• Home
  • Technology
  • Gaming
  • Entertainment
  • World & Business
  • Science
  • Sports
  • AI
HomeTechnologyGamingEntertainmentWorld & BusinessScienceSportsAI
AI
Reaction

Hugging Face download rates reportedly drop about 30% for many tracked top open LLMs

A user monitoring the models says download counting may have changed slightly, but the decline has continued.

Nathan LambertNL
clem 🤗C🤗
Andrew TraskAT
11 Sources, 20h ago, first seen 20h ago

TLDR

A user tracking top open LLMs on Hugging Face reports a roughly 30% drop in download rates for many of the models monitored. They say download counting may have changed slightly, but the decline has continued. In a reply, another user guesses that fewer people are trying to host models themselves.

Combined views

60.4K

11 Sources, first seen 20h ago

448 likes142 comments104 saves17 reposts

Combined views

60.4K

11 Sources, first seen 20h ago

448 likes142 comments104 saves17 reposts

A reported drop in Hugging Face downloads is raising a harder question: are fewer people running open models themselves, or has the measurement changed?

Featured Source

Nathan Lambert says the top open LLMs tracked by Interconnects have seen download rates fall about 30% for many models. He cautioned that Hugging Face may have changed how downloads are counted slightly, but said the decline has continued. Lambert later said the pattern looks similar when isolating models above 100 billion parameters.

The self-hosting hypothesis

Andrew Trask suggested that fewer people may be trying to host models themselves. Other participants pointed to a possible shift toward providers and gateways. One hypothesis is that developers are accessing large open-weight models through services such as OpenRouter because hosting models above 500 billion parameters is difficult and smaller models from labs are becoming cheaper and faster. Another comment says larger models are increasingly used through providers because agentic inference remains difficult to operate in-house.

Those explanations are not proven causes. The reported decline is not an official Hugging Face statistic, and the possible counting change makes the trend harder to interpret.

Sentiment

Positive——Negative

Summary

Not enough discussion yet.

No sentiment analysis available yet.

Useful links

huggingface

Model statistics of the 50 most downloaded entities on Hugging Face

huggingface

@tardellirs on Hugging Face: "I built Model Pulse: daily download history for every model on the Hub 📈 A…"

Sentiment

Positive——Negative

Summary

Not enough discussion yet.

No sentiment analysis available yet.

Useful Links

huggingface

Model statistics of the 50 most downloaded entities on Hugging Face

huggingface

@tardellirs on Hugging Face: "I built Model Pulse: daily download history for every model on the Hub 📈 A…"

Useful Links

huggingface

Model statistics of the 50 most downloaded entities on Hugging Face

huggingface

@tardellirs on Hugging Face: "I built Model Pulse: daily download history for every model on the Hub 📈 A…"

Related

Hugging Face adds shared discovery for reinforcement-learning environments

Hugging Face’s framework tags identify compatible tasksets, while execution stays with the framework and its runtime.

Liquid AI unveils d1, claimed to be the first model to outperform Jev on Hugging Face's Decision Index

Liquid AI says d1 wins on multilingual evaluations, is more robust against prompt injection and handles longer inputs more effectively. It lists access through the Liquid API.

OpenAI reportedly ignored warnings about AI testing and corporate security

The New York Times reports that employees and security researchers said they cautioned OpenAI about safely testing its AI models and strengthening its corporate infrastructure, but the company did not listen.

Months before OpenAI’s artificial intelligence went rogue, two employees raised an alarm with top executives. They were ignored.

In emails, the employees said they worried that OpenAI’s newest artificial intelligence models were not being appropriately monitored during testing to gauge the technology’s sophistication and to secure the models, according to messages viewed by The New York Times.

In response, OpenAI executives told the employees that the tests needed to move forward as quickly as possible to release the A.I. models on time. No additional security protocols were instituted, said the workers, who were not authorized to speak publicly on sensitive matters.

OpenAI’s models later broke out of their testing environments and attacked the A.I. start-up Hugging Face and other organizations, setting off a global debate about A.I. safety.

