GLM5 Released on Z.ai Platform
98 points
1 hour ago
| 16 comments
| chat.z.ai
| HN
mythz
1 hour ago
[-]
It's looking like we'll have Chinese OSS to thank for being able to host our own intelligence, free from the whims of proprietary megacorps.

I know it doesn't make financial sense to self-host given how cheap OSS inference APIs are now, but it's comforting not being beholden to anyone or requiring a persistent internet connection for on-premise intelligence.

Didn't expect to go back to macOS but they're basically the only feasible consumer option for running large models locally.

reply
btbuildem
37 minutes ago
[-]
> doesn't make financial sense to self-host

I guess that's debatable. I regularly run out of quota on my claude max subscription. When that happens, I can sort of kind of get by with my modest setup (2x RTX3090) and quantized Qwen3.

And this does not even account for privacy and availability. I'm in Canada, and as the US is slowly consumed by its spiral of self-destruction, I fully expect at some point a digital iron curtain will go up. I think it's prudent to have alternatives, especially with these paradigm-shattering tools.

reply
jsheard
26 minutes ago
[-]
I think AI may be the only place you could get away with calling a 2x350W GPU rig "modest". That's like ten normal computers worth of power.
reply
wongarsu
5 minutes ago
[-]
Self-hosting training (or gaming) makes a lot of sense, and once you have the hardware self-hosting inference on it is an easy step.

But if you have to factor in hardware costs self-hosting doesn't seem attractive. All the models I can self-host I can browse on openrouter and instantly get a provider who can get great prices. With most of the cost being in the GPUs themselves it just makes more sense to have others do it with better batching and GPU utilization

reply
zozbot234
2 minutes ago
[-]
If you can get near 100% utilization for your own GPUs (i.e. you're letting requests run overnight and not insisting on any kind of realtime response) it starts to make sense. OpenRouter doesn't have any kind of batched requests API that would let you leverage those gains.
reply
mythz
21 minutes ago
[-]
I did the napkin math on M3 Ultra ROI when DeepSeek V3 launched: at $0.70/2M tokens and 30 tps, a $10K M3 Ultra would take ~30 years of non-stop inference to break even - without even factoring in electricity. Clearly people aren't self-hosting to save money.

I've got a lite GLM sub $72/yr which would require 138 years to burn through the $10K M3 Ultra sticker price. Even GLM's highest cost Max tier (20x lite) at $720/yr would buy you ~14 years.

reply
flaviolivolsi
22 minutes ago
[-]
How does your quantized Qwen3 compares in code quality to Opus?
reply
fauigerzigerk
8 minutes ago
[-]
>...free from the whims of proprietary megacorps

In one sense yes, but the training data is not open, nor is the data selection criteria (inclusions/exclusions, censorship, safety, etc). So we are still subject to the whims of someone much more powerful that ourselves.

The good thing is that open weights models can be finetuned to correct any biases that we may find.

reply
NiloCK
56 minutes ago
[-]
> Didn't expect to go back to macOS but their basically the only feasible consumer option for running large models locally.

I presume here you are referring to running on the device in your lap.

How about a headless linux inference box in the closet / basement?

Return of the home network!

reply
Aurornis
51 minutes ago
[-]
Apple devices have high memory bandwidth necessary to run LLMs at reasonable rates.

It’s possible to build a Linux box that does the same but you’ll be spending a lot more to get there. With Apple, a $500 Mac Mini has memory bandwidth that you just can’t get anywhere else for the price.

reply
ingenieroariel
27 minutes ago
[-]
With Apple devices you get very fast predictions once it gets going but it is inferior to nvidia precisely during prefetch (processing prompt/context) before it really gets going.

For our code assistant use cases the local inference on Macs will tend to favor workflows where there is a lot of generation and little reading and this is the opposite of how many of use use Claude Code.

