DE version is available. Content is displayed in original English for accuracy.
Advertisement
Advertisement
⚡ Community Insights
Discussion Sentiment
91% Positive
Analyzed from 1165 words in the discussion.
Trending Topics
#bonsai#model#https#ternary#llama#run#prism#speed#gguf#smaller

Discussion (37 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews
So far feels smarter than Bonsai 1 27B, it’s slightly larger than the Q1_0 quant. Super exciting stuff :)
This should work:
Then open http://localhost:8331 for the (very good) baked in llama-server web UI... or run a prompt via the API like this: That's running at ~20 token/second for me on an M5 Pro (after a server restart I got 44 token/second, not sure why), but I'm pretty sure something isn't working right, on startup the server said "ggml_metal_device_init: - the tensor API is not supported in this environment - disabling".https://tools.simonwillison.net/markdown-svg-renderer?url=ht...
It took 18 minutes 20 seconds. Pretty decent for a 5.5GB model file.
They have a demo repo with a setup.sh script:
https://github.com/PrismML-Eng/Bonsai-demo
The release tag and weight file you suggest doesn’t match what they wrote.
If you have found better instructions and they work then use those instead!
Personally I prefer to download models directly rather than running some `./setup.sh` script where I need to then review what it does first.
Would be good to know if the release and weights from their demo repo work better. I’m trying on a 4090 and will report back.
If I recall correctly, a recent post [1] has shown that Q2 quants (with like 2.6 bpw) of the same base Qwen model sit at the edge between "noticeably worse" and Q1's "useless". I took a quick glance at Bonsai's blog posts, and don't really see them comparing themselves to "typical" quants or explaining what's the special sauce that makes them better?
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49611128
I keep seeing this being used when people talk about efficiency or performance gains and it's just very unintuitive language.
One other way to map both types of linguistic statement consistently to math is to interpret "9x" as "there is a 9 times difference between these two things" and then smaller/larger tells you which end of that separation the subject is rather than specifying whether the multiplication builds up or down.
Conversely, 9x [filesize/natural number] is bigger. Every time. At least in the basic maths used by most people. There is no conversion into other units.
Therefore "9x smaller" when talking about a natural number like filesize is a nonsense statement in logic terms. If you strive for unambiguous phrasing - which is a significant part of the programming experience - this logical nonsense might well perturb you.
But english language is a flexible thing and if the phrase communicates your intent to your audience then that's fine by me.
Remember to clear the downloaded weights afterward.
Like the last model, it's amazing they work as well as they do. Use it for any longer task and they fall apart spectacularly and in interesting ways.
This will hopefully be better, though it'd be a _very_ surprising increase in performace at the size they say. Would love to see more about how it benchmarks.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49732931
And speed matters a lot for many use cases