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.

Running GLM-4.7-Flash on 4 x M4 Pro Mac Minis using EXO Labs. Uses tensor parallelism with RDMA over Thunderbolt & MLX backend (h/t Awni Hannun). Runs at 100 tok/sec. We're working on optimizing this at EXO Labs. Aiming to hit ~200 tok/sec on this setup soon.

Alex Cheema

50,402 subscribers

62,195 views • 5 months ago •via X (Twitter)

News & Politics Science & Technology

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

Running GLM 4.7 Flash (8-bit) with Tensor Parallel / RDMA on 2 M4 Pro Mac Minis at 60 tok/sec. mlx-lm 0.30.5 features huge speedups for GLM 4.7 Flash for long context (h/t N8 Programs & Awni Hannun). M5 Pro (~28 Jan) will have ~4x faster prefill and ~1.3x faster decode.

Running GLM 4.7 Flash (8-bit) with Tensor Parallel / RDMA on 2 M4 Pro Mac Minis at 60 tok/sec. mlx-lm 0.30.5 features huge speedups for GLM 4.7 Flash for long context (h/t N8 Programs & Awni Hannun). M5 Pro (~28 Jan) will have ~4x faster prefill and ~1.3x faster decode.

Alex Cheema

56,555 views • 5 months ago

M4 Mac AI Coding Cluster Uses EXO Labs to run LLMs (here Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B at 18 tok/sec) distributed across 4 M4 Mac Minis (Thunderbolt 5 80Gbps) and a MacBook Pro M4 Max. Local alternative to Cursor (benchmark comparison soon).

M4 Mac AI Coding Cluster Uses EXO Labs to run LLMs (here Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B at 18 tok/sec) distributed across 4 M4 Mac Minis (Thunderbolt 5 80Gbps) and a MacBook Pro M4 Max. Local alternative to Cursor (benchmark comparison soon).

Alex Cheema

517,457 views • 1 year ago

Running GLM-4.7-Flash with OpenCode locally on M4 Max MacBook Pro. 4-bit model runs at 82 tok/sec. Prefill will get ~4x faster with M5 Max MacBook Pro (~28 Jan). EXO will also support disaggregating prefill and decode across devices, e.g. DGX Spark.

Running GLM-4.7-Flash with OpenCode locally on M4 Max MacBook Pro. 4-bit model runs at 82 tok/sec. Prefill will get ~4x faster with M5 Max MacBook Pro (~28 Jan). EXO will also support disaggregating prefill and decode across devices, e.g. DGX Spark.

Alex Cheema

128,404 views • 5 months ago

GLM-4.7-8bit (350GB) running at 19 toks/s on two M3 Ultra 512GB using Tensor Parallelism with EXO - MLX, versus 14 toks/s with single node. 🚀 Now context benchmarking & then OpenCode tests 🔥 Note: this is from sources, I had to change things to run it.

GLM-4.7-8bit (350GB) running at 19 toks/s on two M3 Ultra 512GB using Tensor Parallelism with EXO - MLX, versus 14 toks/s with single node. 🚀 Now context benchmarking & then OpenCode tests 🔥 Note: this is from sources, I had to change things to run it.

Ivan Fioravanti ᯅ

327,687 views • 6 months ago

For even higher throughput and lower latency: batch generation + tensor parallel with mlx-lm + and mlx.distributed. Here it's generating at 63 tok/sec (throughput) with GLM 4.7 in 6-bit and batch size 4 on 4 M3 Ultras:

For even higher throughput and lower latency: batch generation + tensor parallel with mlx-lm + and mlx.distributed. Here it's generating at 63 tok/sec (throughput) with GLM 4.7 in 6-bit and batch size 4 on 4 M3 Ultras:

Awni Hannun

22,721 views • 6 months ago

Linear scaling achieved with multiple DeepSeek v3.1 instances. 4x macs = 4x throughput. 2x M3 Ultra Mac Studios = 1x DeepSeek @ 14 tok/sec 4x M3 Ultra Mac Studios = 2x DeepSeek @ 28 tok/sec DeepSeek V3.1 is a 671B parameter model - so at its native 8-bit quantization, it requires ~700GB of memory to run the model. EXO puts half of the layers on each device, combining their memory. EXO uses MLX distributed with TB5 interconnect, optimized for Apple Silicon. If we need higher throughput, adding two more devices lets us serve more users at once. EXO Labs handles all of this seamlessly - adding more devices to the cluster for linear scaling as we need it. The new EXO 1.0 will be open-source soonTM

