aivs.tv

AI Coding

Lyric motion graphics on local GPUs, DeepSeek vs GLM — DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs GLM 5.3 Flash

0:00 / 1:00
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (top)
Posted by@yu_ichi_suzuki@yu_ichi_suzuki · on X
View post on X

2 likes402 views

Scoreboard2

  1. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017DeepSeekDeepSeek Harness
    Author’s pick
    • Top; unquantized, TP4 on SGLang, 1M context; 12 rounds
  2. GLM 5.3 FlashZhipu AI (Z.ai)DeepSeek Harness
    • Bottom; mixed-precision quantized, TP4 on vLLM, 512K context; 24 rounds

Prompt

Lyric motion graphics on local GPUs, DeepSeek vs GLMThe post doesn’t quote the prompt wording.

Author’s verdict
DeepSeek’s lyrics lined up almost from the start; GLM was faster at generation but its lyrics stayed out of sync after 24 rounds.

@yu_ichi_suzuki’s view (paraphrased)

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and GLM-5.3-Flash, both run locally on four DGX Spark-class machines in DeepSeek Harness, write a beat-synced canvas motion graphic for the same song from the song, lyrics and a background clip.

The post, itemised

Kind
Side-by-side
Task
Lyric motion graphics on local GPUs, DeepSeek vs GLM
Mode
Multi-turn
Posted
Video length
60.5 s
Likes
2
Views
402
Bookmarks
2
Sponsored
No

NotesThe author notes this is not a same-prompt comparison: the fix requests during each run differed.

Related

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017GLM 5.3 FlashDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs GLM 5.3 Flash

Posted by @yu_ichi_suzuki on X. aivs.tv claims no ownership: it hosts a copy for fast playback and links to the post on X. Request removal

More with these models