[HN Gopher] Jensen Huang keynote at CES 2025 [video]
___________________________________________________________________
Jensen Huang keynote at CES 2025 [video]
Author : subharmonicon
Score : 100 points
Date : 2025-01-07 02:42 UTC (4 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.youtube.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.youtube.com)
| behnamoh wrote:
| I liked this part: "one small step at a time,
| and one giant leap, together."
|
| I didn't like this part: 5090 for $2000, about
| $500 more than 4090 when it was announced.
|
| They didn't mention VRAM amount though, and I doubt it's more
| than 24GB. If Apple M4 Ultra gets close to 1.8 TB/s bandwidth of
| 5090, it'll crush GeForce once and for all (and for good).
|
| Also nitpick: the opening video said tokens are responsible for
| all AI, but that only applies to a subset of AI models...
| jsheard wrote:
| It's 32GB, that was leaked well before the event.
|
| > If Apple M4 Ultra gets close to 1.8 TB/s bandwidth of 5090
|
| If past trends hold (Ultra = 2x Max) it'll be around 1.1 TB/s,
| so closer to the 4090.
| behnamoh wrote:
| Jensen didn't talk about it. Maybe he knows it's
| embarrassingly low. Everyone knows nvidia won't give us more
| VRAM to avoid cannibalizing their enterprise products.
| aseipp wrote:
| The official specs for the 5090 have been out for days on
| nvidia.com, and they explicitly state it's 32GB of GDDR7
| with a 512-bit bus, for a total of 1.8TB/s of bandwidth.
| behnamoh wrote:
| 32GB is still not a lot.
| BryanLegend wrote:
| "640k should be enough for anybody"
| toshinoriyagi wrote:
| edit: 32GB is confirmed here https://www.nvidia.com/en-
| us/geforce/graphics-cards/50-serie...
|
| Supposedly, this image of a Inno3D 5090 box leaked, revealing
| 32GB of VRAM. It seems like the 5090 will be more of a true
| halo product, given the pricing of the other cards.
|
| https://www.techpowerup.com/330538/first-nvidia-geforce-rtx-...
| ksec wrote:
| For what 5090 is offering with 32GB RAM I thought it is a
| pretty decent price comparatively to 4090. I thought the whole
| lineup is really well priced.
| headcanon wrote:
| Market price for a 4090 is ~$2700 today:
| https://stockx.com/nvidia-founders-geforce-rtx-4090-24gb-gra...
|
| When you have a retail price so far below "street" price, it
| just makes it harder to obtain and scalpers take a bigger cut.
| Raising the price to something more normal at least gives you
| more of a chance at the big-box store.
| heyoni wrote:
| Or scalpers won't be dissuaded and street price for a 5090
| will be $3200 or more. $1500 was already an insane price tag
| for scalpers to pay but they did it anyways.
| magicalhippo wrote:
| AMD barely mentioned their next-gen GPUs, NVIDIA came out
| swinging right from the start. AMD announced two new models which
| by their own cryptic slide wouldn't even compete with their
| current top-end. Then NVIDIA came and announced a
| 4090-performance GPU for $549...
|
| If that's not just hot hair from NVIDIA, I totally get the
| business decision from AMD but man, would love some more
| competition in the higher end.
| behnamoh wrote:
| AMD has strategically decided to abandon the enthusiasts market
| [0]. Really sad that nvidia's monopoly has got solidified even
| further. That's one of the reasons I contribute to Apple's MLX
| instead of CUDA.
|
| 0: https://www.techradar.com/computing/gpu/amd-announces-new-
| ra...
|
| Update: typical HN behavior. someone is downvoting all my
| comments one by one...
| jiggawatts wrote:
| Someone with a lot of NVIDIA shares, no doubt...
| blitzar wrote:
| More likely someone holding the AMD bag
|
| edit: confirmed.
| ksec wrote:
| >Update: typical HN behavior. someone is downvoting all my
| comments one by one...
|
| You cant downvote older comments or comments older than 1 / 2
| days.
| Permik wrote:
| It depends totally how you define "hot air" in this instance.
| Later in the keynote there's a mention how the $549 card
| achieves the 4090-like rendering performance with DLSS, i.e.
| not with raw graphics, number crunching horsepower.
|
| _Personally?_ It 's a no for me dawg, DLSS unfortunately
| doesn't actually replace the need for the raw GPGPU crunch.
|
| _For the average layman and a consumer?_ Nvidia will be
| selling those GPU 's like hotcakes.
| y-c-o-m-b wrote:
| I kind of agree with this. On the one hand when DLSS works
| well, it's amazing. I didn't notice any issues at all playing
| Senua's Sacrifice and Senua's Saga. They were both as good as
| playing on everything maxed without DLSS. On the other hand
| when using it on Jedi Survivor, it's a very janky experience.
| You can clearly see artifacts and it trying to "self-correct"
| when using DLSS vs without DLSS.
| kcb wrote:
| DLSS upscaling is good. On a 4k display I can't see any
| visual reason not to run the Balanced preset. DLSS frame
| gen on the other hand I'm much more skeptical of. Every
| time I've tried it something just feels off.
| heyoni wrote:
| DLSS in cyberpunk has a lot of issues. Faces look weird,
| tons of ghosting, hair and particle effects looking very
| jagged.
| josephg wrote:
| They're claiming DLSS4 (only available on their new
| cards) fixes a lot of these issues. But we'll have to
| wait for the cards to get in the hands of reviewers
| before we'll know for sure. I'm still pretty skeptical.
|
| That said, if you read between the lines, it looks like
| the new 5090 is about ~40% faster than the 4090 at
| rasterisation. That's a solid inter generational
| improvement.
| nomel wrote:
| > Then NVIDIA came and announced a 4090-performance GPU for
| $549
|
| Never trust vendor performance claims (these specifically rely
| on 3x frame generation), and never assume cards will be
| available at MSRP.
| belter wrote:
| Correct: "Debunking the CUDA Myth Towards GPU-Based AI
| Systems" - https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.00210
| ekianjo wrote:
| > Then NVIDIA came and announced a 4090-performance GPU for
| $549...
|
| That's obviously a marketing hoax. Spray DLSS and other tricks
| and you can make this kind of claims while the raw power is
| clearly on the side of the 4090
| uluyol wrote:
| AMD is not ready to have a full announcement for their new
| consumer GPUs: https://morethanmoore.substack.com/p/where-was-
| rdna4-at-amds...
| caseyy wrote:
| 4090 (no frame generation) performance with a $549 card (4x
| frame generation), isn't it?
|
| In other words, the same performance at somewhere in the range
| of 2x-3.5x lighter workload. In other words, vastly different
| performance under same workload. It is veeery on the edge of
| false advertisement for them to omit the information in
| parentheses until later in the presentation. :)
|
| That line should have been "4090 frame rates on budget hardware
| thanks to DLSS 4" or something like that.
| ksec wrote:
| I actually got a lot more upbeat about the potential of AI after
| watching this keynote more so than any other demonstration or
| presentation.
|
| Blackwell is still based on N4, a derivative of 5nm. We know we
| will have N3 GPU next year, and they should be working with TSMC
| on capacity planning for N2. Currently Blackwell is pretty much
| limited by capacity of either TSMC, HBM or packaging. And unless
| the AI hype dies off soon ( which I doubt will happen ), we
| should still have at least another 5 years of these GPU
| improvements. We will have another 5 - 10x performance increase.
|
| And they have foreshadowed their PC entry with MediaTek
| Partnership. ( I wonder why they dont just acquired Mediatek )
| and may be even Smartphone or Tablet with Geforce GPU IP.
|
| The future is exciting.
| AlotOfReading wrote:
| The same industry opposition that killed the ARM acquisition
| would kill a mediatek acquisition.
| satellite2 wrote:
| The acquisition of ARM would have put Nvidia in the position
| of being able to impose to competitors uncompetitive
| restrictions on a quasi monopolistic market. Is it the case
| with MediaTek?
| AlotOfReading wrote:
| Mediatek is the largest smartphone SoC manufacturer, so
| yes. They're a supplier for Apple and the biggest
| competitor to Qualcomm, the two companies that were the
| most vocal in opposing the ARM acquisition.
| brookst wrote:
| My guess is mediatek's margins are much lower so an acquisition
| would tank Nvidia's stock price by leading to lower returns.
| That and/or not wanting the distraction of operating mediatek's
| many businesses that aren't aligned to Nvidia core competence.
| bloomingkales wrote:
| There was something eerily epic about his assertions. To
| suggest that they are _all_ of those companies is pretty wild.
|
| AI is bewitching.
| dehrmann wrote:
| I was taking these sort of improvements for granted. They'll
| certainly make ai cheaper, but most of the cost is up-front for
| generative models, and the models don't seem to be getting
| linearly better.
| kcb wrote:
| A major chip acquisition by Nvidia will probably never get
| global regulatory approval. I guess the question is what does
| Mediatek provide in the partnership. Nvidia is well versed in
| developing ARM SoCs already.
| bgnn wrote:
| 5g, wifi, bluetooth etc. what makes a mobile processor monile
| processor other than the CPU
| knowitnone wrote:
| yeah, those are just modules that anybody can just buy.
| NVIDIA already makes jetsons which are basically SBCs with
| decent GPU. so again, what does Mediatek provide?
| VHRanger wrote:
| How would shrinking the processor size help if the current GPU
| generation is already completely bottlenecked by VRAM bandwidth
| saturation?
|
| We aren't seeing nearly the same gains on VRAM bandwidth as we
| are on compute bandwidth
| ffsm8 wrote:
| Well, at least this generation almost doubles that bandwidth,
| right?
| contingencies wrote:
| As someone who has gone pretty deep in to robotics over the last
| 9 years I skipped right to the physical AI portion, and wasn't
| impressed.
|
| This has been stated on HN in most robotics threads, but the core
| of what they show, once again, is content generation, a feature
| largely looking for an application. The main application
| discussed is training data synthesis. While there is value in
| this for very specific use cases it's still lipstick ("look it
| works! wow AI!") on a pig (ie. non-deterministic system being
| placed in a critical operations process). This embodies one of
| the most fallacious, generally unspoken assumptions in AI and
| robotics today - that it is desirable to deal with the real world
| in an unstructured manner using fuzzy, vendor-linked,
| unauditable, shifting sand AI building blocks. This assumption
| _can make sense_ for driving and other relatively uncontrolled
| environments with immovable infrastructure and vast cultural,
| capital and paradigm investments demanding complex multi-sensor
| synthesis and rapid decision making based on environmental
| context based on prior training, but it makes _very little sense_
| for industrial, construction, agricultural, rural, etc.
| Industrial is traditionally all about understanding the problem
| or breaking it in to unit operations, design, fabricate and
| _control the environment to optimize the process_ for each of
| those in sequence, and thus lowering the cost and increasing the
| throughput.
|
| NVidia further wants us to believe we should buy three products
| from them: an embedded system ("nano"), a general purpose robotic
| system ("super") and something more computationally expensive for
| simulation-type applications ("ultra"). They claim (with
| apparently no need to proffer evidence whatsoever) that "all
| robotics" companies need these "three computers". I've got news
| for you: we don't, this is a fantasy, and limited if any value
| add will result from what amounts to yet another amorphous
| simulation, integration and modeling platform based on broken
| vendor assumptions. Ask anyone experienced in industrial, they'll
| agree. The industrial vendor space _is_ somewhat broken and rife
| with all sorts of dodgy things that wouldn 't fly in other
| sectors, but NVidia simply ain't gonna fix it with their current
| take, which for me lands somewhere between wishful thinking and
| downright duplicitous.
|
| As for "digital twins", most industrial systems are much like
| software systems: emergent, cobbled together from multiple poor
| and broken individual implementations, sharing state across
| disparate models, each based on poorly or undocumented design
| assumptions. This means their view of self-state, or "digital
| twin", is usually functionally fallacious. Where "digital twins"
| can _truly_ add value is in areas like functional safety, where
| if you design things correctly you avoid being mired in
| potentially lethally disastrous emergent states from
| interdependent subsystems that were not considered at subsystem
| design, maintenance or upgrade time because a non-exhaustive,
| insufficiently formal and deterministic approach was used in
| system design and specification. This very real value however
| hinges on the value being delivered _at design time, before
| implementation_ , which means you're not going to be buying
| 10,000 NVidia chips, but most likely zero.
|
| So my 2c is the Physical AI portion is basically a poorly founded
| forward-looking application sketch from what amounts to a
| professional salesman in a shiny black crocodile jacket at a
| purchased high-viz keynote. Perhaps the other segments had more
| weight.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-01-11 23:00 UTC)