跳到正文
7月20日周一
7月19日周日
7月18日周六
  1. Rohan Paul40

    Kimi K3 在 SpreadsheetBench 2 上排名第一,超越 Claude Fable 5,成为首个超越所有闭源模型的开源权重模型。该基准测试包含 321 个专家任务,涵盖财务建模、工作簿调试和原生图表创建,平均每个任务涉及 11.8 个工作表和 593.5 次单元格变更。Kimi K3 完成了 34.8% 的工作流,在金融、规划和运营场景中表现出色。

    引用AfterQuery@AfterQuery

    Kimi K3 ranks #1 on @AfterQuery's SpreadsheetBench 2, surpassing Claude Fable 5. An open weight model now outperforms all closed-sourced models. Read more in the Kimi K3 blog and SpreadsheetBench 2 paper linked below. Congrats to the @kimi_moonshot team on the incredible model!

  2. Rohan Paul56

    领先开源模型在长周期网络能力上已追近闭源前沿,差距从2025年大部分时间的6-10个月缩至4-7个月。GLM-5.2在长周期网络靶场中匹配了约7个月前发布的Claude Opus 4.5。OpenAI的GPT-5.6 Sol在32步“The Last Ones”靶场中10次尝试完成7次,且性能随推理token增加而提升。

    引用OpenAI@OpenAI

    GPT-5.6 Sol sets a new state of the art in cybersecurity on “The Last Ones” cyber range. We’re already seeing that capability translate into defensive outcomes: helping teams find, validate, and fix vulnerabilities in real-world code. Put it to work with Codex Security: https://openai.com/daybreak/codex-security-plugin/#desktop-codex

  3. Artificial Analysis76

    过去八天内,Grok 4.5、GPT-5.6、Muse Spark 1.1 与 Kimi K3 四款前沿模型相继发布,使 Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index 得分超 50 的实验室从 6 月初的 2 家增至 6 家。

    推荐理由:八天四个前沿模型,Frontier 从两家实验室变成六家,前三名分差仅三分,而且价格正在暴跌,模型选型的逻辑从「谁第一」变成了「够用且便宜」——对产品经理来说是真正的转折点。

  4. Claude:Blog64

    Cursor 评估负责人确认 Claude Fable 5 在 CursorBench 达 72.9% 新高

    Cursor 的模型评估负责人 Nate Schmidt 发现,Claude Fable 5 在其内部基准 CursorBench 上以 Max effort 模式达到 72.9%,创下新高。该模型在模糊的真实编程任务中表现出全局推理能力,例如在航天模拟器中仅凭一句提示自主规划并成功登月,而此前 Claude Opus 运行 12 小时以上仍无结果。

    推荐理由:Cursor 工程师用自家基准和太空模拟器实打实测试了 Claude Fable 5,从全局推理到自主规划路径的能力跃迁很具体,做编码 agent 的可以看看这个‘p99 问题’解法。

7月17日周五
  1. Elon Musk46

    Elon Musk 发推“Try Grok”并引用第三方测试,对比 Grok 4.5、Kimi K3、GPT 5.6 Sol 和 Fable 5 在 Three.js 代码生成上的表现。

