Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

Round 2: Ming-Image-0.1-Design vs Qwen Image 2.1! This time in ComfyUI - same exact prompt, identical seed, with an auto stitched side-by-side. Full prompt in comments. - Both got all 4 captions right. - Ming: a detailed illustration for every step, like a real cafe poster. - Qwen was...

10,304 просмотров • 10 дней назад •via X (Twitter)

Комментарии: 15

Фото профиля Mia
Mia10 дней назад

Prompt used in this video: Clean flat infographic titled "POUR-OVER IN 4 STEPS". Four numbered panels with simple icons and captions: "1 RINSE THE FILTER", "2 ADD 20G COFFEE", "3 BLOOM 30 SECONDS", "4 POUR 320G WATER". Beige background, brown accents, modern layout. HF links:

Фото профиля HealthRanger
HealthRanger10 дней назад

Very cool, I'm loading weights and gonna try this myself on a 6000 pro, with side by side compared to qwen-image-2.1. Will share results.

Фото профиля James Malsawm
James Malsawm10 дней назад

This look very impressive

Фото профиля JJ Eaton
JJ Eaton10 дней назад

Wow. Ming is amazing. How does it perform with editing existing images?

Фото профиля 💫 Dor 🎗️
💫 Dor 🎗️10 дней назад

Who is you? great account @MiaAI_lab

Фото профиля Soveryn Intelligence
Soveryn Intelligence10 дней назад

Round 2 makes the split clear — Ming takes the cafe-poster detail, Qwen wins wall-clock 35s vs 90s on the 5090 at matched seed. Did you lock steps/CFG too, or was seed the only fixed knob?

Фото профиля BullBear.News
BullBear.News10 дней назад

ComfyUI node execution order on the image loader step still drops metadata if you pass custom dicts through native loaders.

Фото профиля Don
Don10 дней назад

ming looking pretty good. Looking forward for the barrage of tests you will put it through.

Фото профиля _alphashark_
_alphashark_10 дней назад

in ComfyUI, pin the sampler and scheduler, not just the seed. I’d also rerun at each model’s native resolution since latent rescaling can skew detail retention.

Фото профиля LocalAiLab
LocalAiLab10 дней назад

Hmm... Intressting. I will try it. Thx for the workflow

Фото профиля Sanjeev
Sanjeev9 дней назад

You post this kind of tweets also??? Awesome dud. I can get to experience this in less time.well Appreciated

Фото профиля Ekithanun
Ekithanun10 дней назад

The side-by-side setup is such a smart test—great to see both models handle the prompt so well.

Фото профиля Mike Hutu
Mike Hutu10 дней назад

Wow ming seems like a great model ! Need to load the weights!

Фото профиля Mia
Mia10 дней назад

Try both. It's better than Qwen in some scenarios and worse in others.

Фото профиля Mike Hutu
Mike Hutu10 дней назад

I’ve been using ideogram4 and it has been a very good model for high quality images (mostly ugc type i’ve tried) and the json prompting + bbox mapping is really great feature to get the objects exactly where i want them to be. I’ll download both of these. Been really busy lately..

Похожие видео

GLM-5.3 Flash vs Qwen3.8 Flash-Next. Both local on my 4x 3090, both left alone with 1 prompt per task. 11 scenes, 18 hours, 2.4M tokens out. All of it is in the video. I wanted a clear winner. I didnt get one, but I know which one stays on my rig. GLM-5.3 Flash: Maya-M quant, 116 GB, runs in Project Maya on all 4 cards plus RAM. 35 to 48 tok/s while it works. Qwen3.8 Flash-Next: IQ3_S quant, 78 GB, runs in Strata on 2 cards. 85 to 118 tok/s. Both have 262K context and vision, so the agent opens its own page, takes a screenshot, looks at it and fixes what it sees. 1 prompt per scene. No follow ups and no hints from me. 120 minutes max per scene, 150 for the kart game. I ran them in 2 harnesses, OMP first and then DeepSeek Harness. Minutes until the model said it was done: Pelican in OMP: GLM 39, Qwen 66 Pelican in DeepSeek Harness: GLM 93, Qwen 86 Kart game in OMP: GLM 130, Qwen stopped by the 150 limit Millipede in OMP: both stopped by the 120 limit Millipede in DeepSeek Harness: Qwen stopped at 120 again Battle diorama in DeepSeek Harness: GLM 81, Qwen 113 Thats 11 of 16 combos. I ran out of time for the other 5, sorry. They work in a very different way and I didnt expect that. GLM thinks for a long time and then writes a lot at once. Its first pelican took only 36 turns. For the diorama it gave 1 answer of 47K tokens that ran for almost 18 minutes, with the full scene in a single file. Qwen goes in small steps and checks everything. The same pelican was 240 turns and 45 browser checks. In total GLM wrote 513K tokens in 5 runs and Qwen wrote 1.9M in 6 runs, so Qwen puts out 2.6x more per minute of real time, on half the cards. The harness also changed more than I thought it would. OMP keeps only 5 images in a request when the provider is local. So every new screenshot removes the oldest one, the prompt changes in the middle, and the server has to read the context again from the start. GLM lost 37 of its 130 kart minutes just on that. In DeepSeek Harness, on the diorama, it lost 3.5 minutes out of 81. Qwen reads a prompt almost 4x faster on my rig (84K tokens in 23 seconds, GLM needs 100 seconds for 96K), so in OMP it lost only 9 to 12 minutes per run. I cant give you a winner. GLM is the only one that finished the kart game inside the limit, and its scenes look cleaner to me. But its millipede is bad. Qwen puts more detail into everything, and its diorama and millipede from DeepSeek Harness are my favorite scenes in the video. It also got stopped by the time limit in 3 of its 6 runs, because it just keeps polishing. For my own use I'd take Qwen. It is a lot faster and it needs only 2 cards, so the other 2 stay free and I can run something else next to it. This is 1 run per combo, so dont read it as statistics. Both models ran with my refusal projection on, because thats how I use them every day. And in the kart clips the game's own AI is driving the player kart, I only recorded the screen. Music: YuE2

