blastdoor
About
- Username
- blastdoor
- Joined
- Visits
- 336
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 6,912
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 3,877
Reactions
-
US and China temporarily lower tariffs to start trade negotiations
-
AAPL crumble: stock hit again, as White House clarifies 145% China tariff rate
“On Black Monday, October 28, 1929, the Dow declined nearly 13 percent. On the following day, Black Tuesday, the market dropped nearly 12 percent. By mid-November, the Dow had lost almost half of its value. The slide continued through the summer of 1932, when the Dow closed at 41.22, its lowest value of the twentieth century, 89 percent below its peak. The Dow did not return to its pre-crash heights until November 1954.“ -
Apple shares clawing back, after $638 billion in value is destroyed
linkman said:I'm convinced this morning is the lowest AAPL we'll see. So convinced that I spent all of my remaining brokerage cash account on it. Cook knows how to master Apple's supply chain and it is extremely likely he was prepared for these tariffs several months ago. -
Tim Cook's very light praise for DeepSeek is good politics, not endorsement
The thing about DeepSeek that might seem appealing to Apple is that DeepSeek's performance is due, in part, to NOT using CUDA.
CUDA is supposed to be the 'moat' that keeps Nvidia on top of a big pile of profit. One thing Apple has in common with DeepSeek is a desire to bridge that moat.
DeepSeek bridged the moat using Nvidia's own hardware, just bypassing CUDA (kind of embarrassing for Nvidia). As a company that controls a full stack from CPU and GPU silicon to developer tools to OS and frameworks, Apple is even better positioned to bridge the moat. That's something that Cook might genuinely describe as 'excellent'. -
First Mac Studio M3 Ultra benchmarks significantly outpace the M2 Ultra
Spencer314 said:So, only pay the M3 Ultra if you need a lot of GPU performance, or a lot more RAM than you can attach to an M4 Max (or for some reason need double the displays). The Ultra does so far seem to be most underwhelming part of the Apple Silicon family.
It's not that there's anything wrong with GB6, it's just that it is focused on the performance of a single program using multiple cores. But if you are seriously considering paying the premium for a 32 core processor, there's a good chance that your workloads involve multiple programs running at the same time and/or 'embarrassingly parallel' workloads, in many simultaneous programs (or threads) run independently of each other.
Put another way, GB6 is really more appropriate for mainstream consumer or prosumer users, it's not necessarily the best benchmark for high-end workstation or server type use cases.
Interestingly, GB5 might actually be the better benchmark for people who can really benefit from a bunch of cores. That's because the multicore GB5 just runs multiple copies of the single thread version of the benchmark concurrently, so it is a good test of an embarrassingly parallel workload.
If you look at the multithread GB5, you'll see that the M2 Ultra is faster than the M4 Max, which is not what you see with GB6.