this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2025
455 points (95.4% liked)

Technology

74073 readers
3144 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
 

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
[–] themurphy@lemmy.ml 14 points 22 hours ago (8 children)

It will not go away at this point. Too many daily users already, who uses it for study, work, chatting, looking things up.

If not OpenAI, it will be another service.

[–] krashmo@lemmy.world 17 points 22 hours ago (4 children)

Those same things were said about hundreds of other technologies that no longer exist in any meaningful sense. Current usage of a technology, which in this specific case I would argue is largely frivolous anyway, is not an accurate indicator of future usage.

[–] rigatti@lemmy.world 2 points 22 hours ago (3 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 7 points 16 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

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)