GLM 5.3 and all previous models don't have a vision encoder and can only accept text. Ox-Alpha can accept video and images, so unless Z-ai added a pretty good vision encoder for this model, I don't think so.
My money is on Moonshot and this being Kimi K3.5. The measured tps and latency is in-line with K3's tps and latency from Moonshot.
MiniMax M3.5 is also possible (but the MiniiMax provider is a lot more performant than the lab behind ox-alpha, so less likely).
The other tell from the provider angle is capacity. Whoever is hosting Ox Alpha has a lot of capacity which narrows down a lot of the Chinese companies.
DeepSeek literally just came out with the vision-enabled version of Flash v4 which was purely text based. Why would GLM not be able to do the same thing?
You must have so much time on your hands to go to such great length to dox an anon model on the internet. What new piece of information am I supposed to learn from this passage?
my question is: how does that affect a company's strategy? it's not like management is gonna switch models soon as a new shiny one drops. entire workflows depend on specific models working the way they do; you can't just swap out models.
If it's a really really good model, then yes, people will switch as long as the price is right. Ox Alpha is looking to be a really really good model to the point that it competes with Fable/Sol, and will likely beat them on price.
My money is on Moonshot and this being Kimi K3.5. The measured tps and latency is in-line with K3's tps and latency from Moonshot.
MiniMax M3.5 is also possible (but the MiniiMax provider is a lot more performant than the lab behind ox-alpha, so less likely).
The only question now is if it's 5.3v, 5.4/5.5 or a dedicated flash/vision model
Given the traction the model has received, it is extremely newsworthy to know who's developing and hosting it.
Ox Alpha
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49381896