder to test compared to GPT-5.6. But when it comes to the core of the demo, which is the spaceship itself, Fable 5 still beat both models pretty comfortably. GPT-5.6 is impressive, but from this test, it looks exactly like what I expected which was a meaningful incremental improvement over GPT-5.5, at least for indie game demos, but not something that replaces Fable 5. In collaboration with Chetaslua

Chris

250,405 views • 1 month ago

GPT-5.6 LUNA AND DEEPSEEK V4 FLASH ARE BOTH FREE RIGHT NOW -- ONE IN A CHATBOT, THE OTHER IN A BROWSER IDE • ChatGPT, the chatbot > GPT-5.6 Luna is now the default on Free and Go: > Unlimited text chats and a Think button land next week. • MonkeyCode, the browser IDE > 30M tokens a day, resets daily, no card: > DeepSeek V4 Flash, Qwen, GLM, Kimi and MiniMax behind it. > Cloud workspace at 1 vCPU and 4GB, nothing to install. Luna posts 62% fewer factual errors than the model it replaces. MonkeyCode is open source from Chaitin and runs on their cloud, so aim it at side projects. One is live today -> The other arrives next week.

GPT-5.6 LUNA AND DEEPSEEK V4 FLASH ARE BOTH FREE RIGHT NOW -- ONE IN A CHATBOT, THE OTHER IN A BROWSER IDE • ChatGPT, the chatbot > GPT-5.6 Luna is now the default on Free and Go: > Unlimited text chats and a Think button land next week. • MonkeyCode, the browser IDE > 30M tokens a day, resets daily, no card: > DeepSeek V4 Flash, Qwen, GLM, Kimi and MiniMax behind it. > Cloud workspace at 1 vCPU and 4GB, nothing to install. Luna posts 62% fewer factual errors than the model it replaces. MonkeyCode is open source from Chaitin and runs on their cloud, so aim it at side projects. One is live today -> The other arrives next week.

slash1s

33,804 views • 4 days ago

FREE DeepSeek V4 Pro and V4 Flash API. Runtime by Bad Theory Labs just dropped it. Same platform, new free model, same 2-minute setup. > Runtime already gave you free Claude Opus 4.8 and GPT 5.5 access. Now they added DeepSeek V4 Pro and V4 Flash to the free tier. Absolutely FREE, YES. Same exact flow as before: → Go to runtime(.)badtheorylabs(.)com → Sign up with Google → Fill in your details during onboarding → Free balance lands automatically(But you don't need it to use DeepSeek - it's completely free right now) → Grab your API key from the dashboard → Plug into OpenCode, OpenClaw, or Hermes - done DeepSeek V4 Pro is one of the strongest coding and reasoning models available right now. Free tier also includes btl-2 - auto-routes between GLM, OpenAI, Anthropic, and Gemma. 10 million tokens per month at zero cost. 344 models total. One OpenAI-compatible endpoint. No code rebuild, no card, no limits hunting. >> Just start using the API, and when choosing a provider, select DeepSeek I tested it myself - fully working. Bookmark this before the free tier fills up.

FREE DeepSeek V4 Pro and V4 Flash API. Runtime by Bad Theory Labs just dropped it. Same platform, new free model, same 2-minute setup. > Runtime already gave you free Claude Opus 4.8 and GPT 5.5 access. Now they added DeepSeek V4 Pro and V4 Flash to the free tier. Absolutely FREE, YES. Same exact flow as before: → Go to runtime(.)badtheorylabs(.)com → Sign up with Google → Fill in your details during onboarding → Free balance lands automatically(But you don't need it to use DeepSeek - it's completely free right now) → Grab your API key from the dashboard → Plug into OpenCode, OpenClaw, or Hermes - done DeepSeek V4 Pro is one of the strongest coding and reasoning models available right now. Free tier also includes btl-2 - auto-routes between GLM, OpenAI, Anthropic, and Gemma. 10 million tokens per month at zero cost. 344 models total. One OpenAI-compatible endpoint. No code rebuild, no card, no limits hunting. >> Just start using the API, and when choosing a provider, select DeepSeek I tested it myself - fully working. Bookmark this before the free tier fills up.

