3 ms·
No, Opus cannot be 10x larger than the chinese models. If Opus was 10x larger than the chinese models, then Google Vertex/Amazon Bedrock would serve it 10x slo
by jychang 7mo ago
No, Opus cannot be 10x larger than the chinese models.
If Opus was 10x larger than the chinese models, then Google Vertex/Amazon Bedrock would serve it 10x slower than Deepseek/Kimi/etc.
That's not the case. They're in the same order of magnitude of speed.
- bakugo 7mo agoI agree that Opus almost definitely isn't anywhere near that big, but AWS throughput might not be a great way to measure model size. According to OpenRouter, AWS serves the latest Opus and Sonnet at roughly the same speed. It's likely that they simply allocate hardware differently per model.
- jychang 7mo agoThe numbers look about right. Opus 4.5 is about 1.5x the size of Sonnet 4.6, and Opus 4/4.1 is about 5x the size of Sonnet 4.5/4.6. Note that Opus 4.5 is about 1/3 the size of Opus 4/4.1 (and 1/3 the price in the API)
- Filligree 7mo agoThey serve it about 2x slower. So it must have about 2x the active parameters. It could still be 10x larger overall, though that would not make it 10x more expensive.
- jychang 7mo agoYes, but I highly doubt they would increase sparsity much vs the chinese models. That's how you get Llama 4. Pretty much every major lab settled on ~3-5% sparsity for a reason.
- torginus 7mo agoMy understanding is that for MoE with top K architecture, model size doesn't really matter, as you can have 10 32GB experts or a thousand, if only 2-3 of them are active at the same time, your inference workload will be identical, only your hard drive traffic will incread. Which seems to be the case, seeing how hungry the industry lately has been for hard drives.