Perceptron: Perceptron Mk1.5
Perceptron Mk1.5 is Perceptron's embodied reasoning model for physical agents. It accepts text, image, video, and audio input, and answers with text plus optional structured annotations: points, boxes, polygons, tracks,...
Anyone in the Project can @-mention Perceptron: Perceptron Mk1.5 with the team's shared context - pooled credits, one chat, one memory.
Starter is free forever - 1 Project, 100 credits/month, 1 MCP. No card.
Verdict
Best for
- Budget multimodal prototyping
- Audio and video transcription tasks
- Cross-modal content analysis
- Cost-sensitive vision workflows
Strengths
The standout feature is native support for four modalities — text, image, video, and audio — at a price point where most models offer text-only or text-plus-vision. The 36K token context window is adequate for medium-length documents or short video clips. Output pricing at $1.50/Mtok undercuts many vision-capable models by 50-70%, making it viable for high-volume multimodal tasks where cost matters more than peak accuracy.
Trade-offs
No public benchmarks means you're flying blind on accuracy relative to Claude, GPT-4o, or Gemini. The 36K context window is tight for long videos or multi-document analysis — you'll hit limits faster than with 128K+ models. Output tokens cost 10x input, so verbose responses get expensive quickly. Without benchmark data, expect to run your own evals before committing to production workloads.
Specifications
- Provider
- perceptron
- Category
- llm
- Context length
- 36,864 tokens
- Max output
- 8,192 tokens
- Modalities
- text, image, video, audio
- License
- proprietary
- Released
- 2026-09-25
Pricing
- Input
- $0.15/Mtok
- Output
- $1.50/Mtok
- Model ID
perceptron/perceptron-mk1.5
Per-token prices show what the model costs upstream. On Switchy your team draws from one shared org credit pool - one plan, one balance for everyone.
Team cost calculator
5 seats · 80 msgs/day
Switchy meters this against your org's shared credit pool - one plan, one balance for everyone.
Providers
| Provider | Context | Input | Output | P50 latency | Throughput | 30d uptime |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| perceptron | 37k | $0.15/Mtok | $1.50/Mtok | — | — | — |
Performance
Benchmarks
Works well with
Top MCPs
Compatibility data comes from first-party telemetry; once we have enough co-usage signal, top MCPs for this model will appear here.
How Switchy teams use it
Starter prompts
Transcribe Meeting Audio
Transcribe this audio file and identify distinct speakers. Format the output as a timestamped dialogue with speaker labels.
Analyze Product Screenshot
Describe the layout and key UI components in this screenshot. List any design patterns you recognize and suggest improvements.
Summarize Video Content
Watch this video and provide a 3-sentence summary covering the main topic, key points, and any action items mentioned.
Extract Data from Invoice
Extract the vendor name, invoice number, date, line items, and total from this invoice image. Return the data as JSON.
Compare Audio Sentiment
Listen to these two audio clips and compare the speaker's tone and emotional state. Note any shifts in sentiment or energy level.
Example outputs
Illustrative - representative of the model's voice and quality, not literal recordings.
Review this Python function for potential race conditions. It's part of a distributed cache system that multiple workers access concurrently.
The function updates `cache_state` without acquiring a lock, creating a classic read-modify-write race. Two workers could read the same stale value, increment it independently, then both write back—losing one update. Wrap the read and write in a threading.Lock() context manager, or switch to an atomic operation like `cache_state.increment()` if your cache library supports it. Also note the TTL check happens outside any synchronization, so you might evict an entry another thread just refreshed.
Perceptron Mk1.5's 36k context window lets it hold substantial codebases in memory, making it effective for cross-file analysis like concurrency reviews. The model identifies the specific race pattern and suggests two remediation paths. However, without public benchmarks we can't compare its accuracy on standard code-reasoning tasks against peers in this price tier.
Generate a 30-second product demo script for a B2B SaaS analytics dashboard. Tone: confident but not salesy. Audience: engineering managers.
"You're looking at three months of deployment data—filtered, aggregated, visualized—in under two seconds. Click any spike: drill down to the commit hash, the engineer, the exact line that changed. No SQL. No waiting on the data team. Your dashboard updates every five minutes from your CI pipeline. When something breaks at 2am, you'll know which deploy caused it before your on-call wakes up. That's it. Questions?"
This example shows Mk1.5 handling multimodal context—it can process video storyboards or audio briefs alongside the text prompt, though here we used text only. The output balances technical detail with brevity, appropriate for the audience. The $1.50/Mtok output pricing makes this model expensive for high-volume content generation compared to specialized copywriting models.
Explain how gradient descent works to a product manager who took one statistics course in college. Use a real-world analogy, no equations.
Imagine you're blindfolded on a hillside and need to reach the lowest valley. You can only feel the slope under your feet. Gradient descent is the strategy: feel which direction tilts downward most steeply, take a step that way, repeat. Each step is small so you don't overshoot. Eventually you settle in a low spot—maybe the lowest valley, maybe just a dip. In machine learning, the "hill" is your model's error rate, and each step adjusts the model's internal settings to reduce mistakes. The blindfold is the constraint: you can't see the whole landscape, only the local slope.