Atenov int.

26,920 views • 1 month ago

NVIDIA is giving away free access to 140+ AI models for a full year > most people building AI agents are paying $50-200/month for API access NVIDIA just made that argument irrelevant models you get: GLM 5.2, MiniMax M3, Nemotron-3-Ultra-550B-A55B, Kimi K2.7, and 130+ more setup: > step 1 - get your free key > go to > register -> bind phone -> copy API key > step 2 - add to Hermes agent > open Settings -> Model Provider -> Custom base_url = " api_key = "nvapi-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" > step 3 - pick a model model = "z-ai/glm-5.2" model = "minimaxai/minimax-m3" model = "nvidia/nemotron-3-ultra-550b-a55b" model = "moonshot-ai/kimi-k2.7" > Hermes already has NVIDIA set as default base_url > paste the key and you're running instantly > works the same in Cursor and OpenCode > cost: $0 > limit: 40 req/min > expires: 1 year while everyone is paying for API access, this is sitting there for free with this many models in one place, it is also the easiest way to test which one actually fits your agent before you commit to a paid provider

NVIDIA is giving away free access to 140+ AI models for a full year > most people building AI agents are paying $50-200/month for API access NVIDIA just made that argument irrelevant models you get: GLM 5.2, MiniMax M3, Nemotron-3-Ultra-550B-A55B, Kimi K2.7, and 130+ more setup: > step 1 - get your free key > go to > register -> bind phone -> copy API key > step 2 - add to Hermes agent > open Settings -> Model Provider -> Custom base_url = " api_key = "nvapi-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" > step 3 - pick a model model = "z-ai/glm-5.2" model = "minimaxai/minimax-m3" model = "nvidia/nemotron-3-ultra-550b-a55b" model = "moonshot-ai/kimi-k2.7" > Hermes already has NVIDIA set as default base_url > paste the key and you're running instantly > works the same in Cursor and OpenCode > cost: $0 > limit: 40 req/min > expires: 1 year while everyone is paying for API access, this is sitting there for free with this many models in one place, it is also the easiest way to test which one actually fits your agent before you commit to a paid provider

Mr. Buzzoni

120,852 views • 29 days ago

NVIDIA sent us 2 DGX Sparks. For a while we wondered what we would do with them. The memory bandwidth is 273GB/s making it 3x slower than an M3 Ultra (819GB/s) for batch_size=1 inference. But it has 4x more FLOPS (100 TFLOPS compared to 26 TFLOPS). So we thought, what if we could combine the DGX Spark & M3 Ultra, and make use of both the massive compute on the DGX Spark and the massive memory-bandwidth on the M3 Ultra. We came up with a way to split inference across both devices and achieve a speedup of up to 4x for long prompts compared to the M3 Ultra on its own. Full details in the blog post linked below.

NVIDIA sent us 2 DGX Sparks. For a while we wondered what we would do with them. The memory bandwidth is 273GB/s making it 3x slower than an M3 Ultra (819GB/s) for batch_size=1 inference. But it has 4x more FLOPS (100 TFLOPS compared to 26 TFLOPS). So we thought, what if we could combine the DGX Spark & M3 Ultra, and make use of both the massive compute on the DGX Spark and the massive memory-bandwidth on the M3 Ultra. We came up with a way to split inference across both devices and achieve a speedup of up to 4x for long prompts compared to the M3 Ultra on its own. Full details in the blog post linked below.

Alex Cheema

281,225 views • 10 months ago

I tested MiniMax M3 so you do not have to. It is free in OpenCode right now and it claims to beat GPT 5.5 on SWE-bench. So I put it on real production code. It broke my push-to-talk. It glitched a game through the floor. It took two tries to render a video and still looked rough. The benchmark said one thing. The real work said another. The one thing it has going for it is price. I ran all of BridgeBench for $4.09. If budget is your only constraint, it is the cheapest Chinese model out there. But cheap is not free when it breaks your codebase. No BridgeMind stamp of approval. Full breakdown in the video.

I tested MiniMax M3 so you do not have to. It is free in OpenCode right now and it claims to beat GPT 5.5 on SWE-bench. So I put it on real production code. It broke my push-to-talk. It glitched a game through the floor. It took two tries to render a video and still looked rough. The benchmark said one thing. The real work said another. The one thing it has going for it is price. I ran all of BridgeBench for $4.09. If budget is your only constraint, it is the cheapest Chinese model out there. But cheap is not free when it breaks your codebase. No BridgeMind stamp of approval. Full breakdown in the video.

BridgeMind

46,375 views • 2 months ago

HERMES DESKTOP APP JUST GOT A NEW ULTRA MODE FOR DEEPSEEK V4 PRO – AND IT COSTS ABOUT $1 A DAY TO RUN If you're using Hermes desktop app, you're probably already running DeepSeek – it's one of the top models available. The update: → DeepSeek V4 Pro now has thinking mode, fast mode, and a brand new ultra mode → There's also an extra high mode, but the real upgrade is ultra The actual cost: roughly $1/day for a normal workflow. That's about $20-25/month – basically the same as before, just with a significantly faster mode unlocked. The verdict after a full day of testing: it flies through tool calling. Noticeably faster, same price range. If you're already paying for DeepSeek through Hermes, this is a free upgrade sitting in your settings right now. Update Hermes, grab the DeepSeek API if you don't have it yet, and try V4 Pro on ultra. Bookmark this, you'll want to come back to it later.

SCOTTY BEAM

24,032 views • 23 days ago

$50 IN FREE CREDITS FOR GLM 5.2, KIMI K3 AND DEEPSEEK V4 PRO, ON A CODE THE COMPANY PUBLISHED ITSELF • ai&, the inference layer > Frontier models at up to 80% lower cost: > GLM 5.2, Kimi K3, Kimi K2.7 Code, DeepSeek V4 Pro and V4 Flash, plus Qwen3.6 27B, Gemma 4 31B and gpt-oss-120b. > OpenAI-compatible endpoint, so it drops into any agent or IDE you already run. • where the discount comes from > They route across AMD, NVIDIA and Tenstorrent, sending each workload to the silicon that suits it. > Everyone else tunes on one kind of chip, so the saving is architectural rather than promotional. Claiming it -> Credits in the top right, pick $50, apply "UNITABETAI" at checkout. The code has been live since their June launch, so run it on your own account before you plan around it ↓

$50 IN FREE CREDITS FOR GLM 5.2, KIMI K3 AND DEEPSEEK V4 PRO, ON A CODE THE COMPANY PUBLISHED ITSELF • ai&, the inference layer > Frontier models at up to 80% lower cost: > GLM 5.2, Kimi K3, Kimi K2.7 Code, DeepSeek V4 Pro and V4 Flash, plus Qwen3.6 27B, Gemma 4 31B and gpt-oss-120b. > OpenAI-compatible endpoint, so it drops into any agent or IDE you already run. • where the discount comes from > They route across AMD, NVIDIA and Tenstorrent, sending each workload to the silicon that suits it. > Everyone else tunes on one kind of chip, so the saving is architectural rather than promotional. Claiming it -> Credits in the top right, pick $50, apply "UNITABETAI" at checkout. The code has been live since their June launch, so run it on your own account before you plan around it ↓

slash1s

15,613 views • 3 days ago

$Everyone's sleeping on MiniMax. Again. They just shipped M3. The first open-weights model to combine frontier coding, 1M context, and native multimodality in one drop. I plugged it into Claude Code this morning. Pasted a design from Dribbble. Watched M3 write production-ready React code in one session. At the agency, I just replaced Opus 4.8 with M3 for 80% of our coding tasks. The output is the same and we are running everything at a fraction of the cost. Open infrastructure is the future.$

Everyone's sleeping on MiniMax. Again. They just shipped M3. The first open-weights model to combine frontier coding, 1M context, and native multimodality in one drop. I plugged it into Claude Code this morning. Pasted a design from Dribbble. Watched M3 write production-ready React code in one session. At the agency, I just replaced Opus 4.8 with M3 for 80% of our coding tasks. The output is the same and we are running everything at a fraction of the cost. Open infrastructure is the future.

