• Op-Ed: Could Canada benefit from adopting Finland’s architectural competition system?

    As a Canadian who has spent the last two and a half years working as an intern architect in Helsinki, these questions have been on my mind. In my current role, I have had the opportunity to participate in numerous architectural competitions arranged by Finnish municipalities and public institutions. It has been my observation that the Finnish system of open, anonymous architectural competitions consistently produces elegant and highly functional public buildings at reasonable cost and at great benefit to the lives of the everyday people for whom the projects are intended to serve. Could Canada benefit from the adoption of a similar model?
    ‘Public project’ has never been a clearly defined term and may bring to mind the image of a bustling library for some while conjuring the image of a municipal power substation for others. In the context of this discussion, I will use the term to refer to projects that are explicitly in-service of the broader public such as community centres, museums, and other cultural venues.
    Finland’s architectural competition system
    Frequented by nearly 2 million visitors per year, the Oodi Central Library in Helsinki, Finland, has become a thriving cultural hub and an internationally recognized symbol of Finnish design innovation. Designed by ALA Architects, the project was procured through a 2-stage, open, international architectural competition. Photo by NinaraIn Finland, most notable public projects begin with an architectural competition. Some are limited to invited participants only, but the majority of these competitions are open to international submissions. Importantly, the authors of any given proposal remain anonymous with regards to the jury. This ensures that all proposals are evaluated purely on quality without bias towards established firms over lesser known competitors. The project budget is known in advance to the competition entrants and cost feasibility is an important factor weighed by the jury. However, the cost for the design services to be procured from the winning entry is fixed ahead of time, preventing companies from lowballing offers in the hopes of securing an interesting commission despite the inevitable compromises in quality that come with under-resourced design work. The result: inspired, functional public spaces are the norm, not the exception. Contrasted against the sea of forgettable public architecture to be found in cities large and small across Canada, the Finnish model paints a utopic picture.
    Several award-winning projects in my current place of employment in Helsinki have been the result of successes in open architectural competitions. The origin of the firm itself stemmed from a winning competition entry for a church in a small village submitted by the firm’s founder while he was still completing his architectural studies.  At that time, many architecture firms in Finland were founded in this manner with the publicity of a competition win serving as a career launching off point for young architects. While less common today, many students and recent graduates still participate in these design competitions. On the occasion that a young practitioner wins a competition, they are required to assemble a team with the necessary expertise and qualifications to satisfy the requirements of the jury. I believe there is a direct link between the high architectural quality outcomes of these competitions and the fact that they are conducted anonymously. The opening of these competitions to submissions from companies outside of Finland further enhances the diversity of entries and fosters international interest in the goings-on of Finland’s architectural scene. Nonetheless, it is worth acknowledging that exemplary projects have also resulted from invited and privately organized competitions. Ultimately, the mindset of the client, the selection of an appropriate jury, and the existence of sufficient incentives for architects to invest significant time in their proposals play a more critical role in shaping the quality of the final outcome.
    Tikkurila Church and Housing in Vantaa, Finland, hosts a diverse range of functions including a café, community event spaces and student housing. Designed by OOPEAA in collaboration with a local builder, the project was realized as the result of a competition organized by local Finnish and Swedish parishes. Photo by Marc Goodwin
    Finland’s competition system, administered by the Finnish Association of Architects, is not limited to major public projects such as museums, libraries and city halls. A significant number of idea competitions are organized seeking compelling visions for urban masterplans. The quality of this system has received international recognition. To quote a research paper from a Swedish university on the structure, criteria and judgement process of Finnish architectural competitions, “The Finnishexperience can provide a rich information source for scholars and students studying the structure and process of competition system and architectural judgement, as well as those concerned with commissioning and financing of competitions due to innovative solutions found in the realms of urban revitalization, poverty elimination, environmental pollution, cultural and socio-spatial renewals, and democratization of design and planning process.” This has not gone entirely under the radar in Canada. According to the website of the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada, “Competitions are common in countries such as Finland, Ireland, the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand. These competitions have resulted in a high quality of design as well as creating public interest in the role of architecture in national and community life.”
    Canada’s architectural competition system
    In Canada, the RAIC sets general competition guidelines while provincial and territorial architect associations are typically responsible for the oversight of any endorsed architectural competition. Although the idea of implementing European architectural competition models has been gaining traction in recent years, competitions remain relatively rare even for significant public projects. While Canada is yet to fully embrace competition systems as a powerful tool for ensuring higher quality public spaces, success stories from various corners of the country have opened up constructive conversations. In Edmonton, unconventional, competitive procurement efforts spearheaded by city architect Carol Belanger have produced some remarkable public buildings. This has not gone unnoticed in other parts of the country where consistent banality is the norm for public projects.
    Jasper Place Branch Library designed by HCMA and Dub Architects is one of several striking projects in Edmonton built under reimagined commissioning processes which broaden the pool of design practices eligible to participate and give greater weight to design quality as an evaluation criterion. Photo by Hubert Kang
    The wider applicability of competition systems as a positive mechanism for securing better public architecture has also started to receive broader discussion. In my hometown of Ottawa, this system has been used to procure several powerful monuments and, more recently, to select a design for the redevelopment of a key city block across from Parliament Hill. The volume and quality of entries, including from internationally renowned architectural practices, attests to the strengths of the open competition format.
    Render of the winning entry for the Block 2 Redevelopment in Ottawa. This 2-stage competition was overseen directly by the RAIC. Design and render by Zeidler Architecture Inc. in cooperation with David Chipperfield Architects.
    Despite these successes, there is significant room for improvement. A key barrier to wider adoption of competition practices according to the RAIC is “…that potential sponsors are not familiar with competitions or may consider the competition process to be complicated, expensive, and time consuming.” This is understandable for private actors, but an unsatisfactory answer in the case of public, tax-payer funded projects. Finland’s success has come through the normalization of competitions for public project procurement. We should endeavour to do the same. Maintaining design contribution anonymity prior to jury decision has thus far been the exception, not the norm in Canada. This reduces the credibility of the jury without improving the result. Additionally, the financing of such competitions has been piece-meal and inconsistent. For example, several world-class schools have been realized in Quebec as the result of competitions funded by a provincial investment.  With the depletion of that fund, it is no longer clear if any further schools will be commissioned in Quebec under a similar model. While high quality documentation has been produced, there is a risk that developed expertise will be lost if the team of professionals responsible for overseeing the process is not retained.
    École du Zénith in Shefford, Quebec, designed by Pelletier de Fontenay + Leclerc Architectes is one of six elegant and functional schools commission by the province through an anonymous competition process. Photo by James Brittain
    A path forward
    Now more than ever, it is essential that our public projects instill in us a sense of pride and reflect our uniquely Canadian values. This will continue to be a rare occurrence until more ambitious measures are taken to ensure the consistent realization of beautiful, innovative and functional public spaces that connect us with one another. In service of this objective, Canada should incentivize architectural competitions by normalizing their use for major public projects such as national museums, libraries and cultural centres. A dedicated Competitions Fund could be established to support provinces, territories and cities who demonstrate initiative in the pursuit of more ambitious, inspiring and equitable public projects. A National Competitions Expert could be appointed to ensure retention and dissemination of expertise. Maintaining the anonymity of competition entrants should be established as the norm. At a moment when talk of removing inter-provincial trade barriers has re-entered public discourse, why not consider striking down red tape that prevents out-of-province firms from participating in architectural competitions? Alas, one can dream. Competitions are no silver bullet. However, recent trials within our borders should give us confidence that architectural competitions are a relatively low-risk, high-reward proposition. To this end, Finland’s open, anonymous competition system offers a compelling case study from which we would be well served to take inspiration.

    Isaac Edmonds is a Canadian working for OOPEAA – Office for Peripheral Architecture in Helsinki, Finland. My observations of the Finnish competition system’s ability to consistently produce functional, beautiful buildings inform my interest in procurement methods that elevate the quality of our shared public realm.
    The post Op-Ed: Could Canada benefit from adopting Finland’s architectural competition system? appeared first on Canadian Architect.
    #oped #could #canada #benefit #adopting
    Op-Ed: Could Canada benefit from adopting Finland’s architectural competition system?
    As a Canadian who has spent the last two and a half years working as an intern architect in Helsinki, these questions have been on my mind. In my current role, I have had the opportunity to participate in numerous architectural competitions arranged by Finnish municipalities and public institutions. It has been my observation that the Finnish system of open, anonymous architectural competitions consistently produces elegant and highly functional public buildings at reasonable cost and at great benefit to the lives of the everyday people for whom the projects are intended to serve. Could Canada benefit from the adoption of a similar model? ‘Public project’ has never been a clearly defined term and may bring to mind the image of a bustling library for some while conjuring the image of a municipal power substation for others. In the context of this discussion, I will use the term to refer to projects that are explicitly in-service of the broader public such as community centres, museums, and other cultural venues. Finland’s architectural competition system Frequented by nearly 2 million visitors per year, the Oodi Central Library in Helsinki, Finland, has become a thriving cultural hub and an internationally recognized symbol of Finnish design innovation. Designed by ALA Architects, the project was procured through a 2-stage, open, international architectural competition. Photo by NinaraIn Finland, most notable public projects begin with an architectural competition. Some are limited to invited participants only, but the majority of these competitions are open to international submissions. Importantly, the authors of any given proposal remain anonymous with regards to the jury. This ensures that all proposals are evaluated purely on quality without bias towards established firms over lesser known competitors. The project budget is known in advance to the competition entrants and cost feasibility is an important factor weighed by the jury. However, the cost for the design services to be procured from the winning entry is fixed ahead of time, preventing companies from lowballing offers in the hopes of securing an interesting commission despite the inevitable compromises in quality that come with under-resourced design work. The result: inspired, functional public spaces are the norm, not the exception. Contrasted against the sea of forgettable public architecture to be found in cities large and small across Canada, the Finnish model paints a utopic picture. Several award-winning projects in my current place of employment in Helsinki have been the result of successes in open architectural competitions. The origin of the firm itself stemmed from a winning competition entry for a church in a small village submitted by the firm’s founder while he was still completing his architectural studies.  At that time, many architecture firms in Finland were founded in this manner with the publicity of a competition win serving as a career launching off point for young architects. While less common today, many students and recent graduates still participate in these design competitions. On the occasion that a young practitioner wins a competition, they are required to assemble a team with the necessary expertise and qualifications to satisfy the requirements of the jury. I believe there is a direct link between the high architectural quality outcomes of these competitions and the fact that they are conducted anonymously. The opening of these competitions to submissions from companies outside of Finland further enhances the diversity of entries and fosters international interest in the goings-on of Finland’s architectural scene. Nonetheless, it is worth acknowledging that exemplary projects have also resulted from invited and privately organized competitions. Ultimately, the mindset of the client, the selection of an appropriate jury, and the existence of sufficient incentives for architects to invest significant time in their proposals play a more critical role in shaping the quality of the final outcome. Tikkurila Church and Housing in Vantaa, Finland, hosts a diverse range of functions including a café, community event spaces and student housing. Designed by OOPEAA in collaboration with a local builder, the project was realized as the result of a competition organized by local Finnish and Swedish parishes. Photo by Marc Goodwin Finland’s competition system, administered by the Finnish Association of Architects, is not limited to major public projects such as museums, libraries and city halls. A significant number of idea competitions are organized seeking compelling visions for urban masterplans. The quality of this system has received international recognition. To quote a research paper from a Swedish university on the structure, criteria and judgement process of Finnish architectural competitions, “The Finnishexperience can provide a rich information source for scholars and students studying the structure and process of competition system and architectural judgement, as well as those concerned with commissioning and financing of competitions due to innovative solutions found in the realms of urban revitalization, poverty elimination, environmental pollution, cultural and socio-spatial renewals, and democratization of design and planning process.” This has not gone entirely under the radar in Canada. According to the website of the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada, “Competitions are common in countries such as Finland, Ireland, the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand. These competitions have resulted in a high quality of design as well as creating public interest in the role of architecture in national and community life.” Canada’s architectural competition system In Canada, the RAIC sets general competition guidelines while provincial and territorial architect associations are typically responsible for the oversight of any endorsed architectural competition. Although the idea of implementing European architectural competition models has been gaining traction in recent years, competitions remain relatively rare even for significant public projects. While Canada is yet to fully embrace competition systems as a powerful tool for ensuring higher quality public spaces, success stories from various corners of the country have opened up constructive conversations. In Edmonton, unconventional, competitive procurement efforts spearheaded by city architect Carol Belanger have produced some remarkable public buildings. This has not gone unnoticed in other parts of the country where consistent banality is the norm for public projects. Jasper Place Branch Library designed by HCMA and Dub Architects is one of several striking projects in Edmonton built under reimagined commissioning processes which broaden the pool of design practices eligible to participate and give greater weight to design quality as an evaluation criterion. Photo by Hubert Kang The wider applicability of competition systems as a positive mechanism for securing better public architecture has also started to receive broader discussion. In my hometown of Ottawa, this system has been used to procure several powerful monuments and, more recently, to select a design for the redevelopment of a key city block across from Parliament Hill. The volume and quality of entries, including from internationally renowned architectural practices, attests to the strengths of the open competition format. Render of the winning entry for the Block 2 Redevelopment in Ottawa. This 2-stage competition was overseen directly by the RAIC. Design and render by Zeidler Architecture Inc. in cooperation with David Chipperfield Architects. Despite these successes, there is significant room for improvement. A key barrier to wider adoption of competition practices according to the RAIC is “…that potential sponsors are not familiar with competitions or may consider the competition process to be complicated, expensive, and time consuming.” This is understandable for private actors, but an unsatisfactory answer in the case of public, tax-payer funded projects. Finland’s success has come through the normalization of competitions for public project procurement. We should endeavour to do the same. Maintaining design contribution anonymity prior to jury decision has thus far been the exception, not the norm in Canada. This reduces the credibility of the jury without improving the result. Additionally, the financing of such competitions has been piece-meal and inconsistent. For example, several world-class schools have been realized in Quebec as the result of competitions funded by a provincial investment.  With the depletion of that fund, it is no longer clear if any further schools will be commissioned in Quebec under a similar model. While high quality documentation has been produced, there is a risk that developed expertise will be lost if the team of professionals responsible for overseeing the process is not retained. École du Zénith in Shefford, Quebec, designed by Pelletier de Fontenay + Leclerc Architectes is one of six elegant and functional schools commission by the province through an anonymous competition process. Photo by James Brittain A path forward Now more than ever, it is essential that our public projects instill in us a sense of pride and reflect our uniquely Canadian values. This will continue to be a rare occurrence until more ambitious measures are taken to ensure the consistent realization of beautiful, innovative and functional public spaces that connect us with one another. In service of this objective, Canada should incentivize architectural competitions by normalizing their use for major public projects such as national museums, libraries and cultural centres. A dedicated Competitions Fund could be established to support provinces, territories and cities who demonstrate initiative in the pursuit of more ambitious, inspiring and equitable public projects. A National Competitions Expert could be appointed to ensure retention and dissemination of expertise. Maintaining the anonymity of competition entrants should be established as the norm. At a moment when talk of removing inter-provincial trade barriers has re-entered public discourse, why not consider striking down red tape that prevents out-of-province firms from participating in architectural competitions? Alas, one can dream. Competitions are no silver bullet. However, recent trials within our borders should give us confidence that architectural competitions are a relatively low-risk, high-reward proposition. To this end, Finland’s open, anonymous competition system offers a compelling case study from which we would be well served to take inspiration. Isaac Edmonds is a Canadian working for OOPEAA – Office for Peripheral Architecture in Helsinki, Finland. My observations of the Finnish competition system’s ability to consistently produce functional, beautiful buildings inform my interest in procurement methods that elevate the quality of our shared public realm. The post Op-Ed: Could Canada benefit from adopting Finland’s architectural competition system? appeared first on Canadian Architect. #oped #could #canada #benefit #adopting
    WWW.CANADIANARCHITECT.COM
    Op-Ed: Could Canada benefit from adopting Finland’s architectural competition system?
    As a Canadian who has spent the last two and a half years working as an intern architect in Helsinki, these questions have been on my mind. In my current role, I have had the opportunity to participate in numerous architectural competitions arranged by Finnish municipalities and public institutions. It has been my observation that the Finnish system of open, anonymous architectural competitions consistently produces elegant and highly functional public buildings at reasonable cost and at great benefit to the lives of the everyday people for whom the projects are intended to serve. Could Canada benefit from the adoption of a similar model? ‘Public project’ has never been a clearly defined term and may bring to mind the image of a bustling library for some while conjuring the image of a municipal power substation for others. In the context of this discussion, I will use the term to refer to projects that are explicitly in-service of the broader public such as community centres, museums, and other cultural venues. Finland’s architectural competition system Frequented by nearly 2 million visitors per year, the Oodi Central Library in Helsinki, Finland, has become a thriving cultural hub and an internationally recognized symbol of Finnish design innovation. Designed by ALA Architects, the project was procured through a 2-stage, open, international architectural competition. Photo by Ninara (flickr, CC BY 2.0) In Finland, most notable public projects begin with an architectural competition. Some are limited to invited participants only, but the majority of these competitions are open to international submissions. Importantly, the authors of any given proposal remain anonymous with regards to the jury. This ensures that all proposals are evaluated purely on quality without bias towards established firms over lesser known competitors. The project budget is known in advance to the competition entrants and cost feasibility is an important factor weighed by the jury. However, the cost for the design services to be procured from the winning entry is fixed ahead of time, preventing companies from lowballing offers in the hopes of securing an interesting commission despite the inevitable compromises in quality that come with under-resourced design work. The result: inspired, functional public spaces are the norm, not the exception. Contrasted against the sea of forgettable public architecture to be found in cities large and small across Canada, the Finnish model paints a utopic picture. Several award-winning projects in my current place of employment in Helsinki have been the result of successes in open architectural competitions. The origin of the firm itself stemmed from a winning competition entry for a church in a small village submitted by the firm’s founder while he was still completing his architectural studies.  At that time, many architecture firms in Finland were founded in this manner with the publicity of a competition win serving as a career launching off point for young architects. While less common today, many students and recent graduates still participate in these design competitions. On the occasion that a young practitioner wins a competition, they are required to assemble a team with the necessary expertise and qualifications to satisfy the requirements of the jury. I believe there is a direct link between the high architectural quality outcomes of these competitions and the fact that they are conducted anonymously. The opening of these competitions to submissions from companies outside of Finland further enhances the diversity of entries and fosters international interest in the goings-on of Finland’s architectural scene. Nonetheless, it is worth acknowledging that exemplary projects have also resulted from invited and privately organized competitions. Ultimately, the mindset of the client, the selection of an appropriate jury, and the existence of sufficient incentives for architects to invest significant time in their proposals play a more critical role in shaping the quality of the final outcome. Tikkurila Church and Housing in Vantaa, Finland, hosts a diverse range of functions including a café, community event spaces and student housing. Designed by OOPEAA in collaboration with a local builder, the project was realized as the result of a competition organized by local Finnish and Swedish parishes. Photo by Marc Goodwin Finland’s competition system, administered by the Finnish Association of Architects (SAFA), is not limited to major public projects such as museums, libraries and city halls. A significant number of idea competitions are organized seeking compelling visions for urban masterplans. The quality of this system has received international recognition. To quote a research paper from a Swedish university on the structure, criteria and judgement process of Finnish architectural competitions, “The Finnish (competition) experience can provide a rich information source for scholars and students studying the structure and process of competition system and architectural judgement, as well as those concerned with commissioning and financing of competitions due to innovative solutions found in the realms of urban revitalization, poverty elimination, environmental pollution, cultural and socio-spatial renewals, and democratization of design and planning process.” This has not gone entirely under the radar in Canada. According to the website of the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada (RAIC), “Competitions are common in countries such as Finland, Ireland, the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand. These competitions have resulted in a high quality of design as well as creating public interest in the role of architecture in national and community life.” Canada’s architectural competition system In Canada, the RAIC sets general competition guidelines while provincial and territorial architect associations are typically responsible for the oversight of any endorsed architectural competition. Although the idea of implementing European architectural competition models has been gaining traction in recent years, competitions remain relatively rare even for significant public projects. While Canada is yet to fully embrace competition systems as a powerful tool for ensuring higher quality public spaces, success stories from various corners of the country have opened up constructive conversations. In Edmonton, unconventional, competitive procurement efforts spearheaded by city architect Carol Belanger have produced some remarkable public buildings. This has not gone unnoticed in other parts of the country where consistent banality is the norm for public projects. Jasper Place Branch Library designed by HCMA and Dub Architects is one of several striking projects in Edmonton built under reimagined commissioning processes which broaden the pool of design practices eligible to participate and give greater weight to design quality as an evaluation criterion. Photo by Hubert Kang The wider applicability of competition systems as a positive mechanism for securing better public architecture has also started to receive broader discussion. In my hometown of Ottawa, this system has been used to procure several powerful monuments and, more recently, to select a design for the redevelopment of a key city block across from Parliament Hill. The volume and quality of entries, including from internationally renowned architectural practices, attests to the strengths of the open competition format. Render of the winning entry for the Block 2 Redevelopment in Ottawa. This 2-stage competition was overseen directly by the RAIC. Design and render by Zeidler Architecture Inc. in cooperation with David Chipperfield Architects. Despite these successes, there is significant room for improvement. A key barrier to wider adoption of competition practices according to the RAIC is “…that potential sponsors are not familiar with competitions or may consider the competition process to be complicated, expensive, and time consuming.” This is understandable for private actors, but an unsatisfactory answer in the case of public, tax-payer funded projects. Finland’s success has come through the normalization of competitions for public project procurement. We should endeavour to do the same. Maintaining design contribution anonymity prior to jury decision has thus far been the exception, not the norm in Canada. This reduces the credibility of the jury without improving the result. Additionally, the financing of such competitions has been piece-meal and inconsistent. For example, several world-class schools have been realized in Quebec as the result of competitions funded by a provincial investment.  With the depletion of that fund, it is no longer clear if any further schools will be commissioned in Quebec under a similar model. While high quality documentation has been produced, there is a risk that developed expertise will be lost if the team of professionals responsible for overseeing the process is not retained. École du Zénith in Shefford, Quebec, designed by Pelletier de Fontenay + Leclerc Architectes is one of six elegant and functional schools commission by the province through an anonymous competition process. Photo by James Brittain A path forward Now more than ever, it is essential that our public projects instill in us a sense of pride and reflect our uniquely Canadian values. This will continue to be a rare occurrence until more ambitious measures are taken to ensure the consistent realization of beautiful, innovative and functional public spaces that connect us with one another. In service of this objective, Canada should incentivize architectural competitions by normalizing their use for major public projects such as national museums, libraries and cultural centres. A dedicated Competitions Fund could be established to support provinces, territories and cities who demonstrate initiative in the pursuit of more ambitious, inspiring and equitable public projects. A National Competitions Expert could be appointed to ensure retention and dissemination of expertise. Maintaining the anonymity of competition entrants should be established as the norm. At a moment when talk of removing inter-provincial trade barriers has re-entered public discourse, why not consider striking down red tape that prevents out-of-province firms from participating in architectural competitions? Alas, one can dream. Competitions are no silver bullet. However, recent trials within our borders should give us confidence that architectural competitions are a relatively low-risk, high-reward proposition. To this end, Finland’s open, anonymous competition system offers a compelling case study from which we would be well served to take inspiration. Isaac Edmonds is a Canadian working for OOPEAA – Office for Peripheral Architecture in Helsinki, Finland. My observations of the Finnish competition system’s ability to consistently produce functional, beautiful buildings inform my interest in procurement methods that elevate the quality of our shared public realm. The post Op-Ed: Could Canada benefit from adopting Finland’s architectural competition system? appeared first on Canadian Architect.
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Sad
    Angry
    451
    0 Σχόλια 0 Μοιράστηκε
  • AI enables shift from enablement to strategic leadership