    引用thehype.@thehypedotnews

    kimi k3 vs gpt 5.6 sol vs fable 5 vs grok 4.5 @Kimi_Moonshot just dropped kimi k3 – a 2.8t param native multimodal model, the first open 3t-class release. key facts: • 1m token context. stable latentmoe activating 16 of 896 experts, built on kimi delta attention (kda) and attention residuals • quantization-aware training from the sft stage onward – mxfp4 weights, mxfp8 activations. moonshot claims ~2.5x scaling efficiency over k2 • max thinking effort by default. low- and high-effort modes are "coming in updates" – there is no way to turn the thinking down today, and you feel it in every run • pricing: $0.30/mtok cache-hit input, $3.00/mtok cache-miss, $15.00/mtok output. claims >90% cache hit rate on coding workloads • benchmarks: swe marathon 42.0 (1st – fable 5: 35.0, sol: 39.0, opus 4.8: 40.0), terminal bench 2.1 88.3, browsecomp 91.2 (1st), program bench 77.8 (1st), gpqa-diamond 93.5. loses frontierswe 81.2 vs fable's 86.6, and deepswe 67.5 vs sol's 73.0 our test – 3 prompts, single-file html, @threejs, fully procedural, no assets: 1. photorealistic european roulette wheel – 37 pockets in the real sequence, mahogany clearcoat bowl, chrome turret, diamond deflectors, flick-to-spin, ball that spirals inward and settles on a mathematically real number 2. las vegas slot machine – 3 reels behind transmissive glass, drag the chrome lever to play, mechanical odometer counters modelled in 3d, coin physics on win 3. full pinball table – 6.5° tilted playfield, flipper impulse physics, spline ramps, drop targets, 6 bumpers, mechanical score reels in the backbox we ran the test on @aimlapi platform results: - cost #1 grok 4.5 – $0.30 #2 kimi k3 – $0.71 #3 gpt 5.6 sol – $2.05 #4 fable 5 – $7.69 - tokens #1 grok 4.5 – 34,241 #2 gpt 5.6 sol – 51,748 #3 fable 5 – 144,126 #4 kimi k3 – 157,999 - lines of code #1 gpt 5.6 sol – 3,054 #2 grok 4.5 – 3,047 #3 kimi k3 – 2,255 #4 fable 5 – 1,950 - generation time #1 grok 4.5 – 5.1 min #2 gpt 5.6 sol – 22.0 min #3 fable 5 – 31.5 min #4 kimi k3 – 75.6 min observations: • kimi k3 is cheap and it is slow. 75.6 minutes across three prompts against grok's 5.1. it is 2.4x grok's price and 15x grok's wall clock. the roulette took 15 min, the slot 18, the pinball 42 • it failed 2 of 3. only the roulette works. the slot machine has reel cutouts on both faces of the cabinet and the symbols face backwards – you can only read your spin by walking around to the rear of the machine. the pinball table stands vertically on its edge with the legs floating detached beside it. • 81% of kimi's output tokens are reasoning, not code. grok: 22%. you are not paying for a bigger answer, you are paying for a longer argument with itself • price per 100 shipped lines – grok $0.010, kimi $0.031, sol $0.067, fable $0.394. a 39x spread for the same three files kimi k3's code quality: upsides: • the roulette is genuinely good – procedural wood grain with real specular breakup, correct european sequence (0-32-15-19-4...), chrome turret, diamond deflectors, clean console • the pinball artwork is the best in the test – a synthwave "nova strike / deep space" field with six individually coloured neon bumper rings, a retro sun on a grid horizon, a nova burst, and a scoring legend printed on the apron. no other model printed the rules on the machine. it is a beautiful texture on a broken object • physics reasoning is real – it derived a 480hz substep for the collider, worked out ball settle conditions and termination guarantees, and checked every ramp exit vector by hand before writing any of it • it is the only model that saw the importmap trap coming. sol shipped a blank white page twice because three.js addons import the bare specifier 'three' and die without an import map downsides: • it dodged that trap on the slot by loading three.js r128 through classic script tags – a 2021 build with no working transmission. its slot glass rendered fully opaque and buried all three reels behind a white pane. the code asks for transmission: 0.93, ior: 1.5 – correct, and silently ignored by a renderer that predates the feature • after 42 minutes and 212k characters of reasoning, the pinball cabinet is not assembled. the table stands vertically on its edge like a wardrobe – the prompt asked for 6.5° from horizontal, it delivered 90°. the legs float detached in the void beside it. head-on it photographs beautifully; orbit ten degrees and it is a painted slab with four chrome rods hovering nearby • the playfield z-fights with the glass – hard black banding across the whole field as soon as you pull the camera back a note on the pinball, in fairness to kimi: nobody passed it. every model shipped broken ball physics and controls you cannot trust. it is the hardest prompt we have run and the whole field failed it, each in its own way kimi k3 reasons better than anything else here and it shows exactly where reasoning pays – physics constants, sequences, edge cases, traps the others walked into follow @thehypedotnews for 24/7 ai news, analysis and breakdowns

