• xthexder@l.sw0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Asking ChatGPT a question doesn’t take 1 hour like most of these… this is a very misleading graph

    • vivendi@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      This is actually misleading in the other direction: ChatGPT is a particularly intensive model. You can run a GPT-4o class model on a consumer mid to high end GPU which would then use something in the ballpark of gaming in terms of environmental impact.

      You can also run a cluster of 3090s or 4090s to train the model, which is what people do actually, in which case it’s still in the same range as gaming. (And more productive than 8 hours of WoW grind while chugging a warmed up Nutella glass as a drink).

      Models like Google’s Gemma (NOT Gemini these are two completely different things) are insanely power efficient.

      • xthexder@l.sw0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        I didn’t even say which direction it was misleading, it’s just not really a valid comparison to compare a single invocation of an LLM with an unrelated continuous task.

        You’re comparing Volume of Water with Flow Rate. Or if this was power, you’d be comparing Energy (Joules or kWh) with Power (Watts)

        Maybe comparing asking ChatGPT a question to doing a Google search (before their AI results) would actually make sense. I’d also dispute those “downloading a file” and other bandwidth related numbers. Network transfers are insanely optimized at this point.