    CIOs and business leaders know they’re sitting on a goldmine of business data. And while traditional tools such as business intelligence platforms and statistical analysis software can effectively surface insights from the collated data resources, doing so quickly, in real-time and at scale remains an unsolved challenge.Enterprise AI, when deployed responsibly and at scale, can turn these bottlenecks into opportunities. Acting quickly on data, even ‘live’, is one of the technology’s abilities, as is scalability: AI can process large amounts of information from disparate sources almost as easily as it can summarize a one-page spreadsheet.But deploying an AI solution in the modern enterprise isn’t simple. It takes structure, trust and the right talent. Along with the practical implementation challenges, using AI brings its own challenges, such as data governance, the need to impose guardrails on AI responses and training data, and persistent staffing issues.We met with Rani Radhakrishnan, PwC Principal, Technology Managed Services – AI, Data Analytics and Insights, to talk candidly about what’s working — and what’s holding back CIOs in their AI journey. We spoke ahead of her speaking engagement at TechEx AI & Big Data Expo North America, June 4 and 5, at the Santa Clara Convention Center.Rani is especially attuned to some of the governance, data privacy and sovereignty issues that face enterprises, having spent many years in her career working with numerous clients in the health sector — an area where issues like privacy, data oversight and above all data accuracy are make-or-break aspects of technology deployments.“It’s not enough to just have a prompt engineer or a Python developer. … You still need the human in the loop to curate the right training data sets, review and address any bias in the outputs.” —Rani Radhakrishnan, PwCFrom support to strategy: shifting expectations for AIRani said that there’s a growing enthusiasm from PwC’s clients for AI-powered managed services that can provide both business insights in every sector, and for the technology to be used more proactively, in so-called agentic roles where agents can independently act on data and user input; where autonomous AI agents can take action based on interactions with humans, access to data resources and automation.For example, PwC’s agent OS is a modular AI platform that connects systems and scales intelligent agents into workflows, many times faster than traditional computing methods. It’s an example of how PwC responds to the demand for AI from its clients, many of whom see the potential of this new technology, but lack the in-house expertise and staff to act on their needs.Depending on the sector of the organization, the interest in AI can come from many different places in the business. Proactive monitoring of physical or digital systems; predictive maintenance in manufacturing or engineering; or cost efficiencies won by automation in complex, customer-facing environments, are just a few examples.But regardless of where AI can bring value, most companies don’t yet have in-house the range of skills and people necessary for effective AI deployment — or at least, deployments that achieve ROI and don’t come with significant risk.“It’s not enough to just have a prompt engineer or a Python developer,” Rani said. “You’ve got to put all of these together in a very structured manner, and you still need the human in the loop to curate the right training data sets, review and address any bias in the outputs.”Cleaning house: the data challenge behind AIRani says that effective AI implementations need a mix of technical skills — data engineering, data science, prompt engineering — in combination with an organization’s domain expertise. Internal domain expertise can define the right outcomes, and technical staff can cover the responsible AI practices, like data collation and governance, and confirm that AI systems work responsibly and within company guidelines.“In order to get the most value out of AI, an organization has to get the underlying data right,” she said. “I don’t know of a single company that says its data is in great shape … you’ve got to get it into the right structure and normalize it properly so you can query, analyze, and annotate it and identify emerging trends.”Part of the work enterprises have to put in for effective AI use is the observation for and correction of bias — in both output of AI systems and in the analysis of potential bias inherent in training and operational data.It’s important that as part of the underlying architecture of AI systems, teams apply stringent data sanitization, normalization, and data annotation processes. The latter requires “a lot of human effort,” Rani said, and the skilled personnel required are among the new breed of data professionals that are beginning to emerge.If data and personnel challenges can be overcome, then the feedback loop makes the possible outcomes from generative AI really valuable, Rani said. “Now you have an opportunity with AI prompts to go back and refine the answer that you get. And that’s what makes it so unique and so valuable because now you’re training the model to answer the questions the way you want them answered.”For CIOs, the shift isn’t just about tech enablement. It’s about integrating AI into enterprise architecture, aligning with business strategy, and managing the governance risks that come with scale. CIOs are becoming AI stewards — architecting not just systems, but trust and transformation.ConclusionIt’s only been a few years since AI emerged from its roots in academic computer science research, so it’s understandable that today’s enterprise organizations are, to a certain extent, feeling their way towards realizing AI’s potential.But a new playbook is emerging — one that helps CIOs access the value held in their data reserves, in business strategy, operational improvement, customer-facing experiences and a dozen more areas of the business.As a company that’s steeped in experience with clients large and small from all over the world, PwC is one of the leading choices that decision-makers turn to, to begin or rationalize and direct their existing AI journeys.Explore how PwC is helping CIOs embed AI into core operations, and see Rani’s latest insights at the June TechEx AI & Big Data Expo North America.
    #enables #shift #enablement #strategic #leadership
    AI enables shift from enablement to strategic leadership
    CIOs and business leaders know they’re sitting on a goldmine of business data. And while traditional tools such as business intelligence platforms and statistical analysis software can effectively surface insights from the collated data resources, doing so quickly, in real-time and at scale remains an unsolved challenge.Enterprise AI, when deployed responsibly and at scale, can turn these bottlenecks into opportunities. Acting quickly on data, even ‘live’, is one of the technology’s abilities, as is scalability: AI can process large amounts of information from disparate sources almost as easily as it can summarize a one-page spreadsheet.But deploying an AI solution in the modern enterprise isn’t simple. It takes structure, trust and the right talent. Along with the practical implementation challenges, using AI brings its own challenges, such as data governance, the need to impose guardrails on AI responses and training data, and persistent staffing issues.We met with Rani Radhakrishnan, PwC Principal, Technology Managed Services – AI, Data Analytics and Insights, to talk candidly about what’s working — and what’s holding back CIOs in their AI journey. We spoke ahead of her speaking engagement at TechEx AI & Big Data Expo North America, June 4 and 5, at the Santa Clara Convention Center.Rani is especially attuned to some of the governance, data privacy and sovereignty issues that face enterprises, having spent many years in her career working with numerous clients in the health sector — an area where issues like privacy, data oversight and above all data accuracy are make-or-break aspects of technology deployments.“It’s not enough to just have a prompt engineer or a Python developer. … You still need the human in the loop to curate the right training data sets, review and address any bias in the outputs.” —Rani Radhakrishnan, PwCFrom support to strategy: shifting expectations for AIRani said that there’s a growing enthusiasm from PwC’s clients for AI-powered managed services that can provide both business insights in every sector, and for the technology to be used more proactively, in so-called agentic roles where agents can independently act on data and user input; where autonomous AI agents can take action based on interactions with humans, access to data resources and automation.For example, PwC’s agent OS is a modular AI platform that connects systems and scales intelligent agents into workflows, many times faster than traditional computing methods. It’s an example of how PwC responds to the demand for AI from its clients, many of whom see the potential of this new technology, but lack the in-house expertise and staff to act on their needs.Depending on the sector of the organization, the interest in AI can come from many different places in the business. Proactive monitoring of physical or digital systems; predictive maintenance in manufacturing or engineering; or cost efficiencies won by automation in complex, customer-facing environments, are just a few examples.But regardless of where AI can bring value, most companies don’t yet have in-house the range of skills and people necessary for effective AI deployment — or at least, deployments that achieve ROI and don’t come with significant risk.“It’s not enough to just have a prompt engineer or a Python developer,” Rani said. “You’ve got to put all of these together in a very structured manner, and you still need the human in the loop to curate the right training data sets, review and address any bias in the outputs.”Cleaning house: the data challenge behind AIRani says that effective AI implementations need a mix of technical skills — data engineering, data science, prompt engineering — in combination with an organization’s domain expertise. Internal domain expertise can define the right outcomes, and technical staff can cover the responsible AI practices, like data collation and governance, and confirm that AI systems work responsibly and within company guidelines.“In order to get the most value out of AI, an organization has to get the underlying data right,” she said. “I don’t know of a single company that says its data is in great shape … you’ve got to get it into the right structure and normalize it properly so you can query, analyze, and annotate it and identify emerging trends.”Part of the work enterprises have to put in for effective AI use is the observation for and correction of bias — in both output of AI systems and in the analysis of potential bias inherent in training and operational data.It’s important that as part of the underlying architecture of AI systems, teams apply stringent data sanitization, normalization, and data annotation processes. The latter requires “a lot of human effort,” Rani said, and the skilled personnel required are among the new breed of data professionals that are beginning to emerge.If data and personnel challenges can be overcome, then the feedback loop makes the possible outcomes from generative AI really valuable, Rani said. “Now you have an opportunity with AI prompts to go back and refine the answer that you get. And that’s what makes it so unique and so valuable because now you’re training the model to answer the questions the way you want them answered.”For CIOs, the shift isn’t just about tech enablement. It’s about integrating AI into enterprise architecture, aligning with business strategy, and managing the governance risks that come with scale. CIOs are becoming AI stewards — architecting not just systems, but trust and transformation.ConclusionIt’s only been a few years since AI emerged from its roots in academic computer science research, so it’s understandable that today’s enterprise organizations are, to a certain extent, feeling their way towards realizing AI’s potential.But a new playbook is emerging — one that helps CIOs access the value held in their data reserves, in business strategy, operational improvement, customer-facing experiences and a dozen more areas of the business.As a company that’s steeped in experience with clients large and small from all over the world, PwC is one of the leading choices that decision-makers turn to, to begin or rationalize and direct their existing AI journeys.Explore how PwC is helping CIOs embed AI into core operations, and see Rani’s latest insights at the June TechEx AI & Big Data Expo North America. #enables #shift #enablement #strategic #leadership
    WWW.ARTIFICIALINTELLIGENCE-NEWS.COM
    AI enables shift from enablement to strategic leadership
    CIOs and business leaders know they’re sitting on a goldmine of business data. And while traditional tools such as business intelligence platforms and statistical analysis software can effectively surface insights from the collated data resources, doing so quickly, in real-time and at scale remains an unsolved challenge.Enterprise AI, when deployed responsibly and at scale, can turn these bottlenecks into opportunities. Acting quickly on data, even ‘live’ (during a customer interaction, for example), is one of the technology’s abilities, as is scalability: AI can process large amounts of information from disparate sources almost as easily as it can summarize a one-page spreadsheet.But deploying an AI solution in the modern enterprise isn’t simple. It takes structure, trust and the right talent. Along with the practical implementation challenges, using AI brings its own challenges, such as data governance, the need to impose guardrails on AI responses and training data, and persistent staffing issues.We met with Rani Radhakrishnan, PwC Principal, Technology Managed Services – AI, Data Analytics and Insights, to talk candidly about what’s working — and what’s holding back CIOs in their AI journey. We spoke ahead of her speaking engagement at TechEx AI & Big Data Expo North America, June 4 and 5, at the Santa Clara Convention Center.Rani is especially attuned to some of the governance, data privacy and sovereignty issues that face enterprises, having spent many years in her career working with numerous clients in the health sector — an area where issues like privacy, data oversight and above all data accuracy are make-or-break aspects of technology deployments.“It’s not enough to just have a prompt engineer or a Python developer. … You still need the human in the loop to curate the right training data sets, review and address any bias in the outputs.” —Rani Radhakrishnan, PwCFrom support to strategy: shifting expectations for AIRani said that there’s a growing enthusiasm from PwC’s clients for AI-powered managed services that can provide both business insights in every sector, and for the technology to be used more proactively, in so-called agentic roles where agents can independently act on data and user input; where autonomous AI agents can take action based on interactions with humans, access to data resources and automation.For example, PwC’s agent OS is a modular AI platform that connects systems and scales intelligent agents into workflows, many times faster than traditional computing methods. It’s an example of how PwC responds to the demand for AI from its clients, many of whom see the potential of this new technology, but lack the in-house expertise and staff to act on their needs.Depending on the sector of the organization, the interest in AI can come from many different places in the business. Proactive monitoring of physical or digital systems; predictive maintenance in manufacturing or engineering; or cost efficiencies won by automation in complex, customer-facing environments, are just a few examples.But regardless of where AI can bring value, most companies don’t yet have in-house the range of skills and people necessary for effective AI deployment — or at least, deployments that achieve ROI and don’t come with significant risk.“It’s not enough to just have a prompt engineer or a Python developer,” Rani said. “You’ve got to put all of these together in a very structured manner, and you still need the human in the loop to curate the right training data sets, review and address any bias in the outputs.”Cleaning house: the data challenge behind AIRani says that effective AI implementations need a mix of technical skills — data engineering, data science, prompt engineering — in combination with an organization’s domain expertise. Internal domain expertise can define the right outcomes, and technical staff can cover the responsible AI practices, like data collation and governance, and confirm that AI systems work responsibly and within company guidelines.“In order to get the most value out of AI, an organization has to get the underlying data right,” she said. “I don’t know of a single company that says its data is in great shape … you’ve got to get it into the right structure and normalize it properly so you can query, analyze, and annotate it and identify emerging trends.”Part of the work enterprises have to put in for effective AI use is the observation for and correction of bias — in both output of AI systems and in the analysis of potential bias inherent in training and operational data.It’s important that as part of the underlying architecture of AI systems, teams apply stringent data sanitization, normalization, and data annotation processes. The latter requires “a lot of human effort,” Rani said, and the skilled personnel required are among the new breed of data professionals that are beginning to emerge.If data and personnel challenges can be overcome, then the feedback loop makes the possible outcomes from generative AI really valuable, Rani said. “Now you have an opportunity with AI prompts to go back and refine the answer that you get. And that’s what makes it so unique and so valuable because now you’re training the model to answer the questions the way you want them answered.”For CIOs, the shift isn’t just about tech enablement. It’s about integrating AI into enterprise architecture, aligning with business strategy, and managing the governance risks that come with scale. CIOs are becoming AI stewards — architecting not just systems, but trust and transformation.ConclusionIt’s only been a few years since AI emerged from its roots in academic computer science research, so it’s understandable that today’s enterprise organizations are, to a certain extent, feeling their way towards realizing AI’s potential.But a new playbook is emerging — one that helps CIOs access the value held in their data reserves, in business strategy, operational improvement, customer-facing experiences and a dozen more areas of the business.As a company that’s steeped in experience with clients large and small from all over the world, PwC is one of the leading choices that decision-makers turn to, to begin or rationalize and direct their existing AI journeys.Explore how PwC is helping CIOs embed AI into core operations, and see Rani’s latest insights at the June TechEx AI & Big Data Expo North America.(Image source: “Network Rack” by one individual is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0.)
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Sad
    Angry
    400
    0 Σχόλια 0 Μοιράστηκε
  • 9-to-5 jobs, ChatGPT, and preventive Botox: Gen Z is not falling for any of this ‘propaganda’ in 2025

    A new TikTok trend, set to a snippet of Charli XCX’s “I Think About It All the Time” featuring Bon Iver, sees users, particularly Gen Z women, sharing lists of “propaganda” they’re not falling for in 2025. 

    One list, shared by TikTok creator Lxyzfbxx, includes the “clean girl look,” “the normalization of OF,” and “preventative Botox,” among other things.

    Another user listed “organic deodorant,” “Teslas,” and “mouth tape” among the modern-day propaganda.

    A third user included “push-up bras,” “being anti-sunscreen,” and “branded sweatshirts.”

    A fourth took aim at “working,” “a 9-5,” and “employment.”

    From social media trends to beauty standards, internet users are drawing attention to the capitalist, political, and aesthetic pressures that they’re subjected to daily, and they are de-normalizing those they see as unhealthy, undesirable, or just cringe. 

    “Propaganda I won’t be falling for”: How did the trend start?

    While it’s hard to pinpoint exactly where the trend began, it’s clear that it’s caught on: If there’s one thing social media loves, it’s a hot take—and it can be on anything from working a full-time job to singer-songwriter Benson Boone.

    For instance, 2024 was the year of the “in” and “out” lists. Now, with the hashtag “propaganda” currently at over 240,000 posts on TikTok, we have the 2025 version of a similar trend.

    However, what is and what isn’t propaganda varies wildly, depending on whom you ask. The comments section below many of these videos is a hotbed for debate.

    “Sorry but i WILL be falling for the Labubu propaganda everytime,” one person commented under a list that included the viral dolls.

    “I hate to admit it but Dubai chocolate is soooo bomb,” another commented under a propaganda list that included the pistachio-flavored chocolate.

    Take these opinions with a rather large pinch of salt. One frequent name that appears on many of these lists is singer-songwriter Gracie Abrams.

    Does that mean the poster actually dislikes Abrams’s music? Not necessarily. As one TikTok user told The New York Times: “I think sometimes the internet just likes to have a running gag.”Casey Lewis, of the youth consumer trends newsletter After School, did the legwork and tallied up the most commonly mentioned “propaganda” across hundreds of TikToks.

    The top 10 list she compiled included matcha, the tradwife movement, MAHA-adjacent trends like beef tallow and anti-seed oil, author Colleen Hoover, and milk.

    Coming in at the No. 1 spot, to no one’s surprise, is ChatGPT.  
    #9to5 #jobs #chatgpt #preventive #botox
    9-to-5 jobs, ChatGPT, and preventive Botox: Gen Z is not falling for any of this ‘propaganda’ in 2025
    A new TikTok trend, set to a snippet of Charli XCX’s “I Think About It All the Time” featuring Bon Iver, sees users, particularly Gen Z women, sharing lists of “propaganda” they’re not falling for in 2025.  One list, shared by TikTok creator Lxyzfbxx, includes the “clean girl look,” “the normalization of OF,” and “preventative Botox,” among other things. Another user listed “organic deodorant,” “Teslas,” and “mouth tape” among the modern-day propaganda. A third user included “push-up bras,” “being anti-sunscreen,” and “branded sweatshirts.” A fourth took aim at “working,” “a 9-5,” and “employment.” From social media trends to beauty standards, internet users are drawing attention to the capitalist, political, and aesthetic pressures that they’re subjected to daily, and they are de-normalizing those they see as unhealthy, undesirable, or just cringe.  “Propaganda I won’t be falling for”: How did the trend start? While it’s hard to pinpoint exactly where the trend began, it’s clear that it’s caught on: If there’s one thing social media loves, it’s a hot take—and it can be on anything from working a full-time job to singer-songwriter Benson Boone. For instance, 2024 was the year of the “in” and “out” lists. Now, with the hashtag “propaganda” currently at over 240,000 posts on TikTok, we have the 2025 version of a similar trend. However, what is and what isn’t propaganda varies wildly, depending on whom you ask. The comments section below many of these videos is a hotbed for debate. “Sorry but i WILL be falling for the Labubu propaganda everytime,” one person commented under a list that included the viral dolls. “I hate to admit it but Dubai chocolate is soooo bomb,” another commented under a propaganda list that included the pistachio-flavored chocolate. Take these opinions with a rather large pinch of salt. One frequent name that appears on many of these lists is singer-songwriter Gracie Abrams. Does that mean the poster actually dislikes Abrams’s music? Not necessarily. As one TikTok user told The New York Times: “I think sometimes the internet just likes to have a running gag.”Casey Lewis, of the youth consumer trends newsletter After School, did the legwork and tallied up the most commonly mentioned “propaganda” across hundreds of TikToks. The top 10 list she compiled included matcha, the tradwife movement, MAHA-adjacent trends like beef tallow and anti-seed oil, author Colleen Hoover, and milk. Coming in at the No. 1 spot, to no one’s surprise, is ChatGPT.   #9to5 #jobs #chatgpt #preventive #botox
    WWW.FASTCOMPANY.COM
    9-to-5 jobs, ChatGPT, and preventive Botox: Gen Z is not falling for any of this ‘propaganda’ in 2025
    A new TikTok trend, set to a snippet of Charli XCX’s “I Think About It All the Time” featuring Bon Iver, sees users, particularly Gen Z women, sharing lists of “propaganda” they’re not falling for in 2025.  One list, shared by TikTok creator Lxyzfbxx, includes the “clean girl look,” “the normalization of OF [OnlyFans],” and “preventative Botox,” among other things. Another user listed “organic deodorant,” “Teslas,” and “mouth tape” among the modern-day propaganda. A third user included “push-up bras,” “being anti-sunscreen,” and “branded sweatshirts.” A fourth took aim at “working,” “a 9-5,” and “employment.” From social media trends to beauty standards, internet users are drawing attention to the capitalist, political, and aesthetic pressures that they’re subjected to daily, and they are de-normalizing those they see as unhealthy, undesirable, or just cringe.  “Propaganda I won’t be falling for”: How did the trend start? While it’s hard to pinpoint exactly where the trend began, it’s clear that it’s caught on: If there’s one thing social media loves, it’s a hot take—and it can be on anything from working a full-time job to singer-songwriter Benson Boone. For instance, 2024 was the year of the “in” and “out” lists. Now, with the hashtag “propaganda” currently at over 240,000 posts on TikTok, we have the 2025 version of a similar trend. However, what is and what isn’t propaganda varies wildly, depending on whom you ask. The comments section below many of these videos is a hotbed for debate. “Sorry but i WILL be falling for the Labubu propaganda everytime,” one person commented under a list that included the viral dolls. “I hate to admit it but Dubai chocolate is soooo bomb,” another commented under a propaganda list that included the pistachio-flavored chocolate. Take these opinions with a rather large pinch of salt. One frequent name that appears on many of these lists is singer-songwriter Gracie Abrams. Does that mean the poster actually dislikes Abrams’s music? Not necessarily. As one TikTok user told The New York Times: “I think sometimes the internet just likes to have a running gag.” (Jumping on the Gracie Abrams hate train, in other words, might just be good for views.) Casey Lewis, of the youth consumer trends newsletter After School, did the legwork and tallied up the most commonly mentioned “propaganda” across hundreds of TikToks. The top 10 list she compiled included matcha, the tradwife movement, MAHA-adjacent trends like beef tallow and anti-seed oil, author Colleen Hoover, and milk (both of the oat and cow variety). Coming in at the No. 1 spot, to no one’s surprise, is ChatGPT.  
    0 Σχόλια 0 Μοιράστηκε
  • FxSound delivers louder, cleaner audio with new features

    Amazing sound for everything you listen to. FxSound corrects the limitations of your devices and compressed audio.
    FxSound isa 90's kid at heart. It's roots are in a program called DFX Audio Enhancer, born in 1999. This audio processor was a huge hit, and sold millions. As much as we dug all the crazy colorful skins and old-school sound, it was eventually time to move into the future of audio.
    With a few major overhauls and some polish, FxSound was born. We wanted to build on the pedigree and foundation of DFX, so we kept the best aspects while modernizing the sound and look. The result is the FxSound you see here today.

    Now, we made FxSound so that you can download it, turn it on, and just watch the cool bars bounce without touching the settings. Out of the box, it's got a great, all-around tone, with a good amount of volume and space added to your sound.
    But there is so much more under the hood, and with a little active effort FxSound can go from a nice audio quality booster to a fully customizable, powerful audio suite. Read on to learn more about how to use FxSound, and learn a little bit about your audio along the way.
    Video Games
    Surround sound to create full immersion into your virtual world.
    TV and Movies
    FxSound smooths and improves audio for your favorite shows and movies.
    Transcription
    FxSound boosts your clarity to save your sanity. Rewind less, get paid more.
    EQ
    Balanced your sound with our 9-band EQ with customizable center frequencies.
    Visualizer
    Feel your music in a new way.
    Effects
    Boosted bass and volume that will make your neighbors complain.
    Presets
    Presets professionally designed for music, gaming, movies, transcription, and more.
    How does FxSound work?
    Home stereo systems and PC's are built with a compromise: keep hardware affordable at the cost of quality. FxSound compensates for low quality hardware by targeting and processing sound's timbre, volume, spatial balance, and dynamics. What this means for you is clearer, louder, deeper, and balanced audio. Install our lightweight program, let it run quietly in the background, and enjoy your new audio experience.
    How does FxSound boost volume?
    FxSound is built to provide a dynamic yet controlled increase in volume. We prevent harmful peaking to make listening less fatiguing. Along with our equalized boost means you can increase your volume without distortion..
    How does FxSound improve sound quality for music?
    Your music files, even ones labeled as "high quality", have some compromises. Some of the original data is removed to make the file a more manageable size. When you stream your music, even more 1's and 0's are cut out to make it fast to deliver. As such, your favorite songs become flat, dull, and lifeless.
    This is where FxSound comes in. FxSound helps by giving you the highest possible audio passthrough and output. Then, with targeted EQ, you can bring up those compressed areas and return your music to its proper form.
    How does FxSound help with gaming?
    Video games are one of the most acoustically rich, audio-saturated situations you'll encounter. Music, sound effects, ambient sounds, spatial processing, audio cues, warnings, indicators, and dialogue all crowd into your headphones or speakers. Unless you're dropping serious coin on a hi-fi gaming setup, you'll lose detail and miss important sounds. And if you're lucky enough to have that high-end gear, you can't always dial in global settings to fit your hearing profile.
    FxSound will pass your game's audio through at a higher bitrate than almost any other digital sound card. With EQ and effects, you can apply a smoother, richer, more clear experience to your favorite games. When looking to get that edge, give FxSound a shot.
    What's New
    FxSound 1.1.33.0 Beta Changelog

    Volume normalization supported through RMS normalization
    Bugfix: Tray icon added back after explorer restart
    Context menu changes for playback device selection
    In mini mode, window will be always on top
    Ukrainian language support added
    Translation corrections in Arabic, Bosnian, Croatian, Dutch, Hungarian, Japanese, Portuguese and Spanish

    FxSound 1.1.31.0 Changelog

    Fixed the unhandled exception and crash in the application after installation
    Notifications not displayed during output device change is fixed
    Correction in Swedish translation
    #fxsound #delivers #louder #cleaner #audio
    FxSound delivers louder, cleaner audio with new features
    Amazing sound for everything you listen to. FxSound corrects the limitations of your devices and compressed audio. FxSound isa 90's kid at heart. It's roots are in a program called DFX Audio Enhancer, born in 1999. This audio processor was a huge hit, and sold millions. As much as we dug all the crazy colorful skins and old-school sound, it was eventually time to move into the future of audio. With a few major overhauls and some polish, FxSound was born. We wanted to build on the pedigree and foundation of DFX, so we kept the best aspects while modernizing the sound and look. The result is the FxSound you see here today. Now, we made FxSound so that you can download it, turn it on, and just watch the cool bars bounce without touching the settings. Out of the box, it's got a great, all-around tone, with a good amount of volume and space added to your sound. But there is so much more under the hood, and with a little active effort FxSound can go from a nice audio quality booster to a fully customizable, powerful audio suite. Read on to learn more about how to use FxSound, and learn a little bit about your audio along the way. Video Games Surround sound to create full immersion into your virtual world. TV and Movies FxSound smooths and improves audio for your favorite shows and movies. Transcription FxSound boosts your clarity to save your sanity. Rewind less, get paid more. EQ Balanced your sound with our 9-band EQ with customizable center frequencies. Visualizer Feel your music in a new way. Effects Boosted bass and volume that will make your neighbors complain. Presets Presets professionally designed for music, gaming, movies, transcription, and more. How does FxSound work? Home stereo systems and PC's are built with a compromise: keep hardware affordable at the cost of quality. FxSound compensates for low quality hardware by targeting and processing sound's timbre, volume, spatial balance, and dynamics. What this means for you is clearer, louder, deeper, and balanced audio. Install our lightweight program, let it run quietly in the background, and enjoy your new audio experience. How does FxSound boost volume? FxSound is built to provide a dynamic yet controlled increase in volume. We prevent harmful peaking to make listening less fatiguing. Along with our equalized boost means you can increase your volume without distortion.. How does FxSound improve sound quality for music? Your music files, even ones labeled as "high quality", have some compromises. Some of the original data is removed to make the file a more manageable size. When you stream your music, even more 1's and 0's are cut out to make it fast to deliver. As such, your favorite songs become flat, dull, and lifeless. This is where FxSound comes in. FxSound helps by giving you the highest possible audio passthrough and output. Then, with targeted EQ, you can bring up those compressed areas and return your music to its proper form. How does FxSound help with gaming? Video games are one of the most acoustically rich, audio-saturated situations you'll encounter. Music, sound effects, ambient sounds, spatial processing, audio cues, warnings, indicators, and dialogue all crowd into your headphones or speakers. Unless you're dropping serious coin on a hi-fi gaming setup, you'll lose detail and miss important sounds. And if you're lucky enough to have that high-end gear, you can't always dial in global settings to fit your hearing profile. FxSound will pass your game's audio through at a higher bitrate than almost any other digital sound card. With EQ and effects, you can apply a smoother, richer, more clear experience to your favorite games. When looking to get that edge, give FxSound a shot. What's New FxSound 1.1.33.0 Beta Changelog Volume normalization supported through RMS normalization Bugfix: Tray icon added back after explorer restart Context menu changes for playback device selection In mini mode, window will be always on top Ukrainian language support added Translation corrections in Arabic, Bosnian, Croatian, Dutch, Hungarian, Japanese, Portuguese and Spanish FxSound 1.1.31.0 Changelog Fixed the unhandled exception and crash in the application after installation Notifications not displayed during output device change is fixed Correction in Swedish translation #fxsound #delivers #louder #cleaner #audio
    WWW.TECHSPOT.COM
    FxSound delivers louder, cleaner audio with new features
    Amazing sound for everything you listen to. FxSound corrects the limitations of your devices and compressed audio. FxSound is (technically) a 90's kid at heart. It's roots are in a program called DFX Audio Enhancer, born in 1999. This audio processor was a huge hit, and sold millions. As much as we dug all the crazy colorful skins and old-school sound, it was eventually time to move into the future of audio. With a few major overhauls and some polish, FxSound was born. We wanted to build on the pedigree and foundation of DFX, so we kept the best aspects while modernizing the sound and look. The result is the FxSound you see here today. Now, we made FxSound so that you can download it, turn it on, and just watch the cool bars bounce without touching the settings. Out of the box, it's got a great, all-around tone, with a good amount of volume and space added to your sound. But there is so much more under the hood, and with a little active effort FxSound can go from a nice audio quality booster to a fully customizable, powerful audio suite. Read on to learn more about how to use FxSound, and learn a little bit about your audio along the way. Video Games Surround sound to create full immersion into your virtual world. TV and Movies FxSound smooths and improves audio for your favorite shows and movies. Transcription FxSound boosts your clarity to save your sanity. Rewind less, get paid more. EQ Balanced your sound with our 9-band EQ with customizable center frequencies. Visualizer Feel your music in a new way. Effects Boosted bass and volume that will make your neighbors complain. Presets Presets professionally designed for music, gaming, movies, transcription, and more. How does FxSound work? Home stereo systems and PC's are built with a compromise: keep hardware affordable at the cost of quality. FxSound compensates for low quality hardware by targeting and processing sound's timbre, volume, spatial balance, and dynamics. What this means for you is clearer, louder, deeper, and balanced audio. Install our lightweight program, let it run quietly in the background, and enjoy your new audio experience. How does FxSound boost volume? FxSound is built to provide a dynamic yet controlled increase in volume. We prevent harmful peaking to make listening less fatiguing. Along with our equalized boost means you can increase your volume without distortion. (Unlike some other volume boosters out there). How does FxSound improve sound quality for music? Your music files, even ones labeled as "high quality", have some compromises. Some of the original data is removed to make the file a more manageable size. When you stream your music, even more 1's and 0's are cut out to make it fast to deliver. As such, your favorite songs become flat, dull, and lifeless. This is where FxSound comes in. FxSound helps by giving you the highest possible audio passthrough and output. Then, with targeted EQ, you can bring up those compressed areas and return your music to its proper form. How does FxSound help with gaming? Video games are one of the most acoustically rich, audio-saturated situations you'll encounter. Music, sound effects, ambient sounds, spatial processing, audio cues, warnings, indicators, and dialogue all crowd into your headphones or speakers. Unless you're dropping serious coin on a hi-fi gaming setup, you'll lose detail and miss important sounds. And if you're lucky enough to have that high-end gear, you can't always dial in global settings to fit your hearing profile. FxSound will pass your game's audio through at a higher bitrate than almost any other digital sound card. With EQ and effects, you can apply a smoother, richer, more clear experience to your favorite games. When looking to get that edge (and finally joining your high ELO friends), give FxSound a shot. What's New FxSound 1.1.33.0 Beta Changelog Volume normalization supported through RMS normalization Bugfix: Tray icon added back after explorer restart Context menu changes for playback device selection In mini mode, window will be always on top Ukrainian language support added Translation corrections in Arabic, Bosnian, Croatian, Dutch, Hungarian, Japanese, Portuguese and Spanish FxSound 1.1.31.0 Changelog Fixed the unhandled exception and crash in the application after installation Notifications not displayed during output device change is fixed Correction in Swedish translation
    0 Σχόλια 0 Μοιράστηκε
  • Housing market shift explained—and where it’s happening the fastest

    Want more housing market stories from Lance Lambert’s ResiClub in your inbox? Subscribe to the ResiClub newsletter.

    During the Pandemic Housing Boom, housing demand surged rapidly amid ultralow interest rates, stimulus, and the remote work boom—which increased demand for space and unlocked “WFH arbitrage” as high earners were able to keep their income from a job in say, NYC or L.A., and buy in say Austin or Tampa. Federal Reserve researchers estimate “new construction would have had to increase by roughly 300% to absorb the pandemic-era surge in demand.” Unlike housing demand, housing stock supply isn’t as elastic and can’t ramp up as quickly. As a result, the heightened pandemic era demand drained the market of active inventory and overheated home prices, with U.S. home prices rising a staggering 43.2% between March 2020 and June 2022.

    While many commentators view active inventory and months of supply simply as measures of “supply,” ResiClub sees them more as proxies for the supply-demand equilibrium. Because housing demand is more elastic than housing stock, large swings in active inventory or months of supply are usually driven by shifts in demand. For example, during the Pandemic Housing Boom, surging demand caused homes to sell faster—pushing active inventory down, even as new listings remained steady. Conversely, in recent years, weakening demand has led to slower sales, causing active inventory to rise—even as new listings fell below trend.

    Indeed, during the ravenous housing demand at the height of the Pandemic Housing Boom in April 2022, almost the entire country was at least -50% below pre-pandemic 2019 active inventory levels.

    BROWN = Active housing inventory for sale in April 2022 was BELOW pre-pandemic 2019 levels

    GREEN = Active housing inventory for sale in April 2022 was ABOVE pre-pandemic 2019 levels

    Of course, now it’s a different picture: National active inventory is on a multiyear rise.

    Not long after mortgage rates spiked in 2022—causing affordability to reflect the reality of the sharp home price increases during the Pandemic Housing Boom—and return-to-office gained a bit of momentum, national demand in the for-sale market pulled back and the Pandemic Housing Boom fizzled out. Initially, in the second half of 2022, that housing demand pullback triggered a “fever breaking” in a number of markets—particularly in rate-sensitive West Coast housing markets and in pandemic boomtowns like Austin and Boise—causing active inventory to spike and pushing those markets into correction-mode in the second half of 2022.

    Heading into 2023, many of those same Western and pandemic boomtown marketsstabilized, as the spring seasonal demand—coupled with still-tight active inventory levels—was enough to temporarily firm up the market. For a bit, national active inventory stopped rising year-over-year.

    However, that period of national inventory stabilization didn’t last. Amid still slumped housing demand, national active inventory began to rise again—and we’re now in the midst of an 18-month streak of year-over-year increases in national active listings.

    Where active inventory/months of supply has risen the most, homebuyers have gained the most leverage. Generally speaking, housing markets where inventoryhas returned to pre-pandemic 2019 levels have experienced weaker home price growthover the past 34 months. Conversely, housing markets where inventory remains far below pre-pandemic 2019 levels have, generally speaking, experienced stronger home price growth over the past 34 months.

    BROWN = Active housing inventory for sale in April 2025 was BELOW pre-pandemic 2019 levels

    GREEN = Active housing inventory for sale in April 2025 was ABOVE pre-pandemic 2019 levels

    As ResiClub has closely documented, that picture varies significantly across the country: much of the Northeast and Midwest remain below pre-pandemic 2019 inventory levels, while many parts of the Mountain West and Gulf regions have bounced back.

    Many of the softest housing markets, where homebuyers have gained leverage, are located in Gulf Coast and Mountain West regions. These areas were among the nation’s top pandemic boomtowns, having experienced significant home price growth during the Pandemic Housing Boom, which stretched housing fundamentals far beyond local income levels. When pandemic-fueled domestic migration slowed and mortgage rates spiked, markets like Cape Coral, Florida, and San Antonio, Texas, faced challenges as they had to rely on local incomes to sustain frothy home prices. The housing market softening in these areas was further accelerated by higher levels of new home supply in the pipeline across the Sun Belt. Builders in these regions are often willing to reduce prices or make other affordability adjustments to maintain sales in a shifted environment. These adjustments in the new construction market also create a cooling effect on the resale market, as some buyers who might have opted for an existing home shift their focus to new homes where deals are still available.

    In contrast, many Northeast and Midwest markets were less reliant on pandemic migration and have less new home construction in progress. With lower exposure to that domestic migration pullback demand shock—and fewer builders doing big affordability adjustments to move product—active inventory in these Midwest and Northeast regions has remained relatively tight—with home sellers retaining more power relative to their peers in the Gulf and Mountain West regions.

