You say that like apple doesn't do the same. But apple doesn't just overcharge for apple tech but also "off the self" tech like ram and storage.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple to Power AI Features With M2 Ultra Servers
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
They need the manufacturing capacities of the 3nm process for the new iPhones and iPads. And it's not a problem to run as many M2 Ultra in parallel as needed for whatever they do.
I might actually buy one if they released it.Return of XServe, anyone?
Kinda like Amazon’s stores where they claimed to use AI when instead it was just a bunch of cameras with low paid Indian workers watching them.
@eas
I'm literally dumbfounded trying to figure out how you disagreed with me here. In a recent interview with NVIDIA's CEO Jensen Huang, he made this exact statement.
one query. It was confirmed that the M1, M2 and M3 series all contain a security flaw within the hardware. With comments about customer security is it wise to utilise flawed hardware?
With regards the latest buzz of AI, it is worth perusing the following article as its nothing new. Even Siri with all its faults can be described as AI, as are the awful newer answerphone systems that seem to confer the title Artificial Ignorance rather than 'intelligence'
With regards the latest buzz of AI, it is worth perusing the following article as its nothing new. Even Siri with all its faults can be described as AI, as are the awful newer answerphone systems that seem to confer the title Artificial Ignorance rather than 'intelligence'
The History of Artificial Intelligence - Science in the News
by Rockwell Anyoha Can Machines Think? In the first half of the 20th century, science fiction familiarized the world with the concept of artificially intelligent robots. It began with the “heartless” Tin man from the Wizard of Oz and continued with the humanoid robot that impersonated Maria in...
sitn.hms.harvard.edu
Last edited:
If I ever tried writing “NVIDIA chips are power-consuming” somewhere on reddit (even in r/macgaming!), they would have downvoted me into void.
But it is true. People saying NVIDIA can do premium graphics, but at what cost? TDP of an average gaming PC with NVIDIA card is at least 500w/h (and usually around 800), card alone is 120-180w, even my coffee grinder draws 65W, and I use it only for 30 seconds a day. This is stupidly insane, even my old Intel iMac draws only 70w under load. New ARM Macs are at least twice more efficient.
If computer tech companies actually had to care about how much power their stuff draws, we would not have only lived in greener world but also have had new games on every device, even on Apple TV.
New age gatekeeping is when you want to play some new game like Hogwarts Legacy or NFS Unbound and you just cannot, you gotta own elite gaming PC with sluggish spying Windows OS installed. And yeah I am sure developers can make stripped out versions of these games to run on cheaper devices like new iPads or Macs. They just don’t want to
Actually, the right question is, why would Tim Cook agree to lock Apple into a Cuda subscription for all their AI needs? Not only are the premiums on NVIDIA servers way too bloated but they also want Apple to build on top of their proprietary stack when Google, Intel, Qualcomm, ARM, etc. will release open source UXL stack for GPU's by year end. No way that Tim Cook will allow Apple to be fleeced by NVIDIA. He stated in earnings call last week that Apple is using hybrid solutions for now such as AWS, Google cloud. So these other back ends for them may use some NVIDIA servers but these appear to be stop gap solutions until Apple Silicon AI server chip is readied. IMO there is zero chance of Apple wanting to lock themselves into an NVIDIA / Cuda stack for their own AI iCloud server farms.
As another poster commented above, they both have same chip architecture, i.e., ARM. Thus far, Apple focused on efficiency and thermal management. Now that they are turning their attention to AI server chips, Apple is more than capable of catching up to NVIDIA. Their future AI server platform already has 2 billion plus growing device user base they can tap on as data sources for their LLM. Why do you suppose NVIDIA has had so much insider selling? They don't have a clue where they will be in one or two years as UXL for GPU's matures.
Well said. The purpose of shifting from intel to apple silicone was greater control of the evolution and lifecycle of Apple product.
AI is a new generation of computing. Relying on Nvidia would take Apple back 5 years as they would not only depend on Nvidia hardware but also Nvidia's tech stack.
I hope you realise that AI is already powering lots of products and features that people know and love it:
-Face/Touch ID
-Content algorithm recommendation on Instagram and TikTok
Furthermore we use computers to calculate things for us in Excel and other software.
What some of the smartest people in the world are great at doing is scaling their time and energy. This includes finding ways of getting 6 hours of work done in 1 hour using resources avaiable e.g computing power, other people etc.
I think apple will just bake the costs of the ai features into iCloud and increase the annual subscription cost by 1-3% every year."Introducing our magical, incredible iCloud AI Pro Max... starting at only $69/month.
We think you'll love it!"
It's easier to make 500m users pay an extra $0.5 per month extra for a service that they already use than to get 50m users to pay $5 per month for a new service.
You are missing the point, Apple, according to this article, is not making an AI specific chip, but is trying to use their outdated M2 Ultra to compete with hardware that are much faster in AI and more efficient ultimately.
It's like trying to mine crypto with GPU and compete with ASIC miners that are built specifically for that task.
If Apple makes their own optimized hardware for AI, something that Google did for Gemini's LLM and was successful with it, is a whole other story.
Apple also thought that they can compete with Qualcomm for modem chip because they were successful to make their own SoC, but failed miserably, I wouldn't claim they can catch up to Nvidia in AI anytime soon unless it actually happens, but that's Apple's Tim Cook in a nutshell these days, try to catch up with everyone else because you are always behind.
Those who believe Apple can compete with Nvidia in AI using M2 Ultra are the same people who believed 8GB of ram on mac is 16GB on windows .
Let's face it, we all know exactly why Apple is not going to use Nvidia GPU's.
Well said. Nvidia are years ahead of their nearest rivals.
However it's worth splitting ai into two:
Training
Inference
Nvidia chips are superior for training but overkill for B2C inference. Apple's use of M2 chips is a good interim solution for simple inference tasks.
I also expect groq and other up and coming chip manufacturers to offer alternatives to nvidia for inference.
That makes sense ... one good thing about Copilot is to create a summary of a huge design document.
"Privacy is at the core of Apple"
Unless you live in China, use our servers for AI and ignore all the stuff about "on device for your privacy" stuff.
Unless you live in China, use our servers for AI and ignore all the stuff about "on device for your privacy" stuff.
LLM context windows generally aren't large enough for full books (yet).
Apple could already do this today, since they have that feature for web pages in Safari (https://support.apple.com/guide/iphone/use-siri-to-listen-to-a-webpage-iph449fc616c/ios). They won't do this for ebooks, however, because that would conflict with audiobook rights, and publishers would pull their books from Apple. Besides, it would diminish Apple's profits from audiobook sales.
Yes. I could use Microsoft’s version for free or other options, but I also use some of the other plugin GPTs.
I thought Apple could have released a Mac Pro that was upgradable by adding boards/blades: processing, storage, etc. These boards would be interconnected using something like InfiniBand or a proprietary bus based on a torus topology.
The way I see it (I might be missing something here), there would be no need to come up with these “sticking two Ax Pro/Max to each other” ideas, and machines could escalate to ridiculous amounts of processing, memory and storage, for rendering videos, scientific computing, AI and other massive workloads.
AI itself is worth it at any cost. We've been using generative AI for a few years now and are starting to take it for granted, Apple can't delay a few years to sort out a better deal for themselves.
So apple should risk their 2Trillion dollar evaluation byt kissing Jensen's ring and become a captive customer?
as someone who uses chatgpt i can see what the hype is all about, its like when google and youtube came out. However I would love if apple just integrated with chapgpt instead of creating their own, its like the iPhone using google search engine and I believe the majority use google maps. Time will tell, but i still don’t use siri after all the years since it came out.