This one is allegedly/hopefully a bug but just waiting for it to become a revenue stream / paywall. Uh oh, you want to run locally your dangerous illegal foreign open models, not licensed by Nvidia? Can’t work with you paying for a special security feature unlock on your GPU.
Or maybe just not at all - shell out for OAI tokens and send us all your data - your privacy is very valuable to us and we will make sure to be the only ones to monetize it.
You could say, Nvidia is selling pickaxes and has no business gatekeeping what rocks you hit with it, but I guess it depends on their relationships with major mining companies, and ultimately what pays more.
Why does the title say DGX spark when the link is the RTX Spark laptop?
Those are very different things as far as I understand, and the whole "doesn't work well with linux" really only makes sense on the RTX Spark laptop I think?
Isn't the DGX spark linux by default?
Enumerating 3 things really ..sparks a comment nowadays? Doing that as a rhetorical device has been a thing for generations and of course LLMs mimic it because it is everywhere in their training data.
I just heard a quick J. Talarico speech at some country concert. In the 10 or so sentences he spoke, he had 3 or 4 instances of doing this "Claudism" enumeration. Are you saying Texas just elected Claude for Senate?
Maybe we should stop with such superficial judgements. It's the modern equivalent of not liking the speaker's tie. (Doesn't mean the speaker's speech is good, but it doesn't mean it's bad either.)
There are more Claude-isms in there than just rule of three (Hence -isms and not -ism), and while I'd generally agree that we generally shouldn't be superficial with our judgements, this particular heuristic has served me pretty well so far.
Please be aware that you have been the target of foreign anti-AI influence campaigns. Your comment history makes it clear they have had a strong negative effect on you.
What an odd response, but if by "foreign influence campaign" you mean "masses of badly written blog posts that i regret wasting my time reading" then sure
The attack on reverse engineering of games is a precursor to universal computing lockdown. When you need AI to keep up with programming, the entity controlling the AI controls what software is possible to create. It’s a bid for centralised control and thought censorship at a scale and depth much more ambitious than anything we have ever seen before.
Not everyone grew up in a situation where home was a stable dependable place. Not everyone has a home to go to. If you have it with you, they can't mess with it or take it away from you when you're not there. If you grew up in a broken home, you would understand.
If the security of your home possessions is an issue, it should be addressed first before you spend thousands on a very stealable laptop that you need to carry everywhere.
I have been saying this for years, and the answer hits a nerve that gets you downvoted into oblivion: people prefer the aesthetics of laptops, simple as that. They will absolutely go to the grave arguing that they need the mobility etc, then just leave it plugged in. They simply prefer how laptops look, and they absolutely hate it when someone dares say it.
I have a laptop for work. 95% of the time i'd prefer a tower or at least a mini PC with proper cooling, but that remaining 5% i have to be around with the laptop is enough. I don't like the idea of having to remember to sync the projects every time (especially while i'm in the middle of testing something new so it's not like i can just pull the latest commit or sync the latest good version of something)
100% agreed, and people saying they need a laptop are missing the point; I wasn't saying don't use laptops, either.
The simple point I'm always trying to make is that area vs volume is a fundamental physical difference regarding cooling, which is critical for high performance applications (that's why they're considering an RTX Spark in the first place, right?).
There's so much more I could say about my Strix Halo machine, which fits in the palm of my hand and I have a wonderful portable screen and keyboard+touchpad (and only cost me 2k with 128 GB fast memory, idles at 4w, amazing 32 thread Zen 5 CPU with AVX-512, ...), but it's either preaching to the choir or pissing against the wind.
> why anyone would want to do inference on a laptop
Because reviewers tell them this is is a good use case, and people want to take advantage of the HW they buy [0]. Unfortunately those reviewers didn't take any extra step to validate anything beyond the default config, out of the box.
Exactly. Get yourself a DGX spark and plug it in at home.
