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

Apple M3 Ultra

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple M3 Ultra

#261

Post by Numerlor »

la_oveja wrote: post #80
Numerlor wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A basic brand new server can easily do 512gb. Not as fast as soldered memory but it should be maybe mid to high 5 figures

5 figures? can be done in 6k https://x.com/carrigmat/status/1884244369907278106

Ah seems like I remembered the CPU price for a higher tier CPU which can cost the 6k on their own.

Thinking about it you can get a decent 256gb on consumer platforms now too, but the speed will be a bit crap and would need to make sure the platform ully supports ECC UDIMMs

Re: Apple M3 Ultra

#262

Post by devmor »

naikrovek wrote: post #253
devmor wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I run Docker and Podman on my Macs. The same way Windows users run them. In a linux VM. You don't get real on-hardware containerization.

surprisingly, Windows containers on Windows are not run in a VM. Well, not necessarily; they can be. It is definitely odd that Macs have no native container support, though, especially when you learn that Windows does.

That is an important point, I didn't really think of it since I've never had a reason to use Windows containers.

Re: Apple M3 Ultra

#263

Post by gjsman-1000 »

diggan wrote: post #218
internetter wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is more about "average" end user software, not the type of software that would be running on a machine like this. Yes their applications fell off, but if you're paying for 512gb of RAM apple notes being slow isn't the bottleneck

Lack of focus on quality of software affects all types of workloads, not just consumer-oriented or professional-oriented in isolation.

Nah, if I ever wrote an article about the software crisis on the Linux desktop, there’d be flames here making Apple’s issues look small.

Re: Apple M3 Ultra

#264

Post by ferguess_k »

bigyabai wrote: post #190
ferguess_k wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks, looks like even M1 support has some gaps: https://asahilinux.org/docs/M1-Series-Feature-Support/#table... I assume anything that doesn't have "linux-asahi" is not supported -- or any WIP is not supported. Wish I had the skills to help them. Targeting just one set of architecture, I think Asahi has more chances of success.

It's just not an easy task. I can't help but compare it to the Nouveau project spending years of effort to reverse-engineer just a few GPU designs. Then Nvidia changed their software and hardware architecture, and things went from "relatively hopeful" to "there is no chance" overnight.

I agree, it's a lot of work, plus Apple definitely is not not going to help with the project. Maybe an alternative is something like Framework -- find some good enough hardware and support it.

Re: Apple M3 Ultra

#265

Post by EgoIncarnate »

notpushkin wrote: post #224
exabrial wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Apple supported Linux (headless) natively, and we could rack m4 pros, I absolutely would use them in our Colo. The CPUs have zero competition in terms of speed, memory bandwidth. Still blown away no other company has been able to produce Arm server chips that can compete.

Asahi is a thing. For headless usage it’s pretty much ready to go already.

M3 support in Asahi is still heavily WIP. I think it doesn't even have display support, Ethernet, or Wifi yet, I think it's only serial over USB . Without any GPU or ANE support, it's not very useful for AI stuff. https://asahilinux.org/docs/M3-Series-Feature-Support/

Re: Apple M3 Ultra

#266

Post by baq »

AlchemistCamp wrote: post #197
InTheArena wrote: post #29

Whoa. M3 instead of M4. I wonder if this was basically binning, but I thought that I had read somewhere that the interposer that enabled this for the M1 chips where not available. That Said, 512GB of unified ram with access to the NPU is absolutely a game changer. My guess is that Apple developed this chip for their internal AI efforts, and are now at the point where they are releasing it publicly for others to use.…

Keep in mind the minimum configuration that has 512GB of unified RAM is $9,499.

This is a ‘shut up and take my money’ price, it’ll fly off the shelves.

Re: Apple M3 Ultra

#267

Post by kstrauser »

devmor wrote: post #225
kstrauser wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. I run Docker and Podman on my Macs. 2. If you mean MDM, there are several good options. Screen sharing and SSH are build in. 3. In what sense? 4. `uv python install whatever` is infinitely better than upgrading on the OS vendor’s schedule. 5. What does that affect?

>I run Docker and Podman on my Macs. The same way Windows users run them. In a linux VM. You don't get real on-hardware containerization.

Ah, I see what you’re saying. Basically, Darwin doesn’t support cgroups, so Docker runs Linux in a VM to get that.

Re: Apple M3 Ultra

#268

Post by pavlov »

bigyabai wrote: post #246
pavlov wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Mac Studio isn’t meant for data centers anyway? It’s a small and silent desktop form factor — in every respect the opposite of a design you’d want to put in a rack. A long time ago Apple had a rackmount server called Xserve, but there’s no sign that they’re interested in updating that for the AI age.

It's the Ultra chip, the same one that goes into the rackmount Mac Pro. I don't think there's much confusion as to who this is for. > there’s no sign that they’re interested in updating that for the AI age. https://security.apple.com/blog/private-cloud-compute/

I genuinely forgot the Mac Pro still exists. It’s been so long since I even saw one.

And I’ve had every previous Mac tower design since 1999: G4, G5, the excellent dual Xeon, the horrible black trash can… But Apple Silicon delivers so much punch in the Studio form factor, the old school Pro has become very niche.

Edit - looks like the new M3 Ultra is only available in Mac Studio anyway? So the existence of the Pro is moot here.

Re: Apple M3 Ultra

#269

Post by dylan604 »

cosmic_cheese wrote: post #251
dylan604 wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are a large number of macOS users that are not app software devs. There's a large base of creative users that couldn't code their way out of a wet paper bag, yet spend lots of money on Mac hardware. This forum looses track of the world outside this echo chamber

I’m among them, even if creative works aren’t my bread and butter (I’m a dev with a bit of an artistic bent). That said, attracting creative users also adds value to the platform by creating demand for creative software for macOS, which keeps existing packages for macOS maintained and brings new ones on board every so often.

I'm a mix of both, however, my dev time does not create macOS or iDevice apps. My dev is still focused on creative/media workflows, while I still get work for photo/video. I don't even use Xcode any further than running the CLI command to install the necessary tools to have CLI be useful.

Re: Apple M3 Ultra

#270

Post by pier25 »

bigfishrunning wrote: post #136
pier25 wrote: post #36

So weird they released the Mac Studio with an M4 Max and M3 Ultra. Why? They have too many M3 chips on stock?

The M4 Max is faster, the M3 Ultra supports more unified memory -- So pick whichever meets your requirements

Yes but why not release an M4 Ultra?
Post reply on HN