Linear scaling achieved with multiple DeepSeek v3.1 instances. 4x macs = 4x throughput. 2x M3 Ultra Mac Studios = 1x DeepSeek @ 14 tok/sec 4x M3 Ultra Mac Studios = 2x DeepSeek @ 28 tok/sec DeepSeek V3.1 is a 671B parameter model - so at its native 8-bit quantization, it requires ~700GB of memory to run the model. EXO puts half of the layers on each device, combining their memory. EXO uses MLX distributed with TB5 interconnect, optimized for Apple Silicon. If we need higher throughput, adding two more devices lets us serve more users at once. EXO Labs handles all of this seamlessly - adding more devices to the cluster for linear scaling as we need it. The new EXO 1.0 will be open-source soonTM

Matt Beton

158,485 views • 10 months ago

Thanks for the mention TBPN! We're working on making this run at >40 tok/sec on 2 Mac Studios (the full, unquantized Kimi K2.5). I'm already running Kimi K2.5 myself locally with Claude Code and it's impressive - very close to Opus level.

Thanks for the mention TBPN! We're working on making this run at >40 tok/sec on 2 Mac Studios (the full, unquantized Kimi K2.5). I'm already running Kimi K2.5 myself locally with Claude Code and it's impressive - very close to Opus level.

Alex Cheema

40,471 views • 5 months ago

GLM 4.6 runs quite fast on an M3 Ultra with mlx-lm even at higher precision. Pretty remarkable that it benchmarks competitive to the just-released Sonnet 4.5. Hope those benchmarks hold-up in day-to-day use. Here's a run using 5.5 bpw quantized model, generating 5.3k tokens at 17+ tok/sec using 244 GB. What prompts should I test?

GLM 4.6 runs quite fast on an M3 Ultra with mlx-lm even at higher precision. Pretty remarkable that it benchmarks competitive to the just-released Sonnet 4.5. Hope those benchmarks hold-up in day-to-day use. Here's a run using 5.5 bpw quantized model, generating 5.3k tokens at 17+ tok/sec using 244 GB. What prompts should I test?

Awni Hannun

68,539 views • 9 months ago

DeepSeek-V4-Flash powering 4 parallel agents on Pi (by Mario Zechner) 🚀 Running on M3 Ultra at ~30-34 tok/s and 160-187GB peak URAM using MLX-LM. Special shoutout to clandestine.eth 🦇🔊, Pedro Cuenca, Tarjei Mandt, Ivan Fioravanti ᯅ and others for helping optimize and shape this PR. PR:

DeepSeek-V4-Flash powering 4 parallel agents on Pi (by Mario Zechner) 🚀 Running on M3 Ultra at ~30-34 tok/s and 160-187GB peak URAM using MLX-LM. Special shoutout to clandestine.eth 🦇🔊, Pedro Cuenca, Tarjei Mandt, Ivan Fioravanti ᯅ and others for helping optimize and shape this PR. PR:

Prince Canuma

109,941 views • 2 months ago

How Fast is Gemma 4 on a MacBook Pro M4? Benchmarking Google's new MoE (26B-A4B) > Model size: 26.1 GiB > Load time: ~4.2s Comparing single request VS > concurrent requests performance > 32k total context, 4 parallel slots single request behavior > TTFT: 5.68s > prompt: 3,701 tokens @ 652 tok/s > decode: 40.08 tok/s sequential (1 request at a time): > avg duration: 20.5s > p99: 22.1s > throughput: 40.11 tok/s > clean finishes: 100% concurrent (4 parallel requests): > aggregate throughput: 47.25 tok/s > total system throughput: 262.27 tok/s > avg duration: 65.1s > p95 latency: 68.8s > req/sec: 0.058 Head-to-Head: Sequential vs Concurrent throughput: > 40.11 tok/s → 47.25 tok/s (+17.8%) > small gain despite 4x parallelism latency per request: > 20.5s → 65.1s (~3.2x slower) > you pay heavily for concurrency system throughput (true utilization): > ~40 tok/s → 262 tok/s (~6.5x total output) > this is where concurrency wins tokens per second (decode ceiling): > ~40 tok/s steady in both modes > hardware-bound, not scheduler-bound TTFT impact: > ~5.7s baseline → buried under queueing in concurrent > “headers waittime” becomes the bottleneck What this actually means? - You don’t get linear scaling from parallel slots - You trade latency for total output - Mac Unified Memory setup is clearly saturating - Bandwidth + Scheduling overhead show up immediately This is exactly why GPUs dominate here Concurrency without killing latency

How Fast is Gemma 4 on a MacBook Pro M4? Benchmarking Google's new MoE (26B-A4B) > Model size: 26.1 GiB > Load time: ~4.2s Comparing single request VS > concurrent requests performance > 32k total context, 4 parallel slots single request behavior > TTFT: 5.68s > prompt: 3,701 tokens @ 652 tok/s > decode: 40.08 tok/s sequential (1 request at a time): > avg duration: 20.5s > p99: 22.1s > throughput: 40.11 tok/s > clean finishes: 100% concurrent (4 parallel requests): > aggregate throughput: 47.25 tok/s > total system throughput: 262.27 tok/s > avg duration: 65.1s > p95 latency: 68.8s > req/sec: 0.058 Head-to-Head: Sequential vs Concurrent throughput: > 40.11 tok/s → 47.25 tok/s (+17.8%) > small gain despite 4x parallelism latency per request: > 20.5s → 65.1s (~3.2x slower) > you pay heavily for concurrency system throughput (true utilization): > ~40 tok/s → 262 tok/s (~6.5x total output) > this is where concurrency wins tokens per second (decode ceiling): > ~40 tok/s steady in both modes > hardware-bound, not scheduler-bound TTFT impact: > ~5.7s baseline → buried under queueing in concurrent > “headers waittime” becomes the bottleneck What this actually means? - You don’t get linear scaling from parallel slots - You trade latency for total output - Mac Unified Memory setup is clearly saturating - Bandwidth + Scheduling overhead show up immediately This is exactly why GPUs dominate here Concurrency without killing latency

Ahmad

88,866 views • 3 months ago

Google's Gemma 4 26B A4B QAT hits 25+ tokens/sec and 320+ tokens/sec prefill on 8 GB VRAM (RTX 4060) + 16 GB RAM using TurboQuant Prefill just went from 200 → 320+ tok/s on the same 8GB card. 1.6x, no new hardware, no new quant, just a KV cache trick stacked on top of the Gemma 4 26B MoE setup from a few days ago. A few days ago I posted Gemma 4 26B A4B hitting 28 tok/s decode on 8GB VRAM using native MTP. prefill was stuck around 200 tok/s. fair callout by the community. So today I tested something I'd already been meaning to try: TheTom/llama-cpp-turboquant, the TurboQuant KV cache fork by Tom Turney (Tom Turney). (github link in the comments) thanks to him, the fork just got resynced to mainline, so MTP + TurboQuant now run together cleanly (I didnt see any meaningful gains by using MTP with this setup though but you can try). The flags (No MTP): -m gemma-4-26B-A4B-it-qat-UD-Q4_K_XL.gguf -cnv -c 64000 --cache-type-k q8_0 --cache-type-v turbo3 Results on the same RTX 4060 8GB, tested with a 27k token prompt at 64k context loaded: Prefill: 200 tok/s → 320+ tok/s Decode: stayed above 25 tok/s (without MTP) Why it works: TurboQuant uses walsh hadamard rotation + polar quantization on the KV cache. keys are sensitive to compression, values aren't much, so it splits the difference: K stays at q8_0, V drops to turbo3 (~3 bits). bonus from the memory savings: same 8GB card can now stretch to 100-120k context with minimal decode penalty. It should now be snappier with any agent harness such as hermes agent without compromise on intelligence. If you're already running Gemma 4 on a small card, this stacks on top for free. Try --cache-type-k q8_0 --cache-type-v turbo3 on your setup and report back what your prefill/decode split looks like. unsloth model gguf and llama.cpp turboquant fork links in the comments. what's your prefill number before vs after?

Google's Gemma 4 26B A4B QAT hits 25+ tokens/sec and 320+ tokens/sec prefill on 8 GB VRAM (RTX 4060) + 16 GB RAM using TurboQuant Prefill just went from 200 → 320+ tok/s on the same 8GB card. 1.6x, no new hardware, no new quant, just a KV cache trick stacked on top of the Gemma 4 26B MoE setup from a few days ago. A few days ago I posted Gemma 4 26B A4B hitting 28 tok/s decode on 8GB VRAM using native MTP. prefill was stuck around 200 tok/s. fair callout by the community. So today I tested something I'd already been meaning to try: TheTom/llama-cpp-turboquant, the TurboQuant KV cache fork by Tom Turney (Tom Turney). (github link in the comments) thanks to him, the fork just got resynced to mainline, so MTP + TurboQuant now run together cleanly (I didnt see any meaningful gains by using MTP with this setup though but you can try). The flags (No MTP): -m gemma-4-26B-A4B-it-qat-UD-Q4_K_XL.gguf -cnv -c 64000 --cache-type-k q8_0 --cache-type-v turbo3 Results on the same RTX 4060 8GB, tested with a 27k token prompt at 64k context loaded: Prefill: 200 tok/s → 320+ tok/s Decode: stayed above 25 tok/s (without MTP) Why it works: TurboQuant uses walsh hadamard rotation + polar quantization on the KV cache. keys are sensitive to compression, values aren't much, so it splits the difference: K stays at q8_0, V drops to turbo3 (~3 bits). bonus from the memory savings: same 8GB card can now stretch to 100-120k context with minimal decode penalty. It should now be snappier with any agent harness such as hermes agent without compromise on intelligence. If you're already running Gemma 4 on a small card, this stacks on top for free. Try --cache-type-k q8_0 --cache-type-v turbo3 on your setup and report back what your prefill/decode split looks like. unsloth model gguf and llama.cpp turboquant fork links in the comments. what's your prefill number before vs after?

