3 ms·
I agree; I don't think there's any reason to assume Jevons paradox won't apply. > If we have to switch to something like burning the model weights into silicon
by ekunazanu 2mo ago
I agree; I don't think there's any reason to assume Jevons paradox won't apply.
> If we have to switch to something like burning the model weights into silicon to continue to make gains
I think that's already being considered semi-seriously [0][1]
[0] https://taalas.com/products/ https://taalas.com/products/
[1] https://ir.amd.com/news-events/press-releases/detail/1296/amd-acquires-taalas-to-advance-compute-solutions-for-rapidly-growing-ai-inference-market https://ir.amd.com/news-events/press-releases/detail/1296/am...
- kurthr 2mo agoWhat's really interesting is that if you scale it to higher densities (eg 3nm and stacked die) with ComputeInMemory for fp8 you can reasonably start to fit 30B-70B models. With MoE and multiple stacked die, just like HBM, you could fit an open weight near frontier 1T model (like GLM5.2) at similarly much lower power <10kW and high token rates >2ktps. For running a bunch of agents where fill rate and speed/latency are important it may not matter that you're 6-18mo behind on weights. The process for the chip design could be largely automated, and new silicon pumped out as new weights are available (with a 3-6mo delay).