But also, the latest DeepSeek is 1.6T parameters. “Choosing” to run this locally is a choice that comes with a seven digit price tag, and is a sunk cost that will probably not run any other frontier model anytime soon.
Most organizations are not looking to spend millions of dollars trying to find a workaround to specifically run DeepSeek. Most enterprise consumption in this space is still very experimental and a pay as you go model is much more palatable. Most are simply just looking for three checkboxes: is it close to frontier performance, is it compliant with my organizations requirements, and is it a good price? DeepSeek can only do two of the three at the same time.
Unless you're specifically thinking about running the model at stock precision in a datacenter environment and generating ~100 tok/s or more on a 24/7 basis (the equivalent of a >$1000/mo spend even on the cheapest third-party APIs), that's very likely off by multiple orders of magnitude. Even then, experimentation can be done with cheap neoclouds on a pay-as-you-go basis.
I can see now why I was being downvoted - you have explained it eloquently.
(Your cost analysis is flawed and irrelevant. Azure serves V4 Pro.)