    While national active inventory at the end of April 2025 was still -16% below pre-pandemic April 2019, ResiClub expects national active inventory to surpass pre-pandemic 2019 levels later this year.

    Big picture: The housing market is still undergoing a process of normalization following the surge in housing demand during the Pandemic Housing Boom, when home prices went up too fast, too quickly. To date, that normalization process has pushed some markets—including Austin, Las Vegas, Phoenix, San Francisco, Boise, Punta Gorda, Cape Coral, and Tampa—into correction-mode. In some other areas, so far, it has caused home price growth to stall out. Meanwhile, some markets still remain tight and have only seen a deceleration in home price growth from the highs of the Pandemic Housing Boom.

    ResiClub PRO members can access my latest monthly inventory analysishere, and my latest monthly home price analysishere.
    #housing #market #shift #explainedand #where
    Housing market shift explained—and where it’s happening the fastest
    Want more housing market stories from Lance Lambert’s ResiClub in your inbox? Subscribe to the ResiClub newsletter. During the Pandemic Housing Boom, housing demand surged rapidly amid ultralow interest rates, stimulus, and the remote work boom—which increased demand for space and unlocked “WFH arbitrage” as high earners were able to keep their income from a job in say, NYC or L.A., and buy in say Austin or Tampa. Federal Reserve researchers estimate “new construction would have had to increase by roughly 300% to absorb the pandemic-era surge in demand.” Unlike housing demand, housing stock supply isn’t as elastic and can’t ramp up as quickly. As a result, the heightened pandemic era demand drained the market of active inventory and overheated home prices, with U.S. home prices rising a staggering 43.2% between March 2020 and June 2022. While many commentators view active inventory and months of supply simply as measures of “supply,” ResiClub sees them more as proxies for the supply-demand equilibrium. Because housing demand is more elastic than housing stock, large swings in active inventory or months of supply are usually driven by shifts in demand. For example, during the Pandemic Housing Boom, surging demand caused homes to sell faster—pushing active inventory down, even as new listings remained steady. Conversely, in recent years, weakening demand has led to slower sales, causing active inventory to rise—even as new listings fell below trend. Indeed, during the ravenous housing demand at the height of the Pandemic Housing Boom in April 2022, almost the entire country was at least -50% below pre-pandemic 2019 active inventory levels. BROWN = Active housing inventory for sale in April 2022 was BELOW pre-pandemic 2019 levels GREEN = Active housing inventory for sale in April 2022 was ABOVE pre-pandemic 2019 levels Of course, now it’s a different picture: National active inventory is on a multiyear rise. Not long after mortgage rates spiked in 2022—causing affordability to reflect the reality of the sharp home price increases during the Pandemic Housing Boom—and return-to-office gained a bit of momentum, national demand in the for-sale market pulled back and the Pandemic Housing Boom fizzled out. Initially, in the second half of 2022, that housing demand pullback triggered a “fever breaking” in a number of markets—particularly in rate-sensitive West Coast housing markets and in pandemic boomtowns like Austin and Boise—causing active inventory to spike and pushing those markets into correction-mode in the second half of 2022. Heading into 2023, many of those same Western and pandemic boomtown marketsstabilized, as the spring seasonal demand—coupled with still-tight active inventory levels—was enough to temporarily firm up the market. For a bit, national active inventory stopped rising year-over-year. However, that period of national inventory stabilization didn’t last. Amid still slumped housing demand, national active inventory began to rise again—and we’re now in the midst of an 18-month streak of year-over-year increases in national active listings. Where active inventory/months of supply has risen the most, homebuyers have gained the most leverage. Generally speaking, housing markets where inventoryhas returned to pre-pandemic 2019 levels have experienced weaker home price growthover the past 34 months. Conversely, housing markets where inventory remains far below pre-pandemic 2019 levels have, generally speaking, experienced stronger home price growth over the past 34 months. BROWN = Active housing inventory for sale in April 2025 was BELOW pre-pandemic 2019 levels GREEN = Active housing inventory for sale in April 2025 was ABOVE pre-pandemic 2019 levels As ResiClub has closely documented, that picture varies significantly across the country: much of the Northeast and Midwest remain below pre-pandemic 2019 inventory levels, while many parts of the Mountain West and Gulf regions have bounced back. Many of the softest housing markets, where homebuyers have gained leverage, are located in Gulf Coast and Mountain West regions. These areas were among the nation’s top pandemic boomtowns, having experienced significant home price growth during the Pandemic Housing Boom, which stretched housing fundamentals far beyond local income levels. When pandemic-fueled domestic migration slowed and mortgage rates spiked, markets like Cape Coral, Florida, and San Antonio, Texas, faced challenges as they had to rely on local incomes to sustain frothy home prices. The housing market softening in these areas was further accelerated by higher levels of new home supply in the pipeline across the Sun Belt. Builders in these regions are often willing to reduce prices or make other affordability adjustments to maintain sales in a shifted environment. These adjustments in the new construction market also create a cooling effect on the resale market, as some buyers who might have opted for an existing home shift their focus to new homes where deals are still available. In contrast, many Northeast and Midwest markets were less reliant on pandemic migration and have less new home construction in progress. With lower exposure to that domestic migration pullback demand shock—and fewer builders doing big affordability adjustments to move product—active inventory in these Midwest and Northeast regions has remained relatively tight—with home sellers retaining more power relative to their peers in the Gulf and Mountain West regions. While national active inventory at the end of April 2025 was still -16% below pre-pandemic April 2019, ResiClub expects national active inventory to surpass pre-pandemic 2019 levels later this year. Big picture: The housing market is still undergoing a process of normalization following the surge in housing demand during the Pandemic Housing Boom, when home prices went up too fast, too quickly. To date, that normalization process has pushed some markets—including Austin, Las Vegas, Phoenix, San Francisco, Boise, Punta Gorda, Cape Coral, and Tampa—into correction-mode. In some other areas, so far, it has caused home price growth to stall out. Meanwhile, some markets still remain tight and have only seen a deceleration in home price growth from the highs of the Pandemic Housing Boom. ResiClub PRO members can access my latest monthly inventory analysishere, and my latest monthly home price analysishere. #housing #market #shift #explainedand #where
    WWW.FASTCOMPANY.COM
    Housing market shift explained—and where it’s happening the fastest
    Want more housing market stories from Lance Lambert’s ResiClub in your inbox? Subscribe to the ResiClub newsletter. During the Pandemic Housing Boom, housing demand surged rapidly amid ultralow interest rates, stimulus, and the remote work boom—which increased demand for space and unlocked “WFH arbitrage” as high earners were able to keep their income from a job in say, NYC or L.A., and buy in say Austin or Tampa. Federal Reserve researchers estimate “new construction would have had to increase by roughly 300% to absorb the pandemic-era surge in demand.” Unlike housing demand, housing stock supply isn’t as elastic and can’t ramp up as quickly. As a result, the heightened pandemic era demand drained the market of active inventory and overheated home prices, with U.S. home prices rising a staggering 43.2% between March 2020 and June 2022. While many commentators view active inventory and months of supply simply as measures of “supply,” ResiClub sees them more as proxies for the supply-demand equilibrium. Because housing demand is more elastic than housing stock, large swings in active inventory or months of supply are usually driven by shifts in demand. For example, during the Pandemic Housing Boom, surging demand caused homes to sell faster—pushing active inventory down, even as new listings remained steady. Conversely, in recent years, weakening demand has led to slower sales, causing active inventory to rise—even as new listings fell below trend. Indeed, during the ravenous housing demand at the height of the Pandemic Housing Boom in April 2022, almost the entire country was at least -50% below pre-pandemic 2019 active inventory levels. BROWN = Active housing inventory for sale in April 2022 was BELOW pre-pandemic 2019 levels GREEN = Active housing inventory for sale in April 2022 was ABOVE pre-pandemic 2019 levels Of course, now it’s a different picture: National active inventory is on a multiyear rise. Not long after mortgage rates spiked in 2022—causing affordability to reflect the reality of the sharp home price increases during the Pandemic Housing Boom—and return-to-office gained a bit of momentum, national demand in the for-sale market pulled back and the Pandemic Housing Boom fizzled out. Initially, in the second half of 2022, that housing demand pullback triggered a “fever breaking” in a number of markets—particularly in rate-sensitive West Coast housing markets and in pandemic boomtowns like Austin and Boise—causing active inventory to spike and pushing those markets into correction-mode in the second half of 2022. Heading into 2023, many of those same Western and pandemic boomtown markets (excluding Austin) stabilized, as the spring seasonal demand—coupled with still-tight active inventory levels—was enough to temporarily firm up the market. For a bit, national active inventory stopped rising year-over-year. However, that period of national inventory stabilization didn’t last. Amid still slumped housing demand, national active inventory began to rise again—and we’re now in the midst of an 18-month streak of year-over-year increases in national active listings. Where active inventory/months of supply has risen the most, homebuyers have gained the most leverage. Generally speaking, housing markets where inventory (i.e., active listings) has returned to pre-pandemic 2019 levels have experienced weaker home price growth (or outright declines) over the past 34 months. Conversely, housing markets where inventory remains far below pre-pandemic 2019 levels have, generally speaking, experienced stronger home price growth over the past 34 months. BROWN = Active housing inventory for sale in April 2025 was BELOW pre-pandemic 2019 levels GREEN = Active housing inventory for sale in April 2025 was ABOVE pre-pandemic 2019 levels As ResiClub has closely documented, that picture varies significantly across the country: much of the Northeast and Midwest remain below pre-pandemic 2019 inventory levels, while many parts of the Mountain West and Gulf regions have bounced back. Many of the softest housing markets, where homebuyers have gained leverage, are located in Gulf Coast and Mountain West regions. These areas were among the nation’s top pandemic boomtowns, having experienced significant home price growth during the Pandemic Housing Boom, which stretched housing fundamentals far beyond local income levels. When pandemic-fueled domestic migration slowed and mortgage rates spiked, markets like Cape Coral, Florida, and San Antonio, Texas, faced challenges as they had to rely on local incomes to sustain frothy home prices. The housing market softening in these areas was further accelerated by higher levels of new home supply in the pipeline across the Sun Belt. Builders in these regions are often willing to reduce prices or make other affordability adjustments to maintain sales in a shifted environment. These adjustments in the new construction market also create a cooling effect on the resale market, as some buyers who might have opted for an existing home shift their focus to new homes where deals are still available. In contrast, many Northeast and Midwest markets were less reliant on pandemic migration and have less new home construction in progress. With lower exposure to that domestic migration pullback demand shock—and fewer builders doing big affordability adjustments to move product—active inventory in these Midwest and Northeast regions has remained relatively tight—with home sellers retaining more power relative to their peers in the Gulf and Mountain West regions. While national active inventory at the end of April 2025 was still -16% below pre-pandemic April 2019, ResiClub expects national active inventory to surpass pre-pandemic 2019 levels later this year. Big picture: The housing market is still undergoing a process of normalization following the surge in housing demand during the Pandemic Housing Boom, when home prices went up too fast, too quickly. To date, that normalization process has pushed some markets—including Austin (mid-2022-present), Las Vegas (second half of 2022), Phoenix (second half of 2022), San Francisco (second half of 2022), Boise (mid-2022–2023), Punta Gorda (2022–present), Cape Coral (2023–present), and Tampa (2024–present)—into correction-mode. In some other areas, so far, it has caused home price growth to stall out. Meanwhile, some markets still remain tight and have only seen a deceleration in home price growth from the highs of the Pandemic Housing Boom. ResiClub PRO members can access my latest monthly inventory analysis (+800 metros and +3,000 counties) here, and my latest monthly home price analysis (+800 metros and +3,000 counties) here.
    0 Σχόλια 0 Μοιράστηκε
  • LAI #75: Generative AI vs. Agentic AI vs. AI Agents

    LAI #75: Generative AI vs. Agentic AI vs. AI Agents

    0 like

    May 15, 2025

    Share this post

    Author: Towards AI Editorial Team

    Originally published on Towards AI.

    Good morning, AI enthusiasts,
    This week’s issue dives into where the field is heading — beyond generation, toward autonomy and better error awareness. We’re starting with a breakdown of the increasingly fuzzy but important distinctions between Generative AI, Agentic AI, and AI Agents. Then we move into applied innovation: Microsoft’s GraphRAG, multimodal RAG systems using Cohere and Gemini, and a practical framework for predicting when your model is about to get something wrong.
    Also in the mix: DNNs vs. tree-based models for e-commerce ranking, a powerful Cursor.ai-like browser extension from the community, and this week’s poll on when vibes are enough — and when accuracy has to come first.
    Let’s get into it.
    — Louis-François Bouchard, Towards AI Co-founder & Head of Community
    Learn AI Together Community Section!
    Featured Community post from the Discord
    Retconned has built Sophon, an AI chat app that enhances your browsing experience by understanding and interacting with your tabs. With its intelligent composer, it can see the tabs you have open, allowing it to understand context and autofill forms, textboxes, or fields with a single click. It is a browser extension and completely free. Check it out here. Share your feedback in the thread and support a fellow community member!
    AI poll of the week!

    Most of you are doing vibe checks, and of course, for general tasks, the entire idea is for the AI to not feel like AI. But would you also rely on “vibes” for more quantitative tasks, where output accuracy matters more than output feel? Share in the thread, let’s decide together!
    Meme of the week!

    Meme shared by rucha8062
    TAI Curated Section
    Article of the week
    How GraphRAG Works Step-by-Step By Mariana Avelino
    This blog explains Microsoft’s GraphRAG, a method that uses knowledge graphs for retrieval-augmented generation. Key detailed processes were graph creation, involving entity extraction, community partitioning, and querying, with distinct Local and Global Search functions. It outlined how entities, relationships, and community reports are generated and used for LLM response generation, including context management and semantic retrieval.
    Our must-read articles
    1. Distill-then-Detect: A Practical Framework for Error-Aware Machine Learning By Shenggang Li
    The author presented a framework, “Distill-then-Detect,” to address prediction errors in machine learning models, particularly the “big misses” on critical data slices. This approach involves distilling a compact “student” model from a larger “teacher” model. It then quantifies teacher uncertainty and trains a meta-model to predict where the teacher is likely to err. By combining these signals into a risk score and applying conformal calibration for thresholding, the system effectively flags high-risk predictions. Experiments demonstrated that this method identified error-prone cases with balanced precision and recall while clustering these errors provided actionable insights into problematic data segments.
    2. Beyond Text: Building Multimodal RAG Systems with Cohere and Gemini By Sridhar Sampath
    Traditional Retrieval-Augmented Generationsystems often fail to process visual data. This article details a multimodal RAG system designed to overcome this limitation by understanding both text and images within documents. It utilizes Cohere’s multimodal embeddings to create unified vector representations from content like PDFs. Gemini 2.5 Flash then generates context-aware answers using either matched text or images, with FAISS managing vector indexing. It explains the system’s workflow, from document upload to answer generation, demonstrating its enhanced capability to extract information from charts, tables, and other visuals compared to text-only RAG.
    3. Generative AI vs. Agentic AI vs. AI Agents: What Everyone Needs to Know By Poojan Vig
    The article clarified the distinct roles of Generative AI, Agentic AI, and AI Agents. It explained that Generative AI produces new content based on learned patterns. Agentic AI focuses on strategy, planning, and iteration towards a goal without continuous human intervention. AI Agents then sense their environment and execute actions in the digital or real world. Using a cooking analogy and examples like automated customer service, the piece illustrated how these AI types can operate independently or collaboratively to perform complex tasks.
    4. DNNs vs Traditional Tree-Based Models for E-Commerce Ranking By Nikhilesh Pandey
    The author discusses the evolution of e-commerce ad ranking systems, detailing the shift from traditional tree-based models to Deep Neural Networks. It outlines why tree-based models have reached their limits and how DNNs offer superior capabilities for handling complex data, personalization, and achieving better conversion ratepredictions. Using DoorDash Ads as a case study, the piece illustrates the iterative migration process, including defining baselines, optimizing model training and evaluation with techniques like data normalization and distributed processing, and addressing challenges such as the offline-online performance gap.
    If you are interested in publishing with Towards AI, check our guidelines and sign up. We will publish your work to our network if it meets our editorial policies and standards.
    Join thousands of data leaders on the AI newsletter. Join over 80,000 subscribers and keep up to date with the latest developments in AI. From research to projects and ideas. If you are building an AI startup, an AI-related product, or a service, we invite you to consider becoming a sponsor.

    Published via Towards AI

    Towards AI - Medium

    Share this post
    #lai #generative #agentic #agents
    LAI #75: Generative AI vs. Agentic AI vs. AI Agents
    LAI #75: Generative AI vs. Agentic AI vs. AI Agents 0 like May 15, 2025 Share this post Author: Towards AI Editorial Team Originally published on Towards AI. Good morning, AI enthusiasts, This week’s issue dives into where the field is heading — beyond generation, toward autonomy and better error awareness. We’re starting with a breakdown of the increasingly fuzzy but important distinctions between Generative AI, Agentic AI, and AI Agents. Then we move into applied innovation: Microsoft’s GraphRAG, multimodal RAG systems using Cohere and Gemini, and a practical framework for predicting when your model is about to get something wrong. Also in the mix: DNNs vs. tree-based models for e-commerce ranking, a powerful Cursor.ai-like browser extension from the community, and this week’s poll on when vibes are enough — and when accuracy has to come first. Let’s get into it. — Louis-François Bouchard, Towards AI Co-founder & Head of Community Learn AI Together Community Section! Featured Community post from the Discord Retconned has built Sophon, an AI chat app that enhances your browsing experience by understanding and interacting with your tabs. With its intelligent composer, it can see the tabs you have open, allowing it to understand context and autofill forms, textboxes, or fields with a single click. It is a browser extension and completely free. Check it out here. Share your feedback in the thread and support a fellow community member! AI poll of the week! Most of you are doing vibe checks, and of course, for general tasks, the entire idea is for the AI to not feel like AI. But would you also rely on “vibes” for more quantitative tasks, where output accuracy matters more than output feel? Share in the thread, let’s decide together! Meme of the week! Meme shared by rucha8062 TAI Curated Section Article of the week How GraphRAG Works Step-by-Step By Mariana Avelino This blog explains Microsoft’s GraphRAG, a method that uses knowledge graphs for retrieval-augmented generation. Key detailed processes were graph creation, involving entity extraction, community partitioning, and querying, with distinct Local and Global Search functions. It outlined how entities, relationships, and community reports are generated and used for LLM response generation, including context management and semantic retrieval. Our must-read articles 1. Distill-then-Detect: A Practical Framework for Error-Aware Machine Learning By Shenggang Li The author presented a framework, “Distill-then-Detect,” to address prediction errors in machine learning models, particularly the “big misses” on critical data slices. This approach involves distilling a compact “student” model from a larger “teacher” model. It then quantifies teacher uncertainty and trains a meta-model to predict where the teacher is likely to err. By combining these signals into a risk score and applying conformal calibration for thresholding, the system effectively flags high-risk predictions. Experiments demonstrated that this method identified error-prone cases with balanced precision and recall while clustering these errors provided actionable insights into problematic data segments. 2. Beyond Text: Building Multimodal RAG Systems with Cohere and Gemini By Sridhar Sampath Traditional Retrieval-Augmented Generationsystems often fail to process visual data. This article details a multimodal RAG system designed to overcome this limitation by understanding both text and images within documents. It utilizes Cohere’s multimodal embeddings to create unified vector representations from content like PDFs. Gemini 2.5 Flash then generates context-aware answers using either matched text or images, with FAISS managing vector indexing. It explains the system’s workflow, from document upload to answer generation, demonstrating its enhanced capability to extract information from charts, tables, and other visuals compared to text-only RAG. 3. Generative AI vs. Agentic AI vs. AI Agents: What Everyone Needs to Know By Poojan Vig The article clarified the distinct roles of Generative AI, Agentic AI, and AI Agents. It explained that Generative AI produces new content based on learned patterns. Agentic AI focuses on strategy, planning, and iteration towards a goal without continuous human intervention. AI Agents then sense their environment and execute actions in the digital or real world. Using a cooking analogy and examples like automated customer service, the piece illustrated how these AI types can operate independently or collaboratively to perform complex tasks. 4. DNNs vs Traditional Tree-Based Models for E-Commerce Ranking By Nikhilesh Pandey The author discusses the evolution of e-commerce ad ranking systems, detailing the shift from traditional tree-based models to Deep Neural Networks. It outlines why tree-based models have reached their limits and how DNNs offer superior capabilities for handling complex data, personalization, and achieving better conversion ratepredictions. Using DoorDash Ads as a case study, the piece illustrates the iterative migration process, including defining baselines, optimizing model training and evaluation with techniques like data normalization and distributed processing, and addressing challenges such as the offline-online performance gap. If you are interested in publishing with Towards AI, check our guidelines and sign up. We will publish your work to our network if it meets our editorial policies and standards. Join thousands of data leaders on the AI newsletter. Join over 80,000 subscribers and keep up to date with the latest developments in AI. From research to projects and ideas. If you are building an AI startup, an AI-related product, or a service, we invite you to consider becoming a sponsor. Published via Towards AI Towards AI - Medium Share this post #lai #generative #agentic #agents
    TOWARDSAI.NET
    LAI #75: Generative AI vs. Agentic AI vs. AI Agents
    LAI #75: Generative AI vs. Agentic AI vs. AI Agents 0 like May 15, 2025 Share this post Author(s): Towards AI Editorial Team Originally published on Towards AI. Good morning, AI enthusiasts, This week’s issue dives into where the field is heading — beyond generation, toward autonomy and better error awareness. We’re starting with a breakdown of the increasingly fuzzy but important distinctions between Generative AI, Agentic AI, and AI Agents. Then we move into applied innovation: Microsoft’s GraphRAG, multimodal RAG systems using Cohere and Gemini, and a practical framework for predicting when your model is about to get something wrong. Also in the mix: DNNs vs. tree-based models for e-commerce ranking, a powerful Cursor.ai-like browser extension from the community, and this week’s poll on when vibes are enough — and when accuracy has to come first. Let’s get into it. — Louis-François Bouchard, Towards AI Co-founder & Head of Community Learn AI Together Community Section! Featured Community post from the Discord Retconned has built Sophon, an AI chat app that enhances your browsing experience by understanding and interacting with your tabs. With its intelligent composer, it can see the tabs you have open, allowing it to understand context and autofill forms, textboxes, or fields with a single click. It is a browser extension and completely free. Check it out here. Share your feedback in the thread and support a fellow community member! AI poll of the week! Most of you are doing vibe checks, and of course, for general tasks, the entire idea is for the AI to not feel like AI. But would you also rely on “vibes” for more quantitative tasks, where output accuracy matters more than output feel? Share in the thread, let’s decide together! Meme of the week! Meme shared by rucha8062 TAI Curated Section Article of the week How GraphRAG Works Step-by-Step By Mariana Avelino This blog explains Microsoft’s GraphRAG, a method that uses knowledge graphs for retrieval-augmented generation. Key detailed processes were graph creation, involving entity extraction, community partitioning, and querying, with distinct Local and Global Search functions. It outlined how entities, relationships, and community reports are generated and used for LLM response generation, including context management and semantic retrieval. Our must-read articles 1. Distill-then-Detect: A Practical Framework for Error-Aware Machine Learning By Shenggang Li The author presented a framework, “Distill-then-Detect,” to address prediction errors in machine learning models, particularly the “big misses” on critical data slices. This approach involves distilling a compact “student” model from a larger “teacher” model. It then quantifies teacher uncertainty and trains a meta-model to predict where the teacher is likely to err. By combining these signals into a risk score and applying conformal calibration for thresholding, the system effectively flags high-risk predictions. Experiments demonstrated that this method identified error-prone cases with balanced precision and recall while clustering these errors provided actionable insights into problematic data segments. 2. Beyond Text: Building Multimodal RAG Systems with Cohere and Gemini By Sridhar Sampath Traditional Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems often fail to process visual data. This article details a multimodal RAG system designed to overcome this limitation by understanding both text and images within documents. It utilizes Cohere’s multimodal embeddings to create unified vector representations from content like PDFs. Gemini 2.5 Flash then generates context-aware answers using either matched text or images, with FAISS managing vector indexing. It explains the system’s workflow, from document upload to answer generation, demonstrating its enhanced capability to extract information from charts, tables, and other visuals compared to text-only RAG. 3. Generative AI vs. Agentic AI vs. AI Agents: What Everyone Needs to Know By Poojan Vig The article clarified the distinct roles of Generative AI, Agentic AI, and AI Agents. It explained that Generative AI produces new content based on learned patterns. Agentic AI focuses on strategy, planning, and iteration towards a goal without continuous human intervention. AI Agents then sense their environment and execute actions in the digital or real world. Using a cooking analogy and examples like automated customer service, the piece illustrated how these AI types can operate independently or collaboratively to perform complex tasks. 4. DNNs vs Traditional Tree-Based Models for E-Commerce Ranking By Nikhilesh Pandey The author discusses the evolution of e-commerce ad ranking systems, detailing the shift from traditional tree-based models to Deep Neural Networks (DNNs). It outlines why tree-based models have reached their limits and how DNNs offer superior capabilities for handling complex data, personalization, and achieving better conversion rate (CVR) predictions. Using DoorDash Ads as a case study, the piece illustrates the iterative migration process, including defining baselines, optimizing model training and evaluation with techniques like data normalization and distributed processing, and addressing challenges such as the offline-online performance gap. If you are interested in publishing with Towards AI, check our guidelines and sign up. We will publish your work to our network if it meets our editorial policies and standards. Join thousands of data leaders on the AI newsletter. Join over 80,000 subscribers and keep up to date with the latest developments in AI. From research to projects and ideas. If you are building an AI startup, an AI-related product, or a service, we invite you to consider becoming a sponsor. Published via Towards AI Towards AI - Medium Share this post
    0 Σχόλια 0 Μοιράστηκε
  • Exclusive Talk: Joey Conway of NVIDIA on Llama Nemotron Ultra and Open Source Models

    Today, MarkTechPost had the pleasure of interviewing Joey Conway from NVIDIA to discuss their exciting work on open-source large language models, including Llama Nemotron Ultra & Parakeet.
    Highlights from the interview:

    NVIDIA’s Open Source Powerhouse: Discover how NVIDIA is pushing the boundaries of open-source AI with the release of cutting-edge models like Llama Nemotron Ultra and Parakeet TDT.
    Llama Nemotron Ultra: Smaller Size, Giant Performance: Learn how NVIDIA achieved on-par performance with models twice the size, enabling deployment on a single GPU node. Explore their innovative FFN fusion technique for significant speedups.
    Reasoning on Demand: Uncover the unique “reasoning on/off” feature in Llama Nemotron Ultra, offering unprecedented control for production deployments and cost optimization.
    Revolutionary Speech Recognition with Parakeet TDT: Dive into NVIDIA’s state-of-the-art ASR model that transcribes one hour of audio in one second with only a 6% word error rate – 50 times faster than other open-source alternatives!
    The “How”: Architectural Innovations: Get insights into the advanced architectures and optimizations behind these models, including FFN fusion, limited context attention, and the Token Duration Transducer 
    Democratizing AI with Open Data: Learn about NVIDIA’s commitment to the open-source community through the release of model weights and massive, high-quality datasets for both language and speech.
    Future Directions: Get a sneak peek into NVIDIA’s plans for multilingual support, even smaller edge-optimized models, and advancements in real-time streaming for speech recognition.
    Production-Ready AI: Understand how these models are designed with real-world deployment challenges in mind, focusing on accuracy, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness.

    Jean-Marc Mommessin: Joey, welcome to Marketechpost! We’re thrilled to have you here and to delve into the impressive open-source models NVIDIA has been releasing. To start, could you please introduce yourself and your role at NVIDIA?
    Joey Conway: Hi Jean-Marc, it’s great to be here. I’m Joey Conway, and I work in product management for some of the deep learning software at NVIDIA. Our team focuses on large language models like Nemotron and Llama Nemotron, as well as text-to-speech models such as Parakeet.
    Jean-Marc Mommessin: Wonderful. And you’ve been at NVIDIA for over seven years now, witnessing significant waves of innovation in AI. Let’s talk about your recent release, Llama Nemotron Ultra, a 253 billion parameter model. From what we’ve seen, it delivers performance on par with models like Llama 405B and DeepSeek R1, which are about twice its size. Remarkably, it can run on a single 8x H100 node. What else can you tell us about Llama Nemotron Ultra and what makes it so impressive?
    Joey Conway: We’re big believers in the open-source community and the fantastic work being done there. With Llama Nemotron, our goal was to build upon the existing foundations, particularly Llama, for which we greatly appreciate Meta’s contributions. We also observed significant progress in reasoning within the open community earlier this year. Inspired by this, we wanted to contribute and see how we could enhance Llama, especially for enterprise use cases.
    Our focus was primarily on improving reasoning capabilities and agentic tasks like tool calling and chat. We aimed to take the strengths of the open-source community, enhance them, and then contribute those improvements back.
    Jean-Marc Mommessin: Did you identify specific gaps in existing models that you aimed to address? You mentioned reasoning, but could you provide an example or two of enterprise agentic tasks where you felt there were shortcomings that Llama Nemotron Ultra overcomes?
    Joey Conway : Yes, I think looking back to the beginning of the year, a key challenge in enterprise deployments was handling complex queries requiring significant thought and reflection. These could be multi-step processes or involve substantial calculations and the use of external tools. At that time, there weren’t many strong open-weight models capable of robust reasoning. The progress we’ve seen in the last few months in this area is very encouraging.
    Another critical aspect for enterprises is the ability to accurately call APIs and closely follow instructions in user queries. We wanted to ensure that while we focused on improving reasoning, we didn’t compromise these essential production-level capabilities.
    Furthermore, we often noticed that when both reasoning and instruction following were well-addressed, they typically resided in separate models. Our aim was to simplify this by creating a single model that excels in both. This was the landscape we observed when we started this project around January and February.
    Jean-Marc Mommessin: That makes perfect sense and aligns with what we’re seeing in the industry as well. Now, let’s dive into the “how.” Your paper mentions FFN fusion as a key optimization. Could you elaborate on this technique, starting with a high-level explanation?
    Joey Conway: Absolutely. Our focus on optimization stemmed from the realization that deploying state-of-the-art models often requires a significant deployment footprint. We wanted to optimize this to fit within more common GPU setups.
    We explored various techniques, including our Puzzle neural architecture search. For dense transformer models, particularly those in the Llama family, we discovered a way to reduce or eliminate redundant attention layers. This process aligned the feed-forward networklayers in a sequence, allowing us to explore fusion methods.
    Our fundamental goal on the GPU is to maximize parallel execution. Fusing these aligned FFN layers enables greater parallel computation than was previously possible. By removing redundant layers, we found opportunities to essentially merge or fuse the remaining ones. This is a key example of how we tackle the challenges of running these models at scale. Importantly, this technique often yields greater improvements with larger models, which was beneficial for our Ultra model based on Meta’s Llama 3.1 -405B.
    Jean-Marc Mommessin: And this FFN fusion significantly improves the model’s throughput, achieving notable speedups. If I recall correctly, it’s in the range of 3 to 5x for the Ultra model?
    Joey Conway: That’s right, the speedups for the Ultra model are in that range. Additionally, by reducing the model’s size in terms of weights, we also lowered its memory footprint. This allowed us to utilize a larger KV cache. For Llama Nemotron Ultra, we could fit it onto a 8x H100 80GB setup, which is quite significant as it fits within common node configurations. So, FFN fusion provided both a substantial compute speedup and a reduction in memory usage, enabling us to handle larger context lengths. These are very exciting outcomes for us.
    Jean-Marc Mommessin: Let’s switch gears to data curation. AI data is crucial, and your training pipeline seems very sophisticated. You touched on “instruction following” earlier. Could you elaborate on your data curation process and how you ensured high-quality data, especially considering you leveraged other models in the process?

