3 ms·
The author notes how Tensorflow on the M1 isn't useable and hasn't been this whole time, but then uses this as one of the reasons why the M2 needed to be return
by mk_stjames 4y ago
The author notes how Tensorflow on the M1 isn't useable and hasn't been this whole time, but then uses this as one of the reasons why the M2 needed to be returned? Did he not realize that the same would be true on the M2 as the M1? If he needed fast Tensorflow for his workflow and bought an M2 mac expecting better I'm not sure what to say. (Also who is using TF? every hot thing recently is using PyTorch and while Metal support in pytorch has had struggles at least people are getting things working)
I don't disagree that with the main conclusion, it is a lot of money and for most people it doesn't make sense. If I was spending $2600 I'd be looking at places that do certified refurb M1 Ultra Mac Studios with at least 64gb unified memory, which I think will be going a long way soon to helping future proof a machine for the next few years.
- whydoineedthis 4y agoFrom the article: > You could say, “well, it’s not designed to be a Machine Learning trainer” > to which I say, then stop marketing the super duper AI chip.
- mk_stjames 4y agoIt reads odd as it is written as someone having the understanding of their technical workflow and doing benchmarking while simultaneously essentially falling for the same marketing hype that Apple used for the previous chip. Like, you can't act both ways. It is true that Apple is pushing the ANE very hard in its marketing considering how little apps actually use it.
- xupybd 4y agoHow else do you test the claims that marketing make?
- JeremyMorgan 4y agoI made some assumptions about the AI chip and they were wrong. Article will hopefully prevent others from making the same assumptions.