Inkling 2 Small

(thinkingmachines.ai)

88 points | by Philpax 3 hours ago

12 comments

  • itkovian_ 11 minutes ago
    The most important thing here is training was entirely nvfp4 - this is best model by far that has ever been trained in that precision and explains why they were able to do it so fast
  • Jackobrien 2 hours ago
    The best open models today have been “good enough” to do most knowledge work for a few months. This might be the first US one good enough too. That’s a big deal.

    Open weight US based Opus 5.5 within 12 months.

    • npc99 1 hour ago
      Inception Mercury 3 and Particle-1's model are also good.

      (I am assuming Inception is an American company, not sure TBH)

      • ray__ 50 minutes ago
        Agree, Mercury 3 is one of my favorite models right now...the speed is such a quality of life improvement.
      • martincsweiss 32 minutes ago
        Really? I'm surprised. What do you use it for?

        My read on Diffusion LLMs has been that it's cool tech, but only useful for things like like code autocomplete or editing a block of text.

        They don't beat autoregressive models on quality per compute, assuming you are serving lots of users and can batch requests.

        • serf 6 minutes ago
          MoA schemes that use proposers/task-separation/supervisory roles can still benefit from very fast diffusion models like mercury, the overall speed doesn't have to be bottle-necked by the slowest model -- that depends on the arrangement it's deployed in.

          but to your point , yeah diffusion models can be kind of brain dead without proper coaxing.

          my ideal arrangement is a smarter/bigger model supervising lots of proposals from diffusion models. The diffusion models spit out a big proposal each, the bigger model can vet something as minor as the headline or filename for each proposal, time still ends up being saved.

    • josh-wrale 19 minutes ago
      Muse Glimmer is pretty good.
    • kadoban 1 hour ago
      > Open weight US based Opus 5.5 within 12 months.

      Seems unlikely. Maybe open weight at all near there? That'd be great.

      • wolttam 1 hour ago
        People say this about the frontier every time, and the open models catch up in a matter of months every time.
        • kadoban 1 hour ago
          The open models catch up, the _US_ open models catch up much more slowly. Different incentives and cultures.
      • p-e-w 1 hour ago
        Why does that seem unlikely? The difference between frontier and open weights has been much less than 12 months for a while now.
        • satvikpendem 1 hour ago
          US open weights are much worse, way more than 12 months apart compared to frontier.
        • kadoban 1 hour ago
          > Why does that seem unlikely? The difference between frontier and open weights has been much less than 12 months for a while now.

          Frontier and open weights? Yes.

          Frontier and _US_ open weights? No.

          I'd expect a US open weights provider to suddenly get bought or go non-open if they get near Opus 5.5 anyway.

      • nghiemphucminh7 50 minutes ago
        [flagged]
  • epsteingpt 2 hours ago
    It's a nice, domestic open weight model.

    Without hundreds of millions in 9 days a small team is producing a model that can beat DeepSeek 4.1 and a platform to tune it.

    Optimistic for the future.

    • explosion-s 3 minutes ago
      Correctly if I’m wrong but isn’t inkling made by a very well funded startup from an ex - OpenAI exec iirc?
    • lifeisloving 0 minutes ago
      If you cant beat Deepseek on price im not using it. I actually dont care about beating DS in capabilities, I dont think you need more intelligence than Deepseek for 99% of the things people work on, and I dont want LLMs to do everything, that kind of defeats the point. I just need a smart fuzzer and to offload some tedious busy work.

      So why should I pay for 3-20x more for a few small percentage points in preformance. (I would prefer DS did some things better, but largely I can force my desired behavior), but I could only have access to Deepseek 4.1 and still beat almost everyone using opus/fable/astra on a productivity basis, I need automation tools not "do my entire job so Im worthless tools", and DS has already more than gotten there for me.

  • a11r 2 hours ago
    Very refreshing to see benchmarks where the reporting team is not the clear winner. They are claiming to be better than GLM 5.3 flash, which is impressive if it holds up outside of benchmarks.
  • tcdent 2 hours ago
    Is it SOTA yet? No. Are the domestic open weights labs demonstrating incredible velocity? Undeniably.
    • bashtoni 2 hours ago
      Distillation is the tide that lifts all boats
      • epsteingpt 2 hours ago
        Imagine if Mira Murati and John Schulman actually know what they're doing?
        • tcdent 1 hour ago
          Given the time to market and the date in which these labs were founded, I find it far more likely that the lag was representative of them establishing proper internal (RL etc) tooling.
  • Neywiny 1 hour ago
    I feel like this is a dumb question, but why are we spending any effort on wine comparisons? Is there a way to get rid of experts on these to just be ones for code?
    • randomblock1 33 minutes ago
      It's not like they're training on that. That's just a good showcase of how the model is good at generalizing & understanding (not benchmaxxed). You might want something similar to these experts for tasks like detecting anomalies or discoloration or whatever.
      • Neywiny 21 minutes ago
        Source they didn't train on it?
    • kccqzy 1 hour ago
      What if your coding project is related to wine? So you would want facts about wine to be inside the weights, not through web search.
      • Neywiny 48 minutes ago
        If it was about wine, why would I want one with a training data cutoff? I'd much rather have one that can query a database about wine
  • syntaxing 2 hours ago
    I can’t seem to find the cost? The craziness of deepseek flash 1017 is how ridiculously cheap it is for how capable it is.
    • Bolwin 2 hours ago
      AA lists it as $0.30/0.03/1 and cost per task is $1.18, about double that of deepseek
      • kadoban 1 hour ago
        Wow, that's pretty good.
      • syntaxing 1 hour ago
        It’s about 2-3X more expensive so about the same token efficiency as 1017. I can see this being a good option for the US.
  • ddxv 2 hours ago
    This is amazing! Can't wait to trying this out. Also, crazy that I found this on LinkedIn with more upvotes and discussion than the HN thread has.
  • singpolyma3 1 hour ago
    So basically comparable to DS4.1? But why bother to make something we already have?
    • multisport 1 hour ago
      Because its american.
      • singpolyma3 1 hour ago
        lol
        • reasonableklout 1 hour ago
          Sovereign open source AI is a real thing, lots of companies want to own their own intelligence but also don't trust the models coming out of China.
          • singpolyma3 27 minutes ago
            Why would you trust anything coming out of USA?
            • estearum 20 minutes ago
              The vast majority of users on this website wouldn't be trusting something coming out of the USA, they'd be trusting something in the USA.
  • lostmsu 2 hours ago
    > Small: 594 billion parameters

    cries in GPU racks

    • colingauvin 1 hour ago
      You could probably run a Q2-Q3 with 2x DGX Sparks. So...$12k at today's prices. Plenty of folks are running DS 4.1 Flash with Strata and some GPU + bulk in system memory. Maybe more like $3k-$4k? But speeds come down quite a bit.
  • jazzyjackson 2 hours ago
    I don’t like it. Poor form to squat on an old companies name like that, one which has a rich legacy in AI. I know the trademark was cancelled so all I can say is I don’t like it.
  • ycui7 17 minutes ago
    [dead]