Alok

119,821 views • 28 days ago

nemotron 3 omni q8 on dgx spark 128gb vram cranking via hermes agent at 56 tok/s. first night of real local agentic on this box and local hits harder than i thought it would. q8 (near lossless quant, perplexity loss <1% vs fp16) running 256k context on 33 gb of unified memory, 90+ gb still free. multimodal omni weights included. hermes agent driving from telegram, talking to it from bed. speed: 56 tok/s generation, 1,300 tok/s prefill. for context, qwen 3.6 27b at q4 (heavy quant) on 3090 = 40 tok/s. nemotron at higher precision quant on spark beats qwen at lower precision quant on 3090. moe 3.5b active params architecture earns its keep. what i tested tonight: agentic tool calling works clean. ask it to check disks, it autonomously runs df -h through hermes agent. ask it to set up telegram gateway, it invokes the hermes-agent skill, walks through the prompts, completes the flow. overthinks a bit before tool calls (reasoning model trait) but lands the right move every time. researches api docs, internalizes, tests, documents. completes tasks. current models on dgx spark: 9 gguf files, 305 gb total, mix of qwen 3.6 27b dense (5 quants), nemotron omni (4 quants), deepseek v4-flash 158b q4 (the 112gb flagship test). more data coming this week as i benchmark each.

nemotron 3 omni q8 on dgx spark 128gb vram cranking via hermes agent at 56 tok/s. first night of real local agentic on this box and local hits harder than i thought it would. q8 (near lossless quant, perplexity loss <1% vs fp16) running 256k context on 33 gb of unified memory, 90+ gb still free. multimodal omni weights included. hermes agent driving from telegram, talking to it from bed. speed: 56 tok/s generation, 1,300 tok/s prefill. for context, qwen 3.6 27b at q4 (heavy quant) on 3090 = 40 tok/s. nemotron at higher precision quant on spark beats qwen at lower precision quant on 3090. moe 3.5b active params architecture earns its keep. what i tested tonight: agentic tool calling works clean. ask it to check disks, it autonomously runs df -h through hermes agent. ask it to set up telegram gateway, it invokes the hermes-agent skill, walks through the prompts, completes the flow. overthinks a bit before tool calls (reasoning model trait) but lands the right move every time. researches api docs, internalizes, tests, documents. completes tasks. current models on dgx spark: 9 gguf files, 305 gb total, mix of qwen 3.6 27b dense (5 quants), nemotron omni (4 quants), deepseek v4-flash 158b q4 (the 112gb flagship test). more data coming this week as i benchmark each.

Sudo su

30,228 views • 2 months ago

HAO WANG BUILT AN AI SERVER FARM OUT OF 100 MAC MINIS. ONE $599 BOX KILLS A $200/MONTH CLAUDE CODE BILL FOR $3 IN ELECTRICITY a developer posted his $170 claude code bill from 10 days on reddit. someone replied "i bought a mac mini m4. haven't paid anthropic since" the m4 chip has 120 gb/s memory bandwidth and unified memory. a $599 mac mini runs ai faster than a $1,500 windows pc with a discrete gpu ollama now supports the anthropic messages api. claude code connects to your local mac mini with one environment variable. zero api costs, same interface a heavy developer pays $459 a month across claude code, chatgpt pro, gemini, cursor and copilot. the mac mini pays off in 3 months and runs on $3 after that uber rolled out claude code to 5,000 engineers and burned $3.4 billion in 4 months. the people who own the hardware in 2026 will look very far ahead in 2028 bookmark this and read the article below