I meanwhile, run my ridiculously OP workstation class hardware as a server - 9995wx, 768GiB, rtx pro 6000 w/ 96GiB vram - at home, and my Asus ZenBook is light, cool, and long-lived.
Runs GLM 5.3 flash at 35 tok/sec while consuming only 15 GiB VRAM, and I can run a lot more stuff on there alongside.
That's slower than I would have expected for the RTX 6000, do you have figures for say Qwen 3.8 27B? That model fits completely on the card, that should push it a lot further.
Your prompts and whatever data they collect from your dev environment go to the inference provider, and typically the customer has neither control nor assurance over what the inference provider (re-)uses that data for.
GP isn't proposing using closed proprietary models over an API, they're proposing having local hardware serving open weight models at your house/apartment being remotely accessible through an overlay network like Tailscale. The idea being that local inference is very hungry for power and thermal budget, so you run the inference somewhere that power and thermal headroom is abundant (your house/apartment, on a tower, or dedicated unified memory boxes like DGX Spark, Strix Halo, Mac Studio, etc) and then remotely utilize that inference from a regular laptop. You still get all of the benefits of local, private AI inference, without having to expend a laptop's limited power and thermal budget on doing the inference on the laptop itself.
On the contrary I think in a few years most inference will be done locally. The smaller models have been slowly catching up to frontier for many tasks, and chips are being developed to run large models on phones and laptops (according to Qualcomm CEO they want to run 10T weights on a mobile chip).
To me the simple answer to why is control. If I run a model locally I get to control the model params, the system prompt, all of it. And of course there is no quota. But probably most importantly I am not tied to paying some company a monthly subscription forever.
Wtf. Are we actually seeing a push towards being 100percent dependent on the cloud?
Sovereign AI has never been more important.
Controlling AI is so much more powerful and impactful than controlling search or social algorithms.
Centralized AI a 10x on social control over everything we have seen before, and there is no way that a free and open society survives contact with centralised, high capability AI if the system is manipulated towards guiding outcomes. It’s essentially mind control, as people will offload an even greater share of their cognition to AI than they do with search and social.
Build and maintain sovereign AI while you still can.
Years ago I would think I was being paranoid to think they would patch hardware retroactively to make it slower so you need to pay more to use your own hardware.
In 2026, I think this is what all car companies are doing after you pay the full car price.
I don't see a reason why they wouldn't do it with so little competition
It smells like something IBM would do. Coming from small computers where you own it, I was flabbergasted to learn that IBM would ship additional processors and ram with their mainframes but you were not allowed to use them until you paid the additional license fee.
So it is something that has been done for a long time now. Still feels like unethical rent-seeking that should not be tolerated by the customer.
See Also: car companies that charge additional fees for hardware already on the car. Additional services I sort of understand(remote start via cell network), but stuff like heated seats, that is just wrong.
> See Also: car companies that charge additional fees for hardware already on the car. Additional services, I sort of understand(remote start via cell network), but stuff like heated seats, that is just wrong.
It saves the car manufacturer on logistics cost. The per-unit cost of a seat heater is (much) smaller than the cost related to keeping two variants of seat in stock and to provide spare parts. Say the heating mat costs 100€ per seat including materials and installation, and can be sold to the customer for 400€ permanent, that means as long as 1 in 4 customers buys the seat heating option, the books are balanced, and all money you save on logistics is pure profit.
Adding subscription on top of that is financially even better, if there is one thing companies LOVE thanks to stonk market incentives it is monthly recurring revenue.
Databases licencing per core is the most ridiculous thing I've heard for me. In this case they have zero marginal cost and still charge you for it. Hilarious.
> In this case they have zero marginal cost and still charge you for it.
A license has zero marginal cost in the first place. Software distribution over networks have a negligible marginal cost. An ebook as zero margin cost. We are constantly paying lots of things with zero or negligible marginal cost.
Yes? How is this at all surprising given....everything we've seen tech companies push for for years and years? People are fully embedding themselves and their workflows in the services of big, closed companies, and are going to be surprised when they finally feel able to clamp down? There has been warning sign after warning sign, but people are only increasing their dependence.
The reason why open source couldn't win search and social was because they need network effects which is not possible for open source maintainers.
AI is a software just like operating systems and executables where open source absolutely dominates the industry. Remember when the compiler engineers optimized the shit out of llama.cpp.
Right now the bottleneck for AI software is compute and data. Moore's law is give us compute, StackOverflow, arXiv (and it's children like bioRxiv), gutenberg and others (3lib, anna, internet.org) will give us data.
>Right now the bottleneck for AI software is compute and data. Moore's law is give us compute, StackOverflow, arXiv (and it's children like bioRxiv), gutenberg and others (3lib, anna, internet.org) will give us data.
Tons of stuff happenning behind closed doors today though. No more stackoverflow for the next decade, that could create a problem if all new context only exists in chatgpt conversations only openAI has access to (or whoever).
Wait until the archives are compromised and millions of people's conversation and uploaded data are published. Such context was never before accessible in that scale, but it will become accessible soon, I am pretty sure.
No, we are just seeing a push towards Nvidia wanting to make money.
Nothing stops you from giving Nvidia half a million for their latest and greatest AI GPUs, unless you are in China I guess, but China does very well despite the export control.
It is just classic market segmentation, the thing Nvidia and just about every company that can benefit from it has done for decades. Cloud providers are ready to pay a lot of money, consumers wanting local AI have a lower budget, and gamers even lower. But a low budget is greater than zero, and there is still money to be made on these markets. But they also don't want to compete against themselves, so they are going to find ways of crippling enterprise-class workloads on consumer hardware.
It used to be that they crippled high precision arithmetic on consumer hardware, because it was a differentiating factor, but AI doesn't care about high precision, so now, it is something else.
Given the history of prohibition in the past few centuries, it wouldn't surprise me if it is much easier to buy Nvidia products in China than in the US. The price is much higher most likely, but the actual transaction is likely easier.
Unless the US somehow differs from the EU in some major ways, can't you just walk into a store and buy a NVIDIA GPU? Not sure how much easier it can get. And yes, it's as easy in China to, walk into store, point at GPU, fork over the money, you get your GPU. Like everywhere else, except the US I suppose?
I can't wait until we have real competition against NVIDIA, whether it is from a Chinese chip maker or someone else. Hopefully then these kinds of intentional crippling of hardware/firmware will be avoidable by buying an equivalent product from another firm.
Even for things like the huawei ascend, what makes them crap for price to perf I think is still dram. They actually cost more than nvidia clusters last I checked. Just like how regular laptops and phones are now being squeezed upwards to become closer (and uncompetitive with) apple devices.
AMD has been #1 for HPC and #2 in AI for a very long while. The currently shipping Helios systems go toe to toe with nVidia's next gen that aren't even shipping, yet (by nVidias own numbers).
These are multi-million dollar datacenter systems, not consumer. If you mean the consumer market, it's coming but it's going to be 2028-29 most likely (if the bubbled hasn't popped by then).
Strix Point is quite good but not the same thing as a DGX, though. Same idea, different methodology.
> but China does very well despite the export control
They're still getting plenty of Nvidia GPUs. Someone in Jensen Huang's inner circle apparently runs a number of companies in Singapore that have been found to source GPUs at scale. The catch is that she has close ties to Beijing and is suspected of working closely with their government, potentially even spying for them.
This was reported just a week or two ago and is just one example of how China is still getting their hands on resources they're supposedly unable to get.
This is classical move from Nvidia. They are doing similiar bullshits on their GPUs for decades. I'm very much looking forwars for their competition to rise.
I do not understand this play. This means that only hyperscalers or someone who purchased a licence can use Spark?
> Are we actually seeing a push towards being 100percent dependent on the cloud?
[Hanlon's Razor] This is such a contrived performance drop scenario that I find it hard to believe it was done with the purpose you're inferring.
I'd interpret this as Nvidia not caring that much about Linux desktops/laptops once again (as opposed to Windows desktops/laptops), rather than anything to do with local vs cloud.
Yes, we are, the amount of data centers being built doesn't make sense for long-term model improvements. They are definitely planning on licensing us terminals to use instead of our own PCs at the very least as a backup plan if the frontier companies fail and have assets liquidated.
This isn't as hyperbolic as people think. This is a continuation of the centralized control of data + products. Not having sovereign AI is just enabling the enshiftification of the next innovation. We let ads win, we let data mining/centralization win... can we not let 3p AI win?
>Wtf. Are we actually seeing a push towards being 100percent dependent on the cloud?
This is a linux driver proble. On laptops designed for windows.
Read the article and stop sensationalizing.
This is a problem on the MSI Prestige laptop using the RTX Spark platform. Lets assume it also applies to the Asus and Dell machines using RTX spark. It isn't an issue with RTX spark desktops.
RTX Spark is a new platform and all of these laptops ship with Windows. You cant get Linux on any of these machines from the factory. There is also precedent for NVIDIA shipping linux support well after Windows (2 years in the case of Dynamic Boost, a similar power sharing feature).
Kindly remove this from your list of "Evidence that NVIDIA is Colluding to Centralize Inference" and everyone else take note of this confirmation bias in action.
It should be possible to reverse engineer this, if it works on windows?
> The laptops also support unified memory configurations up to 128GB, shared between CPU and GPU, which is unusual for a laptop and central to why they’re being marketed at AI developers in the first place.
This isn't rare on laptops, pretty default on AMD with iGPU
Nvidia doing what Nvidia has always done; proprietary closed drivers. Weird choice to cryptographically protect the power settings. Key problem is that we've allowed a company that's always been this way to form a monopoly. Other brands exist, perhaps it is now worth the effort to migrate and rebuild elsewhere.
they could make money that way right now but they figured out they can make even more money by doing this. but jokes on them, people will figure it out, unlock / jailbreak and they just lose good will long term
that seems really hard to believe? If you wanted this running Linux in a data center you'd have just been buying the cheaper and yet also more powerful DGX Sparks.
The only value proposition of RTX Spark at all is the laptop form factor
No sane perse would buy dgx spark for datacenter. If you need Blackwell for the native nvfp4 you'd be better buying pallets of rtx5060 ti 16GB. Or if you don't, pallets of used rtx3090s.
In fact I'm pretty sure it's happening. Why? Because of constantly growing prices of those things.
I was genuinely excited about this device until I heard the specs. Still under 300GB/s memory bandwidth when a gpu like rtx3090 from 6 years ago had 900+
This is really bread crumbing local inference users.
We should be measuring our memory bandwidth in TB by now. The only company that seems to be serious about this is Apple. (the m5 ultra studio etc).
If this were cost-effective, why wouldn't they just buy DGX Sparks, with similar performance at similar price points and a more convenient form factor?
Or RTX Spark and run their workloads under WSL, which as the article notes, has minimal overhead relative to running Linux directly?
This sounds more like a bug than a feature, especially given that Linux on battery runs at full clock speed and downclocks when plugged in, and Windows does the opposite, suggesting they could at least mitigate the problem with no changes to their software stack by inverting a conditional in the firmware and adding a Linux kernel parameter to control memory allocation as apparently already exists for Windows.
New generations such as Blackwell have open source kernel modules, there is not even a proprietary option. I thought there was a move in this direction?
The total linux-firmware-nvidia package for Archlinux uncompressed (outer, the firmware blobs are also compressed on top of that) is ~160MB (Mb would be Megabit), with the biggest individual compressed blob being ~50MB.
Nvidia enabled that by offloading stuff that used to be in the proprietary driver onto the still proprietary GPU firmware. Making it, if anything, less open source as it's now harder to inspect what it's doing at runtime since it's now out of reach of even the kernel
It's "we" as a society. Not pushing our governments to pass laws that could make Nvidia open up its hardware. Of course it's not your fault or mine, the problem is money in politics and uneducated voters.
> Key problem is that we've allowed a company that's always been this way to form a monopoly.
I don’t think anyone “allowed” them - quite the opposite. They’ve made generational bets that ended up being right, bets that IIRC the industry did not agree with for a long time. Them pursuing CUDA resulted in a draw down of something crazy like 75% of their valuation. They bet the farm multiple times to get to the point they are - and it’s only “obvious” in hindsight.
If you want folks to make generational bets as a matter of course (which I think most folks do), centralizing the downside of those bets and socializing the upside of those bets is not a great strategy. Almost as bad as socializing the downside.
Competition will eventually close that gap. We’re only a few years into this thing.
I'm starting to feel empathy with those people who think bus lanes are coming form their freedom as part of some conspiracy to take away their cars.. I would like private enjoyment of my own RAM to use as I wish please.
They really got it right on multiple levels - for those who don't know, roller coaster tycoon was infamously written in 99% assembly and meticulously optimized by the developer to run effectively in 16 megabytes of ram.
Unrelated to this slowdown, I could imagine this sort of thing being the right application for things like Taalas, although I'm not quite sure whether it can actually offer what I imagine that it can (i.e. ability to make a cheap, physically small card that can run a large model).
A laptop can't run the latest big models, because memory is too expensive. This thing probably can't run models larger than Mistral Small 4. But it'd be a completely different thing to have a hardcoded Mistral Large 4, than a choice of tiny models.
You probably won't be able to run a sota model on a single Talaas card. You probably need a set. It should theoretically be cheaper, faster, more power efficient than Nvidia at running that model. But then you are stuck with a chip that can run only that model. And I understand that context size will also be a problem.
Yeah, that was why I felt that, while Taalas might not be the right thing in general, it could be really appealing in a laptop, that would otherwise not be able to run any big model at all.
I think I misunderstood what the technology could do a little bit, because I imagined these fixed matrix multiplies encoded into hardware as small-ish, as using routing space etc., not just fast.
I think what I really imagined was useful would be more easily achieved by having a big ROM with model weights connected to an ordinary GPU.
Fortunately that's just a matter of weeks until someone revengs and publishes the fix... even if we need to wait a while for a proper upstreamed solution.
As someone who went down the rabbit hole of local AI, there is so much exhausting debugging already. Even if this is "just" another step you have to find, it's toxic.
Not really, because for more than 2 decades the closed-source NVIDIA Linux drivers were at parity of features and performance with the Windows drivers, unlike the AMD drivers before they were open-sourced, which was much more recently.
This is a new thing with the firmware that can be used only by Windows. If this NVIDIA policy continues, then NVIDIA will indeed become a bad choice for Linux, but until now, for graphics and AI applications NVIDIA has been the best choice for Linux, by providing the best performance and reliability.
For pure computational applications, especially for those requiring good FP64 throughput, there are many years since NVIDIA has become a worse choice than AMD and more recently also than Intel, but that is due to poor hardware support, not to bad software support.
> closed-source NVIDIA Linux drivers were at parity of features and performance with the Windows drivers
Hell, their old closed-source NVIDIA _FreeBSD_ drivers were at parity with Windows. CUDA included (though the CUDA toolkit required Linuxulator syscall emulation to run the Linux bins).
Imagine my surprise when my new Blackwell card didn’t work, and that the newly required open source drivers were Linux-only.
Assume I'm naive on this matter, but why wouldn't Nvidia allow its own DGX OS to be a first party OS on these devices? Some sort of MS subsidy? Ecosystem-wise, wouldn't it make sense for Nvidia to keep pushing its own OS on all the devices containing its hardware?
I am starting to wonder whether CEOs everywhere ( but especially in US ) are simply unable to read the room. I shrugged off nvidia when they did it to gaming and mining ( it annoyed me, but ultimately there were options to deal with it ), but here it is touching a much wider populace with repercussion well beyond crypto and gaming.
154 comments
[ 4.8 ms ] story [ 18.9 ms ] threadOr maybe just not at all - shell out for OAI tokens and send us all your data - your privacy is very valuable to us and we will make sure to be the only ones to monetize it.
You could say, Nvidia is selling pickaxes and has no business gatekeeping what rocks you hit with it, but I guess it depends on their relationships with major mining companies, and ultimately what pays more.
Those are very different things as far as I understand, and the whole "doesn't work well with linux" really only makes sense on the RTX Spark laptop I think? Isn't the DGX spark linux by default?
Man it really is exhausting to read a title that sparks my interest, just to be greeted with the most basic Claude-isms in the subheading.
I just heard a quick J. Talarico speech at some country concert. In the 10 or so sentences he spoke, he had 3 or 4 instances of doing this "Claudism" enumeration. Are you saying Texas just elected Claude for Senate?
Maybe we should stop with such superficial judgements. It's the modern equivalent of not liking the speaker's tie. (Doesn't mean the speaker's speech is good, but it doesn't mean it's bad either.)
But, on the other hand, having my DGX Spark stack at hand, I know the solution:
"AI views proprietary components as damage and routes around them."Sovereign AI has never been more important.
But yeah, we do need to make sure the REA cat stays out of the bag.
I, for one, welcome our reverse-engineer-anything overlords.
TIL. Nice word.
If you really want to do DIY inference, plug it in at home and set up tailscale so you can access it on the go.
No huge battery drain or toasty hot laptop required. Lower cost laptop. Lighter laptop. Longer battery life laptop. Win win win win.
I am not saying don't use a laptop.
I am not saying you have to use cloud inference.
I am saying using a laptop for inference is dumb. If you want private inference:
- use a dgx spark or similar plugged in at home
- set up tailscale so you can connect from anywhere
- use your phone as a hotspot on the go
- work on your laptop, using tailscale to connect to your home inference server if you're on the go
This gets you everything except for the few hours you might be on an airplane.
The simple point I'm always trying to make is that area vs volume is a fundamental physical difference regarding cooling, which is critical for high performance applications (that's why they're considering an RTX Spark in the first place, right?).
There's so much more I could say about my Strix Halo machine, which fits in the palm of my hand and I have a wonderful portable screen and keyboard+touchpad (and only cost me 2k with 128 GB fast memory, idles at 4w, amazing 32 thread Zen 5 CPU with AVX-512, ...), but it's either preaching to the choir or pissing against the wind.
unique local data and know how not shared with cloud.
Because reviewers tell them this is is a good use case, and people want to take advantage of the HW they buy [0]. Unfortunately those reviewers didn't take any extra step to validate anything beyond the default config, out of the box.
[0] https://arstechnica.com/reviews/2026/10/the-surface-laptop-u...
I meanwhile, run my ridiculously OP workstation class hardware as a server - 9995wx, 768GiB, rtx pro 6000 w/ 96GiB vram - at home, and my Asus ZenBook is light, cool, and long-lived.
Runs GLM 5.3 flash at 35 tok/sec while consuming only 15 GiB VRAM, and I can run a lot more stuff on there alongside.
To me the simple answer to why is control. If I run a model locally I get to control the model params, the system prompt, all of it. And of course there is no quota. But probably most importantly I am not tied to paying some company a monthly subscription forever.
Sovereign AI has never been more important.
Controlling AI is so much more powerful and impactful than controlling search or social algorithms.
Centralized AI a 10x on social control over everything we have seen before, and there is no way that a free and open society survives contact with centralised, high capability AI if the system is manipulated towards guiding outcomes. It’s essentially mind control, as people will offload an even greater share of their cognition to AI than they do with search and social.
Build and maintain sovereign AI while you still can.
So it is something that has been done for a long time now. Still feels like unethical rent-seeking that should not be tolerated by the customer.
See Also: car companies that charge additional fees for hardware already on the car. Additional services I sort of understand(remote start via cell network), but stuff like heated seats, that is just wrong.
Yep, "Batterygate"
https://www.npr.org/2020/11/18/936268845/apple-agrees-to-pay...
It saves the car manufacturer on logistics cost. The per-unit cost of a seat heater is (much) smaller than the cost related to keeping two variants of seat in stock and to provide spare parts. Say the heating mat costs 100€ per seat including materials and installation, and can be sold to the customer for 400€ permanent, that means as long as 1 in 4 customers buys the seat heating option, the books are balanced, and all money you save on logistics is pure profit.
Adding subscription on top of that is financially even better, if there is one thing companies LOVE thanks to stonk market incentives it is monthly recurring revenue.
I think more than that, it is probably a lie they tell us that you are not paying for the hardware/equipment.
A license has zero marginal cost in the first place. Software distribution over networks have a negligible marginal cost. An ebook as zero margin cost. We are constantly paying lots of things with zero or negligible marginal cost.
AI is a software just like operating systems and executables where open source absolutely dominates the industry. Remember when the compiler engineers optimized the shit out of llama.cpp.
Right now the bottleneck for AI software is compute and data. Moore's law is give us compute, StackOverflow, arXiv (and it's children like bioRxiv), gutenberg and others (3lib, anna, internet.org) will give us data.
It's a waiting game. Open source always wins.
Tons of stuff happenning behind closed doors today though. No more stackoverflow for the next decade, that could create a problem if all new context only exists in chatgpt conversations only openAI has access to (or whoever).
Nothing stops you from giving Nvidia half a million for their latest and greatest AI GPUs, unless you are in China I guess, but China does very well despite the export control.
It is just classic market segmentation, the thing Nvidia and just about every company that can benefit from it has done for decades. Cloud providers are ready to pay a lot of money, consumers wanting local AI have a lower budget, and gamers even lower. But a low budget is greater than zero, and there is still money to be made on these markets. But they also don't want to compete against themselves, so they are going to find ways of crippling enterprise-class workloads on consumer hardware.
It used to be that they crippled high precision arithmetic on consumer hardware, because it was a differentiating factor, but AI doesn't care about high precision, so now, it is something else.
These are multi-million dollar datacenter systems, not consumer. If you mean the consumer market, it's coming but it's going to be 2028-29 most likely (if the bubbled hasn't popped by then).
Strix Point is quite good but not the same thing as a DGX, though. Same idea, different methodology.
They're still getting plenty of Nvidia GPUs. Someone in Jensen Huang's inner circle apparently runs a number of companies in Singapore that have been found to source GPUs at scale. The catch is that she has close ties to Beijing and is suspected of working closely with their government, potentially even spying for them.
This was reported just a week or two ago and is just one example of how China is still getting their hands on resources they're supposedly unable to get.
I do not understand this play. This means that only hyperscalers or someone who purchased a licence can use Spark?
I stopped using my laptop for dev and switched to talking to claude code on my phone and as you can imagine I am faster at producing code.
100% cloud with a single entry point device to manage dedicated servers + agents
[Hanlon's Razor] This is such a contrived performance drop scenario that I find it hard to believe it was done with the purpose you're inferring.
I'd interpret this as Nvidia not caring that much about Linux desktops/laptops once again (as opposed to Windows desktops/laptops), rather than anything to do with local vs cloud.
As in, make your own inference and training hardware?
This is a linux driver proble. On laptops designed for windows.
Read the article and stop sensationalizing.
This is a problem on the MSI Prestige laptop using the RTX Spark platform. Lets assume it also applies to the Asus and Dell machines using RTX spark. It isn't an issue with RTX spark desktops.
RTX Spark is a new platform and all of these laptops ship with Windows. You cant get Linux on any of these machines from the factory. There is also precedent for NVIDIA shipping linux support well after Windows (2 years in the case of Dynamic Boost, a similar power sharing feature).
Kindly remove this from your list of "Evidence that NVIDIA is Colluding to Centralize Inference" and everyone else take note of this confirmation bias in action.
> The laptops also support unified memory configurations up to 128GB, shared between CPU and GPU, which is unusual for a laptop and central to why they’re being marketed at AI developers in the first place.
This isn't rare on laptops, pretty default on AMD with iGPU
Nvidia does something to prevent abuse so that regular people who want the laptops can buy one. Nvidia gets knocked on.
This is all but certainly a bug in their linux driver and nothing else. It sure as hell isn't some "anti abuse" to enable "regular people" to buy one.
The only value proposition of RTX Spark at all is the laptop form factor
In fact I'm pretty sure it's happening. Why? Because of constantly growing prices of those things.
I was genuinely excited about this device until I heard the specs. Still under 300GB/s memory bandwidth when a gpu like rtx3090 from 6 years ago had 900+
This is really bread crumbing local inference users.
We should be measuring our memory bandwidth in TB by now. The only company that seems to be serious about this is Apple. (the m5 ultra studio etc).
Or RTX Spark and run their workloads under WSL, which as the article notes, has minimal overhead relative to running Linux directly?
This sounds more like a bug than a feature, especially given that Linux on battery runs at full clock speed and downclocks when plugged in, and Windows does the opposite, suggesting they could at least mitigate the problem with no changes to their software stack by inverting a conditional in the firmware and adding a Linux kernel parameter to control memory allocation as apparently already exists for Windows.
https://developer.nvidia.com/blog/nvidia-transitions-fully-t...
Point was about the kernel drivers being open-source enabling hackability - they don't, the card hardware is just as closed as before.
When did "we" have a say in this? I don't get these types of comments from the "open-source as a community."
Nvidia has been doing this for decades, and there are two possible arguments:
1. They are successful despite it.
2. They are successful because of it.
There is no mythical collective "we" representing the open-source community in Nvidia's supply chain of success. It's Nvidia and its consumers.
I don’t think anyone “allowed” them - quite the opposite. They’ve made generational bets that ended up being right, bets that IIRC the industry did not agree with for a long time. Them pursuing CUDA resulted in a draw down of something crazy like 75% of their valuation. They bet the farm multiple times to get to the point they are - and it’s only “obvious” in hindsight.
If you want folks to make generational bets as a matter of course (which I think most folks do), centralizing the downside of those bets and socializing the upside of those bets is not a great strategy. Almost as bad as socializing the downside.
Competition will eventually close that gap. We’re only a few years into this thing.
They really got it right on multiple levels - for those who don't know, roller coaster tycoon was infamously written in 99% assembly and meticulously optimized by the developer to run effectively in 16 megabytes of ram.
A laptop can't run the latest big models, because memory is too expensive. This thing probably can't run models larger than Mistral Small 4. But it'd be a completely different thing to have a hardcoded Mistral Large 4, than a choice of tiny models.
I think I misunderstood what the technology could do a little bit, because I imagined these fixed matrix multiplies encoded into hardware as small-ish, as using routing space etc., not just fast.
I think what I really imagined was useful would be more easily achieved by having a big ROM with model weights connected to an ordinary GPU.
But with Nvidia people just expect they nerf all the features.
This is a new thing with the firmware that can be used only by Windows. If this NVIDIA policy continues, then NVIDIA will indeed become a bad choice for Linux, but until now, for graphics and AI applications NVIDIA has been the best choice for Linux, by providing the best performance and reliability.
For pure computational applications, especially for those requiring good FP64 throughput, there are many years since NVIDIA has become a worse choice than AMD and more recently also than Intel, but that is due to poor hardware support, not to bad software support.
Hell, their old closed-source NVIDIA _FreeBSD_ drivers were at parity with Windows. CUDA included (though the CUDA toolkit required Linuxulator syscall emulation to run the Linux bins).
Imagine my surprise when my new Blackwell card didn’t work, and that the newly required open source drivers were Linux-only.