4 ms·

Your calculations must be severely off, because I never heard anyone advocating for the construction of nuclear reactors to power game consoles around the world

Your calculations must be severely off, because I never heard anyone advocating for the construction of nuclear reactors to power game consoles around the world. However, we hear everyday that we need to build these reactors right now if we want to have AI.

mulmen 1y ago
Xboxes, smartphones, and personal computers are geographically distributed and so is their power generation. Data centers are …centralized. Dedicated power plants for large data center installations are not new.
- gruez 1y ago
  >Xboxes, smartphones, and personal computers are geographically distributed and so is their power generation. This is irrelevant because most "Xboxes, smartphones, and personal computers" are powered by centralized fossil fuel power plants that could plausibly be replaced with nuclear reactors, just like the power plant for a datacenter can be replaced with nuclear reactors.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - Kudos 1y ago
    My Xbox is powered by solar. I can't say the same for my use of Claude, and I do not have the same agency to change that.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - mulmen 1y ago
    The point is that the centralization of data centers makes them suitable for dedicated power generation.
elpocko 1y ago
I hear people advocating for the construction of nuclear reactors every day. They don't mention gaming, just like they don't mention refrigerators or washing machines specifically. A gaming machine consumes the same amount of energy as a machine used for AI, it's the same hardware. AI consumes it for seconds per user, while one gaming machine is used for hours per session. The energy required by one human to play a game for one hour could serve hundreds or thousands of AI users.
- rybosworld 1y ago
  The GPU's used for AI have significantly higher utilization rates than gaming GPU's... Here's some napkin math: H100: 61% utilization / 700W ~ 3.7MW/year RTX 3080: 10% utilization / 320W ~ 0.27MW/year
  - elpocko 1y ago
    How many AI users are served using a single H100 per time, and how many gamers are served using a single 3080 per time? How many gamers are simultaneously running a 3080 or equivalent for their entertainment?
    - mystified5016 1y ago
      Yes, AI users are being served by much more than one GPU at a time. Which is why the power used is so much higher than a single gaming pc
      - deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
      - elpocko 1y ago
        Thousands of users are being served by those GPUs. A gaming PC has one user. I can't believe I have to point this out on HN of all places.
    - rybosworld 1y ago
gruez 1y ago
That's his point? Greenpace wants AI datacenters to be built with clean energy. elpocko points out that plenty of other pointless electricity consumers also aren't being built with clean energy today. That's not an argument against green energy, but is pointing out that greenpace isn't very rigorous with their pleas. They're seemingly picking whatever is the most topical. We should be against this, because latching on to the latest thing basically guarantees that the next thing rolls around, all the momentum will be lost. Remember when everyone was up in arms about crypto mining? How it's barely brought up because everyone's focused on AI.

mulmen 1y ago

Xboxes, smartphones, and personal computers are geographically distributed and so is their power generation. Data centers are …centralized. Dedicated power plants for large data center installations are not new.

gruez 1y ago
>Xboxes, smartphones, and personal computers are geographically distributed and so is their power generation. This is irrelevant because most "Xboxes, smartphones, and personal computers" are powered by centralized fossil fuel power plants that could plausibly be replaced with nuclear reactors, just like the power plant for a datacenter can be replaced with nuclear reactors.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- Kudos 1y ago
  My Xbox is powered by solar. I can't say the same for my use of Claude, and I do not have the same agency to change that.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- mulmen 1y ago
  The point is that the centralization of data centers makes them suitable for dedicated power generation.

elpocko 1y ago

I hear people advocating for the construction of nuclear reactors every day. They don't mention gaming, just like they don't mention refrigerators or washing machines specifically. A gaming machine consumes the same amount of energy as a machine used for AI, it's the same hardware. AI consumes it for seconds per user, while one gaming machine is used for hours per session. The energy required by one human to play a game for one hour could serve hundreds or thousands of AI users.

rybosworld 1y ago
The GPU's used for AI have significantly higher utilization rates than gaming GPU's... Here's some napkin math: H100: 61% utilization / 700W ~ 3.7MW/year RTX 3080: 10% utilization / 320W ~ 0.27MW/year
- elpocko 1y ago
  How many AI users are served using a single H100 per time, and how many gamers are served using a single 3080 per time? How many gamers are simultaneously running a 3080 or equivalent for their entertainment?
  - mystified5016 1y ago
    Yes, AI users are being served by much more than one GPU at a time. Which is why the power used is so much higher than a single gaming pc
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
    - elpocko 1y ago
      Thousands of users are being served by those GPUs. A gaming PC has one user. I can't believe I have to point this out on HN of all places.
  - rybosworld 1y ago

gruez 1y ago

That's his point? Greenpace wants AI datacenters to be built with clean energy. elpocko points out that plenty of other pointless electricity consumers also aren't being built with clean energy today. That's not an argument against green energy, but is pointing out that greenpace isn't very rigorous with their pleas. They're seemingly picking whatever is the most topical. We should be against this, because latching on to the latest thing basically guarantees that the next thing rolls around, all the momentum will be lost. Remember when everyone was up in arms about crypto mining? How it's barely brought up because everyone's focused on AI.