HAO WANG BUILT AN AI SERVER FARM OUT OF 100 MAC MINIS. ONE $599 BOX KILLS A $200/MONTH CLAUDE CODE BILL FOR $3 IN ELECTRICITY a developer posted his $170 claude code bill from 10 days on reddit. someone replied "i bought a mac mini m4. haven't paid anthropic since" the m4 chip has 120 gb/s memory bandwidth and unified memory. a $599 mac mini runs ai faster than a $1,500 windows pc with a discrete gpu ollama now supports the anthropic messages api. claude code connects to your local mac mini with one environment variable. zero api costs, same interface a heavy developer pays $459 a month across claude code, chatgpt pro, gemini, cursor and copilot. the mac mini pays off in 3 months and runs on $3 after that uber rolled out claude code to 5,000 engineers and burned $3.4 billion in 4 months. the people who own the hardware in 2026 will look very far ahead in 2028 bookmark this and read the article below

starmex

50,610 views • 1 month ago

"Mac Minis for example are a very good fit" - Andrej Karpathy Andrej Karpathy shouted out my work on EXO Labs in his keynote at Y Combinator AI SUS! Here's the breakdown: Right now most AI workloads run in the cloud where requests from different users are continuously batched together. These workloads are FLOPS-bound and favors hardware with the best unit economics of $ per FLOP, i.e. enterprise GPUs. The personal computing revolution will shift these workloads to personal devices with lower batch sizes (mostly batch_size=1). batch_size=1 inference is memory-bound, because all of the model parameters need to be loaded into the GPU every time a token is generated. Apple Silicon with its Unified Memory architecture has a lot of memory and memory bandwidth per $ compared to other hardware: - M4 Pro Mac Mini, 24GB @ 273GB/s, $58.33/GB, $5.13/GB/s - H100, 80GB @ 3350GB/s, $625/GB, $14.93/GB/s The unit economics of Apple Silicon are becoming more compelling with every release of the Mac. The future of AI inference looks more like open weights models (OpenAI open weights model soonTM) run at low batch_size on personal devices.

"Mac Minis for example are a very good fit" - Andrej Karpathy Andrej Karpathy shouted out my work on EXO Labs in his keynote at Y Combinator AI SUS! Here's the breakdown: Right now most AI workloads run in the cloud where requests from different users are continuously batched together. These workloads are FLOPS-bound and favors hardware with the best unit economics of $ per FLOP, i.e. enterprise GPUs. The personal computing revolution will shift these workloads to personal devices with lower batch sizes (mostly batch_size=1). batch_size=1 inference is memory-bound, because all of the model parameters need to be loaded into the GPU every time a token is generated. Apple Silicon with its Unified Memory architecture has a lot of memory and memory bandwidth per $ compared to other hardware: - M4 Pro Mac Mini, 24GB @ 273GB/s, $58.33/GB, $5.13/GB/s - H100, 80GB @ 3350GB/s, $625/GB, $14.93/GB/s The unit economics of Apple Silicon are becoming more compelling with every release of the Mac. The future of AI inference looks more like open weights models (OpenAI open weights model soonTM) run at low batch_size on personal devices.

Alex Cheema

103,487 views • 1 year ago

$A $351 MINI PC IS RUNNING 26-BILLION-PARAMETER AI MODELS AT 20 TOKENS/SEC AND HERMES AGENT ON TOP OF IT This is the Minisforum UM790 Pro. AMD Ryzen 9 7940HS, Radeon 780M iGPU, 48GB DDR5. The BIOS reports the GPU has 4GB of VRAM Here's the part people get wrong. The 780M has no dedicated VRAM at all it borrows from system RAM. Vulkan ignores the BIOS number and reads the full 48GB pool directly That's the whole trick. 21+ GB allocated to model weights on a "4GB" GPU. Because the models are MoE, only 4 billion of the parameters activate per token a fraction of the reads a dense model needs. That's why 20 tok/s works here Gemma 4 26B MoE holds 19.5 tok/s with 196K context. Qwen3.5-35B-A3B holds 20.8. Nemotron Cascade 2 clears 24.8. A dense 31B, by contrast, drops to 4 tok/s it reads the entire model every token, no way around it On top: Hermes Agent, full agentic workflows terminal, file ops, web, 40+ tools against local models only. No API keys. The wall between you and a usable local agent used to be a GPU you couldn't afford. Now it's a BIOS setting most people never check Bookmark this & Try it yourself ↓$

A $351 MINI PC IS RUNNING 26-BILLION-PARAMETER AI MODELS AT 20 TOKENS/SEC AND HERMES AGENT ON TOP OF IT This is the Minisforum UM790 Pro. AMD Ryzen 9 7940HS, Radeon 780M iGPU, 48GB DDR5. The BIOS reports the GPU has 4GB of VRAM Here's the part people get wrong. The 780M has no dedicated VRAM at all it borrows from system RAM. Vulkan ignores the BIOS number and reads the full 48GB pool directly That's the whole trick. 21+ GB allocated to model weights on a "4GB" GPU. Because the models are MoE, only 4 billion of the parameters activate per token a fraction of the reads a dense model needs. That's why 20 tok/s works here Gemma 4 26B MoE holds 19.5 tok/s with 196K context. Qwen3.5-35B-A3B holds 20.8. Nemotron Cascade 2 clears 24.8. A dense 31B, by contrast, drops to 4 tok/s it reads the entire model every token, no way around it On top: Hermes Agent, full agentic workflows terminal, file ops, web, 40+ tools against local models only. No API keys. The wall between you and a usable local agent used to be a GPU you couldn't afford. Now it's a BIOS setting most people never check Bookmark this & Try it yourself ↓

slash1s

35,742 views • 26 days ago

$THIS CLUSTER OF 4 MAC STUDIOS USES LESS POWER THAN ONE NVIDIA CHIP - AND COSTS 5X LESS 17:30 the number hits hard - 600 watts for all four Mac Studios - less than one H200 that costs $30,000 on its own instead of one $30,000 GPU you get 4 machines with 1.5TB of memory, 3x more performance and models that simply cannot run on a single chip Apple quietly added RDMA over Thunderbolt in a beta update - latency dropped 99% and the same cluster became 3x faster without buying any new hardware before the update: 5 tokens per second. after: 15.5 - a free upgrade through a software update 8 Nvidia DGX Sparks for the same memory would cost $32,000 - this cluster costs a fraction and gets faster with every update 10x more productive at half the price - and the only thing you need is knowing where to look$

THIS CLUSTER OF 4 MAC STUDIOS USES LESS POWER THAN ONE NVIDIA CHIP - AND COSTS 5X LESS 17:30 the number hits hard - 600 watts for all four Mac Studios - less than one H200 that costs $30,000 on its own instead of one $30,000 GPU you get 4 machines with 1.5TB of memory, 3x more performance and models that simply cannot run on a single chip Apple quietly added RDMA over Thunderbolt in a beta update - latency dropped 99% and the same cluster became 3x faster without buying any new hardware before the update: 5 tokens per second. after: 15.5 - a free upgrade through a software update 8 Nvidia DGX Sparks for the same memory would cost $32,000 - this cluster costs a fraction and gets faster with every update 10x more productive at half the price - and the only thing you need is knowing where to look

Noisy

105,595 views • 25 days ago

THIS TOKYO PROGRAMMER MADE $8,500 IN HIS FIRST MONTH WITH A MAC MINI — AND SAYS IT'S THE ONLY MACHINE YOU NEED FOR AI Claude Code, Codex, any AI tool - all of it runs on a Mac Mini with zero issues and zero monthly cloud bills at the 0:11 second mark he turns the monitor around - Claude Code with Opus 4.7 running in full context, terminal active and the agent already working - one programmer, one room in Tokyo, one $599 Mac Mini used to pay $200+ a month on subscriptions and cloud GPU - now pays $3 in electricity and everything else stays in his business $599 invested once - and in the first year he saved $2,364 that used to go to someone else's data center his advice is simple: if you're serious about AI - the Mac Mini is the first thing you should buy

THIS TOKYO PROGRAMMER MADE $8,500 IN HIS FIRST MONTH WITH A MAC MINI — AND SAYS IT'S THE ONLY MACHINE YOU NEED FOR AI Claude Code, Codex, any AI tool - all of it runs on a Mac Mini with zero issues and zero monthly cloud bills at the 0:11 second mark he turns the monitor around - Claude Code with Opus 4.7 running in full context, terminal active and the agent already working - one programmer, one room in Tokyo, one $599 Mac Mini used to pay $200+ a month on subscriptions and cloud GPU - now pays $3 in electricity and everything else stays in his business $599 invested once - and in the first year he saved $2,364 that used to go to someone else's data center his advice is simple: if you're serious about AI - the Mac Mini is the first thing you should buy

Sprytix

14,771 views • 1 month ago

EVERYONE BUYING A $2,000 MAC MINI M4 PRO FOR LOCAL AI MISSED THAT A SERVER RESELLER IS UNLOADING DEAD HP PROLIANT DL380 GEN 10 BOXES WITH 5 YEAR WARRANTY, A $250 USED TESLA P40 BOLTED IN RUNS LLAMA 3.3 70B AT HOME 00:19 he stands behind a pallet, "these 10 HP Proliant DL380 Gen 10 servers, they're a few generations older, you guys will be surprised who these servers are going to" a DL380 Gen 10 with dual Xeon Gold 6248 and 256GB of DDR4 ECC sells refurbished for $380-500 in 2026, the same chassis cost $14,000 new in 2018 and got written off the books by every fortune 500 by 2024 drop a $250 used Tesla P40 with 24GB VRAM into one PCIe slot, total bill $650, llama 3.3 70B quantized to 4 bit runs at 9 tokens per second locally, the article calls $2,000 mac mini m4 pro the sweet spot, this stack hits it for a third the seller in the video gives a 5 year warranty on hardware that hyperscalers threw away, the same companies the article warns will jack subscription prices are selling you the rack they used to charge $200 a month to access a 2018 enterprise chassis pulls 280 watts at idle and screams at 65 decibels, the mac mini pulls 10 watts and runs silent, the tradeoff is real but $1,350 cheaper buys a lot of electricity and earplugs over 4 years bookmark this and read the article below

EVERYONE BUYING A $2,000 MAC MINI M4 PRO FOR LOCAL AI MISSED THAT A SERVER RESELLER IS UNLOADING DEAD HP PROLIANT DL380 GEN 10 BOXES WITH 5 YEAR WARRANTY, A $250 USED TESLA P40 BOLTED IN RUNS LLAMA 3.3 70B AT HOME 00:19 he stands behind a pallet, "these 10 HP Proliant DL380 Gen 10 servers, they're a few generations older, you guys will be surprised who these servers are going to" a DL380 Gen 10 with dual Xeon Gold 6248 and 256GB of DDR4 ECC sells refurbished for $380-500 in 2026, the same chassis cost $14,000 new in 2018 and got written off the books by every fortune 500 by 2024 drop a $250 used Tesla P40 with 24GB VRAM into one PCIe slot, total bill $650, llama 3.3 70B quantized to 4 bit runs at 9 tokens per second locally, the article calls $2,000 mac mini m4 pro the sweet spot, this stack hits it for a third the seller in the video gives a 5 year warranty on hardware that hyperscalers threw away, the same companies the article warns will jack subscription prices are selling you the rack they used to charge $200 a month to access a 2018 enterprise chassis pulls 280 watts at idle and screams at 65 decibels, the mac mini pulls 10 watts and runs silent, the tradeoff is real but $1,350 cheaper buys a lot of electricity and earplugs over 4 years bookmark this and read the article below

starmex

107,995 views • 19 days ago

I'm running Llama 4 Maverick at 620 t/s! I'm living in the future! Honestly, a large language model running this fast is something straight out of a sci-fi movie. Speeds like this will enable a whole new world of applications that aren't possible today. For reference, GPT-4o, which is probably the most popular OpenAI model, runs between 60 and 110 t/s. The secret here: I'm not running AI at Meta's Llama 4 Maverick on a GPU. I'm using the SambaNova Cloud (my sponsor) and their custom SN40L chips. They are optimized from the ground up for running AI workflows. Right now, SambaNova Cloud runs DeepSeek, Qwen, Whisper, and the entire family of Llama models on these chips. You can check the speed of each of these models using SambaNova Cloud's Playground (see the attached video). It's completely free, and that's how I'm measuring their speeds. For example, I also tried DeepSeek R1 (the latest version from May) and, oh boy! DeepSeek R1 is a huge 671B parameter model. It's probably the best open reasoning model in the world, and it runs at 140 tokens per second! !!! Inference time on an SN40L is night and day from what you'll get from a GPU. Here is why this is big: If you are running an agentic workflow that uses multiple models simultaneously on a GPU, it will need to swap models in and out of memory (because not every model fits). A single SNL40 chip can simultaneously hold over 100 models (trillions of parameters) in memory. If you are using open models, try the SambaCloud API to see what lightning speed looks like. Here is how: 1. Create a free account at: 2. Check the QuickStart guide: If you try the playground, check the speed you're getting with Llama 4 and DeepSeek, and post the results below. I've seen much higher numbers than I posted here, so I'm curious to see whether geography affects the speed.

I'm running Llama 4 Maverick at 620 t/s! I'm living in the future! Honestly, a large language model running this fast is something straight out of a sci-fi movie. Speeds like this will enable a whole new world of applications that aren't possible today. For reference, GPT-4o, which is probably the most popular OpenAI model, runs between 60 and 110 t/s. The secret here: I'm not running AI at Meta's Llama 4 Maverick on a GPU. I'm using the SambaNova Cloud (my sponsor) and their custom SN40L chips. They are optimized from the ground up for running AI workflows. Right now, SambaNova Cloud runs DeepSeek, Qwen, Whisper, and the entire family of Llama models on these chips. You can check the speed of each of these models using SambaNova Cloud's Playground (see the attached video). It's completely free, and that's how I'm measuring their speeds. For example, I also tried DeepSeek R1 (the latest version from May) and, oh boy! DeepSeek R1 is a huge 671B parameter model. It's probably the best open reasoning model in the world, and it runs at 140 tokens per second! !!! Inference time on an SN40L is night and day from what you'll get from a GPU. Here is why this is big: If you are running an agentic workflow that uses multiple models simultaneously on a GPU, it will need to swap models in and out of memory (because not every model fits). A single SNL40 chip can simultaneously hold over 100 models (trillions of parameters) in memory. If you are using open models, try the SambaCloud API to see what lightning speed looks like. Here is how: 1. Create a free account at: 2. Check the QuickStart guide: If you try the playground, check the speed you're getting with Llama 4 and DeepSeek, and post the results below. I've seen much higher numbers than I posted here, so I'm curious to see whether geography affects the speed.

