Remix.run Logo
ekianjo a day ago

Wouldnt they need racks of GPUs to do that at scale?

als0 a day ago | parent [-]

Have you heard about the cloud?

pxndxx a day ago | parent [-]

The cloud is just someone else's computer. Do you think there's spare GPU compute available during the AI craze?

jdiff a day ago | parent | next [-]

I think there's a lot of spare GPU compute. I don't think it'd be made available for this, or if it was, I believe it'd most likely be from a company that won't survive the AI bust. But I think there's a lot of spare compute sitting idle out there.

If there weren't, I think token prices would be higher than they are, downtime would be higher than it is, and there would be far fewer free tiers or more restrictions on free tiers.

YmiYugy 18 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I don’t think there is a ton of spare capacity. But even if there was the machines are designed for AI not gaming, e.g. low CPU clocks, the GPUs don’t have RT cores or video encoders, etc. Stadia had custom hardware, GeForce Now uses workstation GPUs, xCloud has custom servers. Gaming also isn’t a good use for spare capacity. Demand is very spiky and people don’t have a lot of time flexibility.

jvanderbot 21 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There's a pretty fair staging argument of AI for work, Gaming for play, that would keep north american data centers with north american customers running 2/3 of the day.

Zababa 20 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

There's also an alternative which is that token prices are already high, downtimes do exist (semi frequent on Claude) or are managed by serving degraded versions/quants (speculation that has never really be proven afaik) or reducing thinking time ("juice" values from open AI), and that free tiers are not used much at all or are a loss leader.

alex43578 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

What if steam users could offer their computers up for credit on steam? Not sure if most consumer internet connections would be up for it, but that would be an interesting model.

YmiYugy 17 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I think it’s death by a thousand cuts. I think internet connections are the least of the issue. Plenty of people have gaming PCs wired to 1Gb/s fiber. It may even be better because users can be close together.

Where I see bigger issues is: 1. Economics. GeForce Now for a 5080 is 20ct/h. At retail prices you may get close in electricity.

2. Others want to game when I want to game. What good is offering my PC up at 5am? Who would want to use the service if you can’t reliably get access when you want it. Not to speak of the issue of getting kicked out when the owner wants their PC back.

3. The whole: do you trust someone else’s computer/do you trust others on your computer. Users don’t want their login details stolen or get banned for using a cheaters PC and providers don’t want you to cheat or do other nasty stuff. You can’t really do VMs because consumer GPUs don’t really support virtualization so dual booting

4. You need to dedicate a ton of disk space. Because of 3 you can’t really share and now you have to deal with some system to have the relevant games available.

alex43578 16 hours ago | parent [-]

I agree with all those issues.

Just for discussion though: Economics don’t necessarily dominate these markets when providers aren’t informed - Uber drivers w/ depreciation for example. If your GPU is a sunk cost, and your electricity is cheap enough, it might be attractive (think consumers mining crypto back when).

A floating market rate or “surge pricing” could come into play. Outside of the top 10% of gamers by playtime, there’s plenty of idle compute during prime hours.

A secure environment would definitely be essential. SteamOS could be a great tool for that: dual boot SteamOS and make SteamBucks while you’re not using your computer.

You could only offer your machine for the titles you have downloaded. This again could be addressed by a market: popular titles could get more utilization, but obscure titles could command a premium.

No guarantee any of this would actually work, but it’d be an interesting model to explore if I were at Steam. They have hardware survey data, user activity, etc; to check viability.

freedomben 19 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I suspect the latency would absolutely kill, plus what happens to your killer in-game progress when the owner of the computer decides to play their own game or shut down the machine? So you'd need some sort of handoff, which seems technical very, very difficult.

Hamuko a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Seems like there is considering that Meta is currently selling their excess AI capacity.

https://www.reuters.com/business/meta-sell-excess-ai-computi...

fineIllregister 21 hours ago | parent [-]

They're selling it for AI. Unless retro-nostalgia explodes and gamers are overwhelmed by a desire to pay for tokens (more than ai users), that doesn't change anything.