Tencent Tencent Hy4 preview

Tencent Hy4 preview — the open 770B MoE whose official pages print three different token ceilings, two reasoning levels, and a 46-row appendix against the generation it replaces

Bring the work you would otherwise hand to a person, then check every figure on this page against the official pages that publish it. Three kinds of statement are kept apart below: what Tencent writes down as the specification, what its own appendix measures against the previous generation, and which controls this chat box really opens rather than merely documents.

Explore the model guide
Tencent Hy4 preview

What is Tencent Hy4 preview?

Tencent Hy4 preview is the Mixture-of-Experts flagship that the Tencent Hy Team released and open-sourced on 28 August 2026, and it is shipped as an early version of the Hy4 generation rather than as a finished one — Tencent says so itself and lists two known limitations alongside the release. The backbone is 770B total parameters with 49B activated per token across 78 layers: the first layer is a standard dense feed-forward network, the remaining 77 are mixture-of-experts layers holding 256 routed experts plus one shared expert each, and every token activates the top eight routed experts together with the shared one. A native multi-token-prediction layer of roughly 10B total and 0.7B activated parameters is built in for speculative decoding, so no separate draft model has to be deployed. Attention uses Gated DeepSeek Sparse Attention with IndexCache for cross-layer sparse index reuse, the residual pathway uses identity Hyper-Connections to widen inter-layer information flow, the hidden size is 6,144, the attention head count is 64, and the vocabulary is 120,832 entries. The weights are published under Apache 2.0 in both BF16 and FP8, on Hugging Face, ModelScope, GitCode and CNB, with vLLM and SGLang serving recipes and a prebuilt container image on day one. Three numbers on the official pages describe three different limits rather than one, and keeping them apart is the point of the specifications block below: the context window is 1,024k tokens, the maximum input is 960k tokens, and the maximum output is 64k tokens. Input is text and output is text; the model page and the model list both record function calling, structured output through a response format, and cache support. Thinking is on by default and there are only two settings for it, a full chain-of-thought mode that is the default and a way to turn it off. Tencent also reports its own blind comparison: 163 internal experts rated 203 engineering tasks and put this model at 2.99 out of 4.00 against 2.92 for GLM 5.3 and 2.94 for Kimi K3, figures the company measures itself rather than figures from an independent lab. The identifier is hy4-preview, and the model is listed as available in preview rather than as a finished release.

What Tencent Hy4 preview is worth using for

Three token ceilings printed on one official page, and no competing page prints all three

The Hy4 preview row in the official calling guide carries four figures in a single line, and three of them are different kinds of ceiling rather than restatements of one. The context window is 1,024k tokens. The maximum input is 960k tokens, which is deliberately smaller, because the window has to hold the reply and the conversation state as well as the prompt. The maximum output is 64k tokens, which is smaller again and is the number that actually governs how long a single answer can run. The fourth figure is the model identifier, hy4-preview. This matters because the third-party pages this research could read collapse the three into one: four of the most complete competitor pages all print a context window, two of them print the 64k output ceiling, and none of the four prints the 960k input ceiling at all. A second official page prints the same row with the same three values under different column names, and it is worth reading the two together, because one writes the context as 1,024k while the other writes it as 1M — the same number in two house styles rather than a disagreement. One relevant absence sits beside the figures: in that second official table the previous generation has no maximum output listed at all, and this page does not fill that cell in on its behalf.

Suggested prompt
A vendor specification line lists four figures for one model: a context window, a maximum input, a maximum output, and an identifier. Third-party articles about the same model repeat the first and sometimes the second but never the third. Write a short section that presents all three limits separately, explains why the input ceiling is lower than the window, and states which of the three actually governs the length of one answer. Then add one aside: a second official page prints the same row in a different house style for one of the numbers.

