How about “We sell a computer called the tinybox. It comes in two colors + pro.
tinybox red and green are for people looking for a quiet home/office machine. tinybox pro is for people looking for a loud compact rack machine.” [0]
tinybox red and green are for people looking for a quiet home/office machine. tinybox pro is for people looking for a loud compact rack machine.” [0]
For $40,000, a Tinybox pro is advertised as offering 1.36 petaflops processing and 192 GB VRAM.
For about $6,000 a pair of Nvidia Project Digits offer about a combined 2 petaflops processing and 256 GB VRAM.
The market segment for Tinybox always seemed to be people that were somewhat price-insensitive, but unless Nvidia completely fumbles on execution, I struggle to think of any benefits of a Tinygrad Tinybox over an Nvidia Digits. Maybe if you absolutely, positively, need to run your OS on x86.
I'd love to see if AMD or Intel has a response to these. I'm not holding my breath.
2 PFLOPS at FP4.
256 GB RAM, not VRAM. I think they haven't specified the memory bandwidth.
Also, the Tinybox's memory bandwidth is 8064 GB/s, while the Digits seems to be around 512 GB/s, according to speculation on Reddit.
Moreover, Nvidia's announced their RTX 5090s priced at $2k, which could put downward pressure on the price of Tinybox's 4090s. So the Tinybox green or pro models might get cheaper, or they might come out with a 5090-based model.
If you're the kind of person that's ready to spend $40k on a beastly ML workstation, there's still some upside to Tinybox.
>the size of several ATX desktops