OpenAI will not disclose GPT-5’s energy use. It could be higher than past models
Technology
83
Beiträge
61
Kommentatoren
0
Aufrufe
-
I’m thinking otherwise. I think GPT5 is a much smaller model - with some fallback to previous models if required.
Since it’s running on the exact same hardware with a mostly similar algorithm, using less energy would directly mean it’s a “less intense” model, which translates into an inferior quality in American Investor Language (AIL).
And 2025’s investors doesn’t give a flying fuck about energy efficiency.
They probably wouldn't really care how efficient it is, but they certainly would care that the costs are lower.
-
This post did not contain any content.
OpenAI will not disclose GPT-5’s energy use. It could be higher than past models
Experts working to benchmark resource use of AI models say new version’s enhanced capabilities come at a steep cost
the Guardian (www.theguardian.com)
Photographer1: Sam, could you give us a goofier face?
*click* *click*
Photographer2: Goofier!!
*click* *click* *click* *click*
-
I mean, AI is using like 1-2% of human energy and that's fucking wild.
My take away is we need more clean energy generation. Good things we've got countries like China leading the way in nuclear and renewables!!
Do you have a source for that? Because given a chatgpt query takes a similar amount of energy to running a hair dryer for a few seconds i find it hard to believe.
-
It's a lot of people not understanding the kinds of things it can do vs the things it can't do.
It was like when people tried to search early Google by typing plain language queries ("What is the best restaurant in town?") and getting bad results. The search engine had limited capabilities and understanding language wasn't one of them.
If you ask a LLM to write a function to print the sum of two numbers, it can do that with a high success rate. If you ask it to create a new operating system, it will produce hilariously bad results.
You can’t blame the user when the marketing claims it’s replacing entire humans.
-
I mean, AI is using like 1-2% of human energy and that's fucking wild.
My take away is we need more clean energy generation. Good things we've got countries like China leading the way in nuclear and renewables!!
Yes, China is producing a lot of solar panels (a good thing!) but the percentage of renewables is actually going down. They are adding coal faster than solar.
-
I’m thinking otherwise. I think GPT5 is a much smaller model - with some fallback to previous models if required.
Since it’s running on the exact same hardware with a mostly similar algorithm, using less energy would directly mean it’s a “less intense” model, which translates into an inferior quality in American Investor Language (AIL).
And 2025’s investors doesn’t give a flying fuck about energy efficiency.
And they don't want to disclose the energy efficiency becaaaause ... ?
-
You can’t blame the user when the marketing claims it’s replacing entire humans.
It is replacing entire humans. The thing is, it's replacing the people you should have fired a long time ago
-
Do you have a source for that? Because given a chatgpt query takes a similar amount of energy to running a hair dryer for a few seconds i find it hard to believe.
a similar amount of energy to running a hair dryer
We see a lot of those kinds of comparisons. Thing is, you run a hair dryer once per day at most. Or it's compared to a google search, often. Again, most people will do a handful of searches each day. A ChatGPT conversation can be hundreds of messages back and forth. A Claude Code session can go for hours and involve millions of tokens. An individual AI inference might be pretty tame but the quantity of them is another level.
If it was so efficient then they wouldn't be building Manhatten-sized datacenters.
-
You can’t blame the user when the marketing claims it’s replacing entire humans.
I can blame the user for believing the marketing over their direct experiences.
If you use these tools for any amount of time it's easy to see that there are some tasks they're bad at and some that they are good at. You can learn how big of a project they can handle and when you need to break it up into smaller pieces.
I can't imagine any sane person who lives their life guided by marketing hype instead of direct knowledge and experience.
-
They probably wouldn't really care how efficient it is, but they certainly would care that the costs are lower.
I’m almost sure they’re keeping that for the Earnings call.
-
a similar amount of energy to running a hair dryer
We see a lot of those kinds of comparisons. Thing is, you run a hair dryer once per day at most. Or it's compared to a google search, often. Again, most people will do a handful of searches each day. A ChatGPT conversation can be hundreds of messages back and forth. A Claude Code session can go for hours and involve millions of tokens. An individual AI inference might be pretty tame but the quantity of them is another level.
If it was so efficient then they wouldn't be building Manhatten-sized datacenters.
ok, but running a hairdryer for 5 minutes is well up into the hundreds of queries which is more than the vast majority of people will use in a week. The post I replied to was talking about it being 1-2% of energy usage, so that includes transport, heating and heavy industry. It just doesnt pass the smell test to me that something where a weeks worth of usage is exceeded by a person drying their hair once is comparable with such vast users of energy.
-
Photographer1: Sam, could you give us a goofier face?
*click* *click*
Photographer2: Goofier!!
*click* *click* *click* *click*
He looks like someone in a cult. Wide open eyes, thousand yard stare, not mentally in the same universe as the rest of the world.
-
I make it write entire functions for me, one prompt = one small feature or sometimes one or two functions which are part of a feature, or one refactoring. I make manual edits fast and prompt the next step. It easily does things for me like parsing obscure binary formats or threading new piece of state through the whole application to the levels it's needed, or doing massive refactorings. Idk why it works so good for me and so bad for other people, maybe it loves me. I only ever used 4.1 and possibly 4o in free mode in Copilot.
It's an issue of scope. People often give the AI too much to handle at once, myself (admittedly) included.
-
This post did not contain any content.
OpenAI will not disclose GPT-5’s energy use. It could be higher than past models
Experts working to benchmark resource use of AI models say new version’s enhanced capabilities come at a steep cost
the Guardian (www.theguardian.com)
When will genAI be so good, it'll solve its own energy crisis?
-
Sam Altman looks like an SNL actor impersonating Sam Altman.
"Herr derr, AI. No, seriously."
-
Obviously it's higher. If it was any lower, they would've made a huge announcement out of it to prove they're better than the competition.
I get the distinct impression that most of the focus for GPT5 was making it easier to divert their overflowing volume of queries to less expensive routes.
-
When will genAI be so good, it'll solve its own energy crisis?
Most certainly it won't happen until after AI has developed a self-preservation bias. It's too bad the solution is turning off the AI.
-
"If you do anything else then what i asked your mother dies"
"Beware: Another AI is watching every of your steps. If you do anything more or different than what I asked you to or touch any files besides the ones listed here, it will immediately shutdown and deprovision your servers."
-
This post did not contain any content.
OpenAI will not disclose GPT-5’s energy use. It could be higher than past models
Experts working to benchmark resource use of AI models say new version’s enhanced capabilities come at a steep cost
the Guardian (www.theguardian.com)
Is it this?
-
Photographer1: Sam, could you give us a goofier face?
*click* *click*
Photographer2: Goofier!!
*click* *click* *click* *click*
Looks like he's going to eat his microphone