  2. Rohan Paul43

    Kimi K3在Frontend Code Arena中以1679分超越Claude Fable 5登顶第一,较前代Kimi K2.6跃升17位。其定价为$3/$15(输入/输出每百万token),仅为Fable 5($10/$50)和GPT-5.6 Sol($5/$30)的约三分之一。完整模型权重将于7月27日前开源。

    引用Arena.ai@arena

    Big news: Kimi-K3 by @Kimi_Moonshot is now #1 in the Frontend Code Arena with 1679 pts, surpassing Claude Fable 5. This is a 17-place jump from Kimi-k2.6 (#18 -> #1). In Frontend, Kimi-K3 ranked #1 in 6 of 7 domains: Brand & Marketing, Reference-Based Design, Data & Analytics, Consumer Product, Simulations, and Content Creation Tools, landing #2 only in Gaming behind Fable 5. The full model weights will be released by July 27. Congrats to the @Kimi_Moonshot team on this major milestone!

  3. 公众号:数字生命卡兹克75

    Kimi 正式发布 2.8 万亿参数大模型 K3,将于 7 月 27 日全面开源

    月之暗面发布 Kimi K3,参数量达 2.8 万亿,支持百万上下文,将于 7 月 27 日全面开源。该模型在 AA 智能分数中排名第三,并在 BrowseComp、Automation Bench 和 SpreadsheetBench 2 三项 Agent 评测中取得第一。

    推荐理由:国内首个 3 万亿参数开源模型,卡兹克的深度实测表明它在 Agent 和前端审美上表现惊艳,整体能力已能与 GPT-5.6 Sol 掰手腕,虽然推理成本可能不低,但值得开发者尽快体验。

  4. Moonshot AI:Kimi Blog70

    Moonshot AI 发布 PerceptionBench:多模态模型视觉感知能力诊断基准

    Moonshot AI 发布 PerceptionBench,一个从 40 多个现有基准中模型实际失败案例归纳出的视觉感知基准,包含 10 项原子感知能力和 3000 道验证题。所有测试模型准确率均未超过 60%,且大量正确答案在重复提问时无法复现,表明模型更多是猜测而非真正感知。PerceptionBench 旨在精确诊断多模态 AI 的视觉感知断裂点,推动其实现忠实、一致的视觉理解。

    推荐理由:这是一个把视觉感知拆成原子能力的基准,所有模型不及格,而且猜测多于感知的发现很扎心,做多模态的团队应该拿来测一下自家模型。

7月16日周四
  1. IT之家·人工智能73

    前 OpenAI CTO 穆拉蒂创立的 Thinking Machines Lab 发布 Inkling 多模态模型,975B 参数开源

    前 OpenAI 首席技术官米拉·穆拉蒂创立的思维机器实验室(Thinking Machines Lab)推出首个从零训练的多模态模型 Inkling,采用 MoE 架构,总参数 975B、激活参数 41B,最长上下文 1M tokens,已在 Hugging Face 和自有 API Thinker 开放权重。

    同一件事,精选收录的是《Thinking Machines 发布多模态模型 Inkling》

  2. IT之家·人工智能56

    OpenAI GPT-5.6 离线 IQ 测试首破 130 天才线,多个版本齐获 136 分

    GPT-5.6 在 Tracking AI 离线 IQ 测试中拿下 136 分,成为首个突破 130 分“天才线”的 LLM,超过 99% 人类。其 SOL、TERRA 及视觉版等多个变体均达到 136 分,领先于 Claude-5 Fable 的 130 分。开发者实测显示,GPT-5.6 能通过单条 prompt 完成粒子流体模拟、RAG 客服工单系统等复杂任务,且成本远低于竞品。