    Image source: NVIDIA
    Joey Conway: Transparency and openness were key in our approach. We wanted to share as much as possible about our data, techniques, and tooling so the community could understand and even use it themselves. Our primary goal with data curation was to improve accuracy across several key domains, including reasoning tasks like math and coding, as well as non-reasoning tasks like tool calling, instruction following, and chat.
    Our strategy involved curating specific datasets to enhance performance in these areas. Within our supervised fine-tuning process, we differentiated between “reasoning on” and “reasoning off” scenarios. For example, in math and coding, we curated data for simple questions that don’t require complex reasoning, as well as more intricate problems that do. This helps the model learn when and how to apply reasoning.
    A key part of this process was leveraging high-quality models from the community as “experts” in specific domains. For instance, we used DeepSeek R-1 extensively for reasoning-intensive math and coding tasks. For non-reasoning tasks like basic math, coding, chat, and tool calling, we utilized models like Llama and Qwen. Our aim was to blend the best capabilities of these community models into a single model.
    We’ve also made this curated dataset publicly available on Hugging Face, with around 30 million question-answer pairs. This allows the community to explore, use, and build upon our work. We were also excited to see our partner ServiceNow recently announce their apprehend Nemotron model, which was trained using our dataset to enhance their own reasoning capabilities.
    Jean-Marc Mommessin: That’s fantastic that you’re sharing the dataset. Given that you used other models to generate some of this data, what kind of quality checks did you implement to ensure the reliability of the training pairs?
    Joey Conway: Data quality was absolutely paramount. Since we were generating a significant portion of the data using other models, we implemented a rigorous multi-layered quality assurance process.
    First, for each expert model used to generate data in a specific domain, we would generate multiple candidate responses for the same prompt. Then, we employed a separate set of “critic” models to evaluate these candidates based on correctness, coherence, and adherence to the prompt.
    Second, we implemented a scoring mechanism. Each generated question-answer pair received a quality score based on the critic model’s evaluation. We set a high threshold, and any pair that didn’t meet this standard was discarded.
    Third, human review was integrated at various stages. Our team of data scientists and engineers manually inspected samples of the generated data to identify any systematic errors, biases, or instances of hallucination. This human oversight was crucial for catching nuances that automated systems might miss.
    Fourth, we focused on the diversity of the generated data. We wanted to ensure we weren’t just getting variations of the same types of questions and answers. We implemented strategies to encourage the expert models to generate a broad range of examples within each domain.
    Finally, after training Llama Nemotron Ultra on this curated data, we conducted extensive evaluations against benchmark datasets and in real-world use cases. This feedback loop helped us further refine our data generation and filtering techniques.
    So, it was a comprehensive approach involving expert generation, automated criticism and scoring, human review, diversity checks, and rigorous downstream evaluation to ensure the high quality of our training data.
    Jean-Marc Mommessin: The quality of the synthetic data is so important. Could you elaborate on the stages you take to ensure high accuracy when generating this data?
    Joey Conway: Absolutely. When doing synthetic data generation, there are a few key stages to ensure high accuracy. The first is the prompts – the seed data and how we prompt the model. The second is the quality of the responses.
    On the prompting side, we focus on prompting models where we believe they excel. For example, we might use Llama for chat-related prompts but avoid using a non-reasoning model for math. It’s crucial to align the prompts with the core strengths of the model.
    For vetting the responses, we invest time in both human manual review and automated methods. Going forward, we anticipate increasing our use of verifiers and reward models, similar to what we’ve done on the Reinforcement Learningside.
    The reason we’ve open-sourced much of this is that there’s a lot of nuance involved, and we wanted the community to engage with these challenges. Enterprises like ServiceNow have specific goals, and some of our data might be more or less useful to them. By making it available, they can vet it themselves. We also provide tools like classifier models to help categorize content, such as news or sports, allowing users to make informed decisions about the data blends they use for training.
    Jean-Marc Mommessin: Perfect. Is there anything else you’d like to highlight regarding this pipeline?
    Joey Conway: Yes, I’d like to touch on the Reinforcement Learningaspect. Following the supervised fine-tuning stage, where we enhanced core skills, we’ve just begun to explore the potential of RL with Nemotron. We believe this will be a significant area of future development.
    What’s exciting about RL is that its effectiveness is largely tied to the available compute time. The more time we invest, the better the model becomes at specific tasks. In our RL stages, we’ve developed methods to automate the process of asking the model a question, grading its answer, and providing feedback to allow it to learn and improve.
    You can see on the slide the domains where we’ve applied this: scientific reasoning, instruction following, and chat. If you look at the leaderboards, you’ll see that even with new models emerging, we’ve maintained a strong position in these areas, largely due to the effectiveness of RL in achieving top-tier accuracy. We’re optimistic that we’ll see more of this in the community, with more discussion and publication of techniques and data. We’ve started sharing some of our work in this area and will have much more to come in the next three to six months.
    Jean-Marc Mommessin: You mentioned RL and instruction following, which ties back to the beginning of our conversation. It seems like you’ve come full circle here.
    Joey Conway: Exactly. The exciting aspect here is automating the feedback loop wherever possible. For chat, we published a fine-tuned reward model last fall. Those who followed our work might recall that our Llama Nemotron model topped the chat leaderboards then. This was because the reward model provides an automated way to teach the original model whether its responses are good or bad. It essentially grades responses based on helpfulness, conciseness, verbosity, groundedness, and similar factors. This granular feedback per generated response allows the model to improve significantly, often more so than through supervised fine-tuning alone, which typically involves a few passes without a continuous feedback loop.
    Similarly, for instruction following, we use a verifier and a dataset to teach the model whether it followed instructions well or needs to try again. We’re eager to expand this approach to more domains. We’ve already published datasets related to coding and math since the release of this model a few weeks ago, and these have become popular on Hugging Face. I anticipate significant growth in this area within the community.
    Jean-Marc Mommessin: Alright, so one of the big innovations here, and you touched upon it, but I want to emphasize it, is the ability to toggle reasoning on and off via the system prompt. This is quite unique, and I’m sure many will follow suit. Could you expand on the idea behind this, how you see it applying to agents and beyond, its value, and the key challenges in implementing it?
    Joey Conway: The reasoning on and off capability was a core goal from the outset. We observed that models in the community often excelled in either reasoning or non-reasoning tasks, and we wanted to simplify deployment by having a single model that could handle both.
    We had to determine the best way to teach the model when to reason and when not to, while also providing enterprises with explicit control, as they often have deeper domain knowledge than we do. The motivation behind this is that reasoning generates significantly more tokens, which can lead to higher latency and cost. While crucial for solving complex problems, it’s not always necessary. We wanted to give enterprises the control to balance accuracy with latency and cost, allowing them to decide when to employ reasoning and when to opt for faster, less computationally intensive responses.
    Initially, we weren’t sure how to achieve this, as it hadn’t been widely implemented in the community. Our approach in the supervised fine-tuning stage was to explicitly teach the model by presenting the same question with two different answers: one with detailed reasoning and one without. This essentially doubled our dataset for this specific purpose. However, the outcome is a single model where users can simply include “use detailed thinking on” or “use detailed thinking off” in the prompt to control the model’s reasoning process.
    On the training side, this required more effort to teach the model this distinction. What we have today is essentially a v1, and I expect others will follow this approach. We’re also excited about future developments, such as time or token limits for reasoning and more granular controls. I’m optimistic that we’ll see further breakthroughs in this area within the next six to nine months, as the problem-solving power of reasoning is significant, but it comes with trade-offs that the community will continue to refine.
    Jean-Marc Mommessin: We all know that the real test comes in production. Production environments are sensitive to latency, cost, and while accuracy and reasoning are vital, excessive reasoning can lead to scalability issues and increased latency. The flexibility you’ve introduced is fantastic, and I can see numerous production use cases that will greatly benefit from the ability to control reasoning on a per-query basis.
    So, when you were developing this model, you aimed to balance accuracy and efficiency. Could you share some insights into how you made these trade-offs, the timeline for building the model and the team involved, and how you determined the optimal compromise between these two critical factors?
    Joey Conway: Balancing accuracy and efficiency is always a challenge. Our initial goal was to achieve both, which is a difficult undertaking. We started with the “Super” model, which was the most recent Llama 3.1 70B release from Meta, as our baseline for accuracy. We weren’t sure if we could simultaneously improve accuracy and reduce the model size.
    We found that through our training techniques and distillation process, we could indeed boost accuracy. We even released an initial checkpoint reflecting this. However, we wanted to go further by incorporating strong reasoning capabilities, aiming for state-of-the-art reasoning scores. This is where the SFT and RL stages came in, which required significant time for synthetic data generation since this type of data didn’t exist.
    During training, we carefully considered the number of epochs for each skill and continuously measured accuracy. Our goal was to improve performance across all six key areas rather than excelling in just a couple. This balancing act took more time as we experimented to find the right combinations. However, we felt it was crucial to ensure world-class performance in these six enterprise-relevant scenarios, including chat and instruction following.
    For areas like MMLU, we focused on maintaining performance and preventing regression rather than actively trying to improve scores. So, there were definitely priorities and trade-offs involved. Ultimately, we believe these were the right focus areas for our enterprise customers.
    Jean-Marc Mommessin: You are releasing this model family as part of the open-source community. We’ve discussed the gaps you aimed to address and the unique reasoning on/off feature for production scalability. Could you share your thoughts on how NVIDIA and your team view the role of these models within the broader open-source and LLM ecosystem, especially given your work building upon the Llama base?
    Joey Conway: NVIDIA has a long history of contributing models to the open-source community. What excites us about Llama is its strong traction with enterprise customers. While NVIDIA Research publishes extensively across various domains, our goal with Llama Nemotron was to build upon Llama’s momentum in enterprise adoption by focusing narrowly on specific areas. The base Llama models already cover many things exceptionally well, so we saw an opportunity to build on top of that and be very targeted in our enhancements.
    The recent LlamaCon event and Meta’s announcements sound very promising, and we’re excited about Llama 4 and the ongoing work there. Moving forward, we anticipate continuing to identify specific areas where we can add significant value, while Meta continues to build excellent general-purpose models suitable for enterprise production.
    From our perspective, reasoning will likely remain a key focus, and we’re also excited about Meta’s advancements in this area. Tool calling, instruction following, and chat are also areas we’ll continue to develop. One area we’re particularly interested in exploring is multilingual capabilities. For large enterprises, supporting multiple languages is crucial. While many models handle individual languages well, we aim to focus on a few key languages and ensure world-class accuracy for reasoning, tool calling, and chat within those. This is likely the next major area of expansion for us, beyond the exciting developments in model architectures like Llama 4’s new MoE architecture, which we’re also keen to explore for potential distillation and optimization for NVIDIA GPUs. So, there’s a lot of exciting work ahead.
    Jean-Marc Mommessin: When you say multilingual, are you thinking of supporting a broad range, like 50 languages, or a more focused set, perhaps around 5 or 10 initially, given the benchmark challenges you mentioned?
    Joey Conway: We’ll probably start with a more focused set, perhaps around 5 to 10 languages. The challenge is that the community currently lacks comprehensive benchmarks for tasks like reasoning or tool calling across a wide variety of languages. As we develop these multilingual models, we’re also having to create evaluation data simultaneously, which takes time. If those benchmarks were readily available, the process would be smoother. However, we see this as an exciting challenge. Our initial focus will likely be on a smaller set of languages where we can establish strong performance, given the current limitations in community-wide benchmarks.
    Jean-Marc Mommessin: Let’s shift gears and talk about another state-of-the-art open-source model you recently released: Parakeet TDT 0.6 B parameters, V2. This model has set a new standard for automatic speech recognition, transcribing one hour of audio in just one second. That’s 50 times faster than other open-source ASR models, and remarkably, it achieves only a 6% word error rate. This is truly impressive. What else would you like to highlight about this model before we discuss the “how” behind its incredible performance?
    Joey Conway: It’s worth noting that NVIDIA has been working on ASR models for a long time, even before I joined. We’ve also released many open models in this space over the years. The teams working on this are exceptional, and they consistently strive to balance accuracy with latency and throughput. Parakeet V2 is the latest in this line of high-performance models from NVIDIA.
    Jean-Marc Mommessin: It sounds like the advancements will keep coming. So, let’s delve into how you achieved this remarkable performance with Parakeet TDT. What kind of architecture did you use? I understand it’s based on a Fast Conformer architecture with specific optimizations like 8x depth-wise separable convolutional downsampling and limited context attention. Could you explain how you arrived at this approach and whether these optimizations primarily enhance speed and throughput or if they also contribute to accuracy and the ability to process long audio segments like a full hour in one shot?
    Joey Conway: Yes, we’ve explored various architectures for ASR over the years, and the Conformer architecture, originally from Google, has shown great promise. Our goal with Parakeet TDT was to take the Conformer architecture and make it significantly more efficient and faster without sacrificing quality.
    We’ve implemented several key optimizations. 
    First, as you mentioned, the depth-wise separable convolution downsampling. At the input stage, we significantly downsample the audio, which reduces the computational cost and memory requirements for processing.
    Second is the limited context attention. By focusing on smaller, overlapping chunks of audio, we can maintain accuracy while achieving a speedup in processing.
    Third, on the encoder side, we also utilize a sliding window attention technique, which allows us to process longer audio files without having to split them into shorter segments. This is crucial for handling long-form audio like a full hour in a single pass.
    Beyond the Conformer architecture, Parakeet TDT incorporates a Token and Duration Transducer. Traditional Recurrent Neural Networktransducer technology processes audio frame by frame. What we’ve done with TDT is enable the model to predict both the tokens and the expected duration of those tokens. This allows it to make decisions to skip over redundant frames, significantly speeding up the transcription process. This TDT innovation alone contributes to around a 1.5 to 2x speedup. So, there’s a combination of architectural choices and specific optimizations that contribute to Parakeet TDT’s impressive speed and accuracy.
    Jean-Marc Mommessin: I want to go back to one or two of those. Those are amazing, frankly. The speed increase is remarkable.
    Joey Conway: Yes, and we have another technique called a label looping algorithm. Essentially, when we’re doing batch inference, this algorithm allows us to advance the tokens independently for different samples. This separation of the workflow enables us to sweep and loop over frames and labels more efficiently, significantly speeding up the decoding process.
    Lastly, on the decoder side, we’ve moved some of the computation into CUDA graphs, which is a more efficient way to run many small kernels. This optimization alone provided around a 3x speed boost. So, as you can see with TDT models, we’ve been able to achieve speeds comparable to Connectionist Temporal Classificationdecoders, which are also known for their speed, while maintaining high accuracy. Our overall theme is always to balance speed improvements with maintaining or even enhancing accuracy. Techniques like CTC decoders have been around for a while and are fast but might not be as accurate. It really depends on the use case, but we’re always striving for that balance.
    Jean-Marc Mommessin: Can we revisit the limited context attention? Do you see this technique having broader applications in other areas down the line?
    Joey Conway: Yes, I believe so. Patterns like the sliding window attention are already used in other areas, such as LLMs. Our research teams are constantly experimenting, looking at successful techniques from different domains, and trying to apply them in new ways. Interestingly, some of the researchers who worked on Parakeet TDT also work on Llama Nemotron, so there’s a cross-pollination of ideas. I do expect that some of these techniques will find broader applications going forward. We also anticipate further improvements to TDT and the Conformer architecture, as we’ve been working on them for several years now. I don’t see these core technologies going away anytime soon; we’ll likely continue to refine them.
    Jean-Marc Mommessin: Leaving the TDT aside, do you see other potential applications for the Token and Duration Transducer concept in other domains?
    Joey Conway: That’s a good question. I’m not immediately seeing a direct application of the TDT concept outside of ASR. Its history is rooted in RNNs and RNN transducers, which have primarily been used in speech recognition. However, some of the underlying techniques we’ve applied to it, like using CUDA graphs for optimizing kernel execution, are general techniques that we use whenever we identify bottlenecks in a model’s pipeline. So, while the TDT itself might be domain-specific, some of the optimization strategies we’ve employed could certainly translate to other areas, including large language models.
    Jean-Marc Mommessin: let’s talk about data. AI data is always a key topic. How do you ensure that the data used to train Parakeet TDT is diverse enough to handle various accents, dialects, vocal ranges, pitches, and noisy background conditions, which often negatively impact ASR performance?
    Joey Conway: You’re absolutely right. As humans, we naturally filter out accents and background noise to understand speech. However, deep learning models are only as good as the data they’re trained on. Early on, limited data for specific accents or languages resulted in poor performance for those variations. What might have initially seemed like edge cases have become increasingly common, highlighting the need for more representative data.
    We’ve invested significant effort in curating our datasets to reflect this real-world diversity. We use techniques like classifiers to analyze our data and understand the distributions of accents, dialects, and acoustic conditions. We’ve worked with customers like YUM! Brands, who have drive-through use cases with significant highway noise, illustrating the importance of training the model to handle such challenging environments. Ensuring the right blend and distribution of these conditions in our training data is crucial for the model’s robustness.
    I’m also excited to announce that we plan to open-source a substantial speech dataset, around 100,000 hours, where we’ve meticulously performed this kind of curation. This dataset will include variations in sound levels, signal-to-noise ratios, background noise types, and even telephone audio formats relevant for call centers. Our goal is to provide the community with high-quality, diverse data that enables models to perform well across a wide range of real-world scenarios.
    Jean-Marc Mommessin: That’s fantastic news about the open-sourcing of the speech dataset! My final question regarding the Parakeet family: you currently have the 600 million and 1.1 billion parameter models. How do you envision future development for this family? What are the potential directions?
    Joey Conway: We’re considering development along two main dimensions: model size and the number of supported languages. In terms of size, we’ve released models at the smaller and mid-range to demonstrate the potential, similar to our approach with Llama Nemotron Super. We plan to explore larger models, potentially around 2 billion parameters, which we anticipate will handle even more languages and dialects.
    On the smaller end, we’re even considering models down to around 50 million parameters. The motivation here is to address use cases at the edge where a smaller footprint is necessary, such as enabling real-time audio processing for robots in noisy environments. We’ll be exploring the right trade-offs for such applications.
    Technologically, we plan to work on streaming capabilities for TDT. Currently, much of the processing is done in an offline batch mode, but we want to enable real-time, live transcription. And as mentioned, we’re excited about releasing the large, curated speech dataset.
    Finally, for those looking to deploy these models in production, we recommend exploring techniques like word boosting, which allows for customization of text normalization to include domain-specific terms and acronyms. We aim to provide a wide range of options for users to get started and tailor the models to their specific needs.
    Jean-Marc Mommessin: I’m very familiar with the NVIDIA Orin platform. Would these Parakeet models currently run on NVIDIA Orin?
    Joey Conway: Yes, I believe the 0.6 billion parameter model likely would run on Orin. I would need to double-check the exact specifications, but I’m quite confident it’s feasible.
    Jean-Marc Mommessin: Orin packs a significant punch. I especially love the robotics use case you mentioned. While there’s been a lot of focus on robot vision, the ability to hear and understand quickly is equally crucial, especially for safety. A model that’s 50 times faster and highly accurate in understanding another modality seems like a perfect fit for robotics.
    Joey Conway: Yes, and the slight hesitation I had earlier was due to the understanding that in robotics, there are often multiple models running simultaneously, including vision models. So, resource allocation is a consideration. However, our push towards smaller, more efficient models is precisely to address these kinds of multi-modal edge computing scenarios. The low latency and real-time processing capabilities of Parakeet are indeed very beneficial for enabling robots to react quickly and safely to auditory cues.
    Jean-Marc Mommessin: Anything else you’d like to add as a final thought on the Llama Nemotron Ultra and Parakeet families? They’re both open-source, fast, high-throughput, cost-efficient, and run on smaller footprints – are these the key takeaways?
    Joey Conway: Yes, that’s a great summary. Those were the core objectives we set out to achieve. We aimed for state-of-the-art accuracy, optimized footprints for efficient GPU utilization in terms of latency and throughput, and a commitment to open-sourcing everything to empower the community. We’ve strived to be as community-friendly as possible by releasing datasets, using permissive licenses, and making it easy for people to experiment. We’re eager to see the community’s feedback and the innovative applications they build upon our work. We’re also looking forward to learning from their experiences.
    Jean-Marc Mommessin: Where are all these models and datasets available?
    Joey Conway: Everything we’ve published is on Hugging Face – the models and the datasets. The software stack to run them comes from NVIDIA and is available on NGC, our content repository. Much of the underlying software is also open-source and can be found on GitHub. We also provide pip wheels for easier installation. The Nemo framework is the central hub for much of this software stack, whether you want to run the models or fine-tune them.
    We’ve tried to make it as user-friendly as possible. We use the same software internally to build the models, so it should be relatively straightforward for others to pick up and deploy as well.
    Jean-Marc Mommessin: Well, Joey, this has been fantastic. I’m continually impressed by NVIDIA’s commitment to giving back to the community with state-of-the-art models that will undoubtedly find their way into production. Thank you so much for your time and insights. I look forward to our next conversation.
    Joey Conway: Thank you, Jean-Marc. It was my pleasure, and we appreciate the opportunity. 
    Jean-marc MommessinJean-marc is a successful AI business executive .He leads and accelerates growth for AI powered solutions and started a computer vision company in 2006. He is a recognized speaker at AI conferences and has an MBA from Stanford.Jean-marc Mommessinhttps://www.marktechpost.com/author/jean-marc0000677/NVIDIA AI Releases HOVER: A Breakthrough AI for Versatile Humanoid Control in RoboticsJean-marc Mommessinhttps://www.marktechpost.com/author/jean-marc0000677/Speech-to-Speech Foundation Models Pave the Way for Seamless Multilingual InteractionsJean-marc Mommessinhttps://www.marktechpost.com/author/jean-marc0000677/Lowe’s Revolutionizes Retail with AI: From Personalized Shopping to Proactive Customer AssistanceJean-marc Mommessinhttps://www.marktechpost.com/author/jean-marc0000677/Google DeepMind’s Gemini Robotics: Unleashing Embodied AI with Zero-Shot Control and Enhanced Spatial Reasoning
    #exclusive #talk #joey #conway #nvidia
    Exclusive Talk: Joey Conway of NVIDIA on Llama Nemotron Ultra and Open Source Models
    Today, MarkTechPost had the pleasure of interviewing Joey Conway from NVIDIA to discuss their exciting work on open-source large language models, including Llama Nemotron Ultra & Parakeet. Highlights from the interview: NVIDIA’s Open Source Powerhouse: Discover how NVIDIA is pushing the boundaries of open-source AI with the release of cutting-edge models like Llama Nemotron Ultra and Parakeet TDT. Llama Nemotron Ultra: Smaller Size, Giant Performance: Learn how NVIDIA achieved on-par performance with models twice the size, enabling deployment on a single GPU node. Explore their innovative FFN fusion technique for significant speedups. Reasoning on Demand: Uncover the unique “reasoning on/off” feature in Llama Nemotron Ultra, offering unprecedented control for production deployments and cost optimization. Revolutionary Speech Recognition with Parakeet TDT: Dive into NVIDIA’s state-of-the-art ASR model that transcribes one hour of audio in one second with only a 6% word error rate – 50 times faster than other open-source alternatives! The “How”: Architectural Innovations: Get insights into the advanced architectures and optimizations behind these models, including FFN fusion, limited context attention, and the Token Duration Transducer  Democratizing AI with Open Data: Learn about NVIDIA’s commitment to the open-source community through the release of model weights and massive, high-quality datasets for both language and speech. Future Directions: Get a sneak peek into NVIDIA’s plans for multilingual support, even smaller edge-optimized models, and advancements in real-time streaming for speech recognition. Production-Ready AI: Understand how these models are designed with real-world deployment challenges in mind, focusing on accuracy, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness. Jean-Marc Mommessin: Joey, welcome to Marketechpost! We’re thrilled to have you here and to delve into the impressive open-source models NVIDIA has been releasing. To start, could you please introduce yourself and your role at NVIDIA? Joey Conway: Hi Jean-Marc, it’s great to be here. I’m Joey Conway, and I work in product management for some of the deep learning software at NVIDIA. Our team focuses on large language models like Nemotron and Llama Nemotron, as well as text-to-speech models such as Parakeet. Jean-Marc Mommessin: Wonderful. And you’ve been at NVIDIA for over seven years now, witnessing significant waves of innovation in AI. Let’s talk about your recent release, Llama Nemotron Ultra, a 253 billion parameter model. From what we’ve seen, it delivers performance on par with models like Llama 405B and DeepSeek R1, which are about twice its size. Remarkably, it can run on a single 8x H100 node. What else can you tell us about Llama Nemotron Ultra and what makes it so impressive? Joey Conway: We’re big believers in the open-source community and the fantastic work being done there. With Llama Nemotron, our goal was to build upon the existing foundations, particularly Llama, for which we greatly appreciate Meta’s contributions. We also observed significant progress in reasoning within the open community earlier this year. Inspired by this, we wanted to contribute and see how we could enhance Llama, especially for enterprise use cases. Our focus was primarily on improving reasoning capabilities and agentic tasks like tool calling and chat. We aimed to take the strengths of the open-source community, enhance them, and then contribute those improvements back. Jean-Marc Mommessin: Did you identify specific gaps in existing models that you aimed to address? You mentioned reasoning, but could you provide an example or two of enterprise agentic tasks where you felt there were shortcomings that Llama Nemotron Ultra overcomes? Joey Conway : Yes, I think looking back to the beginning of the year, a key challenge in enterprise deployments was handling complex queries requiring significant thought and reflection. These could be multi-step processes or involve substantial calculations and the use of external tools. At that time, there weren’t many strong open-weight models capable of robust reasoning. The progress we’ve seen in the last few months in this area is very encouraging. Another critical aspect for enterprises is the ability to accurately call APIs and closely follow instructions in user queries. We wanted to ensure that while we focused on improving reasoning, we didn’t compromise these essential production-level capabilities. Furthermore, we often noticed that when both reasoning and instruction following were well-addressed, they typically resided in separate models. Our aim was to simplify this by creating a single model that excels in both. This was the landscape we observed when we started this project around January and February. Jean-Marc Mommessin: That makes perfect sense and aligns with what we’re seeing in the industry as well. Now, let’s dive into the “how.” Your paper mentions FFN fusion as a key optimization. Could you elaborate on this technique, starting with a high-level explanation? Joey Conway: Absolutely. Our focus on optimization stemmed from the realization that deploying state-of-the-art models often requires a significant deployment footprint. We wanted to optimize this to fit within more common GPU setups. We explored various techniques, including our Puzzle neural architecture search. For dense transformer models, particularly those in the Llama family, we discovered a way to reduce or eliminate redundant attention layers. This process aligned the feed-forward networklayers in a sequence, allowing us to explore fusion methods. Our fundamental goal on the GPU is to maximize parallel execution. Fusing these aligned FFN layers enables greater parallel computation than was previously possible. By removing redundant layers, we found opportunities to essentially merge or fuse the remaining ones. This is a key example of how we tackle the challenges of running these models at scale. Importantly, this technique often yields greater improvements with larger models, which was beneficial for our Ultra model based on Meta’s Llama 3.1 -405B. Jean-Marc Mommessin: And this FFN fusion significantly improves the model’s throughput, achieving notable speedups. If I recall correctly, it’s in the range of 3 to 5x for the Ultra model? Joey Conway: That’s right, the speedups for the Ultra model are in that range. Additionally, by reducing the model’s size in terms of weights, we also lowered its memory footprint. This allowed us to utilize a larger KV cache. For Llama Nemotron Ultra, we could fit it onto a 8x H100 80GB setup, which is quite significant as it fits within common node configurations. So, FFN fusion provided both a substantial compute speedup and a reduction in memory usage, enabling us to handle larger context lengths. These are very exciting outcomes for us. Jean-Marc Mommessin: Let’s switch gears to data curation. AI data is crucial, and your training pipeline seems very sophisticated. You touched on “instruction following” earlier. Could you elaborate on your data curation process and how you ensured high-quality data, especially considering you leveraged other models in the process? Image source: NVIDIA Joey Conway: Transparency and openness were key in our approach. We wanted to share as much as possible about our data, techniques, and tooling so the community could understand and even use it themselves. Our primary goal with data curation was to improve accuracy across several key domains, including reasoning tasks like math and coding, as well as non-reasoning tasks like tool calling, instruction following, and chat. Our strategy involved curating specific datasets to enhance performance in these areas. Within our supervised fine-tuning process, we differentiated between “reasoning on” and “reasoning off” scenarios. For example, in math and coding, we curated data for simple questions that don’t require complex reasoning, as well as more intricate problems that do. This helps the model learn when and how to apply reasoning. A key part of this process was leveraging high-quality models from the community as “experts” in specific domains. For instance, we used DeepSeek R-1 extensively for reasoning-intensive math and coding tasks. For non-reasoning tasks like basic math, coding, chat, and tool calling, we utilized models like Llama and Qwen. Our aim was to blend the best capabilities of these community models into a single model. We’ve also made this curated dataset publicly available on Hugging Face, with around 30 million question-answer pairs. This allows the community to explore, use, and build upon our work. We were also excited to see our partner ServiceNow recently announce their apprehend Nemotron model, which was trained using our dataset to enhance their own reasoning capabilities. Jean-Marc Mommessin: That’s fantastic that you’re sharing the dataset. Given that you used other models to generate some of this data, what kind of quality checks did you implement to ensure the reliability of the training pairs? Joey Conway: Data quality was absolutely paramount. Since we were generating a significant portion of the data using other models, we implemented a rigorous multi-layered quality assurance process. First, for each expert model used to generate data in a specific domain, we would generate multiple candidate responses for the same prompt. Then, we employed a separate set of “critic” models to evaluate these candidates based on correctness, coherence, and adherence to the prompt. Second, we implemented a scoring mechanism. Each generated question-answer pair received a quality score based on the critic model’s evaluation. We set a high threshold, and any pair that didn’t meet this standard was discarded. Third, human review was integrated at various stages. Our team of data scientists and engineers manually inspected samples of the generated data to identify any systematic errors, biases, or instances of hallucination. This human oversight was crucial for catching nuances that automated systems might miss. Fourth, we focused on the diversity of the generated data. We wanted to ensure we weren’t just getting variations of the same types of questions and answers. We implemented strategies to encourage the expert models to generate a broad range of examples within each domain. Finally, after training Llama Nemotron Ultra on this curated data, we conducted extensive evaluations against benchmark datasets and in real-world use cases. This feedback loop helped us further refine our data generation and filtering techniques. So, it was a comprehensive approach involving expert generation, automated criticism and scoring, human review, diversity checks, and rigorous downstream evaluation to ensure the high quality of our training data. Jean-Marc Mommessin: The quality of the synthetic data is so important. Could you elaborate on the stages you take to ensure high accuracy when generating this data? Joey Conway: Absolutely. When doing synthetic data generation, there are a few key stages to ensure high accuracy. The first is the prompts – the seed data and how we prompt the model. The second is the quality of the responses. On the prompting side, we focus on prompting models where we believe they excel. For example, we might use Llama for chat-related prompts but avoid using a non-reasoning model for math. It’s crucial to align the prompts with the core strengths of the model. For vetting the responses, we invest time in both human manual review and automated methods. Going forward, we anticipate increasing our use of verifiers and reward models, similar to what we’ve done on the Reinforcement Learningside. The reason we’ve open-sourced much of this is that there’s a lot of nuance involved, and we wanted the community to engage with these challenges. Enterprises like ServiceNow have specific goals, and some of our data might be more or less useful to them. By making it available, they can vet it themselves. We also provide tools like classifier models to help categorize content, such as news or sports, allowing users to make informed decisions about the data blends they use for training. Jean-Marc Mommessin: Perfect. Is there anything else you’d like to highlight regarding this pipeline? Joey Conway: Yes, I’d like to touch on the Reinforcement Learningaspect. Following the supervised fine-tuning stage, where we enhanced core skills, we’ve just begun to explore the potential of RL with Nemotron. We believe this will be a significant area of future development. What’s exciting about RL is that its effectiveness is largely tied to the available compute time. The more time we invest, the better the model becomes at specific tasks. In our RL stages, we’ve developed methods to automate the process of asking the model a question, grading its answer, and providing feedback to allow it to learn and improve. You can see on the slide the domains where we’ve applied this: scientific reasoning, instruction following, and chat. If you look at the leaderboards, you’ll see that even with new models emerging, we’ve maintained a strong position in these areas, largely due to the effectiveness of RL in achieving top-tier accuracy. We’re optimistic that we’ll see more of this in the community, with more discussion and publication of techniques and data. We’ve started sharing some of our work in this area and will have much more to come in the next three to six months. Jean-Marc Mommessin: You mentioned RL and instruction following, which ties back to the beginning of our conversation. It seems like you’ve come full circle here. Joey Conway: Exactly. The exciting aspect here is automating the feedback loop wherever possible. For chat, we published a fine-tuned reward model last fall. Those who followed our work might recall that our Llama Nemotron model topped the chat leaderboards then. This was because the reward model provides an automated way to teach the original model whether its responses are good or bad. It essentially grades responses based on helpfulness, conciseness, verbosity, groundedness, and similar factors. This granular feedback per generated response allows the model to improve significantly, often more so than through supervised fine-tuning alone, which typically involves a few passes without a continuous feedback loop. Similarly, for instruction following, we use a verifier and a dataset to teach the model whether it followed instructions well or needs to try again. We’re eager to expand this approach to more domains. We’ve already published datasets related to coding and math since the release of this model a few weeks ago, and these have become popular on Hugging Face. I anticipate significant growth in this area within the community. Jean-Marc Mommessin: Alright, so one of the big innovations here, and you touched upon it, but I want to emphasize it, is the ability to toggle reasoning on and off via the system prompt. This is quite unique, and I’m sure many will follow suit. Could you expand on the idea behind this, how you see it applying to agents and beyond, its value, and the key challenges in implementing it? Joey Conway: The reasoning on and off capability was a core goal from the outset. We observed that models in the community often excelled in either reasoning or non-reasoning tasks, and we wanted to simplify deployment by having a single model that could handle both. We had to determine the best way to teach the model when to reason and when not to, while also providing enterprises with explicit control, as they often have deeper domain knowledge than we do. The motivation behind this is that reasoning generates significantly more tokens, which can lead to higher latency and cost. While crucial for solving complex problems, it’s not always necessary. We wanted to give enterprises the control to balance accuracy with latency and cost, allowing them to decide when to employ reasoning and when to opt for faster, less computationally intensive responses. Initially, we weren’t sure how to achieve this, as it hadn’t been widely implemented in the community. Our approach in the supervised fine-tuning stage was to explicitly teach the model by presenting the same question with two different answers: one with detailed reasoning and one without. This essentially doubled our dataset for this specific purpose. However, the outcome is a single model where users can simply include “use detailed thinking on” or “use detailed thinking off” in the prompt to control the model’s reasoning process. On the training side, this required more effort to teach the model this distinction. What we have today is essentially a v1, and I expect others will follow this approach. We’re also excited about future developments, such as time or token limits for reasoning and more granular controls. I’m optimistic that we’ll see further breakthroughs in this area within the next six to nine months, as the problem-solving power of reasoning is significant, but it comes with trade-offs that the community will continue to refine. Jean-Marc Mommessin: We all know that the real test comes in production. Production environments are sensitive to latency, cost, and while accuracy and reasoning are vital, excessive reasoning can lead to scalability issues and increased latency. The flexibility you’ve introduced is fantastic, and I can see numerous production use cases that will greatly benefit from the ability to control reasoning on a per-query basis. So, when you were developing this model, you aimed to balance accuracy and efficiency. Could you share some insights into how you made these trade-offs, the timeline for building the model and the team involved, and how you determined the optimal compromise between these two critical factors? Joey Conway: Balancing accuracy and efficiency is always a challenge. Our initial goal was to achieve both, which is a difficult undertaking. We started with the “Super” model, which was the most recent Llama 3.1 70B release from Meta, as our baseline for accuracy. We weren’t sure if we could simultaneously improve accuracy and reduce the model size. We found that through our training techniques and distillation process, we could indeed boost accuracy. We even released an initial checkpoint reflecting this. However, we wanted to go further by incorporating strong reasoning capabilities, aiming for state-of-the-art reasoning scores. This is where the SFT and RL stages came in, which required significant time for synthetic data generation since this type of data didn’t exist. During training, we carefully considered the number of epochs for each skill and continuously measured accuracy. Our goal was to improve performance across all six key areas rather than excelling in just a couple. This balancing act took more time as we experimented to find the right combinations. However, we felt it was crucial to ensure world-class performance in these six enterprise-relevant scenarios, including chat and instruction following. For areas like MMLU, we focused on maintaining performance and preventing regression rather than actively trying to improve scores. So, there were definitely priorities and trade-offs involved. Ultimately, we believe these were the right focus areas for our enterprise customers. Jean-Marc Mommessin: You are releasing this model family as part of the open-source community. We’ve discussed the gaps you aimed to address and the unique reasoning on/off feature for production scalability. Could you share your thoughts on how NVIDIA and your team view the role of these models within the broader open-source and LLM ecosystem, especially given your work building upon the Llama base? Joey Conway: NVIDIA has a long history of contributing models to the open-source community. What excites us about Llama is its strong traction with enterprise customers. While NVIDIA Research publishes extensively across various domains, our goal with Llama Nemotron was to build upon Llama’s momentum in enterprise adoption by focusing narrowly on specific areas. The base Llama models already cover many things exceptionally well, so we saw an opportunity to build on top of that and be very targeted in our enhancements. The recent LlamaCon event and Meta’s announcements sound very promising, and we’re excited about Llama 4 and the ongoing work there. Moving forward, we anticipate continuing to identify specific areas where we can add significant value, while Meta continues to build excellent general-purpose models suitable for enterprise production. From our perspective, reasoning will likely remain a key focus, and we’re also excited about Meta’s advancements in this area. Tool calling, instruction following, and chat are also areas we’ll continue to develop. One area we’re particularly interested in exploring is multilingual capabilities. For large enterprises, supporting multiple languages is crucial. While many models handle individual languages well, we aim to focus on a few key languages and ensure world-class accuracy for reasoning, tool calling, and chat within those. This is likely the next major area of expansion for us, beyond the exciting developments in model architectures like Llama 4’s new MoE architecture, which we’re also keen to explore for potential distillation and optimization for NVIDIA GPUs. So, there’s a lot of exciting work ahead. Jean-Marc Mommessin: When you say multilingual, are you thinking of supporting a broad range, like 50 languages, or a more focused set, perhaps around 5 or 10 initially, given the benchmark challenges you mentioned? Joey Conway: We’ll probably start with a more focused set, perhaps around 5 to 10 languages. The challenge is that the community currently lacks comprehensive benchmarks for tasks like reasoning or tool calling across a wide variety of languages. As we develop these multilingual models, we’re also having to create evaluation data simultaneously, which takes time. If those benchmarks were readily available, the process would be smoother. However, we see this as an exciting challenge. Our initial focus will likely be on a smaller set of languages where we can establish strong performance, given the current limitations in community-wide benchmarks. Jean-Marc Mommessin: Let’s shift gears and talk about another state-of-the-art open-source model you recently released: Parakeet TDT 0.6 B parameters, V2. This model has set a new standard for automatic speech recognition, transcribing one hour of audio in just one second. That’s 50 times faster than other open-source ASR models, and remarkably, it achieves only a 6% word error rate. This is truly impressive. What else would you like to highlight about this model before we discuss the “how” behind its incredible performance? Joey Conway: It’s worth noting that NVIDIA has been working on ASR models for a long time, even before I joined. We’ve also released many open models in this space over the years. The teams working on this are exceptional, and they consistently strive to balance accuracy with latency and throughput. Parakeet V2 is the latest in this line of high-performance models from NVIDIA. Jean-Marc Mommessin: It sounds like the advancements will keep coming. So, let’s delve into how you achieved this remarkable performance with Parakeet TDT. What kind of architecture did you use? I understand it’s based on a Fast Conformer architecture with specific optimizations like 8x depth-wise separable convolutional downsampling and limited context attention. Could you explain how you arrived at this approach and whether these optimizations primarily enhance speed and throughput or if they also contribute to accuracy and the ability to process long audio segments like a full hour in one shot? Joey Conway: Yes, we’ve explored various architectures for ASR over the years, and the Conformer architecture, originally from Google, has shown great promise. Our goal with Parakeet TDT was to take the Conformer architecture and make it significantly more efficient and faster without sacrificing quality. We’ve implemented several key optimizations.  