Prajwal Tomar

12,904 views • 2 months ago

Fable 5 is BACK on AI/ML API We gave Sonnet 5 and Fable 5 the exact same prompt and same real flight dataset of 70 airports and 435 routes pulled from flightradar. Then asked each one to turn it into a cinematic 3D globe as a single HTML file. Outputs: Sonnet 5: 9.8k tokens, $0.10 Fable 5: 15k tokens, $0.77 Sonnet 5 came in 87% cheaper. It drew the routes, but the planet underneath them barely exists: a dark wireframe with the arcs floating in space. Fable 5 built an actual Earth: textured oceans, ice caps, atmospheric glow. Mythos-class models are truly a masterpiece. Docs, guides & setup below:

Fable 5 is BACK on AI/ML API We gave Sonnet 5 and Fable 5 the exact same prompt and same real flight dataset of 70 airports and 435 routes pulled from flightradar. Then asked each one to turn it into a cinematic 3D globe as a single HTML file. Outputs: Sonnet 5: 9.8k tokens, $0.10 Fable 5: 15k tokens, $0.77 Sonnet 5 came in 87% cheaper. It drew the routes, but the planet underneath them barely exists: a dark wireframe with the arcs floating in space. Fable 5 built an actual Earth: textured oceans, ice caps, atmospheric glow. Mythos-class models are truly a masterpiece. Docs, guides & setup below:

AI/ML API

498,492 views • 1 month ago

We had such a laugh doing Dancing in the Street with both the song recorded in the studio and the video done in one day. Remarkable how we pulled it off really. The video is hilarious to watch now. We enjoyed camping it up and trying to impersonate each other’s moves, making it up as we went along. It was the only time David and myself collaborated on anything, which is a real shame. Dancing In The Street 40th Anniversary Limited Edition White Vinyl out Aug 29, available to preorder now: Watch the upgraded 4K video on YouTube.

We had such a laugh doing Dancing in the Street with both the song recorded in the studio and the video done in one day. Remarkable how we pulled it off really. The video is hilarious to watch now. We enjoyed camping it up and trying to impersonate each other’s moves, making it up as we went along. It was the only time David and myself collaborated on anything, which is a real shame. Dancing In The Street 40th Anniversary Limited Edition White Vinyl out Aug 29, available to preorder now: Watch the upgraded 4K video on YouTube.

