• afk_strats@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    23 hours ago

    Im not sure if it’s a me issue but that’s a static image. I figure you posted where they throw a brick into it.

    Also, if this post was serious, how does a highly quantitized model compare to something less quantitized but with fewer parameters? I haven’t seen benchmarks other than perplexity which isn’t a good measure of capability?

    • Xylight@lemdro.idOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      23 hours ago

      It’s a webp animation. Maybe your client doesn’t display it right, i’ll replace it with a gif

      Regarding your other question, I tend to see better results with higher params + lower precision, versus low params + higher precision. That’s just based on “vibes” though, I haven’t done any real testing. Based on what I’ve seen, Q4 is the lowest safe quantization, and beyond that, the performance really starts to drop off. unfortunately even at 1 bit quantization I can’t run GLM 4.6 on my system

      • afk_strats@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        20 hours ago

        That fixed it.

        I am a fan of this quant cook. He often posts perplexity charts.

        https://huggingface.co/ubergarm

        All of his quants require ik_llama which works best with Nvidia CUDA but they can do a lot with RAM+vRAM or even hard drive + rams. I don’t know if 8gb is enough for everything.

      • hendrik@palaver.p3x.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        23 hours ago

        What’s higher precision for you? What I remember from the old measurements for ggml is, lower than Q3 rarely makes sense and roughly at Q3 you’d think about switching to a smaller variant. But on the other hand everything above Q6 only shows marginal differences in perplexity, so Q6 or Q8 or full precision are basically the same thing.

        • Xylight@lemdro.idOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          22 hours ago

          As a memory-poor user (hence the 8gb vram card), I consider Q8+ to be is higher precision, Q4-Q5 is mid-low precision (what i typically use), and below that is low precision

          • hendrik@palaver.p3x.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            21 hours ago

            Thanks. That sounds reasonable. Btw you’re not the only poor person around, I don’t even own a graphics card… I’m not a gamer so I never saw any reason to buy one before I took interest in AI. I’ll do inference on my CPU and that’s connected to more than 8GB of memory. It’s just slow 😉 But I guess I’m fine with that. I don’t rely on AI, it’s just tinkering and I’m patient. And a few times a year I’ll rent some cloud GPU by the hour. Maybe one day I’ll buy one myself.

    • hendrik@palaver.p3x.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      23 hours ago

      I think perplexity is still central to evaluating models. It’s notoriously difficult to come up with other ways to measure these things.