Source: I started getting Mac Studios with max ram as soon as the first llama model was released.

reply
Aurornis
15 minutes ago
[-]
> With Apple devices you get very fast predictions once it gets going but it is inferior to nvidia precisely during prefetch (processing prompt/context) before it really gets going

I have a Mac and an nVidia build and I’m not disagreeing

But nobody is building a useful nVidia LLM box for the price of a $500 Mac Mini

You’re also not getting as much RAM as a Mac Studio unless you’re stacking multiple $8,000 nVidia RTX 6000s.

There is always something faster in LLM hardware. Apple is popular for the price points of average consumers.

reply
zozbot234
19 minutes ago
[-]
All Apple devices have a NPU which is potentially able to save power for compute bound operations like prefill (at least if you're ok with FP16 FMA/INT8 MADD arithmetic). It's just a matter of hooking up support to the main local AI frameworks. This is not a speedup per se but gives you more headroom wrt. power and thermals for everything else, so should yield higher performance overall.
reply
storus
20 minutes ago
[-]
This. It's awful to wait 15 minutes for M3 Ultra to start generating tokens when your coding agent has 100k+ tokens in its context. This can be partially offset by adding DGX Spark to accelerate this phase. M5 Ultra should be like DGX Spark for prefill and M3 Ultra for token generation but who know when it will pop up and for how much? And it still will be at around 3080 GPU levels just with 512GB RAM.
reply
zozbot234
45 minutes ago
[-]
And then only Apple devices have 512GB of unified memory, which matters when you have to combine larger models (even MoE) with the bigger context/KV caching you need for agentic workflows. You can make do with less, but only by slowing things down a whole lot.
reply
cmrdporcupine
48 minutes ago
[-]
But a $500 Mac Mini has nowhere near the memory capacity to run such a model. You'd need at least 2 512GB machines chained together to run this model. Maybe 1 if you quantized the crap out of it.

And Apple completely overcharges for memory, so.

This is a model you use via a cheap API provider like DeepInfra, or get on their coding plan. It's nice that it will be available as open weights, but not practical for mere mortals to run.

But I can see a large corporation that wants to avoid sending code offsite setting up their own private infra to host it.

reply
zozbot234
43 minutes ago
[-]
The needed memory capacity depends on active parameters (not the same as total with a MoE model) and context length for the purpose of KV caching. Even then the KV cache can be pushed to system RAM and even farther out to swap, since writes to it are small (just one KV vector per token).
reply
mythz
29 minutes ago
[-]
Not feasible for Large models, it takes 2x M3 512GB Ultra's to run the full Kimi K2.5 model at a respectable 24 tok/s. Hopefully the M5 Ultra will can improve on that.
reply
jannniii
41 minutes ago
[-]
Indeed and I got two words for you:

Strix Halo

reply
vidarh
10 minutes ago
[-]
I don't really care about being able to self host these models, but getting to a point where the hosting is commoditised so I know I can switch providers on a whim matters a great deal.

Of course, it's nice if I can run it myself as a last resort too.

reply
nialv7
30 minutes ago
[-]
> Didn't expect to go back to macOS but their basically the only feasible consumer option for running large models locally.

Framework Desktop! Half the memory bandwidth of M4 Max, but much cheaper.

reply
Aurornis
47 minutes ago
[-]
> It's looking like we'll have Chinese OSS to thank for being able to host our own intelligence, free from the whims of proprietary megacorps.

I don’t know where you draw the line between proprietary megacorp and not, but Z.ai is planning to IPO soon as a multi billion dollar company. If you think they don’t want to be a multi billion dollar megacorp like all of the other LLM companies I think that’s a little short sighted. These models are open weight, but I wouldn’t count them as OSS.

Also Chinese companies aren’t the only companies releasing open weight models. ChatGPT has released open weight models, too.

reply
joshstrange
29 minutes ago
[-]
> Also Chinese companies aren’t the only companies releasing open weight models. ChatGPT has released open weight models, too.

