←back to thread

548 points nsagent | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.21s | source
Show context
lukev ◴[] No.44567263[source]
So to make sure I understand, this would mean:

1. Programs built against MLX -> Can take advantage of CUDA-enabled chips

but not:

2. CUDA programs -> Can now run on Apple Silicon.

Because the #2 would be a copyright violation (specifically with respect to NVidia's famous moat).

Is this correct?

replies(9): >>44567309 #>>44567350 #>>44567355 #>>44567600 #>>44567699 #>>44568060 #>>44568194 #>>44570427 #>>44577999 #
quitit ◴[] No.44567355[source]
It's 1.

It means that a developer can use their relatively low-powered Apple device (with UMA) to develop for deployment on nvidia's relatively high-powered systems.

That's nice to have for a range of reasons.

replies(5): >>44568550 #>>44568740 #>>44569683 #>>44570543 #>>44571119 #
chvid ◴[] No.44568740[source]
If Apple cannot do their own implementation of CUDA due to copyright second best is this; getting developers to build for LMX (which is on their laptops) and still get NVIDIA hardware support.

Apple should do a similar thing for AMD.

replies(2): >>44569645 #>>44570359 #
1. ◴[] No.44569645[source]