Hacker News .hnnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | chpatrick's commentslogin

If he's right they'll be out of job regardless whether it's because of Claude or another AI.

But they're pretty fast and can have loads of RAM, which would be prohibitively expensive with Nvidia.

A 128GB 2TB Dell Pro Max with Nvidia GB10 is about $4200, a Mac Studio with 128GB RAM and 2TB storage is $4100. So pretty comparable. I think Dell's pricing has been rocked more by the RAM shortage too.

Unfortunately the GB10 is incredibly bandwith starved. You get 128gb ram, but only 270GB/s bandwidth. The M3 Ultra mac studio gets you 820GB/s. (The M4 max is at 410GB/s. I'm not aware of any workload that gets the GB10 to it's theoretical peakflops.

You can't get a 128GB M3 Ultra, it's also more expensive. For some workloads the Studio is better, for others the GB10.

~not unified memory tho~

It is unified memory on this one

From the spec sheets I’m looking at, it is not. I’m seeing models of the Dell Pro Max with 128 GB of DDR5-6400 as CAMM2, then a separate memory of up to 24 GB on the GPU. CAMM2 does not make the memory unified.

There are also SO-DIMM options.


You're not looking at the right thing. Dell's naming is horrible. Dell Pro Max with GB10 (https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/cty/pdp/spd/dell-pro-max-fcm...). It's a very different computer than what you're looking at and has 128GB LPDDR5X unified memory.

Thanks for pointing that out. I found a more informative article about that model at https://www.mcpgov.com/dell-pro-max-gb10

my bad

I took ~ to be a "singing tone" for some reason till I saw sibling and realized it might be an attempted strikethrough xD

That won't hold much benefit as SOCAMM2 and LPCAMM2 get more popular.

> So pretty comparable.

The Mac Studio almost certainly uses at least half the power

(educated guess, I'm too lazy to go look at all the spec sheets and run the numbers)


It's actually reversed. The GB10 chipset has a TDP of 140w, whereas M2/M3 Ultra pulls over 250w from the wall: https://support.apple.com/en-us/102027

> It's actually reversed. The GB10 chipset has a TDP of 140w, whereas M2/M3 Ultra pulls over 250w from the wall

Come on mate ... I think you and I both know I was talking about complete system here, not discrete components.

I'm pretty sure your total package (Dell Pro Max + GB10) will pull more from the wall.


I'm pretty sure you need to look up what you're talking about instead of making a guess.

The Dell Pro Max PSU + enclosure is only rated for 240w, it literally can't pull more than 250w from the wall without shorting itself.


> 240w

280w according to the spec sheet I just looked at.

Also just look at the graphs on Geerling's website. The Mac Studio eats the Dell for breakfast in a number of the tests: https://www.jeffgeerling.com/blog/2025/dells-version-dgx-spa...


Not quite, what is the vRAM bandwidth of each? The bandwidth is a huge contributor to LLM performance.

AFAIK, for the unified bandwidth, it depends mostly on the CPU, for M4 Max (I think it's the default today?) it does ~550 GB/s, while GB10 does ~270 GB/s, so about a 2x difference between the two. For comparison, RTX Pro 6000 does 1.8 TB/s, pretty much the same as what a 5090 does, which is probably the fastest/best GPUs a prosumer reasonable could get.

Granted, it won't be competitive against the flagship dGPUs. Nevertheless, that ~2x is a pretty huge difference in similarly priced offerings.

The detective who was pressured by (presumably) intelligence services to invest the Tisza tech staff has also given an interview today: https://youtu.be/IXmuE2TX9yE?si=d3Kw3-4R8QvFEHz8

Einstein was heavily inspired by Mach: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach%27s_principle



That's how it works when you sing! But if you have an instrument you need to tune it would be annoying if you had to retune it between every song.


Or in the middle of a song -- lots of songs modulate between different keys.


Ok, does this explain why singers drift to a different key when there is no accompaniment?


Singers drift because they use relative pitch, because most musicians dont have perfect pitch.

With relative pitch music sounds the same even if you deviate from the original equal temperament pitch of the key you started singing even changing the key.

For the same reason if there is a fixed instrument playing at the same time, like a piano accompaniment, it's sound would be used as a reference and the singers would not drift


Yes, I mean would it be an additional factor?


Actually Graphene has been shown to be resilient (uniquely) to some of the forensic tools used by governments.


Probably because nobody targeted them yet.


cellbrite specifically has grapheneos in its support matrix.


Which demographics do you think run GrapheneOS as a daily driver other than people who have shit to hide? They've definitely been targeted.


...apparently most of HN, judging by these recent threads?


Yeah, I hide that I’m using apps from other spyware apps.

What of it?