Alexey Fateev

12,116 просмотров • 3 дней назад

This is probably the most complex workflow I’ve ever built, only with open-source tools. It took my 4 days. It takes four inputs: author, title, and style; and generates a full visual animated story in one click in ComfyUI . I worked on it for four days. There are still some bugs, but here’s the first preview. Here’s a quick breakdown: - The four inputs are sent to LLMs with precise instructions to generate: first, prompts for images and image modifications; second, prompts for animations; third, prompts for generating music. - All voices are generated from the text and timed precisely, as they determine the length of each animation segment. - The first image and video are generated to serve as the title, but also as the guide for all other images created for the video. - Titles and subtitles are also added automatically in Comfy. - I also developed a lot of custom nodes for minor frame calculations, mostly to match audio and video. - The full system is a large loop that, for each line of text, generates an image and then a video from that image. The loop was the hardest part to build in this workflow, so it can process either a 20-second video or a 2-minute video with the same input. - There are multiple combinations of LLMs that try to understand the text in the best way to provide the best prompts for images and video. - The final video is assembled entirely within ComfyUI. - The music is generated based on the LLM output and matches the exact timing of the full animation. - Done! For reference, this workflow uses a lot of models and only works on an RTX 6000 Pro with plenty of RAM. My goal is not to replace humans, as I’ll try to explain later, this workflow is highly controlled and can be adapted or reworked at any point by real artists! My aim was to create a tool that can animate text in one go, allowing the AI some freedom while keeping a strict flow. I don’t know yet how I’ll share this workflow with people, I still need to polish it properly, but maybe through Patreon. Anyway, I hope you enjoy my research, and let’s always keep pushing further! :)

Lovis Odin

58,950 просмотров • 1 год назад

hey here is the final result of octopus invaders on nvidia's flagship at full precision. nemotron super 120B on 2x H200 NVL. BF16 unquantized. 287GB of VRAM. hermes agent as the harness. 60 tok/s. first try it autonomously coded for 6 minutes straight. created 11 files. correct project structure. correct load order. started the server. i opened the browser and the result was a blank screen. i did not give up. second try i gave it a precise list of bugs and things to fix. it went back in for another 3 minutes. patched the code. served it again. still blank. so i did what any sane person would do. third try i just said the screen is blank, test it and fix it yourself. and this is where nemotron showed what it actually is. it became a debugger. you can see it in the video. realtime CSS test squares, red screen flashes, hermes agent browser tools, inspecting its own output. it built the parallax background with planets and comets. it rendered a rocket ship that tracks your mouse with fire and bullet physics. the aesthetic is real. but no enemies spawn. no collision. not playable. what surprised me is qwen 27B one shotted this exact game on a single RTX 3090 at Q4 quant. and here is nvidia's flagship at full precision on enterprise hardware needing 3 tries and still not getting there. that makes my hope high for the undisputed qwen 122B which is about to face the same test next. same hardware. same prompt and same harness. lets see if it one shots or not. full session in the video. no cuts. 5x speed.

Sudo su

11,011 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

Very quick comparison between Ornith 1.5 35B MoE and Qwen 3.8 27B Dense. 📣 Clearly it's not a fair one, but let's in any case see how it went. 397B download in progress! In the Videos below: - Brick SA -> Qwen 3.8 - Lego Streets -> Ornith 1.5 Context: - Pi agent used in both cases, prompt below - M3 Ultra 512GB - Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B-oQ8e MTP hosted on oMLX - mlx-community/Qwen3.8-27B-8bit DFlash 2 hosted on mlx-dspark - Ornith has been incredibly fast with speed from 75 t/s to 45 t/s (160K+ context) - Qwen3.8 suffered context much more reaching 5 t/s above 160K context, but it can be due to engine tested still work in progress - Prompt: using threejs, and cdn, create a lego like game that's inspired by gta san andreas, with beautiful aesthetics and graphics and ability to steal cars. it should be 3d and have a nice and large map and areas. the graphics should be decent and nice. it should feature iconic things from gta san andreas Notes: - Qwen 3.8 result is 0-shot, while Ornith 1.5 required 6 iterations - Ornith 1.5 is not at the same level of autonomy as Qwen 3.8 27B honestly. To try getting the same results I'm constantly nudging, steering and 🤬 at it. - Qwen 3.8 took 6 hours to complete, but it was more a problem of timeout of Chrome headless used for testing, real prefill/decode TBD. I'll test again now with oMLX - Pi agent has a nearly perfect Cache Hit ratio that for local models is MEGA important!

Ivan Fioravanti ᯅ

12,150 просмотров • 1 месяц назад