Thinking is on by default with exactly two settings, and this box gives you a switch but no level

The official extended-thinking page handles this model as a special case, and it does so twice. Its thinking table lists the default as enabled, which is the same as the previous generation. Its reasoning-effort table, read for this model specifically, lists a default of high and exactly two supported values: high and none. Every other model in that same table carries three or more values, and the previous generation carries low, high and none. So the accurate statement about this model is not that it has a default level but that it has a default level and only one alternative. That reading has to be stated carefully, because the same documentation site contains a generic sentence about tool calling that mentions a low effort setting, and a separate note that attaches the mapping of a low request to high specifically to the previous generation. One page therefore describes two values for this model and another page uses a word that does not appear in this model's two. Read those the way the model-specific table reads, and the two-value limit is what applies here. This site answers a different question entirely. The live catalog marks reasoning as optional rather than unsupported, so the thinking switch in the composer is enabled and can be turned on and off, but the catalog publishes no levels at all, so there is nothing to choose between. The switch also starts in the off position, which is the opposite of the official default. Three statements therefore sit side by side and none of them replaces the others: the model reasons by default, the API accepts two values for how much, and this box has one switch with no level and starts with it off.

Suggested prompt
One page of a vendor’s documentation gives a model two reasoning settings where every other model on the page has three or more, and the default is the heavier of the two. A second page on the same site mentions a third setting in a generic sentence about tool calls, and a note attaches that third setting to a different model. A hosted chat interface for the first model offers one on-off switch and no level selector, and it starts switched off. Write two paragraphs: the first reconciling the two documentation pages, the second stating exactly what the interface does and does not let a user ask for.

Apache 2.0 weights and a printed architecture table, which this page aligns to line by line

The model repository publishes the full architecture as a property table rather than as prose, and it is unusually complete: architecture, total parameters, activated parameters, layer count, hidden size, attention type, attention head count, query compression dimension, key-value compression dimension, indexer heads and head dimension, indexer top-k, residual stream count, routed experts, shared experts, activated routed experts per token, mixture-of-experts intermediate size, feed-forward intermediate size, context length, and vocabulary size. Nineteen rows, each with a value, and the table states up front that it lists backbone parameters only and excludes the multi-token-prediction layer. Two design choices are named in the prose around it and both have consequences for serving rather than for quality: attention is Gated DeepSeek Sparse Attention with a cross-layer index cache, and the residual pathway uses identity Hyper-Connections for four parallel residual streams. The licence is Apache 2.0, the weights ship in BF16 and FP8, and four model hosts plus two serving recipes are linked from the same page. The honest framing is that this information is not exclusive. Three of the four most complete competing pages examined for this research reproduce the layer count, the expert count, the top-eight routing and the speculative-decoding layer, and two reproduce the index cache and the residual streams as well. What those pages mostly leave out is the two lines that describe the internals rather than the headline: the hidden size of 6,144 and the 64 attention heads. So the reason to keep this block here is not novelty but exactness — every value below is transcribed from the repository table rather than inferred from a summary of it.

Suggested prompt
A model repository publishes its architecture as a nineteen-row property table and states that the table excludes one component. Write a specification section that renders every row as a labelled value rather than as prose, keeps the excluded component as its own labelled line, and then names the two architectural choices that affect serving cost rather than answer quality. Finish with one honest sentence about which of these rows competing articles already repeat and which two they tend to leave out.

What the official pages document for this model, and what this box actually opens

Two sets of statements describe this model and they answer different questions, so they are listed apart. On the official side: a 1,024k-token context window, a 960k-token maximum input, a 64k-token maximum output, text as the only input and the only output, function calling, structured output through a response format, cache support, thinking enabled by default with high and none as the two settings, three API protocols — OpenAI chat completions, OpenAI responses and Anthropic messages — and Apache 2.0 weights in two precisions. On this site’s side, the page behind this chat box opens text chat with streaming replies, a thinking switch that has no level selector and starts off, PDF attachments with a 24 MB per-file limit, and a reference price published in points. The gaps are the useful part. No context figure appears anywhere in the interface, because the catalog carries the context length in a field this interface never reads, so the official 1,024k window describes the API rather than this page. No level selector exists for thinking, because the catalog publishes an empty list of levels even though it does mark reasoning as supported. There is no web-search switch, because the catalog entry declares no such capability. Attachments are text-only in effect: the model takes text in and text out, so a non-vision attachment path accepts PDFs and extracts their text, which means a scanned page or a heavy layout can lose content unless the page is attached as an image to a model that reads images — this one does not. And every reply is requested with at most 4,096 output tokens, because the catalog does carry 64,000 for this model, the same figure the official pages print, but it carries it in a field this interface never reads, so the composer’s 4,096 fallback is what is sent while the official 64k ceiling describes the API. One more difference is a matter of naming rather than capability: the official pages write the model as Hy4 preview and this site writes it as Tencent Hy4 preview, which is the same model with the vendor name attached.

