One million Blackwell GPUs would suck down an astonishing 1.875 gigawatts of power. For context, a typical nuclear power plant only produces 1 gigawatt of power.

Fossil fuel-burning plants, whether that’s natural gas, coal, or oil, produce even less. There’s no way to ramp up nuclear capacity in the time it will take to supply these millions of chips, so much, if not all, of that extra power demand is going to come from carbon-emitting sources.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    (probably on the order of the energy usage from a typical search engine).

    I find that hard to believe. Search engines just regurgitate what is in a database. LLMs have to do calculations to create the sentences they produce. That takes more energy.

    • sunstoned@lemmus.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Believe what you will. I’m not an authority on the topic, but as a researcher in an adjacent field I have a pretty good idea. I also self host Ollama and SearXNG (a metasearch engine, to be clear, not a first party search engine) so I have some anecdotal inclinations.

      Training even a teeny tiny LLM or ML model can run a typical gaming desktop at 100% for days. Sending a query to a pretrained model hardly even shows up on HTop unless it’s gigantic. Even the gigantic models only spike the CPU for a few seconds (until the query is complete). SearXNG, again anecdotally, spikes my PC about the same as Mistral in Ollama.

      I would encourage you to look at more explanations like the one below. I’m not just blowing smoke, and I’m not dismissing the very real problem of massive training costs (in money, energy, and water) that you’re pointing out.

      https://www.baeldung.com/cs/chatgpt-large-language-models-power-consumption