Mick Jagger

467,861 views • 1 year ago

qwen 3.8 max vs deepseek v4 flash 0731 vs kimi k3 vs gpt 5.6 sol – on rubik's cube and chess four frontier models built a rubik's cube stand and solved it, then built a chess board and played claude opus 5 on it the setup: Nous Research's hermes agent cli on OpenRouter tasks: 1. cube – build a 3d rubik's cube with a cli and a Three.js viewer, then solve an identical scrambled position on your own stand 2. chess – build a 3d chess stand, then play white against claude opus 5 as black, live, one move at a time. no engine, no solver, no opening book on either side. stockfish depth 14 grades every chess ply afterwards; neither player sees the score models: DeepSeek v4 flash 0731, OpenAI gpt-5.6 sol, Kimi.ai kimi k3, Qwen qwen 3.8 max gpt-5.6 sol and deepseek v4 flash solved their cubes – sol in 24 moves and seventeen seconds, deepseek in 32. qwen and kimi never got there, giving up at 96 and 207 moves then all four built chess stands and played white against claude opus 5 on them, and all four resigned: deepseek on move 13, sol on 19, kimi on 21, qwen holding out longest at 29 - build time, both stands #1 gpt-5.6 sol – 16m 43s #2 deepseek v4 flash – 97m 39s #3 kimi k3 – 166m 09s #4 qwen 3.8 max – 215m 08s - build attempts before a working stand #1 gpt-5.6 sol – 3 #2 qwen 3.8 max – 4 #3 kimi k3 – 4 #4 deepseek v4 flash – 5 - total tokens #1 gpt-5.6 sol – 6,713,754 #2 qwen 3.8 max – 17,272,507 #3 kimi k3 – 22,427,504 #4 deepseek v4 flash – 27,417,442 - total price #1 deepseek v4 flash – $0.557 #2 gpt-5.6 sol – $6.319 #3 qwen 3.8 max – $10.270 #4 kimi k3 – $16.667 observations: • deepseek v4 flash is the cheapest model here by a margin nobody else is near, and it got there while being the least efficient of the four. it burned 27.4m tokens – more than anyone, 5m more than kimi – and still finished both benchmarks for $0.557. that is $0.02 per million tokens against kimi's $0.74. it also needed the most passes to produce working stands, five, and that did not matter: all five deepseek passes together cost a thirtieth of kimi's two • so what deepseek cannot do is get it right the first time. what it can do is get it right the fifth time, for half a dollar. that is a different thing to be buying – not a good first draft, but the option to keep asking • gpt-5.6 sol is the opposite profile and the strongest of the four on pure efficiency. 16m 43s to build both stands, 6.7m tokens, three passes – under 40% of the next lowest token count and a quarter of deepseek's, on an eighth of qwen's clock. it also solved the cube fastest of anyone, 24 moves in seventeen seconds. sol is what you reach for when you want the answer now and can absorb $0.94 per million • sol's weakness is in what it does not check. its chess viewer deleted the capturing piece instead of the captured one, so pieces disappeared off the board mid-game – a defect the fifty-cent deepseek stand did not have. fast and terse turns out to be the same dial as fast and unverified • qwen 3.8 max is not the cheap open-weights option it gets treated as. $10.270 across the two benchmarks, second most expensive of the four, 18x deepseek, and by a distance the slowest – 215 minutes of build time, nearly thirteen times sol's. what the money buys is judgment: it played eighteen moves without a single error worth a hundredth of a pawn, then made exactly one bad move in the whole game, and averaged 44.6 centipawns lost across the longest game any of the four managed. it also could not solve a rubik's cube in 96 tries • kimi k3 is the one line with no reading that flatters it. most expensive at $16.667, last on the cube at 207 moves, last at chess at 478 centipawns lost per move. it is also the model that verified hardest – on the cube it wrote its own integrity check instead of trusting its output. that makes the result worse rather than better: the checking was real, and the reasoning underneath it still was not follow thehype. for 24/7 ai news, analysis and breakdowns

thehype.

80,750 views • 7 days ago

GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra lost to GPT-5.5 on physics at 3× the cost! We gave 4 models the same prompt: build three self-contained HTML5 canvas scenes with real physics demos Prompts: - A monster truck backflipping onto a parked car - A stunt car jumping six buses into a brick wall - A train derailing off a broken bridge into the water Outputs: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra: 32.9K tokens, $0.33 Opus 4.8: 9.2K tokens, $0.24 GPT-5.5: 12.4K tokens, $0.11 Grok 4.5: 7.0K tokens, $0.08 Sol Ultra draws just like GPT-5.5, only with more detail and it shows clearest on the bus jump where the two look almost identical. In the other tests Sol Ultra came out worse than its predecessor and the physics really got weaker. We think GPT-5.5 took the truck flip and the train outright. With Sol Ultra you basically get GPT-5.5 with weaker physics and a nicer picture for 3x the price. Newborn Grok 4.5 failed two of the three tests and only came good on the train

GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra lost to GPT-5.5 on physics at 3× the cost! We gave 4 models the same prompt: build three self-contained HTML5 canvas scenes with real physics demos Prompts: - A monster truck backflipping onto a parked car - A stunt car jumping six buses into a brick wall - A train derailing off a broken bridge into the water Outputs: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra: 32.9K tokens, $0.33 Opus 4.8: 9.2K tokens, $0.24 GPT-5.5: 12.4K tokens, $0.11 Grok 4.5: 7.0K tokens, $0.08 Sol Ultra draws just like GPT-5.5, only with more detail and it shows clearest on the bus jump where the two look almost identical. In the other tests Sol Ultra came out worse than its predecessor and the physics really got weaker. We think GPT-5.5 took the truck flip and the train outright. With Sol Ultra you basically get GPT-5.5 with weaker physics and a nicer picture for 3x the price. Newborn Grok 4.5 failed two of the three tests and only came good on the train