Suggested prompt
Write a product-page section that keeps two vocabularies apart: what a vendor’s API documentation states about a model — a context window, an input ceiling, an output ceiling, input and output modalities, a default thinking state with two settings, three protocol shapes, a licence — and what a hosted chat box actually opens, which is a text field, one switch, a PDF attachment path and a self-imposed per-reply output cap. List every gap, and name the two limits that the host sets rather than inherits from the model.

Official Tencent Hy4 preview specifications

Developer
Tencent Hunyuan
Model ID
hy4-preview
Official context window
1,024k tokens (also written 1M)
Official maximum input
960k tokens
Official maximum output
64k tokens
Official modalities
Text in, text out
Tencent Cloud TokenHub — Hunyuan calling guide ↗

Tencent Hy4 preview and Hy3 side by side

Every value below comes from a single page — the model repository README on the Tencent Hunyuan GitHub organisation — and from a single image within it, the benchmark appendix in assets. That appendix prints ten columns across 46 rows, one column per model, and the two columns reproduced here are the previous generation, Hy3, and this page’s model, Tencent Hy4 preview. One official artefact therefore accounts for both columns of every row, which is why the table can be read as a comparison at all rather than as two lists placed next to each other. Read the direction before the size of the gaps: the left column is this page’s model and the right column is the generation it replaces, and the later model scores higher on every one of the 46 rows. The gaps are not uniform, and the two largest carry the most information about what changed. On the internal benchmark named Hy-CompanyBench V2 the older model scores 29.8 against 62.4, and on SWE-Marathon it scores 5.0 against 31.9 — both of which are near-doubling or larger, and both of which sit in the agentic-coding and long-horizon-work groups rather than the pure-reasoning group. The smallest gaps cluster at the other end: GPQA Diamond moves from 90.9 to 92.3, and Hy-BrowseComp-Pro2 from 55.0 to 56.1. Nine rows carry an internal label in their names, which the appendix prints rather than hides. Six further columns exist on the same image — DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813, Qwen 3.8 Max, GLM 5.3, Kimi K3, GPT 5.6 Sol and Claude Opus 5 — and they are deliberately not reproduced, because folding six more models into a two-generation comparison would turn it into something else. Three facts travel with the figures rather than being dropped. The first is provenance: the appendix footnote states that every model is evaluated at its highest available reasoning setting, and that results marked with an asterisk are the vendor’s own testing, so no row here is an independently verified measurement. The second is a warning that applies to the right-hand column specifically: the same footnote states that certain Hy3 scores may differ from previously reported results after updates to the evaluation harness, the judge model and anti-hacking mechanisms, so this column is Hy3 as measured under current conditions rather than Hy3 as published at its own launch. The third is that several rows carry harness notes — SWE-bench Multilingual and SWE-bench Pro use a specific agent scaffold, DeepSWE uses a different one in a sandbox with 8 CPU cores and 16 GB of memory, SWE-Marathon doubles the official agent timeout, and Terminal-Bench 2.1 is run with a Claude Code harness allowing up to 500 turns and a 12-hour timeout — so a row is a number plus a procedure, not a number alone. No row predicts the quality or the speed of the conversation you are about to have.

