高盛给LLM经济学算了笔账：中国模型靠架构优势把价格打到美国1/4，但还在亏本卖。想搞清模型定价走势的可以看。
高盛报告指出，中国顶级编码模型GLM5.2和Qwen3.7 Max的每百万混合token成本约1美元，而美国SOTA模型为4-8美元。中国模型以低于成本价销售，高盛估计当前智能体模型EBIT利润率为-30%，编码模型为-39%，预计到2030年分别转为+14%和+22%。架构上，DeepSeek V4 Pro仅激活1.6T参数中的49B（<8%），GLM5.2激活744B中的40B，更低的FLOPs提供了价格下限。在OpenRouter上，中国模型按任务花费占比仅5-16%，但占据了85%的智能体token和89%的编码token。基准SDLLMTK从6月初约2.07降至当前1.67。
源：https://t.co/cUZPL1Q78N
源： x.com/Jadzo1_/status… J.D. @Jadzo1_ Goldman Sachs: LLM primer A week or so ago there was a lot of questions about the model layer economics when LLMs are without a doubt viewed more and more as a commodity+ reaching a level where being on the frontier of intelligence is no longer the swaying factor. Economics 101, in a market with many substitutes like restaurants, price undercutting becomes a crucial factor and just like EV's is where China wins. Now these talks have been pushed to the background as the Lag 7 has revived on the back of Zucks considerations of an AI cloud business+producing an AI chip (positive read through to SUMCO/ I sold to early 😞). Back to the initial topic, Goldman provides a few insights into the landscape: → China's top coding models (GLM5.2, Qwen3.7 Max) sit at ~$1 per 1M blended tokens while US SOTA runs $4-8 for the same rung of output → And they are selling it below cost. GS pegs the value for money agentic model at a -30% EBIT margin today and the coding model at -39%, cash rich balance sheets eating the loss until it flips to +14% and +22% by 2030 on their numbers → The reason they can serve that cheap is architecture, sub-8% of params activated per token across the board, DeepSeek V4 Pro firing 49B of 1.6T and GLM5.2 40B of 744B, fewer FLOPs and a structural floor under the price → The adoption already shows up on OpenRouter where China models are 5-16% of spend by task but 85% of agent tokens and 89% of code tokens, winning wherever duration and volume make cost per task the number that matters → And the blended token price rolled over with it, SDLLMTK peaked around 2.07 in early June and sits at 1.67 now This seems somewhat similar to the EV playbook to me, we the consumers should win/benefit from a price war but the return to equity shareholders is more ify. 🔗 View Quoted Tweet 💬 0 🔄 0 ❤️ 0 👀 209 ⚡
- Viking07-13 09:11原文