Apple Reportedly Developing Its Own Custom Silicon For AI Servers 30
Hartley Charlton reports via MacRumors: Apple is said to be developing its own AI server processor using TSMC's 3nm process, targeting mass production by the second half of 2025. According to a post by the Weibo user known as "Phone Chip Expert," Apple has ambitious plans to design its own artificial intelligence server processor. The user, who claims to have 25 years of experience in the integrated circuit industry, including work on Intel's Pentium processors, suggests this processor will be manufactured using TSMC's 3nm node.
Apple's purported move toward developing a specialist AI server processor is reflective of the company's ongoing strategy to vertically integrate its supply chain. By designing its own server chips, Apple can tailor hardware specifically to its software needs, potentially leading to more powerful and efficient technologies. Apple could use its own AI processors to enhance the performance of its data centers and future AI tools that rely on the cloud. While Apple is rumored to be prioritizing on-device processing for many of its upcoming AI tools, it is inevitable that some operations will have to occur in the cloud. By the time the custom processor could be integrated into operational servers in late 2025, Apple's new AI strategy should be well underway.
Apple's purported move toward developing a specialist AI server processor is reflective of the company's ongoing strategy to vertically integrate its supply chain. By designing its own server chips, Apple can tailor hardware specifically to its software needs, potentially leading to more powerful and efficient technologies. Apple could use its own AI processors to enhance the performance of its data centers and future AI tools that rely on the cloud. While Apple is rumored to be prioritizing on-device processing for many of its upcoming AI tools, it is inevitable that some operations will have to occur in the cloud. By the time the custom processor could be integrated into operational servers in late 2025, Apple's new AI strategy should be well underway.
Apple servers (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Apple cpu can use IPMI hotswap storage raid1,1,5,6 (Score:2)
Apple cpus can use
IPMI (or even just reload OS with out needing an 2th mac)
hotswap storage for os
raid10,1,5,6 (Not the raid 0 that the mac pro has)
more pci-e
Re: (Score:2)
LOL posted nearly the exact same thing.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Not all products are intended for you.
Re: (Score:3)
This is prob
Re: (Score:2)
Mini's aren't used because they're a great choice, they're used because they're the only choice. Cloud provider have demand for Mac VMs, those need to run somehow. And those "lot of workloads" are Mac desktop workloads, what a surprise a Mac desktop is "not all that bad". You have incredible insights, but how is this relevant to Apple doing their own custom AI processor? Yeah, that AI processor is for a "render farm".
Re: (Score:2)
It's just a matter of not getting the same raw core count, but you can buy a lot of cheap Mac Minis to string together if you're buying a $10,000 Xeon or Epyc processor.
If you're buying a $10,000 Epyc processor, you're presumably paying a heavy premium for being able to have a very large system image. It's something of a waste to buy those CPUs if your workload is embarrassingly parallel.
Why not make a server product at that point.
Why bother? You don't buy a mac for the bang per buck, you buy it because y
Re: (Score:3)
I kind of want to see some special grade, precision-milled aluminum server getting shoved into a rack where it will languish in the darkness for the next decade.
Like this?
https://www.apple.com/shop/buy... [apple.com]
Re: (Score:2)
For a lot of workloads it's apparently not all that bad and Apple's SoCs are already in the server-class in terms of power draw. It's just a matter of not getting the same raw core count, but you can buy a lot of cheap Mac Minis to string together if you're buying a $10,000 Xeon or Epyc processor.
That's fine if you have an embarrassingly parallel problem which doesn't require a lot of data transfer between processors. There are jobs like that, of course, but those mac minis have pretty poor connectivity and having that many nodes means doing a lot of extra work to set up and maintain them. The EPYC processor (and to a lesser extent the Xeon) also offers very good price:performance. The minis come with a lot of extra case material that you have to pay for (including making it pretty) but don't really
Re: (Score:1)
I kind of want to see some special grade, precision-milled aluminum server getting shoved into a rack where it will languish in the darkness for the next decade.
Apple did that already. They were called X-Serves, and they were amazing 1U chassis, even if the internal hardware didn't match the cost. Then instead of RAID array capable, dual PSU servers, Apple decided we needed to buy shelves for the racks and stack a bunch of home-user computers. That's when we stopped spending over $90,000 per year on Apple.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not being made to sell to you, it would be internal use. By all means, stay with Supermicro for your personal LLM needs.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'd think these are intended not for server Macs for sale but for Apple's own server farms. Probably for services available to Apple device users only.
EU investigation (Score:3)
The EU needs to investigate this, fine Apple and put a stop to it.
Re: (Score:2)
eh, why?
That makes no sense.
Re: (Score:2)
Like that matters.
Re: (Score:2)
Your comment makes no sense. That does matter if you wish to be understood.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm just curious if you have any concept of what sarcasm is.
Re: (Score:2)
No, I do not.
Re: (Score:2)
That was the joke alright, he doesn't think any of the action against Apple makes sense because he's in favor of anticompetitive behavior at the expense of customers for some sick reason, probably cognitive dissonance.
Re: (Score:2)
It very much had the feeling of "oh noe teh EW".
he's in favor of anticompetitive behavior at the expense of customers for some sick reason, probably cognitive dissonance.
I think some people fundamentally support this sort of thing because they believe that one day eith enough hard work, they'' get to be the ones raking in heaps cash by screwing over people like they are now.
Re: (Score:2)
I am pro consumer and pro choice.
I think the EU's actions are anti-consumer.
Re: (Score:2)
Please please please write a screed explaining how forcing Apple to use stuff that users want them to use and support things users want them to support with absolutely zero harm to other users who simply don't turn on any additional features which will be disabled by default is bad for consumers. And don't cheat and use AI, really lean into it.
Re: (Score:2)
If it's for their own internal use, I doubt EU got anything to say about that.
They can't force you to buy gear from someone else when you are perfectly capably of making gear which is super customised to your needs.
And even if Apple decides to sell it to others, I doubt EU will get involved since there are so many companies which are selling "AI processors" - from Nvidia, AMD, Intel and a whole bunch more.
Not just anybody (Score:3)
but a "Phone Chip Expert". .. doesn't reek of dying to be taken seriously?
Sigh. (Score:2)
Apple - that famous server company.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)