Official benchmarkTencent Hy4 previewHy3
SWE-bench Multilingual82.975.8
SWE-bench Pro65.757.9
DeepSWE64.328.0
SWE Atlas - Codebase Q&A64.030.8
SWE Atlas - Test Writing57.835.9
SWE Atlas - Refactoring53.332.9
SWE-Marathon31.95.0
Terminal-Bench 2.185.470.8
NL2Repo-Bench58.945.6
CyberGym78.451.8
ProgramBench17.53.0
PostTrainBench V1.135.614.5
Harbor-Index39.615.6
Hy-Backend 2.0 (Internal)35.226.2
Hy-SWE Max Verified (Internal)64.249.0
Hy-CompanyBench V2 (Internal)62.429.8
WideSearch83.981.9
OneMillionBench (with tools)65.451.5
DRACO77.265.2
Hy-LifeSearch (Internal)49.238.9
Hy-BrowseComp-Pro2 (Internal)56.155.0
OfficeQA Pro66.254.1
MCP-Atlas (public)83.775.0
Toolathlon-Verified74.156.2
APEX-Agents (pass@1)37.124.4
SkillsBench (79, text-only)62.955.3
JobBench61.734.6
WorkspaceBench60.258.2
Agents' Last Exam (ALE-CLI)22.817.1
GDPval-AA V2 (Elo, official)16781213
AutomationBench (v1.0.6)32.116.1
BankerToolBench78.668.8
E-Bench (Internal)77.148.5
E-Bench-Code (Internal)79.064.4
Hy-FinAgentBench (Internal)79.769.5
Hy-FinmodelBench v2 (Internal)57.028.6
BioMysteryBench71.354.9
HLE (with tools, text-only)55.451.9
CritPt (official)16.94.9
GPQA Diamond92.390.9
HLE (no tools, text-only)43.434.4
SUPERChem66.452.6
ArXivMath66.651.7
HorizonMath (pass@4)8.83.5
MathArena Apex 202574.238.7
BrokenArXiv54.626.7
Tencent Hunyuan — Hy4 preview model repository ↗

How to use Tencent Hy4 preview online

  1. Choose the model

    This page opens with Tencent Hy4 preview already selected. The model navigation and the selector inside the chat box stay in sync, switching models keeps the current conversation, and starting a new chat is how you get a clean context. Two naming facts are worth fixing before you send anything. The official pages write the model as Hy4 preview in prose and as hy4-preview as the identifier, while this site’s display label, which is what the navigation and the heading show, reads Tencent Hy4 preview — the vendor name attached to the same model. And the model is listed as a preview build rather than a finished release, so treat published behaviour as something that can change.

  2. Decide what you expect from thinking, because this box has a switch and no level

    The official pages list thinking as enabled by default and give exactly two settings — a full chain-of-thought mode at high effort and a way to turn it off — and the model-specific table is the one that governs. Other models on the same documentation page carry three or more settings, so it is easy to assume this one does too, and the generic sentence about tool calling on another page does mention a setting this model does not have. What this page gives you is neither the default nor the two values. The catalog marks reasoning as supported but publishes no levels at all, so the switch can be turned on and off and nothing can be chosen, and it starts off rather than on. There is therefore no lever here for how much thinking a task gets, and the only way to shape it is the prompt itself. Note that this is not the same statement as the official ones: the model thinks by default, the API accepts two values, and this box asks for neither unless you flip the switch.

  3. Sign in, send, and check the figures against the official pages

    Sending a message needs an account with available points. The composer reads a reference price from the live model catalog and a finished request reports what it actually cost. Two ceilings are set by this site rather than by the model, so plan around them: replies are requested with at most 4,096 output tokens, and no context figure is shown anywhere. Because the rates and the token ceilings quoted on this page are the ones the official pages print, re-check them there before relying on a figure for planning — and treat any third-party summary that presents a relay, resale or converted figure as out of scope, because no official page publishes one. Nothing here converts points into yuan, and nothing on the official pages puts an expiry on the rates.

What Tencent Hy4 preview costs, and why this page carries no end date

The first thing to establish about this model’s price is what is not attached to it. No official page puts an end date on any of its rates, and no official page publishes a promotional or introductory price for the model itself. Both the pricing page and the research page were checked on 5 October 2026. The official rate card lists this model with three figures per million tokens: 6 yuan for input, 18 yuan for output and 0.3 yuan for cache hits, with no input-length tier and no peak-versus-off-peak rule, both of which are printed for other models on the same page as a dash. The research page prints the same three numbers in the same order under its own heading. Read against the previous generation the card is a clear step up: Hy3 is listed at 1 yuan for input, 4 yuan for output and 0.25 yuan for cache hits, so fresh input costs six times as much here and output four and a half times as much, while the cache rate rises by a fifth. That is worth stating plainly because it means the cache is not where the money is saved on a small workload — cache hits are cheap in both, and the cost of a task scales with fresh input and output instead. Two further readings follow from the layout of the table. Every cell in this model’s row is a bare number except the two that are dashes, so there is no conditional pricing to trip over: no length threshold that re-prices the whole request, which the same page does document for another vendor’s models, and no peak-hour multiplier. And the price page is dated while the rate is not: the page carries its own last-updated timestamp, the rate carries nothing, so the honest statement is that the figures were true when the page was last edited, not that they hold until a given date. One more charge is attached to this model by name, and it is not a rate at all: the model list records cache support as a capability, which is what the third figure on the card is for. The model also appears in a separate product announcement that offers a first-month discount for new customers of that product, and because that offer names no window anywhere on the page, this page does not repeat it. Nothing above is this site’s checkout price. This site bills points against a catalog reference price of 148.7676 points per million input tokens, 446.1243 points per million output tokens and 7.4919 points per million cached read tokens, and there is no conversion between points and yuan.

View points and plans ↗

Tencent Hy4 preview FAQ

What does Tencent Hy4 preview cost, and will the price change?

The official rate card lists 6 yuan per million input tokens, 18 yuan per million output tokens and 0.3 yuan per million cached input tokens, with no input-length tier and no peak-versus-off-peak rule — both are printed as a dash for this model while other models on the same page carry values. The research page prints the same three numbers. On whether the price will change: this page attaches no end date, because no official page gives one. The rate card carries its own last-updated timestamp and the rates carry nothing, so any statement about how long they hold would be this page inventing one. Two comparisons are worth carrying away. Against the previous generation, fresh input costs six times as much and output four and a half times as much, while the cache rate is close in both. And this site does not bill in yuan at all: the workspace bills points, at 148.7676 points per million input tokens, 446.1243 points per million output tokens and 7.4919 points per million cached read tokens, with no conversion between the two bases.

How does Tencent Hy4 preview compare with Hy3 on Tencent’s own appendix?

Across the 46 rows the model repository appendix prints for both, the later model scores higher on every one. The largest gaps sit on long-horizon and agentic work rather than on pure reasoning: the internal benchmark Hy-CompanyBench V2 moves from 29.8 to 62.4 and SWE-Marathon from 5.0 to 31.9, while GPQA Diamond moves only from 90.9 to 92.3 and Hy-BrowseComp-Pro2 from 55.0 to 56.1. The appendix footnote adds two qualifications that travel with the numbers. Every model is evaluated at its highest available reasoning setting and results marked with an asterisk come from the vendor’s own testing, so this is not independent verification. And certain Hy3 scores may differ from previously reported results after updates to the evaluation harness, the judge model and anti-hacking mechanisms, so the right-hand column is Hy3 as measured now rather than as published at its launch. Several rows also carry harness notes, including one that doubles an official agent timeout.

What do the official pages document for this model?

A 1,024k-token context window, a 960k-token maximum input, a 64k-token maximum output, text as the only input and the only output, function calling, structured output through a response format, cache support, thinking enabled by default with high and none as its only two settings, compatibility with the OpenAI chat completions, OpenAI responses and Anthropic messages protocols, and Apache 2.0 weights published in BF16 and FP8 across four model hosts. Three of those are easy to misread. The three token limits are three different numbers and are not interchangeable — the input ceiling is lower than the window because the window also has to hold the reply and the conversation state. The reasoning settings are two, not the three or more that other models on the same page carry. And the model is a preview build by Tencent’s own description, with two known limitations published alongside it. This page runs against none of those numbers directly: replies here are requested with at most 4,096 output tokens, and no context figure is displayed.

Does Tencent Hy4 preview support open weights and self-hosting?

The weights are published under Apache 2.0 in both BF16 and FP8, on four model hosts, with serving recipes for two inference engines and a prebuilt container image released alongside the model. The repository also publishes a full architecture table and a finetuning and quantisation path. Two distinctions are worth keeping. First, open weights are about what you may download rather than about what this page does — hosting the model yourself is a separate operation from using this chat box. Second, the published recipe assumes an eight-way distributed deployment, which is a real hardware decision rather than a download, and one of the architecture choices named in the repository — sparse attention with a cross-layer index cache — determines which attention backend a server has to configure.

How much thinking does this model do, and is it configurable here?

Officially, thinking is on by default and there are two settings: the default high-effort chain-of-thought mode and a way to turn it off. The model-specific table on the extended-thinking page lists exactly those two values, while other models on the same page carry three or more. One generic sentence elsewhere on the same documentation site mentions a lower effort setting, and a note attaches that setting to the previous generation rather than to this model, so the two-value reading is the one to use. On this site the answer is different in a way that matters: the catalog marks reasoning as supported but publishes no level list, so the switch can be toggled and no level can be chosen, and the switch starts off rather than on. The practical consequence is that you cannot ask this box for a specific amount of thinking, and the prompt is the only lever available.

Is Tencent Hy4 preview multimodal, and what can be attached here?

No, and this is a point where several third-party pages are wrong. The official model list and the live catalog both record text as the only input modality and text as the only output, and the weights are a language model rather than a multimodal one. That is also why attachments here work the way they do: the attachment path accepts PDFs only, capped at 24 MB per file, and a PDF is converted to text before it reaches the model. The consequence is that a scanned page or a heavy layout can lose content, because there is no image path to fall back on for this model — an image of a document is not something this model reads. If you need a figure preserved exactly, quote its text rather than attaching a rendering of it.

Is the 64k output ceiling what this chat box can produce?

No. They are two different statements about two different things. Officially the model’s maximum output is 64k tokens, which the calling guide and the model list both print. In this chat box every reply is requested with at most 4,096 output tokens, because the catalog does carry 64,000 for this model but carries it in a field this interface never reads, so the composer’s 4,096 fallback applies. So the ceiling that governs a single answer here is 4,096, and the 64k figure describes what the API will accept. If a task needs a much longer single response, split it into stages rather than expecting one very long reply, and remember that the same 4,096 limit applies to each request.

Are there free, discounted or relay prices for this model?

No official page publishes a promotional rate for the model itself, and this page repeats none. A separate Tencent product announcement does offer new customers of that product a first-month discount, but the offer names no window anywhere on the page, and this site does not publish eligibility claims whose time window cannot be checked — so nothing about it appears here. On relay and resale figures: no official page publishes one, and any converted or discounted number you find elsewhere is outside the official record, including conversion of the yuan card into another currency at an implied rate. Here, billing is in points against the catalog reference price, and there is no conversion between points and yuan.

Sources and model information

Information checked

Start a Tencent Hy4 preview conversation

The chat box above runs this model, and the guide on this page is written to be checked rather than trusted: the specifications come from the official calling guide, the comparison comes from the single official appendix that prints both columns, and the places where official pages differ from each other or from this workspace are named rather than smoothed over. Send the task the way you would brief a person — outcome, constraints, evidence, stopping condition — and re-check the figures against the pages linked below, since the rates carry no end date and the model is a preview build by Tencent’s own description.

Start a chat with Tencent Hy4 preview ↑