First, as you mentioned, the depth-wise separable convolution downsampling. At the input stage, we significantly downsample the audio, which reduces the computational cost and memory requirements for processing. Second is the limited context attention. By focusing on smaller, overlapping chunks of audio, we can maintain accuracy while achieving a speedup in processing. Third, on the encoder side, we also utilize a sliding window attention technique, which allows us to process longer audio files without having to split them into shorter segments. This is crucial for handling long-form audio like a full hour in a single pass. Beyond the Conformer architecture, Parakeet TDT incorporates a Token and Duration Transducer. Traditional Recurrent Neural Networktransducer technology processes audio frame by frame. What we’ve done with TDT is enable the model to predict both the tokens and the expected duration of those tokens. This allows it to make decisions to skip over redundant frames, significantly speeding up the transcription process. This TDT innovation alone contributes to around a 1.5 to 2x speedup. So, there’s a combination of architectural choices and specific optimizations that contribute to Parakeet TDT’s impressive speed and accuracy. Jean-Marc Mommessin: I want to go back to one or two of those. Those are amazing, frankly. The speed increase is remarkable. Joey Conway: Yes, and we have another technique called a label looping algorithm. Essentially, when we’re doing batch inference, this algorithm allows us to advance the tokens independently for different samples. This separation of the workflow enables us to sweep and loop over frames and labels more efficiently, significantly speeding up the decoding process. Lastly, on the decoder side, we’ve moved some of the computation into CUDA graphs, which is a more efficient way to run many small kernels. This optimization alone provided around a 3x speed boost. So, as you can see with TDT models, we’ve been able to achieve speeds comparable to Connectionist Temporal Classificationdecoders, which are also known for their speed, while maintaining high accuracy. Our overall theme is always to balance speed improvements with maintaining or even enhancing accuracy. Techniques like CTC decoders have been around for a while and are fast but might not be as accurate. It really depends on the use case, but we’re always striving for that balance. Jean-Marc Mommessin: Can we revisit the limited context attention? Do you see this technique having broader applications in other areas down the line? Joey Conway: Yes, I believe so. Patterns like the sliding window attention are already used in other areas, such as LLMs. Our research teams are constantly experimenting, looking at successful techniques from different domains, and trying to apply them in new ways. Interestingly, some of the researchers who worked on Parakeet TDT also work on Llama Nemotron, so there’s a cross-pollination of ideas. I do expect that some of these techniques will find broader applications going forward. We also anticipate further improvements to TDT and the Conformer architecture, as we’ve been working on them for several years now. I don’t see these core technologies going away anytime soon; we’ll likely continue to refine them. Jean-Marc Mommessin: Leaving the TDT aside, do you see other potential applications for the Token and Duration Transducer concept in other domains? Joey Conway: That’s a good question. I’m not immediately seeing a direct application of the TDT concept outside of ASR. Its history is rooted in RNNs and RNN transducers, which have primarily been used in speech recognition. However, some of the underlying techniques we’ve applied to it, like using CUDA graphs for optimizing kernel execution, are general techniques that we use whenever we identify bottlenecks in a model’s pipeline. So, while the TDT itself might be domain-specific, some of the optimization strategies we’ve employed could certainly translate to other areas, including large language models. Jean-Marc Mommessin: let’s talk about data. AI data is always a key topic. How do you ensure that the data used to train Parakeet TDT is diverse enough to handle various accents, dialects, vocal ranges, pitches, and noisy background conditions, which often negatively impact ASR performance? Joey Conway: You’re absolutely right. As humans, we naturally filter out accents and background noise to understand speech. However, deep learning models are only as good as the data they’re trained on. Early on, limited data for specific accents or languages resulted in poor performance for those variations. What might have initially seemed like edge cases have become increasingly common, highlighting the need for more representative data. We’ve invested significant effort in curating our datasets to reflect this real-world diversity. We use techniques like classifiers to analyze our data and understand the distributions of accents, dialects, and acoustic conditions. We’ve worked with customers like YUM! Brands, who have drive-through use cases with significant highway noise, illustrating the importance of training the model to handle such challenging environments. Ensuring the right blend and distribution of these conditions in our training data is crucial for the model’s robustness. I’m also excited to announce that we plan to open-source a substantial speech dataset, around 100,000 hours, where we’ve meticulously performed this kind of curation. This dataset will include variations in sound levels, signal-to-noise ratios, background noise types, and even telephone audio formats relevant for call centers. Our goal is to provide the community with high-quality, diverse data that enables models to perform well across a wide range of real-world scenarios. Jean-Marc Mommessin: That’s fantastic news about the open-sourcing of the speech dataset! My final question regarding the Parakeet family: you currently have the 600 million and 1.1 billion parameter models. How do you envision future development for this family? What are the potential directions? Joey Conway: We’re considering development along two main dimensions: model size and the number of supported languages. In terms of size, we’ve released models at the smaller and mid-range to demonstrate the potential, similar to our approach with Llama Nemotron Super. We plan to explore larger models, potentially around 2 billion parameters, which we anticipate will handle even more languages and dialects. On the smaller end, we’re even considering models down to around 50 million parameters. The motivation here is to address use cases at the edge where a smaller footprint is necessary, such as enabling real-time audio processing for robots in noisy environments. We’ll be exploring the right trade-offs for such applications. Technologically, we plan to work on streaming capabilities for TDT. Currently, much of the processing is done in an offline batch mode, but we want to enable real-time, live transcription. And as mentioned, we’re excited about releasing the large, curated speech dataset. Finally, for those looking to deploy these models in production, we recommend exploring techniques like word boosting, which allows for customization of text normalization to include domain-specific terms and acronyms. We aim to provide a wide range of options for users to get started and tailor the models to their specific needs. Jean-Marc Mommessin: I’m very familiar with the NVIDIA Orin platform. Would these Parakeet models currently run on NVIDIA Orin? Joey Conway: Yes, I believe the 0.6 billion parameter model likely would run on Orin. I would need to double-check the exact specifications, but I’m quite confident it’s feasible. Jean-Marc Mommessin: Orin packs a significant punch. I especially love the robotics use case you mentioned. While there’s been a lot of focus on robot vision, the ability to hear and understand quickly is equally crucial, especially for safety. A model that’s 50 times faster and highly accurate in understanding another modality seems like a perfect fit for robotics. Joey Conway: Yes, and the slight hesitation I had earlier was due to the understanding that in robotics, there are often multiple models running simultaneously, including vision models. So, resource allocation is a consideration. However, our push towards smaller, more efficient models is precisely to address these kinds of multi-modal edge computing scenarios. The low latency and real-time processing capabilities of Parakeet are indeed very beneficial for enabling robots to react quickly and safely to auditory cues. Jean-Marc Mommessin: Anything else you’d like to add as a final thought on the Llama Nemotron Ultra and Parakeet families? They’re both open-source, fast, high-throughput, cost-efficient, and run on smaller footprints – are these the key takeaways? Joey Conway: Yes, that’s a great summary. Those were the core objectives we set out to achieve. We aimed for state-of-the-art accuracy, optimized footprints for efficient GPU utilization in terms of latency and throughput, and a commitment to open-sourcing everything to empower the community. We’ve strived to be as community-friendly as possible by releasing datasets, using permissive licenses, and making it easy for people to experiment. We’re eager to see the community’s feedback and the innovative applications they build upon our work. We’re also looking forward to learning from their experiences. Jean-Marc Mommessin: Where are all these models and datasets available? Joey Conway: Everything we’ve published is on Hugging Face – the models and the datasets. The software stack to run them comes from NVIDIA and is available on NGC, our content repository. Much of the underlying software is also open-source and can be found on GitHub. We also provide pip wheels for easier installation. The Nemo framework is the central hub for much of this software stack, whether you want to run the models or fine-tune them. We’ve tried to make it as user-friendly as possible. We use the same software internally to build the models, so it should be relatively straightforward for others to pick up and deploy as well. Jean-Marc Mommessin: Well, Joey, this has been fantastic. I’m continually impressed by NVIDIA’s commitment to giving back to the community with state-of-the-art models that will undoubtedly find their way into production. Thank you so much for your time and insights. I look forward to our next conversation. Joey Conway: Thank you, Jean-Marc. It was my pleasure, and we appreciate the opportunity.  Jean-marc MommessinJean-marc is a successful AI business executive .He leads and accelerates growth for AI powered solutions and started a computer vision company in 2006. He is a recognized speaker at AI conferences and has an MBA from Stanford.Jean-marc Mommessinhttps://www.marktechpost.com/author/jean-marc0000677/NVIDIA AI Releases HOVER: A Breakthrough AI for Versatile Humanoid Control in RoboticsJean-marc Mommessinhttps://www.marktechpost.com/author/jean-marc0000677/Speech-to-Speech Foundation Models Pave the Way for Seamless Multilingual InteractionsJean-marc Mommessinhttps://www.marktechpost.com/author/jean-marc0000677/Lowe’s Revolutionizes Retail with AI: From Personalized Shopping to Proactive Customer AssistanceJean-marc Mommessinhttps://www.marktechpost.com/author/jean-marc0000677/Google DeepMind’s Gemini Robotics: Unleashing Embodied AI with Zero-Shot Control and Enhanced Spatial Reasoning #exclusive #talk #joey #conway #nvidia
    WWW.MARKTECHPOST.COM
    Exclusive Talk: Joey Conway of NVIDIA on Llama Nemotron Ultra and Open Source Models
    Today, MarkTechPost had the pleasure of interviewing Joey Conway from NVIDIA to discuss their exciting work on open-source large language models, including Llama Nemotron Ultra & Parakeet. Highlights from the interview: NVIDIA’s Open Source Powerhouse: Discover how NVIDIA is pushing the boundaries of open-source AI with the release of cutting-edge models like Llama Nemotron Ultra and Parakeet TDT. Llama Nemotron Ultra: Smaller Size, Giant Performance: Learn how NVIDIA achieved on-par performance with models twice the size, enabling deployment on a single GPU node. Explore their innovative FFN fusion technique for significant speedups. Reasoning on Demand: Uncover the unique “reasoning on/off” feature in Llama Nemotron Ultra, offering unprecedented control for production deployments and cost optimization. Revolutionary Speech Recognition with Parakeet TDT: Dive into NVIDIA’s state-of-the-art ASR model that transcribes one hour of audio in one second with only a 6% word error rate – 50 times faster than other open-source alternatives! The “How”: Architectural Innovations: Get insights into the advanced architectures and optimizations behind these models, including FFN fusion, limited context attention, and the Token Duration Transducer (TDT)  Democratizing AI with Open Data: Learn about NVIDIA’s commitment to the open-source community through the release of model weights and massive, high-quality datasets for both language and speech. Future Directions: Get a sneak peek into NVIDIA’s plans for multilingual support, even smaller edge-optimized models, and advancements in real-time streaming for speech recognition. Production-Ready AI: Understand how these models are designed with real-world deployment challenges in mind, focusing on accuracy, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness. Jean-Marc Mommessin: Joey, welcome to Marketechpost! We’re thrilled to have you here and to delve into the impressive open-source models NVIDIA has been releasing. To start, could you please introduce yourself and your role at NVIDIA? Joey Conway: Hi Jean-Marc, it’s great to be here. I’m Joey Conway, and I work in product management for some of the deep learning software at NVIDIA. Our team focuses on large language models like Nemotron and Llama Nemotron, as well as text-to-speech models such as Parakeet. Jean-Marc Mommessin: Wonderful. And you’ve been at NVIDIA for over seven years now, witnessing significant waves of innovation in AI. Let’s talk about your recent release, Llama Nemotron Ultra, a 253 billion parameter model. From what we’ve seen, it delivers performance on par with models like Llama 405B and DeepSeek R1, which are about twice its size. Remarkably, it can run on a single 8x H100 node. What else can you tell us about Llama Nemotron Ultra and what makes it so impressive? Joey Conway: We’re big believers in the open-source community and the fantastic work being done there. With Llama Nemotron, our goal was to build upon the existing foundations, particularly Llama, for which we greatly appreciate Meta’s contributions. We also observed significant progress in reasoning within the open community earlier this year. Inspired by this, we wanted to contribute and see how we could enhance Llama, especially for enterprise use cases. Our focus was primarily on improving reasoning capabilities and agentic tasks like tool calling and chat. We aimed to take the strengths of the open-source community, enhance them, and then contribute those improvements back. Jean-Marc Mommessin: Did you identify specific gaps in existing models that you aimed to address? You mentioned reasoning, but could you provide an example or two of enterprise agentic tasks where you felt there were shortcomings that Llama Nemotron Ultra overcomes? Joey Conway : Yes, I think looking back to the beginning of the year, a key challenge in enterprise deployments was handling complex queries requiring significant thought and reflection. These could be multi-step processes or involve substantial calculations and the use of external tools. At that time, there weren’t many strong open-weight models capable of robust reasoning. The progress we’ve seen in the last few months in this area is very encouraging. Another critical aspect for enterprises is the ability to accurately call APIs and closely follow instructions in user queries. We wanted to ensure that while we focused on improving reasoning, we didn’t compromise these essential production-level capabilities. Furthermore, we often noticed that when both reasoning and instruction following were well-addressed, they typically resided in separate models. Our aim was to simplify this by creating a single model that excels in both. This was the landscape we observed when we started this project around January and February. Jean-Marc Mommessin: That makes perfect sense and aligns with what we’re seeing in the industry as well. Now, let’s dive into the “how.” Your paper mentions FFN fusion as a key optimization. Could you elaborate on this technique, starting with a high-level explanation? Joey Conway: Absolutely. Our focus on optimization stemmed from the realization that deploying state-of-the-art models often requires a significant deployment footprint. We wanted to optimize this to fit within more common GPU setups. We explored various techniques, including our Puzzle neural architecture search. For dense transformer models, particularly those in the Llama family, we discovered a way to reduce or eliminate redundant attention layers. This process aligned the feed-forward network (FFN) layers in a sequence, allowing us to explore fusion methods. Our fundamental goal on the GPU is to maximize parallel execution. Fusing these aligned FFN layers enables greater parallel computation than was previously possible. By removing redundant layers, we found opportunities to essentially merge or fuse the remaining ones. This is a key example of how we tackle the challenges of running these models at scale. Importantly, this technique often yields greater improvements with larger models, which was beneficial for our Ultra model based on Meta’s Llama 3.1 -405B. Jean-Marc Mommessin: And this FFN fusion significantly improves the model’s throughput, achieving notable speedups. If I recall correctly, it’s in the range of 3 to 5x for the Ultra model? Joey Conway: That’s right, the speedups for the Ultra model are in that range. Additionally, by reducing the model’s size in terms of weights, we also lowered its memory footprint. This allowed us to utilize a larger KV cache. For Llama Nemotron Ultra, we could fit it onto a 8x H100 80GB setup, which is quite significant as it fits within common node configurations. So, FFN fusion provided both a substantial compute speedup and a reduction in memory usage, enabling us to handle larger context lengths. These are very exciting outcomes for us. Jean-Marc Mommessin: Let’s switch gears to data curation. AI data is crucial, and your training pipeline seems very sophisticated. You touched on “instruction following” earlier. Could you elaborate on your data curation process and how you ensured high-quality data, especially considering you leveraged other models in the process? Image source: NVIDIA Joey Conway: Transparency and openness were key in our approach. We wanted to share as much as possible about our data, techniques, and tooling so the community could understand and even use it themselves. Our primary goal with data curation was to improve accuracy across several key domains, including reasoning tasks like math and coding, as well as non-reasoning tasks like tool calling, instruction following, and chat. Our strategy involved curating specific datasets to enhance performance in these areas. Within our supervised fine-tuning process, we differentiated between “reasoning on” and “reasoning off” scenarios. For example, in math and coding, we curated data for simple questions that don’t require complex reasoning, as well as more intricate problems that do. This helps the model learn when and how to apply reasoning. A key part of this process was leveraging high-quality models from the community as “experts” in specific domains. For instance, we used DeepSeek R-1 extensively for reasoning-intensive math and coding tasks. For non-reasoning tasks like basic math, coding, chat, and tool calling, we utilized models like Llama and Qwen. Our aim was to blend the best capabilities of these community models into a single model. We’ve also made this curated dataset publicly available on Hugging Face, with around 30 million question-answer pairs. This allows the community to explore, use, and build upon our work. We were also excited to see our partner ServiceNow recently announce their apprehend Nemotron model, which was trained using our dataset to enhance their own reasoning capabilities. Jean-Marc Mommessin: That’s fantastic that you’re sharing the dataset. Given that you used other models to generate some of this data, what kind of quality checks did you implement to ensure the reliability of the training pairs? Joey Conway: Data quality was absolutely paramount. Since we were generating a significant portion of the data using other models, we implemented a rigorous multi-layered quality assurance process. First, for each expert model used to generate data in a specific domain, we would generate multiple candidate responses for the same prompt. Then, we employed a separate set of “critic” models to evaluate these candidates based on correctness, coherence, and adherence to the prompt. Second, we implemented a scoring mechanism. Each generated question-answer pair received a quality score based on the critic model’s evaluation. We set a high threshold, and any pair that didn’t meet this standard was discarded. Third, human review was integrated at various stages. Our team of data scientists and engineers manually inspected samples of the generated data to identify any systematic errors, biases, or instances of hallucination. This human oversight was crucial for catching nuances that automated systems might miss. Fourth, we focused on the diversity of the generated data. We wanted to ensure we weren’t just getting variations of the same types of questions and answers. We implemented strategies to encourage the expert models to generate a broad range of examples within each domain. Finally, after training Llama Nemotron Ultra on this curated data, we conducted extensive evaluations against benchmark datasets and in real-world use cases. This feedback loop helped us further refine our data generation and filtering techniques. So, it was a comprehensive approach involving expert generation, automated criticism and scoring, human review, diversity checks, and rigorous downstream evaluation to ensure the high quality of our training data. Jean-Marc Mommessin: The quality of the synthetic data is so important. Could you elaborate on the stages you take to ensure high accuracy when generating this data? Joey Conway: Absolutely. When doing synthetic data generation, there are a few key stages to ensure high accuracy. The first is the prompts – the seed data and how we prompt the model. The second is the quality of the responses. On the prompting side, we focus on prompting models where we believe they excel. For example, we might use Llama for chat-related prompts but avoid using a non-reasoning model for math. It’s crucial to align the prompts with the core strengths of the model. For vetting the responses, we invest time in both human manual review and automated methods. Going forward, we anticipate increasing our use of verifiers and reward models, similar to what we’ve done on the Reinforcement Learning (RL) side. The reason we’ve open-sourced much of this is that there’s a lot of nuance involved, and we wanted the community to engage with these challenges. Enterprises like ServiceNow have specific goals, and some of our data might be more or less useful to them. By making it available, they can vet it themselves. We also provide tools like classifier models to help categorize content, such as news or sports, allowing users to make informed decisions about the data blends they use for training. Jean-Marc Mommessin: Perfect. Is there anything else you’d like to highlight regarding this pipeline? Joey Conway: Yes, I’d like to touch on the Reinforcement Learning (RL) aspect. Following the supervised fine-tuning stage, where we enhanced core skills, we’ve just begun to explore the potential of RL with Nemotron. We believe this will be a significant area of future development. What’s exciting about RL is that its effectiveness is largely tied to the available compute time. The more time we invest, the better the model becomes at specific tasks. In our RL stages, we’ve developed methods to automate the process of asking the model a question, grading its answer, and providing feedback to allow it to learn and improve. You can see on the slide the domains where we’ve applied this: scientific reasoning, instruction following, and chat. If you look at the leaderboards, you’ll see that even with new models emerging, we’ve maintained a strong position in these areas, largely due to the effectiveness of RL in achieving top-tier accuracy. We’re optimistic that we’ll see more of this in the community, with more discussion and publication of techniques and data. We’ve started sharing some of our work in this area and will have much more to come in the next three to six months. Jean-Marc Mommessin: You mentioned RL and instruction following, which ties back to the beginning of our conversation. It seems like you’ve come full circle here. Joey Conway: Exactly. The exciting aspect here is automating the feedback loop wherever possible. For chat, we published a fine-tuned reward model last fall. Those who followed our work might recall that our Llama Nemotron model topped the chat leaderboards then. This was because the reward model provides an automated way to teach the original model whether its responses are good or bad. It essentially grades responses based on helpfulness, conciseness, verbosity, groundedness, and similar factors. This granular feedback per generated response allows the model to improve significantly, often more so than through supervised fine-tuning alone, which typically involves a few passes without a continuous feedback loop. Similarly, for instruction following, we use a verifier and a dataset to teach the model whether it followed instructions well or needs to try again. We’re eager to expand this approach to more domains. We’ve already published datasets related to coding and math since the release of this model a few weeks ago, and these have become popular on Hugging Face. I anticipate significant growth in this area within the community. Jean-Marc Mommessin: Alright, so one of the big innovations here, and you touched upon it, but I want to emphasize it, is the ability to toggle reasoning on and off via the system prompt. This is quite unique, and I’m sure many will follow suit. Could you expand on the idea behind this, how you see it applying to agents and beyond, its value, and the key challenges in implementing it? Joey Conway: The reasoning on and off capability was a core goal from the outset. We observed that models in the community often excelled in either reasoning or non-reasoning tasks, and we wanted to simplify deployment by having a single model that could handle both. We had to determine the best way to teach the model when to reason and when not to, while also providing enterprises with explicit control, as they often have deeper domain knowledge than we do. The motivation behind this is that reasoning generates significantly more tokens, which can lead to higher latency and cost. While crucial for solving complex problems, it’s not always necessary. We wanted to give enterprises the control to balance accuracy with latency and cost, allowing them to decide when to employ reasoning and when to opt for faster, less computationally intensive responses. Initially, we weren’t sure how to achieve this, as it hadn’t been widely implemented in the community. Our approach in the supervised fine-tuning stage was to explicitly teach the model by presenting the same question with two different answers: one with detailed reasoning and one without. This essentially doubled our dataset for this specific purpose. However, the outcome is a single model where users can simply include “use detailed thinking on” or “use detailed thinking off” in the prompt to control the model’s reasoning process. On the training side, this required more effort to teach the model this distinction. What we have today is essentially a v1, and I expect others will follow this approach. We’re also excited about future developments, such as time or token limits for reasoning and more granular controls. I’m optimistic that we’ll see further breakthroughs in this area within the next six to nine months, as the problem-solving power of reasoning is significant, but it comes with trade-offs that the community will continue to refine. Jean-Marc Mommessin: We all know that the real test comes in production. Production environments are sensitive to latency, cost, and while accuracy and reasoning are vital, excessive reasoning can lead to scalability issues and increased latency. The flexibility you’ve introduced is fantastic, and I can see numerous production use cases that will greatly benefit from the ability to control reasoning on a per-query basis. So, when you were developing this model, you aimed to balance accuracy and efficiency. Could you share some insights into how you made these trade-offs, the timeline for building the model and the team involved, and how you determined the optimal compromise between these two critical factors? Joey Conway: Balancing accuracy and efficiency is always a challenge. Our initial goal was to achieve both, which is a difficult undertaking. We started with the “Super” model, which was the most recent Llama 3.1 70B release from Meta, as our baseline for accuracy. We weren’t sure if we could simultaneously improve accuracy and reduce the model size. We found that through our training techniques and distillation process, we could indeed boost accuracy. We even released an initial checkpoint reflecting this. However, we wanted to go further by incorporating strong reasoning capabilities, aiming for state-of-the-art reasoning scores. This is where the SFT and RL stages came in, which required significant time for synthetic data generation since this type of data didn’t exist. During training, we carefully considered the number of epochs for each skill and continuously measured accuracy. Our goal was to improve performance across all six key areas rather than excelling in just a couple. This balancing act took more time as we experimented to find the right combinations. However, we felt it was crucial to ensure world-class performance in these six enterprise-relevant scenarios, including chat and instruction following. For areas like MMLU, we focused on maintaining performance and preventing regression rather than actively trying to improve scores. So, there were definitely priorities and trade-offs involved. Ultimately, we believe these were the right focus areas for our enterprise customers. Jean-Marc Mommessin: You are releasing this model family as part of the open-source community. We’ve discussed the gaps you aimed to address and the unique reasoning on/off feature for production scalability. Could you share your thoughts on how NVIDIA and your team view the role of these models within the broader open-source and LLM ecosystem, especially given your work building upon the Llama base? Joey Conway: NVIDIA has a long history of contributing models to the open-source community. What excites us about Llama is its strong traction with enterprise customers. While NVIDIA Research publishes extensively across various domains, our goal with Llama Nemotron was to build upon Llama’s momentum in enterprise adoption by focusing narrowly on specific areas. The base Llama models already cover many things exceptionally well, so we saw an opportunity to build on top of that and be very targeted in our enhancements. The recent LlamaCon event and Meta’s announcements sound very promising, and we’re excited about Llama 4 and the ongoing work there. Moving forward, we anticipate continuing to identify specific areas where we can add significant value, while Meta continues to build excellent general-purpose models suitable for enterprise production. From our perspective, reasoning will likely remain a key focus, and we’re also excited about Meta’s advancements in this area. Tool calling, instruction following, and chat are also areas we’ll continue to develop. One area we’re particularly interested in exploring is multilingual capabilities. For large enterprises, supporting multiple languages is crucial. While many models handle individual languages well, we aim to focus on a few key languages and ensure world-class accuracy for reasoning, tool calling, and chat within those. This is likely the next major area of expansion for us, beyond the exciting developments in model architectures like Llama 4’s new MoE architecture, which we’re also keen to explore for potential distillation and optimization for NVIDIA GPUs. So, there’s a lot of exciting work ahead. Jean-Marc Mommessin: When you say multilingual, are you thinking of supporting a broad range, like 50 languages, or a more focused set, perhaps around 5 or 10 initially, given the benchmark challenges you mentioned? Joey Conway: We’ll probably start with a more focused set, perhaps around 5 to 10 languages. The challenge is that the community currently lacks comprehensive benchmarks for tasks like reasoning or tool calling across a wide variety of languages. As we develop these multilingual models, we’re also having to create evaluation data simultaneously, which takes time. If those benchmarks were readily available, the process would be smoother. However, we see this as an exciting challenge. Our initial focus will likely be on a smaller set of languages where we can establish strong performance, given the current limitations in community-wide benchmarks. Jean-Marc Mommessin: Let’s shift gears and talk about another state-of-the-art open-source model you recently released: Parakeet TDT 0.6 B parameters, V2. This model has set a new standard for automatic speech recognition (ASR), transcribing one hour of audio in just one second. That’s 50 times faster than other open-source ASR models, and remarkably, it achieves only a 6% word error rate. This is truly impressive. What else would you like to highlight about this model before we discuss the “how” behind its incredible performance? Joey Conway: It’s worth noting that NVIDIA has been working on ASR models for a long time, even before I joined. We’ve also released many open models in this space over the years. The teams working on this are exceptional, and they consistently strive to balance accuracy with latency and throughput. Parakeet V2 is the latest in this line of high-performance models from NVIDIA. Jean-Marc Mommessin: It sounds like the advancements will keep coming. So, let’s delve into how you achieved this remarkable performance with Parakeet TDT. What kind of architecture did you use? I understand it’s based on a Fast Conformer architecture with specific optimizations like 8x depth-wise separable convolutional downsampling and limited context attention. Could you explain how you arrived at this approach and whether these optimizations primarily enhance speed and throughput or if they also contribute to accuracy and the ability to process long audio segments like a full hour in one shot? Joey Conway: Yes, we’ve explored various architectures for ASR over the years, and the Conformer architecture, originally from Google, has shown great promise. Our goal with Parakeet TDT was to take the Conformer architecture and make it significantly more efficient and faster without sacrificing quality. We’ve implemented several key optimizations.  First, as you mentioned, the depth-wise separable convolution downsampling. At the input stage, we significantly downsample the audio, which reduces the computational cost and memory requirements for processing. Second is the limited context attention. By focusing on smaller, overlapping chunks of audio, we can maintain accuracy while achieving a speedup in processing. Third, on the encoder side, we also utilize a sliding window attention technique, which allows us to process longer audio files without having to split them into shorter segments. This is crucial for handling long-form audio like a full hour in a single pass. Beyond the Conformer architecture, Parakeet TDT incorporates a Token and Duration Transducer (TDT). Traditional Recurrent Neural Network (RNN) transducer technology processes audio frame by frame. What we’ve done with TDT is enable the model to predict both the tokens and the expected duration of those tokens. This allows it to make decisions to skip over redundant frames, significantly speeding up the transcription process. This TDT innovation alone contributes to around a 1.5 to 2x speedup. So, there’s a combination of architectural choices and specific optimizations that contribute to Parakeet TDT’s impressive speed and accuracy. Jean-Marc Mommessin: I want to go back to one or two of those. Those are amazing, frankly. The speed increase is remarkable. Joey Conway: Yes, and we have another technique called a label looping algorithm. Essentially, when we’re doing batch inference, this algorithm allows us to advance the tokens independently for different samples. This separation of the workflow enables us to sweep and loop over frames and labels more efficiently, significantly speeding up the decoding process. Lastly, on the decoder side, we’ve moved some of the computation into CUDA graphs, which is a more efficient way to run many small kernels. This optimization alone provided around a 3x speed boost. So, as you can see with TDT models, we’ve been able to achieve speeds comparable to Connectionist Temporal Classification (CTC) decoders, which are also known for their speed, while maintaining high accuracy. Our overall theme is always to balance speed improvements with maintaining or even enhancing accuracy. Techniques like CTC decoders have been around for a while and are fast but might not be as accurate. It really depends on the use case, but we’re always striving for that balance. Jean-Marc Mommessin: Can we revisit the limited context attention? Do you see this technique having broader applications in other areas down the line? Joey Conway: Yes, I believe so. Patterns like the sliding window attention are already used in other areas, such as LLMs. Our research teams are constantly experimenting, looking at successful techniques from different domains, and trying to apply them in new ways. Interestingly, some of the researchers who worked on Parakeet TDT also work on Llama Nemotron, so there’s a cross-pollination of ideas. I do expect that some of these techniques will find broader applications going forward. We also anticipate further improvements to TDT and the Conformer architecture, as we’ve been working on them for several years now. I don’t see these core technologies going away anytime soon; we’ll likely continue to refine them. Jean-Marc Mommessin: Leaving the TDT aside, do you see other potential applications for the Token and Duration Transducer concept in other domains? Joey Conway: That’s a good question. I’m not immediately seeing a direct application of the TDT concept outside of ASR. Its history is rooted in RNNs and RNN transducers, which have primarily been used in speech recognition. However, some of the underlying techniques we’ve applied to it, like using CUDA graphs for optimizing kernel execution, are general techniques that we use whenever we identify bottlenecks in a model’s pipeline. So, while the TDT itself might be domain-specific, some of the optimization strategies we’ve employed could certainly translate to other areas, including large language models. Jean-Marc Mommessin: let’s talk about data. AI data is always a key topic. How do you ensure that the data used to train Parakeet TDT is diverse enough to handle various accents, dialects, vocal ranges, pitches, and noisy background conditions, which often negatively impact ASR performance? Joey Conway: You’re absolutely right. As humans, we naturally filter out accents and background noise to understand speech. However, deep learning models are only as good as the data they’re trained on. Early on, limited data for specific accents or languages resulted in poor performance for those variations. What might have initially seemed like edge cases have become increasingly common, highlighting the need for more representative data. We’ve invested significant effort in curating our datasets to reflect this real-world diversity. We use techniques like classifiers to analyze our data and understand the distributions of accents, dialects, and acoustic conditions. We’ve worked with customers like YUM! Brands, who have drive-through use cases with significant highway noise, illustrating the importance of training the model to handle such challenging environments. Ensuring the right blend and distribution of these conditions in our training data is crucial for the model’s robustness. I’m also excited to announce that we plan to open-source a substantial speech dataset, around 100,000 hours, where we’ve meticulously performed this kind of curation. This dataset will include variations in sound levels, signal-to-noise ratios, background noise types, and even telephone audio formats relevant for call centers. Our goal is to provide the community with high-quality, diverse data that enables models to perform well across a wide range of real-world scenarios. Jean-Marc Mommessin: That’s fantastic news about the open-sourcing of the speech dataset! My final question regarding the Parakeet family: you currently have the 600 million and 1.1 billion parameter models. How do you envision future development for this family? What are the potential directions? Joey Conway: We’re considering development along two main dimensions: model size and the number of supported languages. In terms of size, we’ve released models at the smaller and mid-range to demonstrate the potential, similar to our approach with Llama Nemotron Super. We plan to explore larger models, potentially around 2 billion parameters, which we anticipate will handle even more languages and dialects. On the smaller end, we’re even considering models down to around 50 million parameters. The motivation here is to address use cases at the edge where a smaller footprint is necessary, such as enabling real-time audio processing for robots in noisy environments. We’ll be exploring the right trade-offs for such applications. Technologically, we plan to work on streaming capabilities for TDT. Currently, much of the processing is done in an offline batch mode, but we want to enable real-time, live transcription. And as mentioned, we’re excited about releasing the large, curated speech dataset. Finally, for those looking to deploy these models in production, we recommend exploring techniques like word boosting, which allows for customization of text normalization to include domain-specific terms and acronyms. We aim to provide a wide range of options for users to get started and tailor the models to their specific needs. Jean-Marc Mommessin: I’m very familiar with the NVIDIA Orin platform. Would these Parakeet models currently run on NVIDIA Orin? Joey Conway: Yes, I believe the 0.6 billion parameter model likely would run on Orin. I would need to double-check the exact specifications, but I’m quite confident it’s feasible. Jean-Marc Mommessin: Orin packs a significant punch. I especially love the robotics use case you mentioned. While there’s been a lot of focus on robot vision, the ability to hear and understand quickly is equally crucial, especially for safety. A model that’s 50 times faster and highly accurate in understanding another modality seems like a perfect fit for robotics. Joey Conway: Yes, and the slight hesitation I had earlier was due to the understanding that in robotics, there are often multiple models running simultaneously, including vision models. So, resource allocation is a consideration. However, our push towards smaller, more efficient models is precisely to address these kinds of multi-modal edge computing scenarios. The low latency and real-time processing capabilities of Parakeet are indeed very beneficial for enabling robots to react quickly and safely to auditory cues. Jean-Marc Mommessin: Anything else you’d like to add as a final thought on the Llama Nemotron Ultra and Parakeet families? They’re both open-source, fast, high-throughput, cost-efficient, and run on smaller footprints – are these the key takeaways? Joey Conway: Yes, that’s a great summary. Those were the core objectives we set out to achieve. We aimed for state-of-the-art accuracy, optimized footprints for efficient GPU utilization in terms of latency and throughput, and a commitment to open-sourcing everything to empower the community. We’ve strived to be as community-friendly as possible by releasing datasets, using permissive licenses, and making it easy for people to experiment. We’re eager to see the community’s feedback and the innovative applications they build upon our work. We’re also looking forward to learning from their experiences. Jean-Marc Mommessin: Where are all these models and datasets available? Joey Conway: Everything we’ve published is on Hugging Face – the models and the datasets. The software stack to run them comes from NVIDIA and is available on NGC, our content repository. Much of the underlying software is also open-source and can be found on GitHub. We also provide pip wheels for easier installation. The Nemo framework is the central hub for much of this software stack, whether you want to run the models or fine-tune them. We’ve tried to make it as user-friendly as possible. We use the same software internally to build the models, so it should be relatively straightforward for others to pick up and deploy as well. Jean-Marc Mommessin: Well, Joey, this has been fantastic. I’m continually impressed by NVIDIA’s commitment to giving back to the community with state-of-the-art models that will undoubtedly find their way into production. Thank you so much for your time and insights. I look forward to our next conversation. Joey Conway: Thank you, Jean-Marc. It was my pleasure, and we appreciate the opportunity.  Jean-marc MommessinJean-marc is a successful AI business executive .He leads and accelerates growth for AI powered solutions and started a computer vision company in 2006. He is a recognized speaker at AI conferences and has an MBA from Stanford.Jean-marc Mommessinhttps://www.marktechpost.com/author/jean-marc0000677/NVIDIA AI Releases HOVER: A Breakthrough AI for Versatile Humanoid Control in RoboticsJean-marc Mommessinhttps://www.marktechpost.com/author/jean-marc0000677/Speech-to-Speech Foundation Models Pave the Way for Seamless Multilingual InteractionsJean-marc Mommessinhttps://www.marktechpost.com/author/jean-marc0000677/Lowe’s Revolutionizes Retail with AI: From Personalized Shopping to Proactive Customer AssistanceJean-marc Mommessinhttps://www.marktechpost.com/author/jean-marc0000677/Google DeepMind’s Gemini Robotics: Unleashing Embodied AI with Zero-Shot Control and Enhanced Spatial Reasoning
    0 Σχόλια 0 Μοιράστηκε
  • Trump's $142 billion arms deal may not get the Saudis the F-35 stealth fighter

