Live data from Hacker News

Apple's 512GB Mac Studio vanishes, a quiet acknowledgment of the RAM shortage

arstechnica.com

211–220 of 264 posts

Re: Apple's 512GB Mac Studio vanishes, a quiet acknowledgment of the RAM shortage

#211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> safari. Browsing the web from a headless vps has hurdles Hooking things up to puppeteer maybe? You can use pupeteer to then use the chromium control remote (debug?) option iirc which uses websockets underneath the hood Then you can connect this from your pc or theoretically any Control server. Surprised to not hear much work on that front now that you mention it.

The CDP debugger is easily detectable client side and many websites will flag your traffic as undesirable

I didn't know that, Sorry about that, but is there no way to make CDP debugger less detectable. Seems doable to me but maybe there's a catch if its not already done by somebody maybe?

Re: Apple's 512GB Mac Studio vanishes, a quiet acknowledgment of the RAM shortage

#212
post #43
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The raspberry pis have been bad value for money for at least 4 or 5 years now unless you're really sensitive to the power draw. Once you add in a case and fan (required if you don't want it to overheat and screw the SD card), the charger, SD card it generally comes in at roughly the same price as more capable intel 1L PC like the Lenovo M920Q (though of course, they aren't new)

Yeah power consumption (and performance per watt) is the main reason I keep buying Raspberry Pi, I haven't find anything similar on that regard, specially for pi zeros

I really like the ecosystem around them. All of the nice compact hats, the software, the 3D print files. Very googleable which also means easy to get help from an LLM.

Re: Apple's 512GB Mac Studio vanishes, a quiet acknowledgment of the RAM shortage

#213
post #37
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you specifically need a pi (unlikely) then they really are awful value now. Hard to really go out of the way to support them now they've stuck two fingers up at the solo/indie/educational community and gone all enterprise. Second hand mini pc's are a good option. Half the price of a pi 5 + sd + power and you often get them with 16gb ram, a decent ssd, etc. If you need GPIO then many of the rockchip boards are…

The Pi isn't great value, but honestly, I'm finding it hard to find a better trade-off between price, performance and software support right now than the compute modules for embedded projects where you can afford to spin a custom PCB. Especially for low-ish volume or prototype stuff.

I also love the compute modules for their size. Stick one on a nano base board and they’re half the size of a Pi 5. TBH the standard Pis are a bit frustrating with all of the IO. I do not believe the average purchaser is using one as a PC replacement and wants 4 USB ports and 2 HDMI ports. I’ve never seen one in use like that. They are mostly servers or driving a single display without any user input.

Re: Apple's 512GB Mac Studio vanishes, a quiet acknowledgment of the RAM shortage

#214
post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't watched up the video but I went way too into the weeds of the ram crisis. I am not sure what the video suggests. This is my own understanding of the things after I got way too invested in why does OpenAI need all of this ram all of a sudden. (On a random tuesday) My understanding is TLDR: The stargate project had OpenAI,Oracle,Softbank etc. Softbank got the money from Japanese bank loan[0] at low interests…

>Almost all of that money when given to OpenAI was used/(will be used?) to commit 20% of the Ram supply of the whole world at a more expensive package because these companies just package ram in different order to get "AI ram" and then Micron shuts down the consumer brand (Crucial) >[...] >All of this does feel very cartel/monopoly-ish to me to push the competitors out of the market or the people running open source…

My point suggests that there is enough Ram to go around in an ideal world even with LLM's but its rather that stocking up Ram could give you so much benefit over your enemies within this space and leverage that you have no reason not to.

So it isn't there isn't enough ram to go around (period) but rather an ideology similar to this town ain't big enough for the two of us (OpenAI vs Anthropic/Google/Chinese-Open-Weights-Models)

Atleast that's my understanding of the situation and I can be wrong about it too for what its worth.

Re: Apple's 512GB Mac Studio vanishes, a quiet acknowledgment of the RAM shortage

#215
post #152

IMO its more nuanced. They're likely in production ramp-up of the M5 Ultra Mac Studio, for release in the next ~3 months; they have pre-purchased bins of memory from the supply-constrained major memory supplies; and they need as much as they can get because they want to push an M5 Ultra config to 768gb to continue the "you can run local models" story that the M5 Max Macbook Pro started telling last week. Going beyond…

Is Apple telling the "you can run local models" story, or is it third parties?

[deleted]

Re: Apple's 512GB Mac Studio vanishes, a quiet acknowledgment of the RAM shortage

#216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And here I was hoping they would put an M5 Ultra in a MacBook Pro. Maybe they will add it as an option to the 16” at a later date.

I wonder if the MacBook Pro can handle the thermal envelope of actually running an Ultra flat out.

There are gaming laptops that come with power bricks rated for higher output than a Mac Studio's power supply. M3 Ultra levels of power dissipation are possible to handle in a laptop, but it wouldn't look much like a MacBook Pro. That kind of gaming laptop typically has four fans (compared to two on a MacBook Pro), and large vents on the sides, bottom, and back of the machine allowing them to move a lot more air through the system.

Re: Apple's 512GB Mac Studio vanishes, a quiet acknowledgment of the RAM shortage

#217

It's not a shortage, it's a cartel. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVzeHTlWIDY

The story here is about what lesson was learned by the DRAM cartel after they got busted and hit with large fines. One might hope the lesson learned would be, "we should not fix prices", but what got them in trouble was colluding secretly. What if we just did it via earnings reports, press releases, and other public statements?

While there is some market variance like the 2022 to 2023 glut, DRAM prices haven't fallen in real terms in over 15 years. This was all done by controlling supply, and it was all done in public. It starts with one of the big three putting out a statement like, "Samsung is considering reducing DRAM wafer output due to softness in the mobile PC segment." The actual reason varies and often makes little sense.

This is followed by similar public statements from the other large vendors expressing a willingness to reduce supply. Once everyone commits in this way, the companies follow up with announcements of actual supply reductions. You can watch this happen any time prices start to dip.

My bet is if the DOJ investigates, they will not find the same sort of embarrassing smoking gun emails between representatives of Micron, Hynix, and Samsung. The collusion was all done in public. The companies will claim it is just good business management, a strategy known as "conscious parallelism." They used this exact defense to get a 2022 antitrust lawsuit dismissed.

That said, their goal seemed to be just keeping prices fixed. They wanted to avoid boom and bust cycles, keep profits high, and keep prices stagnant. A massive price hike invites investigations and creates problems. If DRAM prices just never fall, they can enjoy healthy profits with little risk.

But what happens when your intentionally constrained supply hits a sudden large spike in demand? Prices skyrocket, everyone gets mad, and demands investigations. My guess is instead of being thrilled with the price spike, the executives at the large DRAM manufacturers are very worried someone put something incriminating in a document somewhere that can be subpoenaed ("how we're going to fix prices in public and get away with it").

Re: Apple's 512GB Mac Studio vanishes, a quiet acknowledgment of the RAM shortage

#218
post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What’s the price of that beast? #meCryingTearsOfBlood

Less than $10,000, depending on what CPU and storage you select.

Heh heh, I see you're new to Apple's incredible shamelessness in price-gouging memory.

Just kidding, I'm sure you're aware. I just wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see them go well beyond that.

Re: Apple's 512GB Mac Studio vanishes, a quiet acknowledgment of the RAM shortage

#219
post #179
post #40

I think it's unlikely that Apple is paying the spot price for memory. They almost certainly negotiate delivery/price contracts in advance. Maybe the contract for the chips used in the 512GB model will expire soon?

Apple needs to seriously consider some sort of vertical integration on memory, it has proved it can do it with CPU's

Amazing that it's gotten to that point but I think that's right. It's more intuitive that you would need vertical integration with your processing chips because of the degree of expert specialization necessary to produce them, especially in close coordination with a major product release.

By comparison, ram seems much more a commodity, but the game has changed and it seems like there may be an important strategic interest in sourcing and supplying your own.

Re: Apple's 512GB Mac Studio vanishes, a quiet acknowledgment of the RAM shortage

#220
post #152

IMO its more nuanced. They're likely in production ramp-up of the M5 Ultra Mac Studio, for release in the next ~3 months; they have pre-purchased bins of memory from the supply-constrained major memory supplies; and they need as much as they can get because they want to push an M5 Ultra config to 768gb to continue the "you can run local models" story that the M5 Max Macbook Pro started telling last week. Going beyond…

why just 768gb and not a ~1TB ?
Post reply on HN