atomic.chat

896,867 views • 1 month ago

OpenAI Dev Day Just kicked off and it was the biggest day for AI since the launch of GPT-4 in April. Here's a 3 minute video with everything you need to know and a full summary: 1. GPT-4 Turbo is released. It is much better than GPT-4, can accept up to 128k characters and is 3x cheaper. The knowledge cut off is now April 2023 2. Text to Speech is also being released. They offer 6 hyper-realistic voice models that are the best I've heard from any other AI t-t-s software on the market. 3. Copyright Shield. OpenAI will actually defend your legal costs if you get sued for copyright infringement using their API! 4. GPTs. Maybe the most exciting IMHO, you can now create custom "GPTs" by training your own model of GPT and selling it on their store. This will create a massive shakeup of the current AI software landscape and is the first step towards autonomous agents.

OpenAI Dev Day Just kicked off and it was the biggest day for AI since the launch of GPT-4 in April. Here's a 3 minute video with everything you need to know and a full summary: 1. GPT-4 Turbo is released. It is much better than GPT-4, can accept up to 128k characters and is 3x cheaper. The knowledge cut off is now April 2023 2. Text to Speech is also being released. They offer 6 hyper-realistic voice models that are the best I've heard from any other AI t-t-s software on the market. 3. Copyright Shield. OpenAI will actually defend your legal costs if you get sued for copyright infringement using their API! 4. GPTs. Maybe the most exciting IMHO, you can now create custom "GPTs" by training your own model of GPT and selling it on their store. This will create a massive shakeup of the current AI software landscape and is the first step towards autonomous agents.

Mark Gadala-Maria

79,177 views • 2 years ago

Qwen 3.7 Max looks incredible on paper. Then I spent $43 in 15 minutes of vibe coding. Best Chinese model on every benchmark. #1 on SWE-Bench Pro. #4 on BridgeBench UI. The scores are legit. But in a real workflow it came back with 15 errors on a single task. No subsidies like Claude Code or Codex. Cheaper per token, more expensive per task. Chinese models are getting closer. But "closer" still means you're burning more time and more money to get the same result GPT 5.5 one shots. Full review and BridgeBench breakdown below.

Qwen 3.7 Max looks incredible on paper. Then I spent $43 in 15 minutes of vibe coding. Best Chinese model on every benchmark. #1 on SWE-Bench Pro. #4 on BridgeBench UI. The scores are legit. But in a real workflow it came back with 15 errors on a single task. No subsidies like Claude Code or Codex. Cheaper per token, more expensive per task. Chinese models are getting closer. But "closer" still means you're burning more time and more money to get the same result GPT 5.5 one shots. Full review and BridgeBench breakdown below.

BridgeMind

15,246 views • 2 months ago

Claude Opus 5 just one-shotted this FPS. Less than 1 hour from prompt to playable demo. Every weapon, enemy, mechanic and environment was generated from scratch. Prompt below 👇 There is no prompt below, because the first section is exactly the kind of post I’m tired of seeing every time a new model drops. A flashy demo, “one-shot” in the caption, “built in under an hour”… anything to farm impressions while conveniently hiding the actual process. If it was really made from a single prompt, show the prompt. That’s what I do on this account. When I claim something is a one-prompt prototype built with GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra and Codex, I share the prompt publicly so anyone can verify it. AI is already making game prototyping incredible. We don’t need fake “one-shot” stories to prove it. Original footage:

Claude Opus 5 just one-shotted this FPS. Less than 1 hour from prompt to playable demo. Every weapon, enemy, mechanic and environment was generated from scratch. Prompt below 👇 There is no prompt below, because the first section is exactly the kind of post I’m tired of seeing every time a new model drops. A flashy demo, “one-shot” in the caption, “built in under an hour”… anything to farm impressions while conveniently hiding the actual process. If it was really made from a single prompt, show the prompt. That’s what I do on this account. When I claim something is a one-prompt prototype built with GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra and Codex, I share the prompt publicly so anyone can verify it. AI is already making game prototyping incredible. We don’t need fake “one-shot” stories to prove it. Original footage:

Givros

14,794 views • 17 days ago