Live data from Hacker News

Apple M3 Ultra

apple.com

281–290 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple M3 Ultra

#281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every single AI shop on the planet is trying to figure out if there is enough compute or not to make this a reasonable AI path. If the answer is yes, that 10k is a absolute bargain.

Not much to figure out. It's 2x M4 Max, so you need 100 of these to match the TOPS of even a single consumer card like the RTX 5090.

Now do VRAM

Re: Apple M3 Ultra

#282
post #163

The memory amount is fantastic, memory bandwidth is half decent(~800 GB/s), and the compute capabilities are terrible(36 TOPS). For comparison, a single consumer card like the RTX 5090 is only 32 GB of memory, has 1792 GB/s memory and 3593 TOPS of compute. The use cases will be limited. While you can't run a 600B model directly like Apple says(cause you need more memory for that), you can run a quantized version, but…

You're comparing two different things. The compute level you’re talking about on the M3 Ultra is the neural engine. Not including the GPU. I expect the GPU here will be behind a 5090 for compute but not by the unrelated numbers you’re quoting. After all, the 5090 alone is multiple times the wattage of this SoC.

No, I'm not. I'm comparing the TOPS of the M3 Ultra and the tensor cores of the RTX 5090.

If not, what is the TOPS of the GPU, and why isn't apple talking about it if there is more performance hidden somewhere? Apple states 18 TOPS for the M3 Max. And why do you think Apple added the neural engine, if not to accelerate compute?

The power draw is quite a bit higher, but it's still much more efficient as the performance is much higher.

Re: Apple M3 Ultra

#283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except the linux users won't be buying Apple software, from the app store or elsewhere. They won't subscribe to iCloud.

I have Mac hardware and and have spent $0 through the Mac App Store. I do not use iCloud on it either. I do on iDevices though. I must be an edge case though.

Same here.

Re: Apple M3 Ultra

#284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

The Asahi maintainer resigned recently. What that means for the future only time will tell. I probably wouldn't want to make a big investment in it right now.

You make it sound like there was only one.

Re: Apple M3 Ultra

#285
post #222

512GB of unified memory is truly breaking new ground. I was wondering when Apple would overcome memory constraints, and now we're seeing a half-terabyte level of unified memory. This is incredibly practical for running large AI models locally ("600 billion parameters"), and Apple's approach of integrating this much efficient memory on a single chip is fascinating compared to NVIDIA's solutions. I'm curious about how…

For enterprise markets, this is table stakes. A lot of datacenter customers will probably ignore this release altogether since there isn't a high-bandwidth option for systems interconnect.

Thunderbolt 5 can do bi-directional 80 Gbps....and Mac Studio Ultra has 6 ports...

Re: Apple M3 Ultra

#286
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CAMM2 could kinda work, but each module is only 128-bit so I think the furthest you could possibly push it is a 512-bit M Max equivalent with CAMM2 modules north, east, west and south of the SOC. There just isn't room to put eight modules right next to the SOC for a 1024-bit bus like the M Ultra.

Framework said that when they built a Strix Halo machine, AMD assigned an engineer to work with them on seeing if there's a way to get CAMM2 memory working with it, and after a bunch of back and forth it was decided that CAMM2 still made the traces too long to maintain proper signal integrity due to the 256 bit interface. These machines have a 512 bit interface, so presumably even worse.

Current (individual, not counting dual socketed) AMD Epyc CPUs have 576 GB/s over a 768 bit bus using socketed DIMMs.

Re: Apple M3 Ultra

#287

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.…

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.

The last I checked, AMD was outperforming Apple perf/dollar on the high end, though they were close on perf/watt for the TDPs where their parts overlapped.

I’d be curious to know if this changes that. It’d take a lot more than doubling cores to take out the very high power AMD parts, but this might squeeze them a bit.

Interestingly, AMD has also been investing heavily in unified RAM. I wonder if they have / plan an SoC that competes 1:1 with this. (Most of the parts I’m referring to are set up for discrete graphics.)

Re: Apple M3 Ultra

#288

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.…

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.

What about serviceability? These come with soldered in ssd? That would be an issue for server use, Its too expensive to throw it away all for a broken ssd.

Re: Apple M3 Ultra

#289
post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every single AI shop on the planet is trying to figure out if there is enough compute or not to make this a reasonable AI path. If the answer is yes, that 10k is a absolute bargain.

Is this actually true? Were people doing this with the 192gb of the M2 Ultra? I'm curious to learn how AI shops are actually doing model development if anyone has experience there. What I imagined was: Its all in the "cloud" (or, their own infra), and the local machine doesn't matter. If it did matter, the nvidia software stack is too important, especially given that a 512gb M3 Ultra config costs $10,000+.

You’re largely correct for training models

Where this hardware shines is inference (aka developing products on top of the models themselves)

Re: Apple M3 Ultra

#290
post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This hardware is really being held back by the operating system at this point. It really is. Even if they themselves won't bring back their old XServe OS variant, I'd really appreciate it if they at least partnered with a Linux or BSD (good callout, ryao) dev to bring a server OS to the hardware stack. The consumer OS, while still better (to my subjective tastes) than Windows, is increasingly hampered by bloat and…

Given shared heritage, I would expect to see Apple work with FreeBSD before I would expect Apple to work with Linux.

You are technically correct (the best kind of correct). I’m just a filthy heathen who lumps the BSDs and Linux distros under “Linux” as an incredibly incorrect catchall for casual discourse.
Post reply on HN