| ▲ | orlp a day ago | |||||||
If there was a continuous 500 watt GPU per person we'd increase energy consumption by more than double. The continuous energy footprint per person globally averages to 356 watt currently. | ||||||||
| ▲ | terhechte a day ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
A Mac Studio m4 max in low power mode consumes ~50-100 watt on 100% gpu consumption. On GPU idle it is ~10 watt. If we imagine improved models (e.g. qwen 3.8 is a 5b moe which is way faster to process) and improved chip performance on 2nm and half a day of usage (the AI will sleep when we sleep then): ((75 watt / 2 [faster models]) / 2 [faster chips]) / 2 [half a day of usage]) => ~ 10 watt. AI for everyone does not imply pC mAsTeRraCe for everyone. | ||||||||
| ||||||||
| ▲ | hhjinks a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||
500 watts continuous isn't realistic, unless you foresee a 24/7 digital shadow society where AIs interact continuously without user input. | ||||||||
| ||||||||
| ▲ | cheema33 a day ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
> If there was a continuous 500 watt GPU per person... Would we all be driving the 500 Watt GPU hard 24/7? And the premise that the "AI frontier progress stops as of 1 September 2026" likely does not include semiconductor progress. You are very likely to be able to run Fable class AI model on something that is significantly more efficient in 2040. | ||||||||