this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2025
405 points (95.1% liked)

Technology

74073 readers
2679 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
L4s@hackingne.ws
405
ChatGPT 5 power consumption could be as much as eight times higher than GPT 4 — research institute estimates medium-sized GPT-5 response can consume up to 40 watt-hours of electricity (www.tomshardware.com)
submitted 15 hours ago by homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
97 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

The University of Rhode Island's AI lab estimates that GPT-5 averages just over 18 Wh per query, so putting all of ChatGPT's reported 2.5 billion requests a day through the model could see energy usage as high as 45 GWh.

A daily energy use of 45 GWh is enormous. A typical modern nuclear power plant produces between 1 and 1.6 GW of electricity per reactor per hour, so data centers running OpenAI's GPT-5 at 18 Wh per query could require the power equivalent of two to three nuclear power reactors, an amount that could be enough to power a small country.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] rigatti@lemmy.world 2 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

Can you give some examples of those technologies? I'd be interested in how many weren't replaced with something more efficient or convenient.

[–] kautau@lemmy.world 6 points 7 hours ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dot-com_bubble

There were certainly companies that survived, because yes, the idea of websites being interactive rather than informational was huge, but everyone jumped on that bandwagon to build useless shit.

As an example, this is today’s ProductHunt

And yesterday’s was AI, and the day before that it was AI, but most of them are demonstrating little value with high valuations.

LLMs will survive, likely improve into coordinator models that request data from SLMs and connect through MCP, but the investment bubble can’t sustain

[–] themurphy@lemmy.ml 4 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

Technologies come and go, but often when a worldwide popular one vanishes, it's because it got replaced with something else.

So lets say we need LLM's to go away. What should that be? Impossible to answer, I know, but that's what it would take.

We cant even get rid of Facebook and Twitter.

BUT that being said. LLMs will be 100x more efficient at some point - like any other new technology. We are just not there yet.

[–] glog78@digitalcourage.social 6 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

@themurphy @rigatti There is one difference ... LLM's can't be more efficient there is an inherent limitation to the technology.

https://blog.dshr.org/2021/03/internet-archive-storage.html

In 2021 they used 200PB and they for sure didn't make a copy of the complete internet. Now ask yourself if all this information without loosing informations can fit into a 1TB Model ?? ( Sidenote deepseek r1 is 404GB so not even 1TB ) ... local llm's usually < 16GB ...

This technology has been and will be never able to 100% replicate the original informations.

It has a certain use ( Machine Learning has been used much longer already ) but not what people want it to be (imho).