Paragraph Pollution: AI is (probably) greener than you typing on a laptop (opens in new tab)

(blog.plinth.org.uk)

3 pointstomjohnneill2y ago12 comments

12 comments

Random text generator is even greener than AI and me typing. Does not mean that result is understandable or even coherent.

dartos2y ago

Pretty shallow analysis.

How much energy was used for training chat gpt 2,3 and 4?

Also

> We’ll assume that AI models have roughly the same split of operating costs as a typical data centre

I don’t think this is a good assumption. GPT is not a typical application, it requires a massive amount of power hungry GPUs.

It’d be better to compare the power cost to non-asic crypto mining farms.

tomjohnneillOP2y ago

That's fair about ignoring the training cost. I did write a bit more going into that in a follow up piece here: https://notfunatparties.substack.com/p/ai-is-good-for-the-pl...

Do you have any better sources for the power usage stats? It would be good to get a bit closer on that front. Having said that, even if the cost share is closer to 80%, that still puts it on par with a laptop for an average person.

dartos2y ago

Well openai has about 30k A100s https://www.tomshardware.com/news/chatgpt-nvidia-30000-gpus

What’s the power consumption on that assuming full load at all times?

dartos2y ago

Also, I would expect openai to be taking a loss on each individual inference request as they also have a monthly fee, dalle, and loads of VC capital.

No source for that though, I just wouldn’t assume that they’re breaking even

1 more reply

rsynnott2y ago

Do people actually use gpt-3.5 turbo? Full-fat gpt-4 is 40 times more expensive...

tomjohnneillOP2y ago

It's the default for the free version of ChatGPT no? That's what the majority of people use.

rsynnott2y ago

So, I don't use this stuff, but every time I see someone complaining about it doing something stupid, the response they get tends to be "that's because it's GPT-3, everyone uses GPT-4 now"; I took this on face value.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

12 comments

TheLoafOfBread2y ago

Random text generator is even greener than AI and me typing. Does not mean that result is understandable or even coherent.

dartos2y ago

Pretty shallow analysis.

How much energy was used for training chat gpt 2,3 and 4?

Also

> We’ll assume that AI models have roughly the same split of operating costs as a typical data centre

I don’t think this is a good assumption. GPT is not a typical application, it requires a massive amount of power hungry GPUs.

It’d be better to compare the power cost to non-asic crypto mining farms.

tomjohnneillOP2y ago

That's fair about ignoring the training cost. I did write a bit more going into that in a follow up piece here: https://notfunatparties.substack.com/p/ai-is-good-for-the-pl...

dartos2y ago

Well openai has about 30k A100s https://www.tomshardware.com/news/chatgpt-nvidia-30000-gpus

What’s the power consumption on that assuming full load at all times?

dartos2y ago

Also, I would expect openai to be taking a loss on each individual inference request as they also have a monthly fee, dalle, and loads of VC capital.

No source for that though, I just wouldn’t assume that they’re breaking even

1 more reply

rsynnott2y ago

Do people actually use gpt-3.5 turbo? Full-fat gpt-4 is 40 times more expensive...

tomjohnneillOP2y ago

It's the default for the free version of ChatGPT no? That's what the majority of people use.

rsynnott2y ago

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse