Remix.run Logo
abraae 16 hours ago

It's just the same dynamic as old servers. They still work fine but power costs make them uneconomical compared to latest tech.

acdha 16 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It’s far more extreme: old servers are still okay on I/O, and memory latency, etc. won’t change that dramatically so you can still find productive uses for them. AI workloads are hyper-focused on a single type of work and, unlike most regular servers, a limiting factor in direct competition with other companies.

matt-p 10 hours ago | parent [-]

I mean you could use training GPUs for inference right? That would be use case number 1 for a 8 * a100 box in a couple of years. It can also be used for non IO limited things like folding proteins or other 'scientific' use cases. Push comes to shove im sure an old A100 will run crysis.

physicsguy 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Push comes to shove im sure an old A100 will run crysis.

They don’t have video out ports!

2 hours ago | parent | next [-]
[deleted]
fulafel 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Just like laptop dGPUs.

oblio 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

All those use cases would probably use up 1% of the current AI infrastructure, let alone ahat they're planning to build.

Yeah, just like gas, possible uses will expand if AI crashes out, but:

* will these uses cover, say, 60% of all this infra?

* will these uses scale up to use that 60% within the next 5-7 years, while that hardware is still relevant and fully functional?

Also, we still have railroad tracks from the 1800s rail mania that were never truly used to capacity and dot com boom dark fiber that's also never been used fully, even with the internet growing 100x since. And tracks and fiber don't degrade as quickly as server hardware and especially GPUs.

m00x 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

LambdaLabs is still making money off their Tesla V100s, A100s, and A6000s. The older ones are cheap enough to run some models and very cheap, so if that's all you need, that's what you'll pick.

The V100 was released in 2017, A6000 in 2020, A100 in 2021.

Havoc 14 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That could change with a power generation breakthrough. If power is very cheap then running ancient gear till it falls apart starts making more sense

rgmerk 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Hugely unlikely.

Even if the power is free you still need a grid connection to move it to where you need it, and, guess what, the US grid is bursting at the seams. This is not just due to data center demand; it was struggling to cope with the transition away from coal well before that point.

You also can’t buy a gas turbine for love nor money at the moment, and they’re not ever going to be free.

If you plonked massive amounts of solar panels and batteries in the Nevada desert, that’s becoming cheap but it ain’t free, particularly as you’ll still need gas backup for a string of cloudy days.

If you think SMRs are going to be cheap I have a bridge to sell you, you’re also not going to build them right next to your data centre because the NRC won’t let you.

So that leaves fusion or geothermal. Geothermal is not presently “very cheap” and fusion power has not been demonstrated to work at any price.

overfeed 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Power consumption is only part of the equation. More efficient chips => less heat => lower cooling costs and/or higher compute density in the same space.

nish__ 8 hours ago | parent [-]

Solution: run them in the north. Put a server in the basement of every home in Edmonton and use the excess heat to warm the house.

zppln 16 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I'm a little bit curious about this. Where do all the hardware from the big tech giants usually go once they've upgraded?

q3k 11 hours ago | parent | next [-]

In-house hyperscaler stuff gets shredded, after every single piece of flash storage gets first drilled through and every hard drive gets bent by a hydraulic press. Then it goes into the usual e-waste recycling stream (ie. gets sent to poor countries where precious metals get extracted by people with a halved life expectancy).

Off-the-shelf enterprise gear has a chance to get a second life through remarketing channels, but much of it also gets shredded due to dumb corporate policies. There are stories of some companies refusing to offload a massive decom onto the second hand market as it would actually cause a crash. :)

It's a very efficient system, you see.

oblio 7 hours ago | parent [-]

Similar to corporate laptops where due to stupid policies, for most BigCos you can't really buy or otherwise get a used laptop, even as the former corporate used of said laptop.

