It’s still a bit with only two possible values. But they add a scaling factor to a group of them (128 for example) which when you factor in, results in a fractional number of bits per parameter.
The problem, of course, is if you run the UD_Q2 variant (Unsloth) which does only post-training, the number is pretty close to 1-bit model here and the 5% drop in tool-call is significant than it suggests in real-life use cases.
I've tried a couple in LM Studio - the GGUF one and the MLX one - but neither worked there. Anyone else get them to work? Might be that LM Studio needs to upgrade their llama.cpp or MLX engines first.
Doing some naive math, the F16 filesize is ~53.8gb, the 1-bit version is ~3.8gb, about 7% of the original size. The F16 size is roughly 2x param count, so that gives a rough ballpark of ~110B.
I was trying Ornith 9B locally (it's up on Ollama) which claims:
> Ornith-1.0-9B, which can be easily deployed on edge devices, matches or exceeds the performance of much larger models such as Gemma 4-31B and Qwen 3.6 35B.
Oh, I don't actually know the difference if you want to explain it
The title says it's 27B grade running on a phone and what I was comparing it to in my mind was a model that runs at 35B grade that could presumably run on a phone "better"?
edit: I asked AI for the difference and understand a little better, thanks for the heads up to learn the difference between models... I think the thing was, although ornith was created for a specific agentic purpose, it was still outperforming a previous generalist model I had running locally (so in my mind I thought it was still a better local model) - I'd like to try bonsai out if I can figure out how to run it lol
Orinth was not impressive in my vibes testing, I just completed my first grid analysis with real evals on qwen 27b. I can now scale that grid analysis and intend to include the qwen 9b ftunes I've seen going around. They were actually a main motivation because so many claim this or that one is better, but very little in the way of evals
I don’t know if the llama cpp implementation is wonky (and only supports the binary version) but it’s a lot slower than 35B-A3B @ Q4_KM + MTP with CPU offloading.
What's the hiring space and business strategy around all of these smaller AI labs? Its really cool that people like these guys get paid to optimize models and give them out for free (open source). Do a lot of these labs have forward deployed engineers doing integrations with customers who want local models? Is there a general shift towards the local model crowd?
If you read to the bottom of the page, it says they're funded by a few people, and one of them is Samsung. I'm betting Samsung wants to be able to ship a capable AI system on a future model of their phone so they can compete with Apple.
Agreed, and the prevailing wisdom now seems to be that unless you can release a truly frontier model, you might as well release yours as open source to undercut your competition.
I've been watching and waiting for this, interested to see how smart it is, as it fits with my interest of getting the smartest possible model running in 10GB of VRAM (RTX3060 that has to drive 2 monitors and run an llm)
The KV-cache memory usage also seems remarkably frugal, even at the full context length. That could make this model particularly useful in multi-agent coding workflows.
I wish KV-cache memory usage and related optimizations were discussed more clearly in new model announcements and demos.
quanting kv cache hurts attention / recall, and long-form tasks by proxy. Model families and sizes have different tolerances to quant ting different parts of the model, same for intended tasks.
Why make this comment without having tried it first? It very clearly is not useless and performs a lot better than one might expect. I am currently waiting to do more benchmarks of it in comparison to the full weight model, but it seems promising/better than Mistral Nemo at a lower file size.
Awesome! I've been waiting for them to start scaling ternary models for over a year[1]. Excited to try it out, typical Qwen 27B is too heavy for me to run on my local hardware at reasonable speeds.
Quite weird that heavy quantization methods on a huge dense model gives better results than slightly quantized MoE models like 35B-A3B from Google.
At this point all the different quantization and 'compression' (look at MPO applied to LLMs...) techniques start feeling a bit like snake oil. It's just a gut feeling - or scores on benchmarks models are optimized for - what ends up deciding whether a technique is good enough or not.
alvatech | 2 hours ago
bensyverson | 2 hours ago
NitpickLawyer | an hour ago
Ternary Bonsai 27B uses ternary {−1, 0, +1} weights with FP16 group-wise scaling, giving a true 1.71 effective bits per weight.
1-bit Bonsai 27B uses binary {−1, +1} weights with the same group-wise scaling, giving 1.125 effective bits per weight.
PcChip | 51 minutes ago
is it a float? if so, how many bits is the float?
I've never heard of a bit ever having more than two possible values
zawaideh | 36 minutes ago
petu | 33 minutes ago
e.g. 5 trits (243 states) into a byte gives 1.6 bits per trit: https://compilade.net/blog/ternary-packing
liuliu | 2 hours ago
liuliu | 2 hours ago
Havoc | an hour ago
I can just see their image tool on the app store
Catloafdev | an hour ago
Available on HuggingFace: https://huggingface.co/collections/prism-ml/bonsai-27b
simonw | an hour ago
I've tried a couple in LM Studio - the GGUF one and the MLX one - but neither worked there. Anyone else get them to work? Might be that LM Studio needs to upgrade their llama.cpp or MLX engines first.
trollbridge | 48 minutes ago
bansaltushar | 42 minutes ago
Details are here -> https://github.com/PrismML-Eng/Bonsai-demo/blob/main/README....
xyzsparetimexyz | an hour ago
Catloafdev | an hour ago
syntaxing | an hour ago
erelong | an hour ago
> Ornith-1.0-9B, which can be easily deployed on edge devices, matches or exceeds the performance of much larger models such as Gemma 4-31B and Qwen 3.6 35B.
https://deep-reinforce.com/ornith_1_0.html
Only tried it so much so far; it did a little better than Qwen 9B
liuliu | an hour ago
gunalx | 27 minutes ago
janalsncm | an hour ago
erelong | 55 minutes ago
The title says it's 27B grade running on a phone and what I was comparing it to in my mind was a model that runs at 35B grade that could presumably run on a phone "better"?
edit: I asked AI for the difference and understand a little better, thanks for the heads up to learn the difference between models... I think the thing was, although ornith was created for a specific agentic purpose, it was still outperforming a previous generalist model I had running locally (so in my mind I thought it was still a better local model) - I'd like to try bonsai out if I can figure out how to run it lol
verdverm | 24 minutes ago
syntaxing | an hour ago
pulse7 | an hour ago
sigbottle | an hour ago
trollbridge | 49 minutes ago
doctoboggan | 22 minutes ago
thomasjb | an hour ago
dakolli | 21 minutes ago
kristianp | an hour ago
luckystarr | an hour ago
gunalx | 30 minutes ago
verdverm | 29 minutes ago
When I saw 27b on a phone, I thought not fitting, big phone, or aggressive quant. NVFP4 still takes 27G before KV cache.
erwan577 | an hour ago
I wish KV-cache memory usage and related optimizations were discussed more clearly in new model announcements and demos.
verdverm | 27 minutes ago
wy35 | 19 minutes ago
wmf | 8 minutes ago
theLiminator | 14 minutes ago
oceansweep | 12 minutes ago
Arcuru | 6 minutes ago
[1] https://jackson.dev/post/dont-sleep-on-bitnet/
comandillos | 6 minutes ago
At this point all the different quantization and 'compression' (look at MPO applied to LLMs...) techniques start feeling a bit like snake oil. It's just a gut feeling - or scores on benchmarks models are optimized for - what ends up deciding whether a technique is good enough or not.