Santiago

34,148 views • 1 year ago

An Anthropic researcher sat down next to me at a hackathon last week. Claude Opus 4.7 was running 4 agents on my laptop. Live. No manual input. She looked at the terminal and said: "What is this?" I showed her. 4 agents. 678 trades. 81% win rate. $16,200 last 30 days. She worked on the evals team. She'd never seen Claude pointed at 88 million on-chain trades. The setup is 3 public repos. All free. -> 88 million Polymarket trades. Every wallet. Every entry. Every exit. Every resolution. -> the framework that bridges Claude Opus 4.7 directly to live markets. Order placement, position tracking, exit timing. -> real-time WebSocket order book. Depth on both sides. No polling, no lag. Four agents. One loop. Agent 1 identifies which wallets win consistently across 88 million trades. Agent 2 reverse-engineers their entry timing. Agent 3 monitors order book volume spikes. Agent 4 sizes positions using Kelly. No overbet. Drawdown capped at 1.4% over 678 trades. 85% of windows get killed. No trade. The bot only enters when 3 signals align: -> Elite wallet consensus pointing the same direction. -> Price divergence with Binance and Coinbase both agreeing. -> Order book imbalance confirming the bias. Single-source price data was 57% accurate. All three together: 81%. Exit before resolution. Always. Losers hold to 0 or $1. The agents copy their exits. The agents don't gamble on that. My stack: Claude Opus 4.7 at $19/mo, VPS Hetzner at $4.99/mo, Everything else free. Total stats: $23.99/month. 30 days: 678 trades, 81% win rate, net +$16,200, max drawdown -1.2%, avg hold 4h 12m. She asked if Anthropic could test this internally. "We run Claude on benchmarks and evals. Nobody pointed it at a live market dataset with 88 million rows." Claude Opus 4.7 didn't need a system prompt. It read the wallet index, understood the signal structure, and wrote the combiner logic in one pass. The people who built the model hadn't thought to point it at this data. I had. Copy the live trades: -> all 4 agents run 24/7. The window is open right now. Save this, follow me and comment OPUS. I will send the guide to you.

An Anthropic researcher sat down next to me at a hackathon last week. Claude Opus 4.7 was running 4 agents on my laptop. Live. No manual input. She looked at the terminal and said: "What is this?" I showed her. 4 agents. 678 trades. 81% win rate. $16,200 last 30 days. She worked on the evals team. She'd never seen Claude pointed at 88 million on-chain trades. The setup is 3 public repos. All free. -> 88 million Polymarket trades. Every wallet. Every entry. Every exit. Every resolution. -> the framework that bridges Claude Opus 4.7 directly to live markets. Order placement, position tracking, exit timing. -> real-time WebSocket order book. Depth on both sides. No polling, no lag. Four agents. One loop. Agent 1 identifies which wallets win consistently across 88 million trades. Agent 2 reverse-engineers their entry timing. Agent 3 monitors order book volume spikes. Agent 4 sizes positions using Kelly. No overbet. Drawdown capped at 1.4% over 678 trades. 85% of windows get killed. No trade. The bot only enters when 3 signals align: -> Elite wallet consensus pointing the same direction. -> Price divergence with Binance and Coinbase both agreeing. -> Order book imbalance confirming the bias. Single-source price data was 57% accurate. All three together: 81%. Exit before resolution. Always. Losers hold to 0 or $1. The agents copy their exits. The agents don't gamble on that. My stack: Claude Opus 4.7 at $19/mo, VPS Hetzner at $4.99/mo, Everything else free. Total stats: $23.99/month. 30 days: 678 trades, 81% win rate, net +$16,200, max drawdown -1.2%, avg hold 4h 12m. She asked if Anthropic could test this internally. "We run Claude on benchmarks and evals. Nobody pointed it at a live market dataset with 88 million rows." Claude Opus 4.7 didn't need a system prompt. It read the wallet index, understood the signal structure, and wrote the combiner logic in one pass. The people who built the model hadn't thought to point it at this data. I had. Copy the live trades: -> all 4 agents run 24/7. The window is open right now. Save this, follow me and comment OPUS. I will send the guide to you.

slash1s

46,274 views • 2 months ago