    The Saudis discussed buying the F-35 stealth fighter as part of a major agreement to purchase US arms. Here, a Saudi F-15 fighter escorts Air Force One to Riyadh on May 13.

    Brian Snyder/REUTERS

    2025-05-15T13:47:14Z

    d

    Read in app

    This story is available exclusively to Business Insider
    subscribers. Become an Insider
    and start reading now.
    Have an account?

    A US-Saudi arms agreement may get complicated when it comes to Lockheed Martin's F-35
    The F-35 could put Saudi Arabia's military on par with Israel in what may be a dealbreaker.
    The Saudis may also buy advanced US drones and missile defenses as part of the agreement.

    During his visit to Saudi Arabia, President Donald Trump signed what the White House described as "the largest defense sales agreement in history," valued at almost billion, that will provide the kingdom "state-of-the-art warfighting equipment and services." The offer, the final value of which may ultimately prove much less than billion, is expected to include Lockheed Martin's C-130 Hercules transport aircraft and other unspecified missiles and radars. Neither the White House nor administration officials have provided further details about which specific systems the deal may include, such as the advanced fighter Riyadh has wanted.The two sides discussed a potential Saudi purchase of the F-35 Lightning II stealth strike fighter and Israel's qualitative military edge came up, Reuters reported Tuesday. The Saudis have sought the F-35 for years since it's one of the world's top fighter jets that could put the kingdom's armed forces on par with Israel, the only Middle Eastern country currently flying that fifth-generation combat aircraft. Washington is legally obligated to preserve Israel's military advantage by, among other things, not selling military hardware to regional countries that are as or more advanced than Israel's arsenal. Unlike the neighboring United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia has not joined the Abraham Accords by normalizing ties with Israel and refuses to do so amid the ongoing war in Gaza."I think an F-35 deal could be agreed upon even absent Saudi-Israeli normalization," Ryan Bohl, a senior Middle East and North Africa analyst at the risk intelligence company RANE, told Business Insider. "However, to proceed with the F-35 package, it would have to be significantly downgraded to preserve Israel's qualitative military edge."

    "Such downgrades might diminish the overall sale's attractiveness to the Saudis."Israel took delivery of three F-35s in March, bringing its total fleet strength to 42. It will field 75 eventually. Washington may not agree to sell Riyadh a comparable number, and it may impose limits on their use."I don't think numbers alone will be sufficient, as the Israelis will be concerned that such systems could eventually end up in the hands of adversaries," Bohl said. "Rather, I think we would likely see technical restrictions and end-use requirements that would severely limit the usage of F-35s by the Saudis and reduce their capabilities against the Israelis."Israel's F-35I Adir is a unique version of the stealth aircraft that Israel modifies with indigenous weapons and systems. Therefore, the Adir is arguably already more advanced than any standard F-35A model Saudi Arabia might acquire.Ultimately, it is Israel's arch-rival Iran that may have more concerns over the prospect of Saudi F-35s.Any F-35 acquisition could give Saudi Arabia the "ability to conduct deep strikes in Iran" in ways far greater than presently possible with their current fleet of non-stealthy 4.5-generation F-15s, noted Sebastien Roblin, a widely published military-aviation journalist. Such an acquisition could also "substantially enhance" Saudi airpower and enable Riyadh to participate in any US or Israeli bombing campaign against Iran."I can see such an acquisition affecting the perceived regional balance of power vis-à-vis Tehran," Roblin told BI."That said, in a large-scale conflict, questions would arise about the vulnerability of these aircraft to Iranian strikes when they landed," Roblin said. "And whether these countries could acquire enough F-35s with enough munitions and muster sufficient professionalism and support assets to minimize risks of combat losses."

    F-35 Lightning II fighters entered service with the US Air Force in 2016.

    U.S. Air Force photo/Master Sgt. Ben Mota

    Riyadh may not prioritize acquiring the F-35 and seek other advanced American armaments.The US is much more open to exporting advanced drones to Middle Eastern countries than just a few years ago, when Washington largely followed the range and payload limitations suggested by the Missile Technology Control Regime for exported systems.Before Trump's trip, Washington green-lighted a potential sale of MQ-9B drones to Qatar. General Atomics is expected to offer Saudi Arabia MQ-9B SeaGuardians as part of a "huge" package deal."I think the weakening of end-use restrictions will certainly make the Americans more eager to strike deals to sell their drones to the region," RANE's Bohl said. "American drones will still need to compete against Turkish and Chinese drones that may be cheaper and have fewer political strings attached."When Washington previously declined Middle East requests for advanced American drones, China stepped in and supplied its drones throughout the region in the 2010s. In the 2020s, Saudi Arabia and the UAE signed lucrative contracts with Turkey for its indigenous Bayraktar drones."I wouldn't expect a major surge in American drone exports to the region at this point, but rather for them to become part of this region's drone diversification strategy," Bohl said. "Certainly, there will be notable deals struck in the coming years, but China and Turkey will continue to be formidable competitors in the drone arena in the Arab Gulf states."The White House mentioned that the billion agreement includes "air and missile defense.""If we are looking at recent trends, they should be focusing on air defenses, including deeper stocks of interceptor missiles, and diversification of air defenses to cost-efficiently combat lower-end threats as well as high-end ones," Roblin said.Saudi Arabia already operates advanced US Patriot air defense missiles and the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system, which can target ballistic missiles outside the atmosphere. It completed its first locally manufactured components of the latter system mere days before Trump's visit. Riyadh may seek similar co-production deals to aid in developing its domestic arms industry."There's a need for more long-distance precision strike weapons in the form of missiles and drones, which can be used without risking expensive manned combat aircraft," Roblin said. "There should be some parallel interest at sea, where we've seen Ukraine and the Houthis successfully execute sea denial strategies, one that Iran might seek to imitate in the confined waters of the Gulf.""Thus, the homework of Gulf navies is to ensure their vessels have the sensors and self-defense weapons to cope with small boat threats and cruise and ballistic missiles."Saudi Arabia has already taken steps to expand its navy with more advanced warships in recent years. RANE's Bohl believes Trump may persuade the kingdom to "purchase big-ticket items like warships" as he attempts to "revitalize the manufacturing sector" in the US.Only a fraction of this billion agreement may result in completed deals — as was the case with the series of letters of intent for billion worth of arms sales Trump signed with Riyadh in 2017."These deals involve optioning huge defense sales, but Trump will present these to his supporters as done deals," Roblin said. "So, the Gulf states can gift Trump a large number as a political victory without actually having to pay anywhere near the whole bill.""For the 2017 defense deal, by the following year, Riyadh reportedly had bought only billion out of billion optioned."Paul Iddon is a freelance journalist and columnist who writes about Middle East developments, military affairs, politics, and history. His articles have appeared in a variety of publications focused on the region.

    Recommended video
    #trump039s #billion #arms #deal #not
    Trump's $142 billion arms deal may not get the Saudis the F-35 stealth fighter
    The Saudis discussed buying the F-35 stealth fighter as part of a major agreement to purchase US arms. Here, a Saudi F-15 fighter escorts Air Force One to Riyadh on May 13. Brian Snyder/REUTERS 2025-05-15T13:47:14Z d Read in app This story is available exclusively to Business Insider subscribers. Become an Insider and start reading now. Have an account? A US-Saudi arms agreement may get complicated when it comes to Lockheed Martin's F-35 The F-35 could put Saudi Arabia's military on par with Israel in what may be a dealbreaker. The Saudis may also buy advanced US drones and missile defenses as part of the agreement. During his visit to Saudi Arabia, President Donald Trump signed what the White House described as "the largest defense sales agreement in history," valued at almost billion, that will provide the kingdom "state-of-the-art warfighting equipment and services." The offer, the final value of which may ultimately prove much less than billion, is expected to include Lockheed Martin's C-130 Hercules transport aircraft and other unspecified missiles and radars. Neither the White House nor administration officials have provided further details about which specific systems the deal may include, such as the advanced fighter Riyadh has wanted.The two sides discussed a potential Saudi purchase of the F-35 Lightning II stealth strike fighter and Israel's qualitative military edge came up, Reuters reported Tuesday. The Saudis have sought the F-35 for years since it's one of the world's top fighter jets that could put the kingdom's armed forces on par with Israel, the only Middle Eastern country currently flying that fifth-generation combat aircraft. Washington is legally obligated to preserve Israel's military advantage by, among other things, not selling military hardware to regional countries that are as or more advanced than Israel's arsenal. Unlike the neighboring United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia has not joined the Abraham Accords by normalizing ties with Israel and refuses to do so amid the ongoing war in Gaza."I think an F-35 deal could be agreed upon even absent Saudi-Israeli normalization," Ryan Bohl, a senior Middle East and North Africa analyst at the risk intelligence company RANE, told Business Insider. "However, to proceed with the F-35 package, it would have to be significantly downgraded to preserve Israel's qualitative military edge." "Such downgrades might diminish the overall sale's attractiveness to the Saudis."Israel took delivery of three F-35s in March, bringing its total fleet strength to 42. It will field 75 eventually. Washington may not agree to sell Riyadh a comparable number, and it may impose limits on their use."I don't think numbers alone will be sufficient, as the Israelis will be concerned that such systems could eventually end up in the hands of adversaries," Bohl said. "Rather, I think we would likely see technical restrictions and end-use requirements that would severely limit the usage of F-35s by the Saudis and reduce their capabilities against the Israelis."Israel's F-35I Adir is a unique version of the stealth aircraft that Israel modifies with indigenous weapons and systems. Therefore, the Adir is arguably already more advanced than any standard F-35A model Saudi Arabia might acquire.Ultimately, it is Israel's arch-rival Iran that may have more concerns over the prospect of Saudi F-35s.Any F-35 acquisition could give Saudi Arabia the "ability to conduct deep strikes in Iran" in ways far greater than presently possible with their current fleet of non-stealthy 4.5-generation F-15s, noted Sebastien Roblin, a widely published military-aviation journalist. Such an acquisition could also "substantially enhance" Saudi airpower and enable Riyadh to participate in any US or Israeli bombing campaign against Iran."I can see such an acquisition affecting the perceived regional balance of power vis-à-vis Tehran," Roblin told BI."That said, in a large-scale conflict, questions would arise about the vulnerability of these aircraft to Iranian strikes when they landed," Roblin said. "And whether these countries could acquire enough F-35s with enough munitions and muster sufficient professionalism and support assets to minimize risks of combat losses." F-35 Lightning II fighters entered service with the US Air Force in 2016. U.S. Air Force photo/Master Sgt. Ben Mota Riyadh may not prioritize acquiring the F-35 and seek other advanced American armaments.The US is much more open to exporting advanced drones to Middle Eastern countries than just a few years ago, when Washington largely followed the range and payload limitations suggested by the Missile Technology Control Regime for exported systems.Before Trump's trip, Washington green-lighted a potential sale of MQ-9B drones to Qatar. General Atomics is expected to offer Saudi Arabia MQ-9B SeaGuardians as part of a "huge" package deal."I think the weakening of end-use restrictions will certainly make the Americans more eager to strike deals to sell their drones to the region," RANE's Bohl said. "American drones will still need to compete against Turkish and Chinese drones that may be cheaper and have fewer political strings attached."When Washington previously declined Middle East requests for advanced American drones, China stepped in and supplied its drones throughout the region in the 2010s. In the 2020s, Saudi Arabia and the UAE signed lucrative contracts with Turkey for its indigenous Bayraktar drones."I wouldn't expect a major surge in American drone exports to the region at this point, but rather for them to become part of this region's drone diversification strategy," Bohl said. "Certainly, there will be notable deals struck in the coming years, but China and Turkey will continue to be formidable competitors in the drone arena in the Arab Gulf states."The White House mentioned that the billion agreement includes "air and missile defense.""If we are looking at recent trends, they should be focusing on air defenses, including deeper stocks of interceptor missiles, and diversification of air defenses to cost-efficiently combat lower-end threats as well as high-end ones," Roblin said.Saudi Arabia already operates advanced US Patriot air defense missiles and the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system, which can target ballistic missiles outside the atmosphere. It completed its first locally manufactured components of the latter system mere days before Trump's visit. Riyadh may seek similar co-production deals to aid in developing its domestic arms industry."There's a need for more long-distance precision strike weapons in the form of missiles and drones, which can be used without risking expensive manned combat aircraft," Roblin said. "There should be some parallel interest at sea, where we've seen Ukraine and the Houthis successfully execute sea denial strategies, one that Iran might seek to imitate in the confined waters of the Gulf.""Thus, the homework of Gulf navies is to ensure their vessels have the sensors and self-defense weapons to cope with small boat threats and cruise and ballistic missiles."Saudi Arabia has already taken steps to expand its navy with more advanced warships in recent years. RANE's Bohl believes Trump may persuade the kingdom to "purchase big-ticket items like warships" as he attempts to "revitalize the manufacturing sector" in the US.Only a fraction of this billion agreement may result in completed deals — as was the case with the series of letters of intent for billion worth of arms sales Trump signed with Riyadh in 2017."These deals involve optioning huge defense sales, but Trump will present these to his supporters as done deals," Roblin said. "So, the Gulf states can gift Trump a large number as a political victory without actually having to pay anywhere near the whole bill.""For the 2017 defense deal, by the following year, Riyadh reportedly had bought only billion out of billion optioned."Paul Iddon is a freelance journalist and columnist who writes about Middle East developments, military affairs, politics, and history. His articles have appeared in a variety of publications focused on the region. Recommended video #trump039s #billion #arms #deal #not
    WWW.BUSINESSINSIDER.COM
    Trump's $142 billion arms deal may not get the Saudis the F-35 stealth fighter
    The Saudis discussed buying the F-35 stealth fighter as part of a major agreement to purchase US arms. Here, a Saudi F-15 fighter escorts Air Force One to Riyadh on May 13. Brian Snyder/REUTERS 2025-05-15T13:47:14Z Save Saved Read in app This story is available exclusively to Business Insider subscribers. Become an Insider and start reading now. Have an account? A US-Saudi arms agreement may get complicated when it comes to Lockheed Martin's F-35 The F-35 could put Saudi Arabia's military on par with Israel in what may be a dealbreaker. The Saudis may also buy advanced US drones and missile defenses as part of the agreement. During his visit to Saudi Arabia, President Donald Trump signed what the White House described as "the largest defense sales agreement in history," valued at almost $142 billion, that will provide the kingdom "state-of-the-art warfighting equipment and services." The offer, the final value of which may ultimately prove much less than $142 billion, is expected to include Lockheed Martin's C-130 Hercules transport aircraft and other unspecified missiles and radars. Neither the White House nor administration officials have provided further details about which specific systems the deal may include, such as the advanced fighter Riyadh has wanted.The two sides discussed a potential Saudi purchase of the F-35 Lightning II stealth strike fighter and Israel's qualitative military edge came up, Reuters reported Tuesday. The Saudis have sought the F-35 for years since it's one of the world's top fighter jets that could put the kingdom's armed forces on par with Israel, the only Middle Eastern country currently flying that fifth-generation combat aircraft. Washington is legally obligated to preserve Israel's military advantage by, among other things, not selling military hardware to regional countries that are as or more advanced than Israel's arsenal. Unlike the neighboring United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia has not joined the Abraham Accords by normalizing ties with Israel and refuses to do so amid the ongoing war in Gaza."I think an F-35 deal could be agreed upon even absent Saudi-Israeli normalization," Ryan Bohl, a senior Middle East and North Africa analyst at the risk intelligence company RANE, told Business Insider. "However, to proceed with the F-35 package, it would have to be significantly downgraded to preserve Israel's qualitative military edge." "Such downgrades might diminish the overall sale's attractiveness to the Saudis."Israel took delivery of three F-35s in March, bringing its total fleet strength to 42. It will field 75 eventually. Washington may not agree to sell Riyadh a comparable number, and it may impose limits on their use."I don't think numbers alone will be sufficient, as the Israelis will be concerned that such systems could eventually end up in the hands of adversaries," Bohl said. "Rather, I think we would likely see technical restrictions and end-use requirements that would severely limit the usage of F-35s by the Saudis and reduce their capabilities against the Israelis."Israel's F-35I Adir is a unique version of the stealth aircraft that Israel modifies with indigenous weapons and systems. Therefore, the Adir is arguably already more advanced than any standard F-35A model Saudi Arabia might acquire.Ultimately, it is Israel's arch-rival Iran that may have more concerns over the prospect of Saudi F-35s.Any F-35 acquisition could give Saudi Arabia the "ability to conduct deep strikes in Iran" in ways far greater than presently possible with their current fleet of non-stealthy 4.5-generation F-15s, noted Sebastien Roblin, a widely published military-aviation journalist. Such an acquisition could also "substantially enhance" Saudi airpower and enable Riyadh to participate in any US or Israeli bombing campaign against Iran."I can see such an acquisition affecting the perceived regional balance of power vis-à-vis Tehran," Roblin told BI."That said, in a large-scale conflict, questions would arise about the vulnerability of these aircraft to Iranian strikes when they landed," Roblin said. "And whether these countries could acquire enough F-35s with enough munitions and muster sufficient professionalism and support assets to minimize risks of combat losses." F-35 Lightning II fighters entered service with the US Air Force in 2016. U.S. Air Force photo/Master Sgt. Ben Mota Riyadh may not prioritize acquiring the F-35 and seek other advanced American armaments.The US is much more open to exporting advanced drones to Middle Eastern countries than just a few years ago, when Washington largely followed the range and payload limitations suggested by the Missile Technology Control Regime for exported systems.Before Trump's trip, Washington green-lighted a potential sale of MQ-9B drones to Qatar. General Atomics is expected to offer Saudi Arabia MQ-9B SeaGuardians as part of a "huge" package deal."I think the weakening of end-use restrictions will certainly make the Americans more eager to strike deals to sell their drones to the region," RANE's Bohl said. "American drones will still need to compete against Turkish and Chinese drones that may be cheaper and have fewer political strings attached."When Washington previously declined Middle East requests for advanced American drones, China stepped in and supplied its drones throughout the region in the 2010s. In the 2020s, Saudi Arabia and the UAE signed lucrative contracts with Turkey for its indigenous Bayraktar drones."I wouldn't expect a major surge in American drone exports to the region at this point, but rather for them to become part of this region's drone diversification strategy," Bohl said. "Certainly, there will be notable deals struck in the coming years, but China and Turkey will continue to be formidable competitors in the drone arena in the Arab Gulf states."The White House mentioned that the $142 billion agreement includes "air and missile defense.""If we are looking at recent trends, they should be focusing on air defenses, including deeper stocks of interceptor missiles, and diversification of air defenses to cost-efficiently combat lower-end threats as well as high-end ones," Roblin said.Saudi Arabia already operates advanced US Patriot air defense missiles and the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system, which can target ballistic missiles outside the atmosphere. It completed its first locally manufactured components of the latter system mere days before Trump's visit. Riyadh may seek similar co-production deals to aid in developing its domestic arms industry."There's a need for more long-distance precision strike weapons in the form of missiles and drones, which can be used without risking expensive manned combat aircraft," Roblin said. "There should be some parallel interest at sea, where we've seen Ukraine and the Houthis successfully execute sea denial strategies, one that Iran might seek to imitate in the confined waters of the Gulf.""Thus, the homework of Gulf navies is to ensure their vessels have the sensors and self-defense weapons to cope with small boat threats and cruise and ballistic missiles."Saudi Arabia has already taken steps to expand its navy with more advanced warships in recent years. RANE's Bohl believes Trump may persuade the kingdom to "purchase big-ticket items like warships" as he attempts to "revitalize the manufacturing sector" in the US.Only a fraction of this $142 billion agreement may result in completed deals — as was the case with the series of letters of intent for $110 billion worth of arms sales Trump signed with Riyadh in 2017."These deals involve optioning huge defense sales, but Trump will present these to his supporters as done deals," Roblin said. "So, the Gulf states can gift Trump a large number as a political victory without actually having to pay anywhere near the whole bill.""For the 2017 defense deal, by the following year, Riyadh reportedly had bought only $14.5 billion out of $110 billion optioned."Paul Iddon is a freelance journalist and columnist who writes about Middle East developments, military affairs, politics, and history. His articles have appeared in a variety of publications focused on the region. Recommended video
    0 Σχόλια 0 Μοιράστηκε
  • Corsair Remembered How to Make a Case: Frame 4000D RS ARGB Review
    Cases Corsair Remembered How to Make a Case: Frame 4000D RS ARGB ReviewMay 13, 2025Last Updated: 2025-05-13We analyze Corsair’s FRAME 4000D’s design, specs, build quality, and thermalsThe HighlightsCorsair’s new FRAME 4000D case reprises concepts from the company’s 4000D case but completely overhauls its designThe motherboard tray, power supply shroud, and other components are modular and intended to be replaceable with 3D printable componentsThe FRAME 4000D case puts Corsair on a much better path than its other recent casesOriginal MSRP: $95-$110Release Date: January 7, 2025Table of ContentsAutoTOC Grab a GN15 Large Anti-Static Modmat to celebrate our 15th Anniversary and for a high-quality PC building work surface.
    The Modmat features useful PC building diagrams and is anti-static conductive.
    Purchases directly fund our work! (or consider a direct donation or a Patreon contribution!)IntroToday we’re reviewing the Corsair Frame 4000D and the case is modular in some interesting ways.
    For instance, the motherboard tray and power supply shroud/tray can come out.
    And that’s what gets us to the name “frame.” It’s a frame of a case and it can be reconfigured.It’s actually pretty well built.
    There’s some really good build quality to the case.
    The fan rail system at the front comes off with a pull and has what Corsair calls “3D Y-shaped patterns.” While the front panel looks flimsy, it’s actually strong due to its depth.
    The steel stamping for the cable management shroud area is also relatively high build quality.The reason we’re excited about this case is because Corsair lately has really sucked with some of its cases, but the Frame 4000D doesn’t and that’s encouraging.Editor's note: This was originally published on May 8, 2025 as a video.
    This content has been adapted to written format for this article and is unchanged from the original publication.CreditsTest Lead, Host, WritingSteve BurkeTesting, WritingPatrick LathanVideo Editing, CameraMike GaglioneCameraTim PhetdaraWriting, Web EditingJimmy ThangIn addition to the case’s modularity, it also has trademarks:The new InfiniRail(TM) fan mount is joined by Corsair’s 3D Y-pattern airflow pattern, and better yet, Corsair says this case is “50 Series Ready,” which is impressive, because not even NVIDIA was 50-series ready.This is the Corsair Frame 4000D, and overall, we like it.
    It’s an interesting case.
    The case is the successor to Corsair's long-lived and highly popular 4000D (and its 4000D Airflow and 4000X variants) which we first reviewed back in 2020 and even liked. In spite of the name, the Frame 4000D is an entirely new design, which means we're going to have to say "Frame 4000D" every single time we mention it and can’t shorten it to 4000D as that’s a different case.
    We suspect part of the reason for the similarity is to enable the classic reuse-the-old-Newegg-listing trick: those 1,000+ five-egg reviews are almost all for the original 4000D, not the Frame 4000D, but it gets to share them on the same listing.
    Corsair also occasionally refers to the "Frame 4000 Series" sans-D, so we may see a Frame 4000X at some point.The case ranges from $95 without fans to the $110 RS ARGB with 3x 120 ARGB fans.
    It’s targeting the modern budget range. There's a $100 middle step as well with fans but no ARGB.
    Based on discussion with Corsair, it sounds likely that the MSRPs will increase due to tariffs, but we don't have hard numbers for what those increased prices would be.The Frame 4000D is interesting because Corsair has gone all out with the gigantic holes in the front panel: functionally, they're close to having no front panel at all. Corsair Frame 4000D OverviewThe differentiating factor for the Frame 4000D is that it's intended to be modular, with users able to buy or 3D print alternate components. This is reiterated constantly in Corsair's marketing materials, including public blog posts: "FRAME is all about customization and we have some exciting things on the horizon.
    In addition to parts that will be available for direct purchase, We have modelled some blanks of the PSU shroud and motherboard tray, so you can download [...] these from Printables and customize them however you like."Corsair Frame 4000D Specs4000D Series (2019)FRAME 4000D SeriesDimensions (mm):466 x 230 x 453 mm487 x 239 x 486 mmMaterial:Steel, Tempered GlassSteel, Tempered GlassIncluded Fans:2x SP120 or 3x AF120 RGB ELITENone or 3x RS120 or 3x RS120 ARGBIncluded Controllers:NoneNoneFan Compatibility:Front: 3x 120mm, 2x 140mmTop: 3x 120mm, 2x 140mmSide: NoneBottom: NoneRear: 1x 120mmFront: 3x 120mm, 2x 140mm, 2x 200mmTop: 3x 120mm, 2x 140mm, 2x 160mmSide: 3x 120mm, 2x 140mmBottom: 2x 120mmRear: 1x 120mm, 1x 140mmRadiator Compatibility:Front: 360mm, 280mm, 240mmTop: 280mm, 240mmSide: NoneBottom: NoneRear: 120mmFront: 360mm, 280mm, 240mmTop: 360mm, 280mm, 240mmSide: 360mm, 280mm, 240mmBottom: NoneRear: 120mmExpansion Slots (Main):7 Horizontal (2 Vertical)7 Horizontal (3 Vertical)Motherboard (Main):Mini-ITX, Micro-ATX, ATX, E-ATXMini-ITX, Micro-ATX, ATX, E-ATXStorage:2x 2.5" SSDs2x 3.5" HDDs4x 2.5" SSDs2x 3.5" HDDsClearances:PSU: 220mmCPU Cooler: 170mmGPU: 360mm (335mm w/ fan)PSU: 220mmCPU Cooler: 170mmGPU: 430 mm (405 mm w/ fan)Dust Filters:Front, Top, PSU, SideFront, PSU, SideFront I/O:USB 3.2 Gen1 Type-A (x1)USB 3.2 Gen2 Type-C (x1)Headphone/Microphone (x1)PowerResetUSB 3.2 Gen1 Type-A (x2)USB 3.2 Gen2 Type-C (x1)Headphone/Microphone (x1)PowerResetPower Supply:ATX (Not Included)ATX (Not Included)Warranty:2 Year2 YearThe BuildThe rotatable vertical GPU mount is one of three major features that genuinely live up to Corsair's promise of modularity, the other two being the PSU shroud and the motherboard tray (which can be removed with four screws).
    This is vital: being able to eventually buy or print individual components is nice, but it doesn't have anything to do with the case's design.
    With these three features, we're comfortable saying that the Frame 4000D is more modular than a typical case.
    It's also possible to swap the glass and mesh side panels to either side of the case, but this won't be useful until Corsair sells side panels individually or introduces more case SKUs.The vertical GPU mount is surprisingly quick to set up: by loosening two thumbscrews around the expansion slot covers, the entire set of seven slots can be removed and rotated 90 degrees.
    A riser cable can then be installed and supported by two standoffs installed on the surface of the PSU shroud.
    Using the built-in mounting holes, a maximum of three vertical slots are usable.
    Obviously Corsair intends for you to purchase a Corsair riser cable, but if you want to use your own, the holes are spaced 122mm apart.The Frame 4000D has old school pop-out fill and drain ports at the top and bottom of the chassis, which we also really appreciate.
    Open-loop compatibility fits well with the modular philosophy that Corsair is pushing.So far, these things are good.
    If we’re picking antiquated hills to die on, paper manuals will be one of them: We'd like to see a paper manual included with the case in addition to the version on Corsair's blog.
    The benefit of the online guide is that it can be updated; for example, the online manual now explains what the point of the strip of mylar in the accessory kit is, whereas we had to email Corsair (it covers the reverse-connector holes in the motherboard tray when they're unused).
    A paper manual can’t be updated, which is a downside as much as it is an upside: The upside is that a company can’t gaslight a customer if something proves incompatible and is retconned.
    It’s also just more convenient to build a computer with a physical manual.But then again, maybe Corsair doesn’t deserve paper manuals since its own digital manual incorrectly lists the screw count and steps for removing the power supply shroud.
    With a digital one, they’ll be able to make as many mistakes as they want and the only people who will know about them is everyone who read this article. For the record, it’s 3 screws, not 2.
    And the diagram is also incorrect.There's another, larger piece of black mylar in the kit, but the manual devotes less explanation to this one, simply saying that if you "don’t want your cables visible through the bottom mesh quarter-panel, swap the translucent insert for the color-matched blank-out insert included in the Accessory Box." The case also has a Lian Li-ish strip of mesh ventilation below the glass side panel and it ships with the translucent insert.
    If you install fans in the two 120mm slots on top of the PSU shroud, we'd recommend getting rid of the inserts entirely.The Frame 4000D uses the so-called "InfiniRail" system.
    At the front of the case, there are two metal rails that hold up to 12 plastic clips.
    The rails slide in and out for 120mm or 140mm mounting, and the clips slide up and down the whole length of the rails.
    Technically, the rails can fit 200mm fans at their maximum width, but only by forgoing the clips and mounting directly to the rails. At the top of the case, Corsair took the simpler approach of using a single sliding rail and no clips.
    The system is more complicated than it strictly needs to be, but our only real complaint is that there are exactly twelve clips included with the base model Frame 4000D, with no spares in case one breaks.The only significant fit-and-finish issue with our review sample was that one of the plastic pieces of the ball snap fasteners had popped out of the chassis in shipping.
    We were able to find it and put it back, but just like the InfiniRail clips, Corsair didn't provide any extras (like some other manufacturers do). As for build quality, construction of the Frame 4000D feels more delicate than the older 4000 series cases.
    This is partly a tradeoff for the more breathable mesh pattern, flexible fan mounting, and removable components.
    All of these things get exchanged for rigidity.
    Corsair apparently intends to sell Frame 4000D components individually as well, but we don't see any on the store as of this writing.On the positives for build quality, the elaborate stamped 3D pattern on the front panel is much sturdier than it looks.
    We'll have thermal results later in this review, but the Frame 4000D's front panel appears more open than the 4000D Airflow's (watch our review) while retaining most of its rigidity.There's a cable cover at the front of the case that can be installed in one of two positions, but as is frequently the case, we were only able to use it in the forward position because of the ATX power cable.
    The other position is better suited to back connect motherboards, of which ASUS BTF, MSI Project Zero, and Gigabyte Project Stealth have been validated by Corsair to work.
    The cable cover is extremely easy to remove, requiring only a single screw, and it's equally easy to slot the side fan mount from the accessory kit in its place.
    The side fan mount is another feature that will become more interesting if Corsair introduces a Frame 4000X or other variant with a sealed front panel.Cable management is good with tons of velcro straps behind the motherboard tray, but the best route for the 24-pin cable is along the cable bar, which isn't an option if the side fan mount is installed instead.
    Front I/O cables are neatly sleeved and the whole I/O unit pops off with two screws, so it would have been nice to allow alternate mounting locations (like in the O11D EVO), especially since having the I/O at the bottom of the case has become unusual these days.
    Even still, we like the modularity of it.
    They are delivering on that. As for storage, drives can be mounted on two plates, one behind the motherboard tray and one under the PSU shroud.
    Each plate can mount either two 2.5" drives, one 3.5" drive, or one "iCUE LINK System Hub controller." We'll be interested to see whether Corsair comes up with a modular solution to fit more drives, but for now, that's it.The default location of the GPU anti-sag arm is on the cable cover, too far forward to benefit anything except the longest GPUs, especially if the cable cover is shifted to its forward position.It can be moved a step further back by using the "mini mount" in the accessory kit, but there's no way to do any finer adjustment, and you should look for a different solution if you really think your GPU needs that support. Appearances are subjective.
    For some, a possible downside of the Frame 4000D's increased modularity is that it doesn't have the clean, uninterrupted lines of the original 4000D cases.
    We'll leave it at that; you can form your own opinion.Corsair Frame 4000D Thermals Visit our Patreon page to contribute a few dollars toward this website's operation (or consider a direct donation or buying something from our GN Store!) Additionally, when you purchase through links to retailers on our site, we may earn a small affiliate commission.The $95 base model Frame 4000D that we were sent for review didn't include any stock fans, so Corsair sent along a pack of three RS120 ARGB fans.
    We used these fans to match the stock configuration of the $110 Frame 4000D RS ARGB, which is how the case is marked on our charts.
    According to Corsair's spec sheets, the ARGB fans have the same specs as regular RS120s, so these results are also representative of the $100 Frame 4000D RS (non-ARGB)'s performance.CPU Full Load Thermals - Noise-NormalizedWe’ll start with noise-normalized thermals when using our hemi-anechoic chamber to establish the noise levels.Under full load with the case fans adjusted to hit our 27 dBA noise normalization target, CPU temperature in the Frame 4000D averaged 43 degrees Celsius above ambient, or 47 degrees on just the P-cores.
    That's a significant improvement over the original 4000D Airflow's average of 49 degrees (53 on the P-Cores), but that's to be expected since the older case has only two fans and splits them between the front and rear of the case.Relative to the rest of the chart, the Frame 4000D performed fairly well here.
    The Phanteks XT Pro Ultra is comparable in price and design, but it split the difference between the Corsair cases, with the Frame 4000D still a couple degrees cooler.
    The Lancool 207 (read our review) remains the budget case to beat with averages of 41 degrees across all cores and 45 on the P-Cores, while the NZXT H5 Flow 2024 (watch our review) and Phanteks G400A (watch our review) performed similarly well.
    The G400A remains difficult to find in the US.GPU Full Load Thermals - Noise-NormalizedMoving to GPU thermals under full load in the same noise normalized test, the Frame 4000D averaged 45 degrees above ambient, with 49 degrees for the memory and 59 for the unshown GPU hotspot.
    That's another victory over the original 4000D Airflow, which averaged 49 degrees for the GPU temperature, but again that's with two fans to the Frame 4000D's three.The G400A effectively tied the Frame 4000D in this test, while the H5 and XT Pro UItra didn't do as well.
    The XT Pro UItra averaged 47 degrees for the GPU, a couple degrees warmer than the Frame 4000D.
    The Lancool 207 remains near the top of the chart for cooling.
    To learn more about that one, you can check out our Best Cases round-up from last year or our original review for more info on that case's pros and cons.CPU Full Load Thermals - Full SpeedAt full speed, the Frame 4000D's CPU thermal performance continues to scale fairly well for its price, while the 4000D Airflow falls further behind.
    The Frame 4000D's noise levels and performance were essentially tied with the Phanteks XT Pro Ultra here, with the Frame 4000D averaging 40 degrees above ambient, or 43 on the P-Cores.
    The G400A performed similarly as well, but with a lower 37dBA noise level to the Frame 4000D's 43dBA, while the Lancool 207 remains an outlier with both lower temperatures and lower noise levels, making it a lot better here than really most of these other cases.CPU Full Load Thermals - Standardized FansThe standardized fan test has always had limited usefulness, but this is one of the places it’s useful.It’ll help us evaluate the Frame 4000D's unusual front panel by comparing it against other cases with an identical set of fans and placements including the 4000D.
    Average all-core CPU temperature was 40 degrees above ambient and the P-Cores were 44 degrees.
    That's reasonably well-matched to established mesh-fronted cases like Fractal's Meshify 2 Compact (watch our review) and North XL (read our review), and extremely close to SilverStone's recent FARA 514X (read our review).
    The Frame 4000D is also significantly better than the 4000D Airflow when normalizing to the same fans, reinforcing Corsair’s improvements to the chassis design itself.No matter how open the front panel is, though, the fans still have to pull air through Corsair's filter as well, so it makes some sense that some single-layer mesh designs like the Lancool 207, Pop Air RGB (watch our review), and Flux Pro (read our review) perform slightly better here, although the G400A also did fairly well with two layers.GPU Full Load Thermals - Standardized FansIn the same test, GPU temperature in the Frame 4000D averaged 43 degrees above ambient, tying it with most of the cases we just mentioned (Lancool 207, Pop Air RGB, and Flux Pro), while the XT Pro Ultra did unusually poorly with an average of 50 degrees.As a side note, GPU thermals with the 4000D Airflow were abysmal in this particular test relative to the rest of the chart.
    That differs from what we saw 5 years ago using our old test hardware, which demonstrates the value of retesting these cases now that we've switched to new components and a flow-through GPU design.VRM & RAM Full Load Thermals - Noise NormalizedAs a final note, the VR VCC sensor averaged 30 degrees above ambient in the noise-normalized test with the Frame 4000D.
    That puts it at the cooler end of what we typically see from cases, with only a couple of outliers like the Lancool 207 and Flux Pro dropping to the 27 degree mark. The same goes for the SPD Hub average of 24 degrees above ambient (which is the RAM temperature), with relatively few cases on the chart dropping below 22 degrees.
    Both these sensors indicate normal internal case temperatures.Corsair Frame 4000D Conclusion Our fully custom 3D Emblem Glasses celebrate our 15th Anniversary! We hand-assemble these on the East Coast in the US with a metal badge, strong adhesive, and high-quality pint glass.
    They pair excellently with our 3D 'Debug' Drink Coasters.
    Purchases keep us ad-free and directly support our consumer-focused reviews!Of the existing Frame 4000D SKUs, the Frame 4000D RS at $100 is a decent deal, especially given how tightly packed the SKUs’ prices are.
    Going from 0 fans to 3 fans is worth $5, and going from no RGB to ARGB may or may not be worth another $10.
    We need Corsair to follow through with more modular case components (like the alternate front panels it showed in the trailer) to make it really interesting, or at the absolute least offer some more printable files. The Lancool 207 remains king in terms of min-maxed price-to-performance, but the Frame 4000D is a reasonable alternative to budget Phanteks cases like the G400A and XT Pro Ultra, or potentially some Montech cases (which we'll be adding more of to the charts shortly). As a successor to the existing 4000 series, we like the Frame 4000D functionally.
    Some of the finer attention to detail elements like the geometric patterns and yellow accents remain, just with a more complex appearance than previously.Corsair has mentioned that it may have to increase prices, but we don’t yet have final details on what that amount might be on this case.
    We don't encourage panic buying, but if you've decided that the Frame 4000D is the case for you and it's currently in stock at MSRP, we wouldn't recommend waiting around for a discount.
    Overall, this is a job well done by Corsair.
    It is a much better return to form as compared to something like the 6500D (read our review) from last year.
    Source: https://gamersnexus.net/cases/corsair-remembered-how-make-case-frame-4000d-rs-argb-review" style="color: #0066cc;">https://gamersnexus.net/cases/corsair-remembered-how-make-case-frame-4000d-rs-argb-review
    #corsair #remembered #how #make #case #frame #4000d #argb #review
    Corsair Remembered How to Make a Case: Frame 4000D RS ARGB Review
    Cases Corsair Remembered How to Make a Case: Frame 4000D RS ARGB ReviewMay 13, 2025Last Updated: 2025-05-13We analyze Corsair’s FRAME 4000D’s design, specs, build quality, and thermalsThe HighlightsCorsair’s new FRAME 4000D case reprises concepts from the company’s 4000D case but completely overhauls its designThe motherboard tray, power supply shroud, and other components are modular and intended to be replaceable with 3D printable componentsThe FRAME 4000D case puts Corsair on a much better path than its other recent casesOriginal MSRP: $95-$110Release Date: January 7, 2025Table of ContentsAutoTOC Grab a GN15 Large Anti-Static Modmat to celebrate our 15th Anniversary and for a high-quality PC building work surface. The Modmat features useful PC building diagrams and is anti-static conductive. Purchases directly fund our work! (or consider a direct donation or a Patreon contribution!)IntroToday we’re reviewing the Corsair Frame 4000D and the case is modular in some interesting ways. For instance, the motherboard tray and power supply shroud/tray can come out. And that’s what gets us to the name “frame.” It’s a frame of a case and it can be reconfigured.It’s actually pretty well built. There’s some really good build quality to the case. The fan rail system at the front comes off with a pull and has what Corsair calls “3D Y-shaped patterns.” While the front panel looks flimsy, it’s actually strong due to its depth. The steel stamping for the cable management shroud area is also relatively high build quality.The reason we’re excited about this case is because Corsair lately has really sucked with some of its cases, but the Frame 4000D doesn’t and that’s encouraging.Editor's note: This was originally published on May 8, 2025 as a video. This content has been adapted to written format for this article and is unchanged from the original publication.CreditsTest Lead, Host, WritingSteve BurkeTesting, WritingPatrick LathanVideo Editing, CameraMike GaglioneCameraTim PhetdaraWriting, Web EditingJimmy ThangIn addition to the case’s modularity, it also has trademarks:The new InfiniRail(TM) fan mount is joined by Corsair’s 3D Y-pattern airflow pattern, and better yet, Corsair says this case is “50 Series Ready,” which is impressive, because not even NVIDIA was 50-series ready.This is the Corsair Frame 4000D, and overall, we like it. It’s an interesting case. The case is the successor to Corsair's long-lived and highly popular 4000D (and its 4000D Airflow and 4000X variants) which we first reviewed back in 2020 and even liked. In spite of the name, the Frame 4000D is an entirely new design, which means we're going to have to say "Frame 4000D" every single time we mention it and can’t shorten it to 4000D as that’s a different case. We suspect part of the reason for the similarity is to enable the classic reuse-the-old-Newegg-listing trick: those 1,000+ five-egg reviews are almost all for the original 4000D, not the Frame 4000D, but it gets to share them on the same listing. Corsair also occasionally refers to the "Frame 4000 Series" sans-D, so we may see a Frame 4000X at some point.The case ranges from $95 without fans to the $110 RS ARGB with 3x 120 ARGB fans. It’s targeting the modern budget range. There's a $100 middle step as well with fans but no ARGB. Based on discussion with Corsair, it sounds likely that the MSRPs will increase due to tariffs, but we don't have hard numbers for what those increased prices would be.The Frame 4000D is interesting because Corsair has gone all out with the gigantic holes in the front panel: functionally, they're close to having no front panel at all. Corsair Frame 4000D OverviewThe differentiating factor for the Frame 4000D is that it's intended to be modular, with users able to buy or 3D print alternate components. This is reiterated constantly in Corsair's marketing materials, including public blog posts: "FRAME is all about customization and we have some exciting things on the horizon. In addition to parts that will be available for direct purchase, We have modelled some blanks of the PSU shroud and motherboard tray, so you can download [...] these from Printables and customize them however you like."Corsair Frame 4000D Specs4000D Series (2019)FRAME 4000D SeriesDimensions (mm):466 x 230 x 453 mm487 x 239 x 486 mmMaterial:Steel, Tempered GlassSteel, Tempered GlassIncluded Fans:2x SP120 or 3x AF120 RGB ELITENone or 3x RS120 or 3x RS120 ARGBIncluded Controllers:NoneNoneFan Compatibility:Front: 3x 120mm, 2x 140mmTop: 3x 120mm, 2x 140mmSide: NoneBottom: NoneRear: 1x 120mmFront: 3x 120mm, 2x 140mm, 2x 200mmTop: 3x 120mm, 2x 140mm, 2x 160mmSide: 3x 120mm, 2x 140mmBottom: 2x 120mmRear: 1x 120mm, 1x 140mmRadiator Compatibility:Front: 360mm, 280mm, 240mmTop: 280mm, 240mmSide: NoneBottom: NoneRear: 120mmFront: 360mm, 280mm, 240mmTop: 360mm, 280mm, 240mmSide: 360mm, 280mm, 240mmBottom: NoneRear: 120mmExpansion Slots (Main):7 Horizontal (2 Vertical)7 Horizontal (3 Vertical)Motherboard (Main):Mini-ITX, Micro-ATX, ATX, E-ATXMini-ITX, Micro-ATX, ATX, E-ATXStorage:2x 2.5" SSDs2x 3.5" HDDs4x 2.5" SSDs2x 3.5" HDDsClearances:PSU: 220mmCPU Cooler: 170mmGPU: 360mm (335mm w/ fan)PSU: 220mmCPU Cooler: 170mmGPU: 430 mm (405 mm w/ fan)Dust Filters:Front, Top, PSU, SideFront, PSU, SideFront I/O:USB 3.2 Gen1 Type-A (x1)USB 3.2 Gen2 Type-C (x1)Headphone/Microphone (x1)PowerResetUSB 3.2 Gen1 Type-A (x2)USB 3.2 Gen2 Type-C (x1)Headphone/Microphone (x1)PowerResetPower Supply:ATX (Not Included)ATX (Not Included)Warranty:2 Year2 YearThe BuildThe rotatable vertical GPU mount is one of three major features that genuinely live up to Corsair's promise of modularity, the other two being the PSU shroud and the motherboard tray (which can be removed with four screws). This is vital: being able to eventually buy or print individual components is nice, but it doesn't have anything to do with the case's design. With these three features, we're comfortable saying that the Frame 4000D is more modular than a typical case. It's also possible to swap the glass and mesh side panels to either side of the case, but this won't be useful until Corsair sells side panels individually or introduces more case SKUs.The vertical GPU mount is surprisingly quick to set up: by loosening two thumbscrews around the expansion slot covers, the entire set of seven slots can be removed and rotated 90 degrees. A riser cable can then be installed and supported by two standoffs installed on the surface of the PSU shroud. Using the built-in mounting holes, a maximum of three vertical slots are usable. Obviously Corsair intends for you to purchase a Corsair riser cable, but if you want to use your own, the holes are spaced 122mm apart.The Frame 4000D has old school pop-out fill and drain ports at the top and bottom of the chassis, which we also really appreciate. Open-loop compatibility fits well with the modular philosophy that Corsair is pushing.So far, these things are good. If we’re picking antiquated hills to die on, paper manuals will be one of them: We'd like to see a paper manual included with the case in addition to the version on Corsair's blog. The benefit of the online guide is that it can be updated; for example, the online manual now explains what the point of the strip of mylar in the accessory kit is, whereas we had to email Corsair (it covers the reverse-connector holes in the motherboard tray when they're unused). A paper manual can’t be updated, which is a downside as much as it is an upside: The upside is that a company can’t gaslight a customer if something proves incompatible and is retconned. It’s also just more convenient to build a computer with a physical manual.But then again, maybe Corsair doesn’t deserve paper manuals since its own digital manual incorrectly lists the screw count and steps for removing the power supply shroud. With a digital one, they’ll be able to make as many mistakes as they want and the only people who will know about them is everyone who read this article. For the record, it’s 3 screws, not 2. And the diagram is also incorrect.There's another, larger piece of black mylar in the kit, but the manual devotes less explanation to this one, simply saying that if you "don’t want your cables visible through the bottom mesh quarter-panel, swap the translucent insert for the color-matched blank-out insert included in the Accessory Box." The case also has a Lian Li-ish strip of mesh ventilation below the glass side panel and it ships with the translucent insert. If you install fans in the two 120mm slots on top of the PSU shroud, we'd recommend getting rid of the inserts entirely.The Frame 4000D uses the so-called "InfiniRail" system. At the front of the case, there are two metal rails that hold up to 12 plastic clips. The rails slide in and out for 120mm or 140mm mounting, and the clips slide up and down the whole length of the rails. Technically, the rails can fit 200mm fans at their maximum width, but only by forgoing the clips and mounting directly to the rails. At the top of the case, Corsair took the simpler approach of using a single sliding rail and no clips. The system is more complicated than it strictly needs to be, but our only real complaint is that there are exactly twelve clips included with the base model Frame 4000D, with no spares in case one breaks.The only significant fit-and-finish issue with our review sample was that one of the plastic pieces of the ball snap fasteners had popped out of the chassis in shipping. We were able to find it and put it back, but just like the InfiniRail clips, Corsair didn't provide any extras (like some other manufacturers do). As for build quality, construction of the Frame 4000D feels more delicate than the older 4000 series cases. This is partly a tradeoff for the more breathable mesh pattern, flexible fan mounting, and removable components. All of these things get exchanged for rigidity. Corsair apparently intends to sell Frame 4000D components individually as well, but we don't see any on the store as of this writing.On the positives for build quality, the elaborate stamped 3D pattern on the front panel is much sturdier than it looks. We'll have thermal results later in this review, but the Frame 4000D's front panel appears more open than the 4000D Airflow's (watch our review) while retaining most of its rigidity.There's a cable cover at the front of the case that can be installed in one of two positions, but as is frequently the case, we were only able to use it in the forward position because of the ATX power cable. The other position is better suited to back connect motherboards, of which ASUS BTF, MSI Project Zero, and Gigabyte Project Stealth have been validated by Corsair to work. The cable cover is extremely easy to remove, requiring only a single screw, and it's equally easy to slot the side fan mount from the accessory kit in its place. The side fan mount is another feature that will become more interesting if Corsair introduces a Frame 4000X or other variant with a sealed front panel.Cable management is good with tons of velcro straps behind the motherboard tray, but the best route for the 24-pin cable is along the cable bar, which isn't an option if the side fan mount is installed instead. Front I/O cables are neatly sleeved and the whole I/O unit pops off with two screws, so it would have been nice to allow alternate mounting locations (like in the O11D EVO), especially since having the I/O at the bottom of the case has become unusual these days. Even still, we like the modularity of it. They are delivering on that. As for storage, drives can be mounted on two plates, one behind the motherboard tray and one under the PSU shroud. Each plate can mount either two 2.5" drives, one 3.5" drive, or one "iCUE LINK System Hub controller." We'll be interested to see whether Corsair comes up with a modular solution to fit more drives, but for now, that's it.The default location of the GPU anti-sag arm is on the cable cover, too far forward to benefit anything except the longest GPUs, especially if the cable cover is shifted to its forward position.It can be moved a step further back by using the "mini mount" in the accessory kit, but there's no way to do any finer adjustment, and you should look for a different solution if you really think your GPU needs that support. Appearances are subjective. For some, a possible downside of the Frame 4000D's increased modularity is that it doesn't have the clean, uninterrupted lines of the original 4000D cases. We'll leave it at that; you can form your own opinion.Corsair Frame 4000D Thermals Visit our Patreon page to contribute a few dollars toward this website's operation (or consider a direct donation or buying something from our GN Store!) Additionally, when you purchase through links to retailers on our site, we may earn a small affiliate commission.The $95 base model Frame 4000D that we were sent for review didn't include any stock fans, so Corsair sent along a pack of three RS120 ARGB fans. We used these fans to match the stock configuration of the $110 Frame 4000D RS ARGB, which is how the case is marked on our charts. According to Corsair's spec sheets, the ARGB fans have the same specs as regular RS120s, so these results are also representative of the $100 Frame 4000D RS (non-ARGB)'s performance.CPU Full Load Thermals - Noise-NormalizedWe’ll start with noise-normalized thermals when using our hemi-anechoic chamber to establish the noise levels.Under full load with the case fans adjusted to hit our 27 dBA noise normalization target, CPU temperature in the Frame 4000D averaged 43 degrees Celsius above ambient, or 47 degrees on just the P-cores. That's a significant improvement over the original 4000D Airflow's average of 49 degrees (53 on the P-Cores), but that's to be expected since the older case has only two fans and splits them between the front and rear of the case.Relative to the rest of the chart, the Frame 4000D performed fairly well here. The Phanteks XT Pro Ultra is comparable in price and design, but it split the difference between the Corsair cases, with the Frame 4000D still a couple degrees cooler. The Lancool 207 (read our review) remains the budget case to beat with averages of 41 degrees across all cores and 45 on the P-Cores, while the NZXT H5 Flow 2024 (watch our review) and Phanteks G400A (watch our review) performed similarly well. The G400A remains difficult to find in the US.GPU Full Load Thermals - Noise-NormalizedMoving to GPU thermals under full load in the same noise normalized test, the Frame 4000D averaged 45 degrees above ambient, with 49 degrees for the memory and 59 for the unshown GPU hotspot. That's another victory over the original 4000D Airflow, which averaged 49 degrees for the GPU temperature, but again that's with two fans to the Frame 4000D's three.The G400A effectively tied the Frame 4000D in this test, while the H5 and XT Pro UItra didn't do as well. The XT Pro UItra averaged 47 degrees for the GPU, a couple degrees warmer than the Frame 4000D. The Lancool 207 remains near the top of the chart for cooling. To learn more about that one, you can check out our Best Cases round-up from last year or our original review for more info on that case's pros and cons.CPU Full Load Thermals - Full SpeedAt full speed, the Frame 4000D's CPU thermal performance continues to scale fairly well for its price, while the 4000D Airflow falls further behind. The Frame 4000D's noise levels and performance were essentially tied with the Phanteks XT Pro Ultra here, with the Frame 4000D averaging 40 degrees above ambient, or 43 on the P-Cores. The G400A performed similarly as well, but with a lower 37dBA noise level to the Frame 4000D's 43dBA, while the Lancool 207 remains an outlier with both lower temperatures and lower noise levels, making it a lot better here than really most of these other cases.CPU Full Load Thermals - Standardized FansThe standardized fan test has always had limited usefulness, but this is one of the places it’s useful.It’ll help us evaluate the Frame 4000D's unusual front panel by comparing it against other cases with an identical set of fans and placements including the 4000D. Average all-core CPU temperature was 40 degrees above ambient and the P-Cores were 44 degrees. That's reasonably well-matched to established mesh-fronted cases like Fractal's Meshify 2 Compact (watch our review) and North XL (read our review), and extremely close to SilverStone's recent FARA 514X (read our review). The Frame 4000D is also significantly better than the 4000D Airflow when normalizing to the same fans, reinforcing Corsair’s improvements to the chassis design itself.No matter how open the front panel is, though, the fans still have to pull air through Corsair's filter as well, so it makes some sense that some single-layer mesh designs like the Lancool 207, Pop Air RGB (watch our review), and Flux Pro (read our review) perform slightly better here, although the G400A also did fairly well with two layers.GPU Full Load Thermals - Standardized FansIn the same test, GPU temperature in the Frame 4000D averaged 43 degrees above ambient, tying it with most of the cases we just mentioned (Lancool 207, Pop Air RGB, and Flux Pro), while the XT Pro Ultra did unusually poorly with an average of 50 degrees.As a side note, GPU thermals with the 4000D Airflow were abysmal in this particular test relative to the rest of the chart. That differs from what we saw 5 years ago using our old test hardware, which demonstrates the value of retesting these cases now that we've switched to new components and a flow-through GPU design.VRM & RAM Full Load Thermals - Noise NormalizedAs a final note, the VR VCC sensor averaged 30 degrees above ambient in the noise-normalized test with the Frame 4000D. That puts it at the cooler end of what we typically see from cases, with only a couple of outliers like the Lancool 207 and Flux Pro dropping to the 27 degree mark. The same goes for the SPD Hub average of 24 degrees above ambient (which is the RAM temperature), with relatively few cases on the chart dropping below 22 degrees. Both these sensors indicate normal internal case temperatures.Corsair Frame 4000D Conclusion Our fully custom 3D Emblem Glasses celebrate our 15th Anniversary! We hand-assemble these on the East Coast in the US with a metal badge, strong adhesive, and high-quality pint glass. They pair excellently with our 3D 'Debug' Drink Coasters. Purchases keep us ad-free and directly support our consumer-focused reviews!Of the existing Frame 4000D SKUs, the Frame 4000D RS at $100 is a decent deal, especially given how tightly packed the SKUs’ prices are. Going from 0 fans to 3 fans is worth $5, and going from no RGB to ARGB may or may not be worth another $10. We need Corsair to follow through with more modular case components (like the alternate front panels it showed in the trailer) to make it really interesting, or at the absolute least offer some more printable files. The Lancool 207 remains king in terms of min-maxed price-to-performance, but the Frame 4000D is a reasonable alternative to budget Phanteks cases like the G400A and XT Pro Ultra, or potentially some Montech cases (which we'll be adding more of to the charts shortly). As a successor to the existing 4000 series, we like the Frame 4000D functionally. Some of the finer attention to detail elements like the geometric patterns and yellow accents remain, just with a more complex appearance than previously.Corsair has mentioned that it may have to increase prices, but we don’t yet have final details on what that amount might be on this case. We don't encourage panic buying, but if you've decided that the Frame 4000D is the case for you and it's currently in stock at MSRP, we wouldn't recommend waiting around for a discount. Overall, this is a job well done by Corsair. It is a much better return to form as compared to something like the 6500D (read our review) from last year. Source: https://gamersnexus.net/cases/corsair-remembered-how-make-case-frame-4000d-rs-argb-review #corsair #remembered #how #make #case #frame #4000d #argb #review
    GAMERSNEXUS.NET
    Corsair Remembered How to Make a Case: Frame 4000D RS ARGB Review
    Cases Corsair Remembered How to Make a Case: Frame 4000D RS ARGB ReviewMay 13, 2025Last Updated: 2025-05-13We analyze Corsair’s FRAME 4000D’s design, specs, build quality, and thermalsThe HighlightsCorsair’s new FRAME 4000D case reprises concepts from the company’s 4000D case but completely overhauls its designThe motherboard tray, power supply shroud, and other components are modular and intended to be replaceable with 3D printable componentsThe FRAME 4000D case puts Corsair on a much better path than its other recent casesOriginal MSRP: $95-$110Release Date: January 7, 2025Table of ContentsAutoTOC Grab a GN15 Large Anti-Static Modmat to celebrate our 15th Anniversary and for a high-quality PC building work surface. The Modmat features useful PC building diagrams and is anti-static conductive. Purchases directly fund our work! (or consider a direct donation or a Patreon contribution!)IntroToday we’re reviewing the Corsair Frame 4000D and the case is modular in some interesting ways. For instance, the motherboard tray and power supply shroud/tray can come out. And that’s what gets us to the name “frame.” It’s a frame of a case and it can be reconfigured.It’s actually pretty well built. There’s some really good build quality to the case. The fan rail system at the front comes off with a pull and has what Corsair calls “3D Y-shaped patterns.” While the front panel looks flimsy, it’s actually strong due to its depth. The steel stamping for the cable management shroud area is also relatively high build quality.The reason we’re excited about this case is because Corsair lately has really sucked with some of its cases, but the Frame 4000D doesn’t and that’s encouraging.Editor's note: This was originally published on May 8, 2025 as a video. This content has been adapted to written format for this article and is unchanged from the original publication.CreditsTest Lead, Host, WritingSteve BurkeTesting, WritingPatrick LathanVideo Editing, CameraMike GaglioneCameraTim PhetdaraWriting, Web EditingJimmy ThangIn addition to the case’s modularity, it also has trademarks:The new InfiniRail(TM) fan mount is joined by Corsair’s 3D Y-pattern airflow pattern, and better yet, Corsair says this case is “50 Series Ready,” which is impressive, because not even NVIDIA was 50-series ready.This is the Corsair Frame 4000D, and overall, we like it. It’s an interesting case. The case is the successor to Corsair's long-lived and highly popular 4000D (and its 4000D Airflow and 4000X variants) which we first reviewed back in 2020 and even liked. In spite of the name, the Frame 4000D is an entirely new design, which means we're going to have to say "Frame 4000D" every single time we mention it and can’t shorten it to 4000D as that’s a different case. We suspect part of the reason for the similarity is to enable the classic reuse-the-old-Newegg-listing trick: those 1,000+ five-egg reviews are almost all for the original 4000D, not the Frame 4000D, but it gets to share them on the same listing. Corsair also occasionally refers to the "Frame 4000 Series" sans-D, so we may see a Frame 4000X at some point.The case ranges from $95 without fans to the $110 RS ARGB with 3x 120 ARGB fans. It’s targeting the modern budget range. There's a $100 middle step as well with fans but no ARGB. Based on discussion with Corsair, it sounds likely that the MSRPs will increase due to tariffs, but we don't have hard numbers for what those increased prices would be.The Frame 4000D is interesting because Corsair has gone all out with the gigantic holes in the front panel: functionally, they're close to having no front panel at all. Corsair Frame 4000D OverviewThe differentiating factor for the Frame 4000D is that it's intended to be modular, with users able to buy or 3D print alternate components. This is reiterated constantly in Corsair's marketing materials, including public blog posts: "FRAME is all about customization and we have some exciting things on the horizon. In addition to parts that will be available for direct purchase, We have modelled some blanks of the PSU shroud and motherboard tray, so you can download [...] these from Printables and customize them however you like."Corsair Frame 4000D Specs4000D Series (2019)FRAME 4000D SeriesDimensions (mm):466 x 230 x 453 mm487 x 239 x 486 mmMaterial:Steel, Tempered GlassSteel, Tempered GlassIncluded Fans:2x SP120 or 3x AF120 RGB ELITENone or 3x RS120 or 3x RS120 ARGBIncluded Controllers:NoneNoneFan Compatibility:Front: 3x 120mm, 2x 140mmTop: 3x 120mm, 2x 140mmSide: NoneBottom: NoneRear: 1x 120mmFront: 3x 120mm, 2x 140mm, 2x 200mmTop: 3x 120mm, 2x 140mm, 2x 160mmSide: 3x 120mm, 2x 140mmBottom: 2x 120mmRear: 1x 120mm, 1x 140mmRadiator Compatibility:Front: 360mm, 280mm, 240mmTop: 280mm, 240mmSide: NoneBottom: NoneRear: 120mmFront: 360mm, 280mm, 240mmTop: 360mm, 280mm, 240mmSide: 360mm, 280mm, 240mmBottom: NoneRear: 120mmExpansion Slots (Main):7 Horizontal (2 Vertical)7 Horizontal (3 Vertical)Motherboard (Main):Mini-ITX, Micro-ATX, ATX, E-ATXMini-ITX, Micro-ATX, ATX, E-ATXStorage:2x 2.5" SSDs2x 3.5" HDDs4x 2.5" SSDs2x 3.5" HDDsClearances:PSU: 220mmCPU Cooler: 170mmGPU: 360mm (335mm w/ fan)PSU: 220mmCPU Cooler: 170mmGPU: 430 mm (405 mm w/ fan)Dust Filters:Front, Top, PSU, SideFront, PSU, SideFront I/O:USB 3.2 Gen1 Type-A (x1)USB 3.2 Gen2 Type-C (x1)Headphone/Microphone (x1)PowerResetUSB 3.2 Gen1 Type-A (x2)USB 3.2 Gen2 Type-C (x1)Headphone/Microphone (x1)PowerResetPower Supply:ATX (Not Included)ATX (Not Included)Warranty:2 Year2 YearThe BuildThe rotatable vertical GPU mount is one of three major features that genuinely live up to Corsair's promise of modularity, the other two being the PSU shroud and the motherboard tray (which can be removed with four screws). This is vital: being able to eventually buy or print individual components is nice, but it doesn't have anything to do with the case's design. With these three features, we're comfortable saying that the Frame 4000D is more modular than a typical case. It's also possible to swap the glass and mesh side panels to either side of the case, but this won't be useful until Corsair sells side panels individually or introduces more case SKUs.The vertical GPU mount is surprisingly quick to set up: by loosening two thumbscrews around the expansion slot covers, the entire set of seven slots can be removed and rotated 90 degrees. A riser cable can then be installed and supported by two standoffs installed on the surface of the PSU shroud. Using the built-in mounting holes, a maximum of three vertical slots are usable. Obviously Corsair intends for you to purchase a Corsair riser cable, but if you want to use your own, the holes are spaced 122mm apart.The Frame 4000D has old school pop-out fill and drain ports at the top and bottom of the chassis, which we also really appreciate. Open-loop compatibility fits well with the modular philosophy that Corsair is pushing.So far, these things are good. If we’re picking antiquated hills to die on, paper manuals will be one of them: We'd like to see a paper manual included with the case in addition to the version on Corsair's blog. The benefit of the online guide is that it can be updated; for example, the online manual now explains what the point of the strip of mylar in the accessory kit is, whereas we had to email Corsair (it covers the reverse-connector holes in the motherboard tray when they're unused). A paper manual can’t be updated, which is a downside as much as it is an upside: The upside is that a company can’t gaslight a customer if something proves incompatible and is retconned. It’s also just more convenient to build a computer with a physical manual.But then again, maybe Corsair doesn’t deserve paper manuals since its own digital manual incorrectly lists the screw count and steps for removing the power supply shroud. With a digital one, they’ll be able to make as many mistakes as they want and the only people who will know about them is everyone who read this article. For the record, it’s 3 screws, not 2. And the diagram is also incorrect.There's another, larger piece of black mylar in the kit, but the manual devotes less explanation to this one, simply saying that if you "don’t want your cables visible through the bottom mesh quarter-panel, swap the translucent insert for the color-matched blank-out insert included in the Accessory Box." The case also has a Lian Li-ish strip of mesh ventilation below the glass side panel and it ships with the translucent insert. If you install fans in the two 120mm slots on top of the PSU shroud, we'd recommend getting rid of the inserts entirely.The Frame 4000D uses the so-called "InfiniRail" system. At the front of the case, there are two metal rails that hold up to 12 plastic clips. The rails slide in and out for 120mm or 140mm mounting, and the clips slide up and down the whole length of the rails. Technically, the rails can fit 200mm fans at their maximum width, but only by forgoing the clips and mounting directly to the rails. At the top of the case, Corsair took the simpler approach of using a single sliding rail and no clips. The system is more complicated than it strictly needs to be, but our only real complaint is that there are exactly twelve clips included with the base model Frame 4000D, with no spares in case one breaks.The only significant fit-and-finish issue with our review sample was that one of the plastic pieces of the ball snap fasteners had popped out of the chassis in shipping. We were able to find it and put it back, but just like the InfiniRail clips, Corsair didn't provide any extras (like some other manufacturers do). As for build quality, construction of the Frame 4000D feels more delicate than the older 4000 series cases. This is partly a tradeoff for the more breathable mesh pattern, flexible fan mounting, and removable components. All of these things get exchanged for rigidity. Corsair apparently intends to sell Frame 4000D components individually as well, but we don't see any on the store as of this writing.On the positives for build quality, the elaborate stamped 3D pattern on the front panel is much sturdier than it looks. We'll have thermal results later in this review, but the Frame 4000D's front panel appears more open than the 4000D Airflow's (watch our review) while retaining most of its rigidity.There's a cable cover at the front of the case that can be installed in one of two positions, but as is frequently the case, we were only able to use it in the forward position because of the ATX power cable. The other position is better suited to back connect motherboards, of which ASUS BTF, MSI Project Zero, and Gigabyte Project Stealth have been validated by Corsair to work. The cable cover is extremely easy to remove, requiring only a single screw, and it's equally easy to slot the side fan mount from the accessory kit in its place. The side fan mount is another feature that will become more interesting if Corsair introduces a Frame 4000X or other variant with a sealed front panel.Cable management is good with tons of velcro straps behind the motherboard tray, but the best route for the 24-pin cable is along the cable bar, which isn't an option if the side fan mount is installed instead. Front I/O cables are neatly sleeved and the whole I/O unit pops off with two screws, so it would have been nice to allow alternate mounting locations (like in the O11D EVO), especially since having the I/O at the bottom of the case has become unusual these days. Even still, we like the modularity of it. They are delivering on that. As for storage, drives can be mounted on two plates, one behind the motherboard tray and one under the PSU shroud. Each plate can mount either two 2.5" drives, one 3.5" drive, or one "iCUE LINK System Hub controller." We'll be interested to see whether Corsair comes up with a modular solution to fit more drives, but for now, that's it.The default location of the GPU anti-sag arm is on the cable cover, too far forward to benefit anything except the longest GPUs, especially if the cable cover is shifted to its forward position.It can be moved a step further back by using the "mini mount" in the accessory kit, but there's no way to do any finer adjustment, and you should look for a different solution if you really think your GPU needs that support. Appearances are subjective. For some, a possible downside of the Frame 4000D's increased modularity is that it doesn't have the clean, uninterrupted lines of the original 4000D cases. We'll leave it at that; you can form your own opinion.Corsair Frame 4000D Thermals Visit our Patreon page to contribute a few dollars toward this website's operation (or consider a direct donation or buying something from our GN Store!) Additionally, when you purchase through links to retailers on our site, we may earn a small affiliate commission.The $95 base model Frame 4000D that we were sent for review didn't include any stock fans, so Corsair sent along a pack of three RS120 ARGB fans. We used these fans to match the stock configuration of the $110 Frame 4000D RS ARGB, which is how the case is marked on our charts. According to Corsair's spec sheets, the ARGB fans have the same specs as regular RS120s, so these results are also representative of the $100 Frame 4000D RS (non-ARGB)'s performance.CPU Full Load Thermals - Noise-NormalizedWe’ll start with noise-normalized thermals when using our hemi-anechoic chamber to establish the noise levels.Under full load with the case fans adjusted to hit our 27 dBA noise normalization target, CPU temperature in the Frame 4000D averaged 43 degrees Celsius above ambient, or 47 degrees on just the P-cores. That's a significant improvement over the original 4000D Airflow's average of 49 degrees (53 on the P-Cores), but that's to be expected since the older case has only two fans and splits them between the front and rear of the case.Relative to the rest of the chart, the Frame 4000D performed fairly well here. The Phanteks XT Pro Ultra is comparable in price and design, but it split the difference between the Corsair cases, with the Frame 4000D still a couple degrees cooler. The Lancool 207 (read our review) remains the budget case to beat with averages of 41 degrees across all cores and 45 on the P-Cores, while the NZXT H5 Flow 2024 (watch our review) and Phanteks G400A (watch our review) performed similarly well. The G400A remains difficult to find in the US.GPU Full Load Thermals - Noise-NormalizedMoving to GPU thermals under full load in the same noise normalized test, the Frame 4000D averaged 45 degrees above ambient, with 49 degrees for the memory and 59 for the unshown GPU hotspot. That's another victory over the original 4000D Airflow, which averaged 49 degrees for the GPU temperature, but again that's with two fans to the Frame 4000D's three.The G400A effectively tied the Frame 4000D in this test, while the H5 and XT Pro UItra didn't do as well. The XT Pro UItra averaged 47 degrees for the GPU, a couple degrees warmer than the Frame 4000D. The Lancool 207 remains near the top of the chart for cooling. To learn more about that one, you can check out our Best Cases round-up from last year or our original review for more info on that case's pros and cons.CPU Full Load Thermals - Full SpeedAt full speed, the Frame 4000D's CPU thermal performance continues to scale fairly well for its price, while the 4000D Airflow falls further behind. The Frame 4000D's noise levels and performance were essentially tied with the Phanteks XT Pro Ultra here, with the Frame 4000D averaging 40 degrees above ambient, or 43 on the P-Cores. The G400A performed similarly as well, but with a lower 37dBA noise level to the Frame 4000D's 43dBA, while the Lancool 207 remains an outlier with both lower temperatures and lower noise levels, making it a lot better here than really most of these other cases.CPU Full Load Thermals - Standardized FansThe standardized fan test has always had limited usefulness, but this is one of the places it’s useful.It’ll help us evaluate the Frame 4000D's unusual front panel by comparing it against other cases with an identical set of fans and placements including the 4000D. Average all-core CPU temperature was 40 degrees above ambient and the P-Cores were 44 degrees. That's reasonably well-matched to established mesh-fronted cases like Fractal's Meshify 2 Compact (watch our review) and North XL (read our review), and extremely close to SilverStone's recent FARA 514X (read our review). The Frame 4000D is also significantly better than the 4000D Airflow when normalizing to the same fans, reinforcing Corsair’s improvements to the chassis design itself.No matter how open the front panel is, though, the fans still have to pull air through Corsair's filter as well, so it makes some sense that some single-layer mesh designs like the Lancool 207, Pop Air RGB (watch our review), and Flux Pro (read our review) perform slightly better here, although the G400A also did fairly well with two layers.GPU Full Load Thermals - Standardized FansIn the same test, GPU temperature in the Frame 4000D averaged 43 degrees above ambient, tying it with most of the cases we just mentioned (Lancool 207, Pop Air RGB, and Flux Pro), while the XT Pro Ultra did unusually poorly with an average of 50 degrees.As a side note, GPU thermals with the 4000D Airflow were abysmal in this particular test relative to the rest of the chart. That differs from what we saw 5 years ago using our old test hardware, which demonstrates the value of retesting these cases now that we've switched to new components and a flow-through GPU design.VRM & RAM Full Load Thermals - Noise NormalizedAs a final note, the VR VCC sensor averaged 30 degrees above ambient in the noise-normalized test with the Frame 4000D. That puts it at the cooler end of what we typically see from cases, with only a couple of outliers like the Lancool 207 and Flux Pro dropping to the 27 degree mark. The same goes for the SPD Hub average of 24 degrees above ambient (which is the RAM temperature), with relatively few cases on the chart dropping below 22 degrees. Both these sensors indicate normal internal case temperatures.Corsair Frame 4000D Conclusion Our fully custom 3D Emblem Glasses celebrate our 15th Anniversary! We hand-assemble these on the East Coast in the US with a metal badge, strong adhesive, and high-quality pint glass. They pair excellently with our 3D 'Debug' Drink Coasters. Purchases keep us ad-free and directly support our consumer-focused reviews!Of the existing Frame 4000D SKUs, the Frame 4000D RS at $100 is a decent deal, especially given how tightly packed the SKUs’ prices are. Going from 0 fans to 3 fans is worth $5, and going from no RGB to ARGB may or may not be worth another $10. We need Corsair to follow through with more modular case components (like the alternate front panels it showed in the trailer) to make it really interesting, or at the absolute least offer some more printable files. The Lancool 207 remains king in terms of min-maxed price-to-performance, but the Frame 4000D is a reasonable alternative to budget Phanteks cases like the G400A and XT Pro Ultra, or potentially some Montech cases (which we'll be adding more of to the charts shortly). As a successor to the existing 4000 series, we like the Frame 4000D functionally. Some of the finer attention to detail elements like the geometric patterns and yellow accents remain, just with a more complex appearance than previously.Corsair has mentioned that it may have to increase prices, but we don’t yet have final details on what that amount might be on this case. We don't encourage panic buying, but if you've decided that the Frame 4000D is the case for you and it's currently in stock at MSRP, we wouldn't recommend waiting around for a discount. Overall, this is a job well done by Corsair. It is a much better return to form as compared to something like the 6500D (read our review) from last year.
    0 Σχόλια 0 Μοιράστηκε