Super environmentally friendly.

trollbridge 16 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I used (relatively) ancient servers (5-10 years in age) because their performance is completely adequate; they just use slightly more power. As a plus it's easy to buy spare parts, and they run on DDR3, so I'm not paying the current "RAM tax". I generally get such a server, max out its RAM, max out its CPUs and put it to work.

taneq 11 hours ago | parent [-]

Same, the bang for buck on a 5yo server is insane. I got an old Dell a year ago (to replace our 15yo one that finally died) and it was $1200 AUD for a maxed out recently-retired server with 72TB of hard drives and something like 292GB of RAM.

PunchyHamster 11 hours ago | parent [-]

Just not too old. Easy to get into "power usage makes it not worth it" for any use case when it runs 24/7

monster_truck 10 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Seriously. 24/7 adds up faster than most realize!

The idle wattage per module has shrunk from 2.5-3W down to 1-1.2 between DDR3 & DDR5. Assuming a 1.3W difference (so 10.4W for 8760 hours), a DDR3 machine with 8 sticks would increase your yearly power consumption by almost 1% (assuming avg 10,500kWh/yr household)

That's only a couple dollars in most cases but the gap is only larger in every other instance. When I upgraded from Zen 2 to Zen 3 it was able to complete the same workload just as fast with half as many cores while pulling over 100W less. Sustained 100% utilization barely even heats a room effectively anymore!

blackenedgem 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The one thing to be careful with Zen 2 onwards is that if your server is going to be idling most of the time then the majority of your power usage comes from the IO die. Quite a few times you'd be better off with the "less efficient" Intel chips because they save 10-20 Watts when doing nothing.

3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
nish__ 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Wake on LAN?

darkwater 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Then you cannot enjoy some very useful and used home server functions like home automation or NVR.

dpe82 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Maybe? The price difference on newer hardware can buy a lot of electricity, and if you aren't running stuff at 100% all the time the calculation changes again. Idle power draw on a brand new server isn't significantly different from one that's 5 years old.

taneq 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

To be clear, this server is very lightly loaded, it's just running our internal network services (file server, VPN/DNS, various web apps, SVN etc.) so it's not like we're flogging a room full of GeForce 1080Ti cards instead of buying a new 4090Ti or whatever. Also it's at work so it doesn't impact the home power bill. :D

wmf 16 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Some is sold on the used market; some is destroyed. There are plenty of used V100 and A100 available now for example.

dogman144 15 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Manipulating this for creative accounting seems to be the root of Michael Burry’s argument, although I’m not fluent enough in his figures to map here. But, commenting that it interesting to see IBM argue a similar case (somewhat), or comments ITT hitting the same known facts, in light of Nvidia’s counterpoints to him.

PunchyHamster 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Eh, not exactly. If you don't run CPU at 70%+ the rest of the machine isn't that much more inefficient that model generation or two behind.

It used to be that new server could use half power of the old one at idle but vendors figured out that servers also need proper power management a while ago and it is much better.

Last few gens increase could be summed up to "low % increase in efficiency, with TDP, memory channels and core count increase".

So for loads not CPU bound the savings on newer gen aren't nearly worth it to replace it, and for bulk storage the CPU power usage is even smaller part

matt-p 10 hours ago | parent [-]

Definitely single thread performance and storage are the main reasons not to use an old server. A 6 year old server didn't have nvme drives, so SATA SSD at best. That's a major slow down if disk is important.

Aside from that there's no reason to not use a dual socket server from 5 years ago instead of a single socket server of today. Power and reliability maybe not as good.

zozbot234 5 hours ago | parent [-]

NVMe is just a different form factor for what's essentially a PCIe connection, and adapters are widely available to bridge these formats. Surely old servers will still support PCIe?

knowitnone3 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

that was then. now, high-end chips are reaching 4,3,2 nm. power savings aren't that high anymore. what's the power saving going from 4 to 2nm?

monster_truck 10 hours ago | parent | next [-]

+5-20% clockspeed at 5-25% lower voltages (which has been and continues to be the trend) add up quick from gen to gen, nevermind density or ipc gains.

baq 3 hours ago | parent [-]

We can’t really go lower on voltage anymore without a very significant change in the materials used. Silicon band gap yadda yadda.

10 hours ago | parent | prev [-]
[deleted]