As I suspected at the time (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25314818 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25314818), the Google numbers are lower than anyt

As I suspected at the time (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25314818 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25314818), the Google numbers are lower than anything in the Strubell paper, because you have to start from a much lower PUE and factor in additional efficiencies. (It did mention that power consumption of TPUs was not public knowledge.) It's not like Google hasn't been bragging about a PUE of 1.2 or better for more than a decade. For its employees to reference a paper with much worse assumptions was odd to say the least. It doesn't look like anyone with production experience was involved. And here we have this paper now, with many more details than what Google discloses usually...