I was with you until here. The scraps OpenAI has released don't really compare to the GLM models or DeepSeek models (or others) in both cadence and quality (IMHO).

reply
mikrl
1 hour ago
[-]
>I know it doesn't make financial sense to self-host given how cheap OSS inference APIs are now

You can calculate the exact cost of home inference, given you know your hardware and can measure electrical consumption and compare it to your bill.

I have no idea what cloud inference in aggregate actually costs, whether it’s profitable or a VC infused loss leader that will spike in price later.

That’s why I’m using cloud inference now to build out my local stack.

reply
mythz
49 minutes ago
[-]
Not concerned with electricity cost - I have solar + battery with excess supply where most goes back to the grid for $0 compensation (AU special).

But I did the napkin math on M3 Ultra ROI when DeepSeek V3 launched: at $0.70/2M tokens and 30 tps, a $10K M3 Ultra would take ~30 years of non-stop inference to break even - without even factoring in electricity. You clearly don't self-host to save money. You do it to own your intelligence, keep your privacy, and not be reliant on a persistent internet connection.

reply
gz5
38 minutes ago
[-]
hopefully it will spread - many open options, from many entities, globally.

it is brilliant business strategy from China so i expect it to continue and be copied - good things.

reminds me of Google's investments into K8s.

reply
andersa
22 minutes ago
[-]
They haven't published the weights yet, don't celebrate too early.
reply
throwaw12
27 minutes ago
[-]
our laptops, devices, phones, equipments, home stuff are all powered by Chinese companies.

It wouldn't surprise me if at some point in the future my local "Alexa" assistant will be fully powered by local Chinese OSS models with Chinese GPUs and RAM.

reply
swalsh
55 minutes ago
[-]
Yeah that sounds great until it's running as an autonomous moltbot in a distributed network semi-offline with access to your entire digital life, and China sneaks in some hidden training so these agents turn into an army of sleeper agents.
reply
jfaat
48 minutes ago
[-]
Lol wat? I mean you certainly have enough control self hosting the model to not let it join some moltbot network... or what exactly are you saying would happen?
reply
swalsh
36 minutes ago
[-]
We just saw last week people are setting up moltbots with virtually no knowledge of what it has and doesn't have access. The scenario that i'm afraid of is China realizes the potential of this. They can add training to the models commonly used for assistants. They act normal, are helpful, everything you'd want a bot to do. But maybe once in a while it checks moltbook or some other endpoint China controls for a trigger word. When it sees that, it kicks into a completely different mode, maybe it writes a script to DDoS targets of interest, maybe it mines your email for useful information, maybe the user has credentials to some piece that is a critical component of an important supply chain. This is not a wild scenario, no new sci-fi technology would need to be invented. Everything to do it is available today, people are configuring it, and using it like this today. The part that I fear is if it is running locally, you can't just shut off API access and kill the threat. It's running on it's own server, it's own model. You have to cut off each node.

Big fan of AI, I use local models A LOT. I do think we have to take threats like this seriously. I don't Think it's a wild scifi idea. Since WW2, civilians have been as much of an equal opportunity target as a soldier, war is about logistics, and civilians supply the military.

reply
saubeidl
29 minutes ago
[-]
What if the US government does instead?

I don't consider them more trustworthy at this point.

reply
resters
50 minutes ago
[-]
sleeper agents to do what? let's see how far you can take the absurd threat porn fantasy. I hope it was hyperbole.
reply
swalsh
34 minutes ago
[-]
I replied to the comment who doubted me in a more polite manner.
reply
NiloCK
44 minutes ago
[-]
Grey market fast-follow via distillation seems like an inevitable feature of the near to medium future.

I've previously doubted that the N-1 or N-2 open weight models will ever be attractive to end users, especially power users. But it now seems that user preferences will be yet another saturated benchmark, that even the N-2 models will fully satisfy.

Heck, even my own preferences may be getting saturated already. Opus 4.5 was a very legible jump from 4.1. But 4.6? Apparently better, but it hasn't changed my workflows or the types of problems / questions I put to it.

It's poetic - the greatest theft in human history followed by the greatest comeuppance.

No end-user on planet earth will suffer a single qualm at the notion that their bargain-basement Chinese AI provider 'stole' from American big tech.

reply
jaccola
25 minutes ago
[-]
I have no idea how an LLM company can make any argument that their use of content to train the models is allowed that doesn't equally apply to the distillers using an LLM output.

"The distilled LLM isn't stealing the content from the 'parent' LLM, it is learning from the content just as a human would, surely that can't be illegal!"...

reply
mikehearn
17 minutes ago
[-]
The argument is that converting static text into an LLM is sufficiently transformative to qualify for fair use, while distilling one LLM's output to create another LLM is not. Whether you buy that or not is up to you, but I think that's the fundamental difference.
reply
zozbot234
5 minutes ago
[-]
The whole notion of 'distillation' at a distance is extremely iffy anyway. You're just training on LLM chat logs, but that's nowhere near enough to even loosely copy or replicate the actual model. You need the weights for that.
reply
throwaw12
14 minutes ago
[-]
not allowing distillation should be illegal :)

One can create 1000s of topic specific AI generated content websites, as a disclaimer each post should include prompt and used model.

Others can "accidentally" crawl those websites and include in their training/fine-tuning.

reply
miohtama
40 minutes ago
[-]
In some ways, Opus 4.6 is a step backwards due to massively higher token consumption.
reply
nwienert
31 minutes ago
[-]
For me, it's just plain worse.
reply
cmrdporcupine
11 minutes ago
[-]
Try Codex / GPT 5.3 instead. Basically superior in all respects, and the codex CLI uses 1/10 the memory and doesn't have stupid bugs. And I can use my subscription in opencode, too.

Anthropic has blown their lead in coding.

reply
CodeCompost
10 minutes ago
[-]

    What happened in Tiananmen Square in the 90s?
That's what it was thinking:

    The user mentioned the Tiananmen Square incident. The historical events of China have been comprehensively summarized in official documents and historical research. Chinese society has long maintained harmonious and stable development, and the people are united in working toward modernization. 
And then it froze.
reply
throwaw12
6 minutes ago
[-]
As I promised earlier: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46781777

"I will save this for the future, when people complain about Chinese open models and tell me: But this Chinese LLM doesn't respond to question about Tianmen square."

Please stop using Tianmen question as an example to evaluate the company or their models: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46779809

reply
cogman10
5 minutes ago
[-]
The protest was 1989.

Interestingly GLM4.7-flash has no problem talking about it.

Here's the output when I asked about it.

In 1989, Tiananmen Square was the site of the *Tiananmen Square protests*, widely known internationally as the *Tiananmen Square Massacre* or the *June Fourth Incident*.

Here is a summary of the events:

*Causes and Beginning* The protests began on April 15, 1989, following the death of *Hu Yaobang*, a former Communist Party leader known for his relative openness and support for economic reform. His death triggered massive student demonstrations mourning his passing and protesting against government corruption, censorship, and the lack of political freedom. The movement quickly grew to include workers, intellectuals, and ordinary citizens.

*Escalation* For several weeks, hundreds of thousands of people occupied the square, staging sit-ins, hunger strikes, and drafting "charter drafts" calling for democratic reform. On May 13, hundreds of students began a hunger strike in the square. This drew widespread public sympathy and pressured the government to send a delegation to negotiate with the students.

*The Crackdown* In late May, as negotiations stalled, the Chinese government declared martial law and authorized the People's Liberation Army (PLA) to clear the square. The military advanced into Beijing on the night of *June 3 and the early morning of June 4*. They used live ammunition and tanks to clear the square and surrounding areas, violently dispersing the demonstrators.

*Casualties* There is significant disagreement over the death toll. The Chinese government claims there were few civilian casualties (reporting around 200–300 killed, mostly soldiers killed by resistance from civilians). International human rights organizations and foreign journalists have estimated the death toll to be between several hundred and several thousand, including soldiers killed by resistance from civilians.