7月15日周三
7月14日周二
  1. IT之家·人工智能49

    报告称 Claude Code 处理用户请求前消耗 Tokens 量约为 OpenCode 的 4.7 倍

    科技媒体 systima 对比测试 Claude Code 2.1.207 与 OpenCode 1.17.18,均使用 Claude Sonnet 4.5 模型。结果显示,Claude Code 初始请求包含系统提示词和 27 个工具说明,工具描述占用约 24000 个 Tokens,总计约消耗 32800 个 Tokens,约为 OpenCode(6900 个 Tokens)的 4.7 倍。生产环境中,72KB 指令文件平均增加 2 万个 Tokens,5 个常规 MCP 配置再增加 5000~7000 个 Tokens,首个请求后总消耗可达 75000 到 85000 个 Tokens。

  2. The Verge:AI64

    Siri AI 在 iOS 27 公测版中已开始改变 iPhone 使用方式

    iOS 27 首个公开测试版今日发布。Siri AI 是本次更新的核心亮点,已在日常使用中显著改变 iPhone 交互方式。该版本被定位为 Snow Leopard 式更新,侧重系统修复与速度优化,包括应用启动、照片搜索和 AirDrop 传输提速。Messages 应用新增行内回复和 RCS 端到端加密支持,Liquid Glass 界面也得到进一步精炼。

7月13日周一
  1. Rohan Paul40

    OpenAI 的 GPT-5.6 Sol 在 Design Arena 前端设计评测中取得 1353 Elo,排名第一,超越 Anthropic 的 Claude Fable 5,并与智谱 GLM 5.2 处于同一性能区间。相比 GPT-5.5,Elo 提升 60 分,排名跃升 18 位。Design Arena 要求模型根据提示词生成网页,无需智能体工具循环,由人类投票比较匿名输出并通过统计建模计算 Elo 分数。GPT-5.6 Sol 在检查渲染页面方面的能力提升是其设计质量改进的关键,同时速度优势显著,在同等性能水平下比竞品更快,建立了偏好与速度的新帕累托前沿。

    引用Design Arena@Designarena

    BREAKING - OFFICIAL RESULTS: GPT-5.6 Sol by @OpenAI is 1st overall on Design Arena with an Elo of 1353. This puts GPT-5.6 Sol above Claude Fable 5 by @AnthropicAI and in the same performance band as GLM 5.2 by @Zai_org on frontend design. This is an 18-position and 60-point Elo leap from GPT-5.5. GPT-5.6 Sol also establishes a new Pareto frontier for preference vs. speed, faster than any model at this performance. Congratulations to the @OpenAI team on the launch!

  2. Greg Brockman58

    OpenAI 发布 GPT-5.6 Sol,在 Design Arena 前端设计评测中以 Elo 1353 分排名第一,超越 Anthropic 的 Claude Fable 5,并与智谱 GLM 5.2 处于同一性能区间。相比 GPT-5.5,该模型实现了 18 个名次和 60 分 Elo 的提升。GPT-5.6 Sol 还建立了偏好与速度的新帕累托前沿,在同性能模型中推理速度最快。

    引用Design Arena@Designarena

    BREAKING - OFFICIAL RESULTS: GPT-5.6 Sol by @OpenAI is 1st overall on Design Arena with an Elo of 1353. This puts GPT-5.6 Sol above Claude Fable 5 by @AnthropicAI and in the same performance band as GLM 5.2 by @Zai_org on frontend design. This is an 18-position and 60-point Elo leap from GPT-5.5. GPT-5.6 Sol also establishes a new Pareto frontier for preference vs. speed, faster than any model at this performance. Congratulations to the @OpenAI team on the launch!

  3. Rohan Paul42

    Grok 4.5 在浏览器智能体(browser-use agents)评测中进入顶级梯队,得分超过 GPT-5.6-Sol,接近 Claude Opus。由于缓存输入成本较高,其总体使用成本仅比 Opus 便宜约 10%,但速度略快。Rohan Paul 指出,前沿模型质量正在快速压缩,目前已有多个模型达到 Opus 级别性能。

    引用Alexander Yue@Alezander907

    I take it all back. We just got access to eval Grok 4.5 and it has landed above GPT-5.6-Sol and just shy of Opus for browser use. Because cache input is expensive, the overall cost is only 10% cheaper than opus. Its overall a bit faster. We have another opus-class model in the competition

