Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

ARM64 Linux Workstation

jasoneckert.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 493 posts

Re: ARM64 Linux Workstation

#101

Post by rvz »

deaddodo wrote: post #86
rvz wrote: post #80

> Everything works… and works perfectly. All the hardware (Bluetooth, audio, HDMI, USB, 10G Ethernet, WiFi, and GPU) performs flawlessly with the drivers created by the Asahi team this past year, and there isn’t a single piece of software I want or need that doesn’t run beautifully in Asahi on this system. So I am expecting everything from proper GPU acceleration, power management and sleep to the Touch ID keyboard t…

OP is using a Mac Studio, which is not a laptop. I don’t think you can take their claim of it 100% working on their hardware and apply it to a completely different machine. In addition, it’s open source software. Not some corporate organization selling you a product. Nothing is guaranteed.

> OP is using a Mac Studio, which is not a laptop.

You're telling me that the Mac Studio has no "power management" or "sleep" functionality at all? Not even in macOS? Nor does it have a 'GPU' for GPU acceleration either. We both know that it isn't exclusive to laptops. Everyone knows Touch ID doesn't work, both the seperate keyboard and on Apple Silicon laptops (and Intel Macs) and you know it.

> I don’t think you can take their claim of it 100% working on their hardware and apply it to a completely different machine.

Yes I can, and I just did since Asahi Linux is aimed at specifically supporting all Apple Silicon machines. OPs machine included.

Just admit that the OP is getting carried away with the claim that "Everything works… and works perfectly" when we know that isn't true. A dose of skepticism is needed to cut through wild claims during bouts of hype and euphoria.

Even some have already questioned [0] the 'everything works' claim and are still waiting for sleep and power management support [1].

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35015538

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35014923

Re: ARM64 Linux Workstation

#102

Post by pxc »

nicce wrote: post #37
snazz wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems like a wonderful opportunity to use QEMU since it's not all that performance-sensitive (I think?) and you're not running random pre-built binaries directly on your computer.

I ran all my stuff inside non-root non-volume container so prebuilt binary it is not really a problem. I used QEMU through Podman machine in the end, but the performance is terrible. Even on MacOS side QEMU does not support Rosetta 2. Docker for Desktop supports and gives significant boost, but I don’t want to use it.

> Even on MacOS side QEMU does not support Rosetta 2.

Is Rosetta 2 that much faster than QEMU's own translation? Why?

Re: ARM64 Linux Workstation

#103

Post by sys_64738 »

emilsedgh wrote: post #14

Asahi Linux is amazing and pretty usable at this point. However, last I tried I couldn't get stuff like Slack and Spotify to work on it because there are no Arm packages for those. Has anyone found a way around that?

You can't run any Electron apps. Is that a problem? :)

Re: ARM64 Linux Workstation

#104

Post by sliken »

goosedragons wrote: post #68
gabereiser wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s about half the cost to build your own based on Ryzen thread ripper and DDR5. I’ve done this before however, it’s not ARM64. It also requires like 1000w power supply. Can you build a machine just as capable? Yes. Will it be as efficient? No. Will it be Arm? Probably not. That said, I run Apple MacBook Air as my daily so YMMV. *edit* ok a bit more than half. Chip shortage has scalpers sitting on threadrippers.

Do you need a Threadripper to compete with M1 Ultra? Ryzen 9 7950X seems pretty comparable and doesn't require a 1000W PSU unless you must pair it with a 4090 or something.

Depends, how cache friendly is your workload? The M1 ultra has more than 4x the memory bandwidth of the threadripper. Of course the GPU makes a big difference in cost and power use. If you need a 4090, there's nothing comparable. But if the Apple iGPU is enough you save a ton of power and space.

Re: ARM64 Linux Workstation

#105

Post by hotpotamus »

runjake wrote: post #12
gbN025tt2Z1E2E4 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not that hard to believe when you consider the hardware specs for Apple machines are so heavily locked down to a very specific set of mobo, cpu, and only variability in core count, ram amount, hard drive size, etc. It's not like PC world of mix and match everything.

It's hard to believe because virtually none of the proprietary Apple Silicon platform (except the CPU instruction set itself) is documented and involved a tremendous amount of reverse-engineering effort by some very bright volunteers .

Your italics are strange and makes me wonder if you are trying to convey something. My first thought is that if the reverse engineering was done anonymously or pseudonymously, then the ones best positioned to do it would be actual Apple engineers who have insider information and feel like sharing with the world.

Re: ARM64 Linux Workstation

#106

Post by cjbprime »

smoldesu wrote: post #67
sliken wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the cost for 10x the memory bandwidth of the Ryzen 7950x.

That's... comically untrue. The Playstation 5 has faster memory than the M1 (448gb/s vs 200), and it was manufactured by AMD before Zen 3 or Apple Silicon even shipped. Dual-channel DDR5 should smoke the LPDDR4X in Apple Silicon in terms of memory bandwidth.

The latest Intel/AMD non-HEDT memory controllers only have two channels, so your DDR5 would drop to below-DDR4 speeds if you put 128GB DDR5 in it.

(32GB dual rank sticks * 4 -- there are no 64GB DDR5 sticks yet. Some reports of system instability with all four DDR5 slots populated, too, even when running at DDR4 speeds, it seems the motherboard manufacturers aren't QAing it.)

Re: ARM64 Linux Workstation

#107

Post by synergy20 »

birken wrote: post #92
synergy20 wrote: post #63

is the super fast speed mainly due to Linux the OS? is there benchmark done to compare to MacOS? with most recent hardware and 128GB memory I would expect things will run naturally faster no matter what and Linux might not be the key deciding factor. I'm a Linux user, considering to get a M2 Mac Mini these days, and probably load Linux, even better and if possible, dual-boot as I do need MacOS to run some ios apps on…

I have a relatively mid-to-top tier linux desktop (i5-13600K, 64 GB ram) and an M2 Macbook pro (M2 max, 32GB ram). The linux desktop comfortably outperforms the M2 in any CPU based benchmarks while also being significantly cheaper (though the M2 desktop machines are cheaper than the laptops, but still more expensive than the alternatives). If I were doing GPU heavy work than I assume the M2 would have a leg up, but t…

I saw 64GB vs 32GB here, many apps are memory intensive, thus the linux desktop will win no matter how faster M2 is, it will be interesting to run cpu intensive benchmark between them and see how that goes.

for ML training or 3D graphics, I wonder how M1 and M2's NPU and GPU are supported under Linux, unless they're optimized and verified to be superior, I will grab a machine with RTX 3090Ti instead.

Re: ARM64 Linux Workstation

#109

Post by sliken »

goosedragons wrote: post #81
sliken wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dunno, M1 max (400GB/sec twice a threadripper) fits in a thin laptop, performance well, and has a decent iGPU. That's more bandwidth than a threadripper, better iGPU then anything Intel/AMD ships, and still sips on the power. M1 Ultra doubles the bandwidth again to 800GB/sec, and fits in a small and quite desktop. What CPU+iGPU (or GPU) do you think is comparable to M1 Ultra and competes on performance and power?

PS5 is $500 also has 400GB/sec memory bandwidth. Very good iGPU made by AMD. Also has a Blu-ray drive.

Sadly they are hard to run Linux on 8-(.

Re: ARM64 Linux Workstation

#110

Post by Mike_12345 »

sixothree wrote: post #39
runjake wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's hard to believe because virtually none of the proprietary Apple Silicon platform (except the CPU instruction set itself) is documented and involved a tremendous amount of reverse-engineering effort by some very bright volunteers .

And yet open source community embraces the hardware with fervor.

Vast majority of hardware used by the open source community is proprietary and undocumented, and always has been. They embrace the challenge of reverse-engineering.
Post reply on HN