5 ms·

There's a few comments to this effect in the thread, and I don't entirely understand where they're coming from. There's nothing in the article suggesting they'v

by jsnell 3y ago

There's a few comments to this effect in the thread, and I don't entirely understand where they're coming from. There's nothing in the article suggesting they've changed their strategy with TPUs in any way. The word TPU isn't even mentioned here. There's no suggestion they're actually using this internally either. There's no benchmarks showing that it's more cost-effective or scales better. And isn't your second paragraph the obvious reason for why this product (A3) exists? It's something they expect to sell to cloud customers who have an existing GPU-based workflow, and just want to run it as-is as fast/cheap/scalable as possible, without worrying about compatibility, and making sure they can always move the workload to some other cloud provider or on-prem if needed. It's like suggesting Sony releasing some of their games on the PC means they're deprecating Playstation. (Maybe there would be more details in the IO talk. Does anyone know which one this announcement is from?)

joseph_grobbles 3y ago
>There's nothing in the article suggesting they've changed their strategy with TPUs in any way Google owns and designs their own TPUs. They offer these TPUs in the cloud. I've seen many comments in here about how next-level TPUs are (despite zero evidence indicating that). Google even disclaims their TPU by saying that you shouldn't compare it with the H100 given node levels et al. Their premiere offering is an nvidia H100 offering. Yes, of course this is a pretty telling indication. If Google was all in on TPUs they'd be building mega TPU systems and pushing those. Instead they're pushing nvidia AI offerings.
onion2k 3y ago
The word TPU isn't even mentioned here. A sentence that reads "I am going to eat nothing but vegetables from now on" doesn't mention meat, but you can infer that I won't eat meat again from the sentence. A sentence that says Google are going all in on nVidea GPUs for AI doesn't need to mention TPUs to convey information about their future either.
- Xenomto 3y ago
  That's not true. Google is huge. Just a few H100 doesn't represent anything huge in Google scale. I also tried to find your analogy in that article and google announcement and it's not there.
- PragmaticPulp 3y ago
  > A sentence that says Google are going all in on nVidea GPUs for AI doesn't need to mention TPUs to convey information about their future either Where are you reading that Google is going “all in” on nVidia GPUs? I don’t see that in the linked article at all. These are clearly targeted at their cloud customers who have workloads tailored to GPUs. They’re supplying demand, as cloud providers do. Companies can do more than thing at a time.
- amf12 3y ago
  > A sentence that reads "I am going to eat nothing but vegetables from now on" doesn't mention meat, but you can infer that I won't eat meat again from the sentence. TBF, there is no mention of anything remotely similar to "I am going to eat nothing but vegetables from now on".
- jsnell 3y ago
  Sure. That's why I mentioned multiple ways in which the article could have been relevant to TPUs, which you chose not to quote. But it didn't have any of those either. The sentence you're offering up as a demonstration is just something you made up that does not appear in the article. If anything, this just reinforces the point I was making. There is nothing at all in the article supporting this narrative. So, where is this coming from? Why are you so intent on this idea that you're reduced to fabricating support for it?
  - danielmarkbruce 3y ago
    The comment quoted you, then made an analogy. Where is the fabrication?
  - onion2k 3y ago
    At the very least we know that there's a team in Google that chose to build an AI supercomputer with non-Google hardware. They didn't, or wouldn't, work with the TPU team to do it, or they did and the TPU team couldn't get it to work. Or they could but something still made nVidia hardware more compelling. Every level of management involved were persuaded that this was the case even knowing it would send a message to people outside of Google about TPUs. Andnfrom.all that we're meant to say it infers nothing about TPUs?
foobiekr 3y ago
Companies never announce change of direction like you seem to think. There is no positive outcome in doing so. Instead they announce the new thing and promise to continue to support the old thing and then just don’t.

by jsnell 3y ago

joseph_grobbles 3y ago

>There's nothing in the article suggesting they've changed their strategy with TPUs in any way Google owns and designs their own TPUs. They offer these TPUs in the cloud. I've seen many comments in here about how next-level TPUs are (despite zero evidence indicating that). Google even disclaims their TPU by saying that you shouldn't compare it with the H100 given node levels et al. Their premiere offering is an nvidia H100 offering. Yes, of course this is a pretty telling indication. If Google was all in on TPUs they'd be building mega TPU systems and pushing those. Instead they're pushing nvidia AI offerings.

onion2k 3y ago

The word TPU isn't even mentioned here. A sentence that reads "I am going to eat nothing but vegetables from now on" doesn't mention meat, but you can infer that I won't eat meat again from the sentence. A sentence that says Google are going all in on nVidea GPUs for AI doesn't need to mention TPUs to convey information about their future either.

Xenomto 3y ago
That's not true. Google is huge. Just a few H100 doesn't represent anything huge in Google scale. I also tried to find your analogy in that article and google announcement and it's not there.
PragmaticPulp 3y ago
> A sentence that says Google are going all in on nVidea GPUs for AI doesn't need to mention TPUs to convey information about their future either Where are you reading that Google is going “all in” on nVidia GPUs? I don’t see that in the linked article at all. These are clearly targeted at their cloud customers who have workloads tailored to GPUs. They’re supplying demand, as cloud providers do. Companies can do more than thing at a time.
amf12 3y ago
> A sentence that reads "I am going to eat nothing but vegetables from now on" doesn't mention meat, but you can infer that I won't eat meat again from the sentence. TBF, there is no mention of anything remotely similar to "I am going to eat nothing but vegetables from now on".
jsnell 3y ago
Sure. That's why I mentioned multiple ways in which the article could have been relevant to TPUs, which you chose not to quote. But it didn't have any of those either. The sentence you're offering up as a demonstration is just something you made up that does not appear in the article. If anything, this just reinforces the point I was making. There is nothing at all in the article supporting this narrative. So, where is this coming from? Why are you so intent on this idea that you're reduced to fabricating support for it?
- danielmarkbruce 3y ago
  The comment quoted you, then made an analogy. Where is the fabrication?
- onion2k 3y ago
  At the very least we know that there's a team in Google that chose to build an AI supercomputer with non-Google hardware. They didn't, or wouldn't, work with the TPU team to do it, or they did and the TPU team couldn't get it to work. Or they could but something still made nVidia hardware more compelling. Every level of management involved were persuaded that this was the case even knowing it would send a message to people outside of Google about TPUs. Andnfrom.all that we're meant to say it infers nothing about TPUs?

foobiekr 3y ago

Companies never announce change of direction like you seem to think. There is no positive outcome in doing so. Instead they announce the new thing and promise to continue to support the old thing and then just don’t.