> Low GPU utilisation is a serious issue. Maybe? Maybe not? If you have a low GPU utilisation while loading a new level and only displaying a loading bar, that

> Low GPU utilisation is a serious issue. Maybe? Maybe not? If you have a low GPU utilisation while loading a new level and only displaying a loading bar, that's not a serious issue. If a CAD software has a low GPU utilisation after loading that's not a serious issue. (It just means that the software GUI is written efficiently and can handle complicated assemblies.) If a chat application has a low GPU utilisation that is not a problem, it is simply not the application which calls for full utilisation of the GPU. If your inside-out-tracker has a low GPU utilisation that is not a problem, it just means that you are leaving more space for the user's applications. But this is not the issue with the analogy. This conversation between you and me, whether or not 5% gpu utilisation is bad or good, or it-depends doesn't just happen here. It happens in everyones head who reads his post. He wants people to think about the organisational inefficiencies of Meta. And a significant portion of his audience is thinking "what is a GPU?". Because you can absolutely be a useful member of the Meta company without knowing that. And then a smaller portion of the audience is thinking "Is 5% GPU utilisation bad?" You could totally understand his points about organisational inefficiency without having to have any understanding of GPU performance metrics. He lost clarity, for no good reason.