251–260 of 855 posts
Is it actually more powerful than a top of the line threadripper[0] or is that not a "personal computer" CPU by this definition? I feel like 64 cores would beat 20 on some workloads even if the 20 were way faster in single core performance. [0] https://www.amd.com/en/products/cpu/amd-ryzen-threadripper-3...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Gaming benchmarks are completely irrelevant when discussing the actual raw power of the GPU. As the other commenter said- look at the actual GPU benchmark in the first graph. Legacy games written for x86 CPUs obviously are going to perform poorly. I recommend you actually read the review and don't just scroll to the worst gaming benchmark you can find.
> Gaming benchmarks are completely irrelevant when discussing the actual raw power of the GPU. Maybe, but the "raw power" is useless if it can't be exploited. > Legacy games written for x86 CPUs obviously are going to perform poorly. Not if they're GPU-bound. Even native performance isn't that impressive
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Large businesses do. I bet in some places you could get grant/loan incentives to replace a PC fleet with these things. Back in the Pentium-4 days, iirc I was able to get almost $250k in grants and $1.5M in subsidized loans to do accelerated refresh of a PC fleet and small datacenter, all through a utility's peak load reduction program.
I don't deny such things happen but it's illogical. If you have 20 people on desktops a small fraction of them will use more energy for microwaving lunch, making coffee or on air conditioning than they will save in aggregate on this nominal reduction in power draw.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seems like for things that are: 1. Perfectly parallel 2. Not accelerated by some of the other stuff that's on the Apple Silicon SoC's ...it will be a toss-up. Threadripper 3990X get about 25k in Geekbench Multicore [1] M1 Max gets about 12.5k in Geekbench Multicore, so pretty much exactly half [2] Obviously different tasks will have _vastly_ different performance profiles. For example it's likely that the M1 Ultra wi…
Something is seriously fishy about those geekbench results. 24-core scores 20k, 32-core scores 22.3k, and 64-core score 25k. Something isn't scaling there.
How does Apple manage to blow every other computing OEM out of the water? What's in the secret sauce of their company? Is it great leadership? Top tier engineering talent? Lots of money? I simply don't understand.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seems like for things that are: 1. Perfectly parallel 2. Not accelerated by some of the other stuff that's on the Apple Silicon SoC's ...it will be a toss-up. Threadripper 3990X get about 25k in Geekbench Multicore [1] M1 Max gets about 12.5k in Geekbench Multicore, so pretty much exactly half [2] Obviously different tasks will have _vastly_ different performance profiles. For example it's likely that the M1 Ultra wi…
Something is seriously fishy about those geekbench results. 24-core scores 20k, 32-core scores 22.3k, and 64-core score 25k. Something isn't scaling there.
At what point Apple will put those chips in their servers or sell server chips? It only makes sense for them to take this architecture to the cloud deployments
Unfortunately I still don't think the market has much interest in energy-efficient servers. But maybe the energy-sector crunch created by Putin's war will precipitate some change here...
Lower TDP = lower electric bills and lower airconditioning bill. Win win
If Pytorch becomes stable and easy to use on Apple Silicon [0][1], it could be an appealing choice.
[0]: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/issues/47702#issuecomment... [1]: https://nod.ai/pytorch-m1-max-gpu/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not really. Thanks to the GPU interconnect NVLINK we have system 320GB. https://www.deltacomputer.com/nvidia-dgx-a100-320gb-3ys-edu.... There are even some with 640GB. This is at a different price point though.
640GB should be enough for anyone.
Rendering in VR takes a lot of memory at higher resolutions.
Is it actually more powerful than a top of the line threadripper[0] or is that not a "personal computer" CPU by this definition? I feel like 64 cores would beat 20 on some workloads even if the 20 were way faster in single core performance. [0] https://www.amd.com/en/products/cpu/amd-ryzen-threadripper-3...
So, even if it doesn't quite beat Threadripper in the CPU department - it will absolutely annihilate Threadripper in anything graphics-related.
For this reason, I don't actually have a problem with Apple calling it the fastest. Yes, Threadripper might be marginally faster in real-world work that uses the CPU, but other tasks like video editing, graphics, it won't be anywhere near close.