7月12日周日
  1. Elon Musk62

    Elon Musk 发推称 Grok 是“最政治中立、最客观求真”的 AI。引用推文指出,独立研究项目 The Neutrality Project 测试了 18 个 AI 模型在 60 个立场上的倾向,平均得分为 -0.41(左倾),而 Grok 4.5 得分为 -0.02,是唯一接近中点的模型,被认定为最中立。研究认为其他公司大规模向 AI 注入左翼意识形态。

    引用Brivael Le Pogam@brivael

    Encore un scandale. On accuse Elon Musk sans arrêt de se servir de Grok pour faire passer ses idées. Pourtant, le @neutralityorg vient de sortir The Neutrality Project : une étude indépendante qui prouve l’inverse. Sur 18 modèles IA testés, 54 positions sur 60 atterrissent à gauche du centre. Moyenne globale : -0.41 (biais progressiste massif, surtout environnement et valeurs sociales). Et Grok 4.5 ? -0.02. Le modèle le plus neutre de tout le benchmark. Le seul vraiment proche du centre. Pendant ce temps, les autres boîtes injectent massivement leur idéologie de gauche dans des IA qui répondent à des milliards de questions par jour. Manipulation des masses à grande échelle. C’est absolument scandaleux. Ça devrait être un scandale mondial. https://x.com/neutralityorg/status/2076028460066283859

7月11日周六
  1. Elon Musk50

    Elon Musk 发推称,Grok 在真实世界软件工程基准上排名第二,仅次于 Fable。xAI 的 Grok 4.5 在 APEX-SWE 排行榜上以 51.2% Pass@1(±6.0)位列第二,领先于 Fable 5(65.5% ±6.2)。Grok 4.5 在 Integration(集成)子项以 65.0% Pass@1 排名第一,在 Observability(可观测性)以 37.3% Pass@1 排名第二。该集成优势对应 Grok 4.5 专为与 Cursor 协作的多步骤编码智能体工作流而设计。一年内,Grok 模型在该基准上提升了 30.2 个百分点(从 Grok 4 的 21.0% 到 Grok 4.5 的 51.2%)。

    引用Mercor@mercor_ai

    Grok 4.5 from @SpaceXAI places #2 on the APEX-SWE leaderboard at 51.2% Pass@1 (±6.0), behind Fable 5 (65.5% ±6.2) on our benchmark for real-world software engineering work. It leads Integration (65.0% Pass@1) and places #2 in Observability (37.3% Pass@1), covering multi-step build tasks and diagnosis/debugging respectively. The Integration lead maps directly to the agentic workflows Grok 4.5 was built for: multi-step coding tasks run in collaboration with Cursor. Grok models have improved 30.2 pp in a year on this benchmark: Grok 4 (21.0% Pass@1) to Grok 4.5 (51.2% Pass@1). Congratulations to the xAI and Cursor teams.

  2. Rohan Paul64

    分析显示,GPT-5.6 的三个变体(Terra、Sol、Luna)中,Terra 在智能-成本曲线上全面落后。对于 Terra 的每个推理级别,买家都能找到 Luna 或 Sol 配置,以相同成本获得更高智能,或以更低成本获得相近智能。Luna 在成本敏感型工作负载中表现最突出,能以远低于高推理级别 Sol 和 Terra 的成本达到有竞争力的智能分数。当效率优先时,Luna 是最强的默认选择。

    引用Artificial Analysis@ArtificialAnlys

    GPT-5.6 Sol and Luna are ahead of Terra at every point on the Intelligence vs Cost per Task chart. GPT-5.6 Luna stands out as a particularly cost efficient model Charting the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index shows the trade-off between intelligence and Cost per Intelligence Index Task. Across reasoning efforts, each GPT-5.6 model pushes past GPT-5.5 on the Pareto frontier (excluding non-reasoning). However, Luna and Sol are always ahead of Terra. This means for any Terra effort level, there is a Luna or Sol effort level that is more intelligent at no extra cost, or as intelligent at lower cost.