Mk1.5's multimodal capabilities mean it could pair this explanation with a diagram or animation if provided visual context in the prompt. The analogy is concrete and avoids jargon, fitting the audience. The model's broad context window is underutilized in this short-form task—its pricing structure favors longer, more complex requests over quick explanations.
Use-case deep-dives
When clients send screenshots, voice memos, and PDFs in one thread
A 4-person consulting shop gets discovery calls as Zoom recordings, follow-up questions as voice notes, and reference docs as image scans—all landing in Slack. Perceptron Mk1.5 handles text, image, video, and audio in the same request, so you can pipe the entire thread into one prompt without pre-processing. At $0.15 input, parsing a 20-minute video plus three screenshots costs under $0.02. The 36k context window holds roughly 90 minutes of transcript plus supporting visuals. Output at $1.50/Mtok means a 500-word summary runs $0.0008. If your intake volume stays under 200 threads/month, this beats hiring a VA or stitching together separate transcription and vision APIs.
Screening user-generated video without a dedicated ML team
A 12-person social app needs to flag policy violations in 30-second user clips before they go live. Perceptron Mk1.5's native video input means you send the raw file—no frame extraction, no separate audio track. The model scans visual content, spoken dialogue, and on-screen text in one pass. At $0.15 input per Mtok, a 30-second 720p clip costs roughly $0.01 to analyze. The 36k window handles up to 8 minutes of footage if you batch review queues. Without public benchmarks, you'll need to run a 100-clip pilot to confirm precision/recall meets your threshold. If false-positive rates stay under 5% and you process fewer than 10k clips/day, this is cheaper than training a custom model or paying per-frame API fees.
Turning recorded standups into Notion tasks when video is overkill
A 6-person agency records daily 15-minute standups as audio-only files and wants action items extracted into Notion. Perceptron Mk1.5 ingests the audio directly—no Whisper preprocessing—and the 36k context holds roughly 2 hours of transcript, so you can batch a week's worth of calls in one request. Input cost is $0.15/Mtok; a 15-minute call runs about $0.005 to process. Output at $1.50/Mtok means a 200-word task list costs $0.0003. The multimodal capability is wasted here, but if your workflow occasionally includes screen-share recordings or whiteboard photos from the same meetings, you avoid tool-switching. If you're doing more than 50 calls/day, a transcription-only model at $0.006/minute will be cheaper.
Frequently asked
Is Perceptron Mk1.5 good for general text tasks?
Without public benchmarks, it's hard to say definitively. The 36k context window is decent for most documents but falls short of competitors like Claude (200k+) or Gemini (1M+). The multimodal support (text, image, video, audio) suggests versatility, but you're buying blind without MMLU, HumanEval, or other standard scores. If you need proven performance, pick a model with published numbers.
Is Perceptron Mk1.5 cheaper than GPT-4o or Claude Sonnet?
Yes, significantly. At $0.15 input and $1.50 output per Mtok, Perceptron undercuts GPT-4o ($2.50/$10.00) and Claude Sonnet 3.5 ($3.00/$15.00) by 5-10x. The catch: no benchmarks means you don't know if you're saving money or buying a weaker model. For price-sensitive prototyping where quality is unproven, it's worth testing. For production, the risk is high.
Can Perceptron Mk1.5 handle video and audio inputs reliably?
The model claims video and audio support, but without benchmarks or vendor documentation on modality limits (frame rates, audio duration, file sizes), you're guessing. Most multimodal models struggle with long videos or complex audio transcription. Test your specific use case thoroughly before committing. If you need proven video understanding, GPT-4o or Gemini 1.5 Pro have published multimodal scores.
How does Perceptron Mk1.5 compare to earlier Perceptron versions?
No data available. The "Mk1.5" naming suggests an incremental update, but without benchmarks for this version or its predecessors, there's no way to measure improvement. If you're already using an earlier Perceptron model, ask the vendor for internal evals or migration guidance. Otherwise, treat this as a new, unproven model.
Should I use Perceptron Mk1.5 for a production chatbot?
Not recommended without extensive testing. The 36k context is workable for short conversations, but the lack of benchmarks means you don't know how it handles instruction-following, safety, or edge cases. The low price is tempting, but production chatbots need reliability. Start with a pilot on non-critical flows, measure quality yourself, then decide. For mission-critical apps, use Claude or GPT-4o.
Compare with
More language models
- Perplexity: Sonarperplexity
- Perplexity: Sonar Deep Researchperplexity
- Perplexity: Sonar Properplexity
- Perplexity: Sonar Pro Searchperplexity
- Perplexity: Sonar Reasoning Properplexity
- Poolside: Laguna S 2.1poolside
- Poolside: Laguna S 2.1 (free)poolside
- Poolside: Laguna XS 2.1poolside
- Poolside: Laguna XS 2.1 (free)poolside
- PrismML: Ternary Bonsai 2 27Bprism-ml
- Qwen2.5 72B Instructqwen
- Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instructqwen