You should probably ask the parent commenter. I think GrapheneOS is a good choice even for those that don't have something to hide. Reminds me of iOS, really (in a good way).


My point was it's the OS of choice for those in organised crime, so yes, it has been targeted.


Suicide rate is higher in northern countries.


None of that sells phones.


It does and increasingly will. I've got my non techiterate friends and famkly getting quite concerned about privacy and de-googling. This is something that would on some level be appealing to all. Even if they cannot appreciarw the full depth. Hell, android enjoyed much love because of open it was. Now that google has decided to put an end to that, so too does end android love.


I doubt that more than 5% of the population knows what open source means.


Well 5% of a massive addressable market it itself quite a lot.


Less than 5% of the population knew what it meant to install an app when the iPhone launched. I believe Steve Ballmer ridiculed the idea when asked about it.

A great many amount of people use Android to this day because of its more open nature, and that's despite Google's involvement. If Motorola could go back to its native roots, shake the idea of Chinese influence, and do open source proper, I bet there's a lot more than 5% of the market ready for it.


Try "aware, even vaguely, of the privacy issues standard smartphones pose".

(I would bet more than 5% have at least a vague notion of open source though, and a positive a priori - also possibly mixing it with source-available, which would be on par with some people we can read on HN)


It doesn't matter how many know what open source means - they all use it in some manner after all.

Take away open source and there would barely be a large tech company left standing.


I'm not arguing against that, I'm just saying that open source labelling isn't a feature to users.

The downstream effects of something being open source might acquire users, but being open source in of itself doesn't do anything except for a very tiny slice of the population. I'd say (in the US) more than half of the software developers I know use an Apple phone despite Android being much more open.

Whenever I'm on HN I feel like most of the posters here live in a bubble where they think most people are anywhere near as tech literate as they are. (You can really feel how this forum is SF-coded).


> open source labelling isn't a feature to users

> The downstream effects of something being open source might acquire users

So labeling means nothing, but open-source is important to users. See also: enshittification.


It does to a certain audience: the people who care about privacy, security and freedom.

I suspect that as time goes on our numbers will only increase.


My non-technical mother recently texted the family group chat to try to get us to use Signal. The winds are shifting towards privacy in a broader sense than ever before. This type of counter argument ("that doesn't sell [product") is usually a bad argument when the market doesn't offer anything that actually sells on privacy. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.


Hopefully there's only so many times Meta can suggest some creepy connection you didn't want made before people start valuing privacy


As much as I wish, it is going the other way. Caring about the 3 requires literacy, which in the world of LLM, is one thing that going to be reduced as a whole for human-kind.


Agreed graphene is the only reason I picked up a Pixel. Google phone would have been a no thanks from me otherwise.


Eh, wildcard statements like this. Checked your history and you sure like one-liner hit-and-runs like this one. No substance, just vague opinions.

But to actually answer you properly: Heard of OnePlus? They were niche manufacturers curating to geeks like ourselves at the very beginning and THEY USED CyanogenMod ROM! When it was way, WAY more amateurish than GrapheneOS!

When a market is super saturated, the only way to stand out is to experiment and see if something sticks.

This is going to be a very good experiment and can absolutely sell like hot cakes, especially in Europe if they market it well. We absolutely need an – even semi – independent Android hardware here.

Not that I am expecting any meaningful response from you.


Nice ad hominems, good job.

It's the same deal with small phones. Everyone thinks they're a great idea, then when they actually release them no one buys them. You can't plan your products based on what a small group of users want.

I use Graphene myself and I think it's great but this idea that it's something the average user is clamoring for is just fiction.


Isn't OnePlus rumored to be on their way out?

At minimum, sales haven't been great, & their upmarket push into becoming a mainstream premium brand hasn't perfectly worked out for them


That brand is 12 y/o and has between 3 and 5% market share, roughly the same as Motorola. Whether or not they make it doesn't matter, what matters is how they started as total amateurs with no brand and a beloved aftermarket ROM and where this got them.


They started (and still are?) as an Oppo spinoff. Very (very) far from 'total amateurs'.

I would very much like something other than a Pixel for GrapheneOS. But let's not get wild expectations based on false pretenses.


Oppo itself released their first smartphone in 2011. So not total amateurs, you're right on that, but it was no Apple or Samsung or HTC. They managed to appeal to geeks and started a niche brand that went mainstream.


Market share declining albeit slowly, customer opinions of each device release declining over time as well & they are generally on the more expensive end of the phone market.

Most of the tech enthusiasts who helped them kick off by buying for modding like cyanogen don't go near them now.

They used to be my recommendation to non technical friends and I doubt that I am the only one who long ago changed to other recommendations.

The company needs to revisit their roots in my opinion.


"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it." - Upton Sinclair


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

Search: