Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

True, but these "Ultra" chips do target the same niche as (some) high-TDP chips.

Workstations (like the Mac Studio) have traditionally been a space where "enthusiast"-grade consumer parts (think Threadripper) and actual server parts competed. The owner of a workstation didn't usually care about their machine's TDP; they just cared that it could chew through their workloads as quickly as possible. But, unlike an actual server, workstations didn't need the super-high core count required for multitenant parallelism; and would go idle for long stretches — thus benefitting (though not requiring) more-efficient power management that could drive down baseline TDP.



Oh you. mean Threadripper. I thought you were talking about Epyc.

Anyway, I don't think it's comparable really. This thing comes with a fat GPU, NPU, and unified memory. Threadripper is just a CPU.


The GPU and NPU shouldn't be consuming power when not in use. Why shouldn't we compare M3 Ultra to Threadripper?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: