Live data from Hacker News

Nvidia is proposing a beast of a CPU system for Windows PCs

twitter.com

141–150 of 581 posts

Re: Nvidia is proposing a beast of a CPU system for Windows PCs

#141

The Qualcomm Snapdragon X2 Elite Extreme trounces Nvidia's chip in single core CPU performance. It beats Intel and AMD's best, too. It has unified memory. It's the only CPU in the same league as Apple's M-series in both CPU performance and power efficiency. And it's available in laptops today, not later this year. People are sleeping on Qualcomm.

Is it well supported under Linux?

Re: Nvidia is proposing a beast of a CPU system for Windows PCs

#142
post #15

"I am not sure how many people will run AI models locally. It still seems like a niche application to me. However, it will make decent machines to play video games." I don't know who will be the winner but with some of the recent releases from gemma it seems more probable that you may run some models locally if only from a cost perspective, not even considering business security. Not sure how this type of architectur…

> this guy puts this everywhere, gives me probably the inverse of what he is marketing for.

Do you think he's in mensa too?

Re: Nvidia is proposing a beast of a CPU system for Windows PCs

#143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s too strong of an assertion. Local models aren’t deterministically equivalent in capabilities to foundation models. Home computers are turing complete; just like a mainframe. They are just slower. Often not slower enough to matter.

Most people are ok with slower. An AI that lets you edit a family picture, in say 30 seconds, locally is preferable to one that is instantaneous but requires you to submit that picture to examination/storage/training/sale in someone else's AI ecosystem. If i want to crop my ex out of family photos, i should not have to first give that photo to Microsoft. If want an LLM to write a book report for me, i dont want it al…

I'd like to think so but the existence of Google and Apple and Microsoft's cloud based photo tools with phone integration suggests that's false.

You could run a pretty good home server on $50 of gear and yet we never saw any real adoption of OwnCloud/NextCloud style products as an alternative to Google Drive/Photos or Apple Cloud.

Why should LLM/Transformers be any different? Especially when you need a proper expensive GPU to run them instead of a Raspberry Pi?

Re: Nvidia is proposing a beast of a CPU system for Windows PCs

#144
post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft is sleeping on Qualcomm with their lousy port of Windows to Arm processors…

and is Qualcomm is sleeping on Linux?

Seems like not? Judging based on https://github.com/qualcomm-linux something is happening, although I can't say how much. They definitively seem awake at least.

Re: Nvidia is proposing a beast of a CPU system for Windows PCs

#145
post #15

"I am not sure how many people will run AI models locally. It still seems like a niche application to me. However, it will make decent machines to play video games." I don't know who will be the winner but with some of the recent releases from gemma it seems more probable that you may run some models locally if only from a cost perspective, not even considering business security. Not sure how this type of architectur…

I hope a family-level AI appliance is a thing later. Local non-cloud assistant that lives in the house, families interact via voice or phones or whatever. Knows the contextual family stuff you need, etc.

We didn't get people buying family-level file servers for the family photo gallery and documents at any real scale, so i doubt we'll see similar for AI especially when the cost is that much higher for GPUs vs an SBC machine.

Re: Nvidia is proposing a beast of a CPU system for Windows PCs

#146
> The game changer is the unified 128 GB memory. That is the path Apple took years ago. Instead of separate memory for the CPU and GPU, everything shares a single pool. It is increasingly popular.

> The memory is not as fast as dedicated GPU memory, but it is cheap enough while delivering enough bandwidth to run AI models locally.

So, the reason "dedicated GPU memory" is fast, isn't because it's "dedicated"; it's because the types of memory built into GPU cards — GDDR and HBM — are designed for throughput over latency.

Which is to say, GDDR and HBM memory could be shared with the CPU in UMA while still being "fast" (for GPU use-cases.) In fact, the PS4/5 and Xbox 360 / One X / Series consoles have UMA architectures that use GDDR memory as their main memory, with no regular DDR memory to be found.

What I don't understand: why don't we see UMA architectures where there's both regular DDR and GDDR/HBM memory mapped into the address space of the CPU+GPU? That seems like the best of both worlds: you'd have some memory that's "tuned" for random-access CPU usage (regular DDR), and some memory that's "tuned" for streaming GPU usage (GDDR/HBM), but either type of memory can still be put to the use it wasn't "tuned" for, just with slightly-worse performance.

I guess you'd need to do a bit of software work:

1. a bit of work in the OS kernel / malloc library to get CPU workloads to "prefer" allocating DDR memory over the GDDR/HBM memory until they've exhausted DDR memory (or maybe not, if you just tell the kernel the GDDR/HBM memory is something like a zswap thinpool);

2. and a bit of work in supported ML frameworks, to teach them about a hybrid strategy between UMA "allocate anywhere, it's all the same" and NUMA "keep assets in VRAM if possible; if you spill assets to RAM, then they must stream into VRAM on access" (i.e. "at allocation time, allocate as if the system were NUMA, VRAM first then spilling to RAM; but at execution time, use the UMA codepaths, no need to copy RAM into VRAM.")

...but once that's done, it's done.

Re: Nvidia is proposing a beast of a CPU system for Windows PCs

#147
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where did you get those numbers from? DGX Spark has a maximum of 273 GB/s bandwidth in ideal scenarios (hard to reach) That puts it between an M5 (153) and M5 Pro (307)

The 900 GB/s is from the NVLink-C2C interconnect, if you were wondering about that. They quote "up to 900 GB/s of bidirectional bandwidth between GPU and CPU". Mind you thats not to/from memory, which indeed only has 273 GB/s.

Ah I see. But the only C2C equivalent on the Apple side is the UltraFusion which is 2.5TB/s if I recall correctly.

Re: Nvidia is proposing a beast of a CPU system for Windows PCs

#148

And who in 2026 is still anal-fixated on a "Windows" PC? It's just a personal computer. It normally runs multiple operating systems just fine. Windows PC sounds like people talking about tech who are either payed by M$, or embed pictures into Word documents to send them. Nobody has to kill the fun those OS agnostic machine allow, by artificially bind them to a shitty OS.

A big push specifically for Windows ARM from Nvidia seems like relevant information.

Re: Nvidia is proposing a beast of a CPU system for Windows PCs

#149

> up to 6,144 state-of-the-art CUDA cores A RTX Pro 6000 has ~24K 5th generation tensor cores, I'm guessing this would then be 1/4 of the count but 6th generation? Wasn't clear from the images.

What is more important than core count is how the caching architecture is laid out. They could lay out those 6k cuda cores in a layout which provides much larger blocks of cache to smaller number of cores. That would increase the memory bandwidth which would be better for inference.

Re: Nvidia is proposing a beast of a CPU system for Windows PCs

#150

"I am not sure how many people will run AI models locally. It still seems like a niche application to me." Clip me :). You are currently living through the final stages of unrestricted computing in the hands of the 'public'. Our regimes are going to pull up the drawbridge in the name of 'safety'. Download the open models asap and prepare for an airgapped computing environment. That will be your frontier in not extrem…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN