Remix.run Logo
mchusma 7 hours ago

I think they talked about this being general purpose chip but I would think that Anthropic/OpenAI are at the scale now they could bake LLM weights into chips themselves.

For example, GPT Sol baked into a custom chip run for $100M that runs 10x as fast and 10x as cheap should pay for itself as long as the chip is useful for long enough.

While 2 years ago nothing was useful more than 1 year long, there are many older models in use now (e.g. Haiku 4.5, GPT-OSS 120b), and I expect this trend to continue.

I know this is what Taalas was doing (acquired by AMD), here was their demo, https://chatjimmy.ai/ which is based on Llama 3.1 8B. It feels like this should start to happen soon.

bmulholland 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Probably! But not viable yet; the chips would be about a year behind SOTA. Note the ~16 months that the article quotes as being insanely fast to get this chip to tape-out (read: start producing). We'll have to bootstrap our way there: AI is actively being used to get us closer to viable lead times for this.

Unfortunately, there's some real physical constraints: IIRC, manufacturing a wafer takes on the order of a month, start to finish, for the physical processing.

Maybe once LLM improvements asymptote further?

kurthr 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The metal masked ROM is basically only 2 metal/contact layers. It's not a full new design and tapeout. You could roll a new set of parameters every ~2-3months. It's not an architectural change. See statements below.

https://www.eetimes.com/taalas-specializes-to-extremes-for-e...

https://www.turingpost.com/p/taalas

https://cambrian-ai.com/taalas-launches-hardcore-chip-with-i...

Part of the key is that by moving even from 6nm to 3-4nm one could embed a 20-30B model as part of a MoE (or only a subset of activated layers) on a single reticle die (note B300s are already multi-reticle), with a separate predictive/dispatch model controlling them each on a separate chip. This is without even stacking CiM ROM die. Moving the layer activations (and KV cache etc) between die requires relatively high speeds (and low latency), but distributed with multiple die in parallel might well be doable even with standard multilane PCIe. Of course KV cache prefill could also be handled by external GPUs. I'm sure AMD will make some reasonable choices.

MBCook an hour ago | parent [-]

But that means your different chips all have different sets of weights and are different generations.

If none of that is baked into the chip as now then all the chips are running the latest weights every time.

Even if you could ignore the stuff built into the chip when the time came, at that point you just wasted money on silicon that’s useless in 2-3 months.

tintor 17 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

They could etch the model architecture, without the weights into the chip.

This way newly post-trained model can be loaded and served the same day.

vineyardmike 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

How much of that 16mo is design versus just production? If there was a “plug and play” chip where you just BYO weights, how long would it take?

The bigger issue seems to be that these chips can’t hold that many weights at the moment.

(I’m curious if chips with large weights in them would be more tolerant or less to yield issues. If you flip a few bits in the weights, does it really matter at scale?)

RealityVoid 5 hours ago | parent [-]

Talaas, from what I understand is building stuff just like that. The infra is the same and the weights layer is all you need to change. I guess you could half etch the chips and then finish them with the weights only. I think their turnaround is 6-8 Weeks. The size of the models fitting on the chips at the moment is llama 3 I think?

derefr 4 hours ago | parent [-]

> I guess you could half etch the chips and then finish them with the weights only.

Basically a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gate_array. (The non-field-programmable kind.)

kushie 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

tapeout could shrink but days per mask layer (DPML) does not have much margin..

smallmancontrov an hour ago | parent [-]

I'm not in industry, is DPML (which I assume is the time required to make a mask?) set by electron beam scan time or something?

jeremyjh 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I think Sol is already good enough though.

basilgohar 2 hours ago | parent [-]

"640k (token context) should be enough for anyone."

jerf 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I know what you're saying, but modulo things like losing track of what year it is as time passes by, a current frontier model is going to continue to be useful for many tasks for many years, even moreso if it's 5-10x faster due to the chip architecture.

It's not that it would be the best forever, it's that it would be useful for plenty long enough to be worthwhile, even if there was better stuff available. In exactly the same way that this computer I'm typing this message on is not the latest and hottest cutting edge stuff. A 7 year old CPU, 7 year old Intel integrated graphics, an older NVMe disk, a mere 32GB of RAM... ok, that's one spec that's still pretty modern although it is slower RAM... but it's still plenty fast enough to comment on HN, even these seven years after it was cutting edge.

throwuxiytayq 35 minutes ago | parent [-]

> but it's still plenty fast enough to comment on HN, even these seven years after it was cutting edge

While it’s still too early to tell, I don’t think that’s how intelligence scales. Better models get you better solutions even to trivial problems. The ceiling for getting it done better is very high even if you’re not doing anything complicated. And difficulty isn’t uniformly distributed anyway - it seems to me that “mostly simple” tasks often have annoying 1% tails that low-intelligence models struggle with. I think we’ll see people chasing the top models for quite a while, or indefinitely - depending on the cost curve.

thoughtbefore 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It may not matter. Think about why SOTA model companies are exploring chips. What do chips offer?

If SOTA models haven’t peaked, then the SOTA model companies would still be churning out better and better intelligence.

calebkaiser an hour ago | parent [-]

Google rolled out TPUs in 2015. AWS released Inferentia and Trainium chips in 2020.

If companies working on ML-specific chips was evidence that large transformer models have fully saturated their potential, the field would have been done circa GPT-2.

Aurornis 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> I know this is what Taalas was doing (acquired by AMD), here was their demo, https://chatjimmy.ai/ which is based on Llama 3.1 8B. It feels like this should start to happen soon.

Taalas needed a giant chip (6nm) for an 8B model.

At best you could use a more advanced node to try to put a MoE model across several chips working together, but you can’t have GPT Sol size models on a single chip like that.

greenknight 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Nope. But we are hitting some pretty impressive levels with 128B models.

The other thing is, a lot of the time, model performance is improved with more 'thinking' time.

The thinking time is just more tokens... but instead of say 1000 tokens or 10,000 tokens worth of thinking its 1,000,000... how does that improve model performance? Could a 128B model hit levels of GPT Sol?

cherioo 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Thinking generates a ton of tokens. These baked in chips tend to not have a lot of memory for context. I am not sure taalas supports Thinking at all.

The more problem like these they solve the more they will look like GPU.

nextaccountic 3 hours ago | parent [-]

couldn't one just add some hundreds of GB of HBM?

kimixa 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Yeah, but then there's the size of KV cache needing to be read through that HBM interface for each token, putting a hard limit on the tok/s based on the memory bandwidth.

On some models a large context can be a notable proportion of the size of the weights themselves.

For example, qwen 3.8 27b uses ~64kb/token for the kv cache - so for a 256k token context that's ~16gb of the kv cache for a ~54gb model (assuming 2 bytes-per-param/f16 for both).

So if the current non-baked-in chip is already memory bandwidth bound, as is often the case for current hardware and models, and the "only KV cache in HBM" chip has the same total memory bandwidth, it can only ever be (54/16)=~3.4x faster for the baked in-silicon model.

EDIT: I guess actually (54+16)/16=~4.3x faster, as the current implementation would need to read that KV cache too :)

andy_ppp 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yes, they could also sell me GPT Sol 5.6 or 5.7 on a chip and I’d probably buy it. It’s a really really useful model for me, I’m not sure how much better for coding I need it to be. For most things I find Sol good enough with a small amount of coaxing around my tastes.

structural 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Keep in mind that what previous work has done on a single chip with weights baked in was on a 8b parameter model. Sol is likely something in the 5T parameter range, perhaps higher. Serving the whole thing at BF16 is on the order of $3m in hardware just to serve it at all, and closer to $1-1.5m of hardware if it was being served as NVFP4. And power draw starting at high tens to low hundreds of kilowatts.

Let's say a magic set of chips comes along to host this. Maybe it's 2-3x more efficient in size and power. You're still talking a form factor that's a good chunk of a rack, draws tens of kilowatts, and could actually be sold at a similar if not higher price point because the OPEX is so much lower.

It may be useful but it's certainly uneconomic to spend >$1m to self host the model, plus ongoing power and maintenance costs, plus the cost to adapt whatever building you're in to be able to power it.

nimchimpsky 5 hours ago | parent [-]

[dead]

Caracas288 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Man wouldn’t it be cool to be able to slot a massive ROM AI chip into the external AI drive of the pc…

pantelisk 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It should look like a NES cartridge! That you have to blow on its end to clear any dust and it should do a satisfying click when it slots in.

Cooling might be an issue though...

xyzsparetimexyz 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It'd just be pcie probably

porphyra 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Also right now Sol 5.6 Max is super slow but if it were way faster on a chip (like Taalas' Llama 8b demo) then it would be an extreme value multiplier. But the model is so large that "baking it onto a chip" doesn't seem straightforward.

redox99 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

That'd be ungodly expensive.

lqstuart an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Eventually, someone is going to do this in Minecraft

raincole an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It won't happen until IPO. If they do it now it'd be signaling that AI isn't improving fast.

andsoitis 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> For example, GPT Sol baked into a custom chip run for $100M that runs 10x as fast and 10x as cheap should pay for itself as long as the chip is useful for long enough.

but you trade updatability, which I don't think is worth it yet.

mchusma an hour ago | parent [-]

Maybe! (1) Would SOL level intelligence be useful 3 years from now? 5 years? (2) would dedicated chips be the most affordable way to run this model in 3-5 years?

I suspect the answer to both of these questions is yes right now, but I agree it’s borderline.

andsoitis 42 minutes ago | parent [-]

3 years is an eternity.

mf_tomb 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

"Baking in" a model into a chip is a bad idea because chips take 2 years to tape out and then you're stuck doing inference on llama 3 in 2026 when fable/sol are available. Every accelerator is a tradeoff between flexibility and performance and GPUs are already pareto-optimal

guhcampos an hour ago | parent | next [-]

There are other options. I worked for a startup called NVXL and we were programming DNNs into FPGAs using OpenCL, on custom boards we built to plug into NVME. It worked great, but it wasn't fast enough at the time to compete with Nvidia, or even Intel AVX512. Ultimately the company failed, but maybe some hybrid like that could work for LLMs? I haven't been up to date on how DNNs and LLMs look like under the hood these days, but there's got to be someone doing something similar.

twobitshifter 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It depends when the good enough level hits. Pretty sure we are almost there for most common applications of AI.

dgacmu 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

That's only half the problem. OpenAI is contractually obligated, if you will, to believe that models will continue improving at an impressive rate for the foreseeable future (otherwise their valuation makes no sense).

If you believe that, then you should expect to get Sol-level performance out of a Luna-cost model within six months or a year. If you have a system with the weights baked in, that means you're going to end up serving that Sol-class model several times more expensively than it will take someone who comes along a few months later. (such as what recently happened with DeepSeek's update.)

And under that assumption of continuing advancement, baking things in doesn't make sense in general - it's a play you'd make if you think things are slowing down a lot. Which may be right but it's not OpenAI or anthropic's play.

adventured 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Assume a $800 billion valuation. $100 billion ad network. $30 billion op income. 26x price to op income ratio. It's right there for them to grab, or someone else to grab.

Their valuation does make sense if you believe: 1) they can retain a massive user base and 2) a massive user base can be monetized. Future value is almost always pulled forward these days for high growth tech companies.

An LLM the size of Google search in users is even more valuable than Google search. The ad market for LLMs will be even larger than search was (no matter what HN prefers).

The monetization part is the easier part. Silicon Valley understands extraordinarily well how to build ad networks. If OpenAI maintain their gigantic user base, a $100 billion ad network is a given bolt-on. They'd have to screw that up in an epic way to not get there.

Facebook - Insta - WhatsApp is an absolute dogshit tandem with a gigantic user base. $228 billion in ad sales and still expanding 10% per year.

Google knows this is what's happening, that's why they don't care about chasing Anthropic very much. They're busy completely remaking how their core search business works.

Gigachad 38 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Good enough will hit when the tech stops advancing quickly. You could have a "good enough" model but in 2 years if the general purpose chip can run it just as fast, there is no point having the single purpose one.

usef- 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The whole point is that it's supposed to be more efficient. But models are also still getting absurdly more efficient every year, so you're likely nullifying much/most of the advantage. 18 months is a long time right now (and 18 is only time to tape out, not operational in data centers).

Even if the balance was net positive, you would also not be able to train them against new tools/harnesses or knowledge. How many years do you expect to keep using them?

adventured 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The good enough level isn't ever arriving. We're in the first or second inning for LLMs. They will rapidly subdivide in complexity, they will not stagnate in the next decade.

Beyond the model, when would you freeze processor performance, such that it was good enough? Because that's exactly what freezing on Talaas is premised around.

The semiconductor technology will also continue to improve. You lose twice. Talaas is one of the dumbest ideas I've seen in semiconductors in decades.

pantalaimon 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Well we'll see those surplus chips being repurposed for toys then. Who wouldn't want a new Furby that can actually hold a conversation.

vunderba 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I've seen several attempts even on HN of the LLM meets Teddy Ruxpin (or more accurately AG Talking Bear) but most of them offloaded the AI to some off-site servers.

I’d like to think that most parents would be weary of handing their children what basically amounts to a tape recorder that siphons all the data off to a large corporation.

OTOH, a completely local one (LLM + VAD + Speech Rec) would be a fun little thing to build.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AG_Bear

sebzim4500 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

My guess is we only see this once they start saturating computer use benchmarks. That's a use case which would be extremely valuable at the right costs/speed, but the current models just aren't there yet.

fl0id 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

isn't that what they are doing with cerebras?

mkl 5 hours ago | parent [-]

No, Cerebras holds the weights in SRAM - they are changeable, not baked in.

htrp 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

etched tried this.... it didn't go very well

anukin 4 hours ago | parent [-]

I would assume asic based llm would work really well. Why did it not go well?

striking 3 hours ago | parent [-]

https://chatjimmy.ai/ runs Llama 3.1-8B on an ASIC as a demo by https://taalas.com/ I believe.

That's quite a few parameters shy of today's trillion-weight behemoths, but it is fast.

mchusma 25 minutes ago | parent [-]

You are correct. I think this is the bull case. It seems like this would be useful right now for some things (eg moderation).