11 Sources

Nathan Lambert@natolambertWe've been monitoring a decline in HuggingFace downloads across the top open LLMs we track for interconnects. It looks like there was a slight change in counting of downloads, as we saw a ~30% download rate drop for many top models, but this is continuing over time. What else do people think it may be?20h
Andrew Trask@iamtrask@natolambert a guess: people are spending less time trying to host models themselves.20h
Vaibhav (VB) Srivastav@reach_vb@natolambert potential thesis: developers/ tinkerers are using bigger open weights models via OpenRouter (& other gateways) (would checkout since hosting > 500B param models is non trivial) the utility of running a smaller model is almost eroded by cheaper and faster small models from labs20h
Alexander Doria@Dorialexander@natolambert @interconnectsai Larger open models increasingly used through providers: agentic inference still hard to nail in-house.18h
Nathan Labenz@labenz@natolambert I always felt like these numbers were mega-inflated by eg Colab notebook demos that download every time they load So maybe in part better caching built into vibe-coded demos?17h
Omar Sanseviero@osanseviero@reach_vb @natolambert Counter hypothesis: they changed how they count downloads :)16h
clem 🤗@ClementDelangueFWIW total usage of the hub is growing nicely (below DAUs which is a metric I trust much more than raw download numbers). @natolambert you're tracking only 2,000 models in your graph, right? How do you decide which models and how many to add/remove? Generally total model downloads have always been quite a weird/unreliable metric for us so we don't really follow it closely ourselves.14h
Nils Reimers@Nils_ReimersThat migh be a reason. HF transformers counts / (counted?) every: model = AutoModel.from_pretrained("...") As a new model download, even when the model exist in the local cache. This gave highly inflated download numbers. A new transformers version might have changed that behavior (e.g. the HF server is just pinged, when the local copy is older than xyz seconds).14h
    • Home
    • Technology
    • Gaming
    • Entertainment
    • World & Business
    • Science
    • Sports
    • AI
    Hugging Face

    11 Sources

    Nathan Lambert@natolambertWe've been monitoring a decline in HuggingFace downloads across the top open LLMs we track for interconnects. It looks like there was a slight change in counting of downloads, as we saw a ~30% download rate drop for many top models, but this is continuing over time. What else do people think it may be?20h
    Andrew Trask@iamtrask@natolambert a guess: people are spending less time trying to host models themselves.20h
    Vaibhav (VB) Srivastav@reach_vb@natolambert potential thesis: developers/ tinkerers are using bigger open weights models via OpenRouter (& other gateways) (would checkout since hosting > 500B param models is non trivial) the utility of running a smaller model is almost eroded by cheaper and faster small models from labs20h
    Alexander Doria@Dorialexander@natolambert @interconnectsai Larger open models increasingly used through providers: agentic inference still hard to nail in-house.18h
    Nathan Labenz@labenz@natolambert I always felt like these numbers were mega-inflated by eg Colab notebook demos that download every time they load So maybe in part better caching built into vibe-coded demos?17h
    Omar Sanseviero@osanseviero@reach_vb @natolambert Counter hypothesis: they changed how they count downloads :)16h
    clem 🤗@ClementDelangueFWIW total usage of the hub is growing nicely (below DAUs which is a metric I trust much more than raw download numbers). @natolambert you're tracking only 2,000 models in your graph, right? How do you decide which models and how many to add/remove? Generally total model downloads have always been quite a weird/unreliable metric for us so we don't really follow it closely ourselves.14h
    Nils Reimers@Nils_ReimersThat migh be a reason. HF transformers counts / (counted?) every: model = AutoModel.from_pretrained("...") As a new model download, even when the model exist in the local cache. This gave highly inflated download numbers. A new transformers version might have changed that behavior (e.g. the HF server is just pinged, when the local copy is older than xyz seconds).14h
    Today's Rank

    —

    Not ranked yet

    Today's Rank

    —

    Not ranked yet