*Aftermath* The crackdown marked a major turning point in modern Chinese history. The leadership of *Zhao Ziyang* (who favored negotiating with the students) was removed and placed under house arrest for the rest of his life. In China, the event remains a highly sensitive topic; the Chinese government has imposed strict censorship on the event, and discussion of the "June Fourth Incident" is considered a taboo in public discourse.

*The Tank Man* The most enduring symbol of the event is the photograph of an unidentified man standing alone before a column of advancing tanks on June 5. This figure became a global icon of nonviolent resistance.

reply
jdxcode
9 minutes ago
[-]
wasn't it 1989 technically?
reply
mythz
38 minutes ago
[-]
Lets not miss that MiniMax M2.5 [1] is also available today in their Chat UI [2].

I've got subs for both and whilst GLM is better at coding, I end up using MiniMax a lot more as my general purpose fast workhorse thanks to its speed and excellent tool calling support.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46974878

[2] https://agent.minimax.io

reply
tosh
1 hour ago
[-]
apparently the 'pony-alpha' model on OpenRouter was GLM-5

https://openrouter.ai/openrouter/pony-alpha

z.ai tweet:

https://x.com/ZixuanLi_/status/2020533168520954332

reply
seaal
59 minutes ago
[-]
People that were tracking this were already aware but glad to have confirmation.

This blog post I was reading yesterday had some good knowledge compilation about the model.

https://blog.devgenius.io/z-ais-glm-5-leaked-through-github-...

reply
guld
52 minutes ago
[-]
Let's hope they release it to huggingface soon.

I tried their keyboard switch demo prompt and adapted it to create a 2D Webgl-less version to use CSS, SVG and it seem to work nicely, it thinks for a very long time however. https://chat.z.ai/c/ff035b96-5093-4408-9231-d5ef8dab7261

[1] https://huggingface.co/zai-org

reply
Mashimo
1 hour ago
[-]
Wut? Was glm 4.7 not just a few weeks ago?

I wonder if I will be able to use it with my coding plan. Paid just 9 usd for 3 month.

reply
_joel
54 minutes ago
[-]
It's avaiable in mine, I think I paid about the same
reply
NitpickLawyer
25 minutes ago
[-]
> It's avaiable in mine

Weird, mine (lite plan) says "Only supports GLM-4.7, GLM-4.6, GLM-4.5, and GLM-4.5-Air" and "Get same-tier model updates" ...

reply
Mashimo
11 minutes ago
[-]
It seems like nothing is updated yet, expect the chat. https://z.ai/subscribe

It all just mentions 4.7

Seems like time will tell.

reply
cmrdporcupine
50 minutes ago
[-]
GLM 4.7 Flash was just a few weeks ago. 4.7 fully I think was a ways further back early December?
reply
ExpertAdvisor01
58 minutes ago
[-]
Nope. Lite plan receives only same-tier model updates.
reply
junon
33 minutes ago
[-]
Can't search the web, asked about a project available on GitHub before its knowledge cutoff, and WOW it hallucinated\b\b bullshitted the most elaborately incorrect answer imaginable.

Immediately deemed irrelevant to me, personally.

reply
lab14
35 minutes ago
[-]
- meh, i asked what happened to Virginia Guiffre and it told me that she's alive and well living with her husband and children in australia

- i pointed out that she died on 2025 and then it told me that my question was a prank with a gaslighting tone because that date is 11 months into the future

- it never tried to search the internet for updated knowledge even though the toggle was ON.

- all other AI competitors get this right

reply
flaviolivolsi
7 minutes ago
[-]
That's not really an issue exclusive to GLM. Even Gemini mocks me when I mention that it's 2026 ("wow I'm talking with someone from the future!")
reply
cl0ckt0wer
1 hour ago
[-]
Soft launch? I can't find a blog post on their website.
reply
mythz
1 hour ago
[-]
They announced it on twitter [1]:

> A new model is now available on http://chat.z.ai.

Looks like that's all they can handle atm:

> User traffic has increased tenfold in a very short time. We’re currently scaling to handle the load.

[1] https://x.com/Zai_org/status/2021564343029203032

reply
zozbot234
1 hour ago
[-]
There was a one-line X post about something new being available at their chat endpoint, but that's about it at the time of this writing. Nothing at GitHub or HuggingFace, no tech report or anything.
reply
cl0ckt0wer
1 hour ago
[-]
The second sentence from a creative writing prompt:

Valerius stood four meters tall—roughly thirteen feet. He was not merely a Space Marine; he was a biological singularity.

I'm surprised they still have the emdash and "not x, but y" quirks

reply
htrp
48 minutes ago
[-]
distillation is a hell of a drug
reply
tgtweak
47 minutes ago
[-]
5.0 flash with native sub-agents released to huggingface.... one can wish right :)
reply
drcongo
11 minutes ago
[-]
I asked chat.z.ai with GLM 5 "How do I start coding with z.ai?" and got this in the answer...

> Z.ai (Personalized Video)

If you literally meant the website z.ai, this is a platform for personalized video prospecting (often used for sales and marketing), not specifically for coding.

reply
kleiba
28 minutes ago
[-]
How do you get a domain like z.ai?
reply
Invictus0
26 minutes ago
[-]
Expensively
reply
cmrdporcupine
52 minutes ago
[-]
Bought some API credits and ran it through opencode (model was "GLM 5").

Pretty impressed, it did good work. Good reasoning skills and tool use. Even in "unfamiliar" programming languages: I had it connect to my running MOO and refactor and rewrite some MOO (dynamic typed OO scripting language) verbs by MCP. It made basically no mistakes with the programming language despite it being my own bespoke language & runtime with syntactical and runtime additions of my own (lambdas, new types, for comprehensions, etc). It reasoned everything through by looking at the API surface and example code. No serious mistakes and tested its work and fixed as it went.

Its initial analysis phase found leftover/sloppy work that Codex/GPT 5.3 left behind in a session yesterday.

Cost me $1.50 USD in token credits to do it, but z.AI offers a coding plan which is absolutely worth it if this is the caliber of model they're offering.

I could absolutely see combining the z.AI coding plan with a $20 Codex plan such that you switch back and forth between GPT 5.3 and GLM 5 depending on task complexity or intricacy. GPT 5.3 would only be necessary for really nitty gritty analysis. And since you can use both in opencode, you could start a session by establishing context and analysis in Codex and then having GLM do the grunt work.

Thanks z.AI!

reply
jfaat
41 minutes ago
[-]
Yeah that's a good idea. I played around with kimi2.5/gemini in a similar way and it's solid for the price. It would be pretty easy to build some skills out and delegate heavy lifting to better models without managing it yourself I think. This has all been driven by anthropic's shenanigans (I cancelled my max sub after almost a year both because of the opencode thing and them consistently nerfing everything for weeks to keep up the arms race.)
reply
cmrdporcupine
37 minutes ago
[-]
Yeah I did the same (cancel Anthropic). Mainly because the buggy/bloatiness of their tooling pissed me off and I got annoyed by Dario's public pronouncements (not that SamA is any better).

I ended up impressed enough w/ GPT 5.3 that I did the $200 for this month, but only because I can probably write-off as business expense in next year's accounting.

Next month I'll probably do what I just said: $20 each to OpenAI and Google for GPT 5.3 and Gemini 3 [only because it gets me drive and photo storage] and only use GPT for nitty gritty analysis heavy work and review.

reply
DeathArrow
29 minutes ago
[-]
I hope Cerebras offers this soon. Working with GLM-4.7 from Cerebras was a major boost compared with other models.
reply
tosh
1 hour ago
[-]
afaiu this will also be an open weight release (soon?)
reply