[stingraycharles]

As always, benchmarks rarely paint the whole picture. It also seems like this article is somewhat biased, eg when Fable and Kimi are close but Fable wins it’s “dead heat”, but when Kimi wins it’s “Kimi wins”. GPT 5.6 seems to be missing as well.

I am really eager to give Kimi K3 a try, but I’ll reserve my judgement until I’ve worked with it for at least a few days.

[rogerrogerr]

The apparent bias may be explainable as it’s not remarkable for OpenAI or Anthropic to be slightly ahead. It _is_ remarkable for an open weights model to be better than the closed models from the trillion dollar (allegedly) companies.

[the_sleaze_]

I believe the Chinese government is angling to destroy the western economy and rise from the ashes. Instead of a billion a day to bomb some buildings and bridges they're intentionally hamstringing the biggest concentration of speculation in history

[malshe]

I agree. The commenter you replied to makes it sound like the Chinese models are coming out of tiny startups with meager resources. It's really not a David vs Goliath story.

[omnimus]

Is it? From what i could find Anthropic and OpenAI are hovering around 5000 employees where as Deepseek and Moonshot are more like 300. The funding/investments are similarly many times less.

I agree that 300 employees is not a small company but the overall outlook for Anthropic/OpenAI is not geat.

[rogerrogerr]

It’s not about who’s developing the models, it’s the fact that free alternatives that are neck-and-neck are available at all. What’s the story for OpenAI & Anthropic’s valuation if they have to compete against free-weight models? Starts to feel like a commodity.

[jmtulloss]

it appears that 3% is the threshold as 3.1% gets the nod the other way