Base-10's Charlie O'Neill on why Kimi and GLM are "almost objectively" better than Opus 5
Summary
The article recommends a YouTube episode featuring Charlie O'Neill from Baseten, discussing how Kimi and GLM models are superior to Opus 5 and addressing skepticism about AI progress and AGI.
Similar Articles
@peterom: 1) GLM 5.2 + Kimi 2.7 feel only marginally less intelligent than top-tier models 2) That additional intelligence matter…
A thread argues that GLM 5.2 and Kimi 2.7 are only marginally less intelligent than top-tier models, and with proper planning/systems can handle 95-99% of complex tasks. It warns that U.S. regulation could favor Chinese AI players.
IS GLM 5.2, Kimi 2.7 still worth it?
A discussion questioning whether older AI models like GLM 5.2 and Kimi 2.7 remain relevant for coding now that newer models such as Kimi K3, Qwen 3.8 Max, and DeepSeek V4 Pro are arriving.
Can Kimi K3 solve the same problems that Claude Fable can?
A discussion questioning whether open-source models like Kimi K3 or GLM can replicate the mathematical and cybersecurity problem-solving achievements recently demonstrated by closed-source models from OpenAI and Anthropic.
@philipkiely: On sample workloads: Opus 4.8 -> Kimi 2.7 Code | 82% savings GPT 5.5 -> GLM 5.2 | 77% savings Gemini 3.5 Flash -> Nemot…
A tweet from Philip Kiely highlights cost savings by switching from closed-source AI models to open-source alternatives, using Baseten's ROI calculator tool.
UPDATE: "Gentle Coding" is mathematically proven. 1,500+ test runs show major gain for Kimi K2.6 and even more for GLM-5.1! GPT 5.4/5.5 and Claude Sonnet 3.5/Opus 4.6 also better, with ZERO REGRESSION ACROSS THE BOARD.
The 'Gentle Coding' technique is empirically validated across 1,500+ tests, showing significant improvements (zero regression) for multiple models including Kimi K2.6, GLM-5.1, GPT 5.4/5.5, and Claude Sonnet 3.5/Opus 4.6 by reducing looping and hallucinations.