anyone else is facing this issue? the pipelines are stuck at "Created" or multiple pipelines are created automatically and are still stuck at "Created". layoffs yesterday, runners resigned today 👀
I asked both the models to "Review the code for improvements, use graphify" on a small codebase of my hobby project and asked Opus 4.7 thinking with max efforts to review and here's the output.
| Dimension | Minimax m2.7 | Deepseek v4 Pro | Opus 4.7 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bugs caught | drag undo, structuredClone, history singleton |
none | both + verified mechanism |
| Architecture insight | store-slicing, subscription perf | community cohesion | union + concrete splits |
| Line counts | canvas.ts 554 (actual 561, close) | Popup.tsx 467 (actual 657), Toolbar.tsx 388 (actual 546) | verified all |
| Dead code | motion-path caught | missed | confirmed |
| Used graph data | no — manual review only | yes — cited cohesion + god nodes | yes |
| Hallucinations | minor (line numbers off by ~7) | major (line counts off by 30–40%) | none |
| Actionable fixes | yes, prioritized | partial (suggested split points but no specifics) | yes |
Minimax wins on substance. It found 3 real bugs Deepseek missed (drag undo, structuredClone, history singleton) and the dead motion-path tool. Its perf observations are concrete and correct.
Deepseek wins on graph utilization. It actually used cohesion scores and god-node analysis from graphify, which is the whole point of running it. But it invented line counts and missed every concrete bug.
Best play: Minimax's bug list + Deepseek's community-cohesion framing. Minimax did real code reading; Deepseek did graph reading. Mine combined both and verified line numbers.
I asked both the models to "Review the code for improvements, use graphify" on a small codebase of my hobby project and asked Opus 4.7 thinking with max efforts to review and here's the output.
| Dimension | Minimax m2.7 | Deepseek v4 Pro | Opus 4.7 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bugs caught | drag undo, structuredClone, history singleton |
none | both + verified mechanism |
| Architecture insight | store-slicing, subscription perf | community cohesion | union + concrete splits |
| Line counts | canvas.ts 554 (actual 561, close) | Popup.tsx 467 (actual 657), Toolbar.tsx 388 (actual 546) | verified all |
| Dead code | motion-path caught | missed | confirmed |
| Used graph data | no — manual review only | yes — cited cohesion + god nodes | yes |
| Hallucinations | minor (line numbers off by ~7) | major (line counts off by 30–40%) | none |
| Actionable fixes | yes, prioritized | partial (suggested split points but no specifics) | yes |
Minimax wins on substance. It found 3 real bugs Deepseek missed (drag undo, structuredClone, history singleton) and the dead motion-path tool. Its perf observations are concrete and correct.
Deepseek wins on graph utilization. It actually used cohesion scores and god-node analysis from graphify, which is the whole point of running it. But it invented line counts and missed every concrete bug.
Best play: Minimax's bug list + Deepseek's community-cohesion framing. Minimax did real code reading; Deepseek did graph reading. Mine combined both and verified line numbers.
I have been using minimax 2.7 with tokens plan on cursor, i have noticed that it YAPS for too long and talks too much. Is there a solutions for faster development?