opt-175B doesn't exist; the largest one is opt-66B. And, at least in the tests I've run (not with the biggest one, but only up to a dozen billion parameters), a

opt-175B doesn't exist; the largest one is opt-66B. And, at least in the tests I've run (not with the biggest one, but only up to a dozen billion parameters), all the opt models severely underperform with respect to even much smaller models. To the point that the launch of OPT (before BLOOM) was literally advertised as "the biggest OpenSource language model released to date", because they couldn't push on much else. BLOOM goes indeed up to 175B parameters, and is certainly better than OPT. However, at least in my specific tests, it's still significantly inferior to OpenAI models, and actually on par with a few smaller models. There's also a "newer" fine-tuned model, called BLOOMZ, but at least in my tests it's even worse. Of course, that depends a lot on what you ask the model to do... If LLAMA can indeed match OpenAI products, and do so with much fewer parameters, then it would be really great, and I'd really like to test it. However, even if the weights are now in the wild, using them would be clearly against the user agreement, and there's no way I'm going to do that in my work time :-) so let's hope Meta will come to sense and release them with a more friendly set of terms...