Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
I think the question to me is whether Apple can ship affordable consumer devices with enough memory to run sufficiently useful models sufficiently fast.

Right now 128GB MacBook is the top of the line and you could do Qwen 3.8 Flash or similar.

There is a rumor that the M7 chip can use 1.5TB of memory which would imply Apple is aiming for more memory on devices.[1]

Would that imply the entry-level MacBook will have 128GB and top of the line models could run larger reasoning models? Then the question is price and if any of this will translate to iPhone for on-phone models.

With how expensive memory is, IDK if they can pull this off but I hope they do

[1] https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/semiconductors/ap...

> Would that imply the entry-level MacBook will have 128GB

Most people neither need nor want to run large LLMs locally.

The entry level MacBook Neo costs $599. Even if RAM prices revert to the pre-AI mean, the entry level models are not going to be that stacked with RAM.

Eventually we'll get to a doubling where entry level means 16GB of RAM, but most people won't be running anything more than simple models for light local work.

Have you ever tried running large LLMs on a MacBook Pro? It's hot, loud, and makes your battery level disappear at rates you didn't know were possible if you're not plugged in. It's a very niche hobby.

The first time my family bought standalone RAM to upgrade our PC, it cost over $100 for 2 MB. Not GB, but MB. Consumers will get much larger stacks of RAM at some point, likely sooner than later.
Don’t underestimate porn. There will be a moment when the average consumer can create personalized porn and erotica fully offline with a local LLM.
loading story #50451392
> running large LLMs on a MacBook Pro

Whatever local LLM device comes out of this, it certainly won't be a laptop.

(I envision a black box like a router you plug into a socket and let sit in a corner of some room.)

> Most people neither need nor want to run large LLMs locally

I'm old enough to remember the time when most people neither needed nor wanted a phone with a large screen and no buttons

loading story #50450908
Even if it's 2030 - that's a mere 3 years from now - it will take at least that long for the greater economy to figure out how to use LLMs. And probably a memory boom/bust cycle in that time too.

If Apple, in 2030 has a compute product that a worker can BYO(X) to work that has 2TB RAM, with an encrypted personalized context that can float between agents, then they will be in a very interesting place.

Can you give a citation for your 2030 being 3 years away claim
loading story #50449534
> 2030 - that's a mere 3 years from now

holy shit

loading story #50450444
I'm on 128gb Mac and Laguna2.1 is able to do 800tps coding as good at Sonnet 4.5 or Opus 4. It's awesome.
The Mac Studio hardware can do 512GB. That might be a hardware limit of the current architecture.

But the family shouldn’t be limited by that. We’re not going to see M6 Max hardware, because the M7 line is being fast-tracked and pulled forward. And I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see M7 capable of 1-2TB or more.

> That might be a hardware limit of the current architecture.

It is, at the very least, a practical limit. There are unlikely to be enough customers willing to pay $50k+ for a hypothetical 1TB RAM version to make it worth manufacturing.

M5 Ultra has 64 channels and the densest LPDDR5X chip is 16GB - so they could produce 1TB Macs but I doubt Micron or Samsung has any to sell.
loading story #50448553
The limit is strictly to cost of memory at this time. If you wanna get by that limit, you have to, well… design it yourself in house.
loading story #50448908
> whether Apple can ship affordable consumer devices with enough memory to run sufficiently useful models sufficiently fast.

i suspect that they will at least do offloading for casual usage as well. if they can ship 24GB in a homeview or appletv style product, it's game over.

Apple’s position down the road. When the Chinese company CMXT takes a much bigger share of the memory market worldwide, and they will. Their dominance in memory will probably be pretty close to what BYD is today in the worldwide car industry.

I don’t think Apple can be in a position where all of the Chinese device-making companies can get memory at a significantly cheaper price from CMXT, and Apple is stuck with buying memory from the three hyenas of memory at a significantly higher price.

That’s not going to help Apple sell their devices at a competitive price worldwide over time against the Chinese computer makers (Lenovo, Asus, and Motorola) and make no mistake about it: their share of the market worldwide will get bigger because of this change in the memory market; their focus will be on the long term, while the lawyers/MBA/finance types in the West will have their heads stuck in the short term.

It’s the (Chinese companies’) opportunity, and they’re not going to let it pass; I wouldn’t. In addition, Apple is in competition with Nvidia, Microsoft, Intel, AMD, Qualcomm, Google, Meta, and indirectly with Anthropic and OpenAI (whose CEO, Sam Altman, recently declared that computer ram is wasted on low-level regular computer users), along with a whole legion of other 3D model makers on the procurement of memory.

The combination of all these elements going into the future means that if Apple wants to stay ahead, I believe Apple has no choice but to take memory in house, they have the design and engineering capability in-house, and they have the money because they didn’t burn it on AI models and data centers.

This scenario is no different than replacing Intel or Qualcomm; you can see the writing/destination and the ultimate train wreck up ahead if Apple doesn’t roll up its sleeves and get busy, the market has changed and again Apple has to change and adapt to the new conditions.

> The combination of all these elements going into the future means that if Apple wants to stay ahead, I believe Apple has no choice but to take memory in house, they have the design and engineering capability in-house, and they have the money because they didn’t burn it on AI models and data centers.

I wouldn't be surprised if that was happening already -- they plan five years ahead, after all, and they've been slowly taking other systems in-house (e.g. baseband/modem) already.

Why do you think the Chinese wouldn’t gladly sell Apple memory?
loading story #50450792
Most likely Apple has been spending whatever they can to get in front of the memory market.
They definitely are, judging by their price increases.

Even so, DDR5 is so high-demand that it's likely that Apple can't outbid customers like Nvidia or OpenAI when they drive the margins they do.

loading story #50447733
I dunno, I reckon they are targeting 64GB and will develop a smaller model thats built in by default that handles a lot of simple tasks quickly.

Probably sitting under a router, so that it can hand off bigger jobs to an Apple DC somewhere, probably with a certain number of credits based on your iCloud sub.

Why is there a desire to have this stuff on the edge on the engineers lap instead of just building some arbitrarily scalable cluster for I'm guessing cheaper than apple's usual premium? Habitual practice from the engineers who would compile on the device getting hot in their lap? Lack of widespread hpc experience compared to running docker?
Many users would prefer to use a Sonnet-level (or better) LLM without sharing their data with others.

And with a device like this, you pay one single time to buy the product and then never have to think about paying for tokens ever again. For ordinary users that's silly, but for users or businesses chewing through lots of tokens, this means they can create their own turnkey replacement for "the cloud" where the only cost after purchasing the machine is the electricity to run it (which with these machines is very little). Mix that with the privacy benefits and suddenly it makes a lot of sense.

loading story #50449253
First of all, it seems to be possible to build a scalable cluster from TB5 Macs. They don't have to be on individual desks, they could be hosted in a data center.

But on the other side, equipping data centers was never Apples main business. Their approach to markets is to design products for the individuals. They also usually have very long time plans. Look at where the Apple Silicon today is and how long a path it took. What about the day, where at least a medium sized Mac becomes a great platform for running large models locally? Very easy to use, no setup, no privacy concerns. Also never worry about "tokens". You can then use AI as you use other local resources of the hardware you own today.

I don’t want it in my laptop, I want it in my mini server rack at home. I’m not running any of my personal data through an external service that is certainly collecting it as training data.
loading story #50450760
People don’t want to send all their private company data to the model providers?
Because why not? If you can get unlimited inference with roughly Opus 5.5 intelligence for $10k that easily beats current API pricing. Like not even a question.
Distrust in allowing an unreliable vendor to control the fate of your business?