Submitted 4 hours ago by callouscomic@lemmy.zip to memes@sopuli.xyz
https://lemmy.zip/pictrs/image/69f4e804-e810-4e6b-800a-f9fc8aba0f6f.webp
I spared by another post.
Quick sources.
According to Google, a single search requires about 0.0003 kWh of energy.
https://www.rwdigital.ca/blog/how-much-energy-do-google-search-and-chatgpt-use/
Each ChatGPT query consumes an estimated 2.9 Wh of electricity…
For context, 0.0003 Wh are 0.3 Wh, i.e. ten times less than a ChatGPT query.
While we’re at it: Ten times less shouldn’t be a thing.
Ten percent, 0.1 times, a tenth …
wait, you never walk up downstairs?
0.0003 Wh are 0.3 Wh
A- for trying
LOL dammit, fixed
Did you ask ChatGPT to do your math too?
Terrible choice of units hides the fact that 0.3 and 3 are not that far apart.
I simply copied from the sources, not thinking at all. I’ve added context to the edit per everyone’s remarks. It’s about a tenth.
But you raise an interesting question.
A quick search suggests ChatGPT gets 2.5 billion prompts a day. I wouldn’t presume this is a one-to-one scale. How many Google searches result in more searches as the person is trying to refine to figure out what they’re looking for or not finding it? Additionally, how prompts into ChatGPT have further prompts for refinement?
I could see a case when ChatGPT gives quick results that take one prompt whereas someone unsuccessfully googling might make 10 searches.
Does it net out? Who knows. There’s also innumerable other factors at play. What we CAN know is that energy use has skyrocketed recently, whereas Googles been around for decades.
A full order of magnitude is “not that far”?
A lot closer than 4 orders.
When you’re talking about a difference of 9 Google Searches, or an LED bulb running for 15 minutes, or running an AC unit for about a second, yes its not much.
I look up recipes a lot, would love to know the actual cost of visiting a site, given all of the JavaScript and cookies, tracking, images etc that has to be loaded, that I don’t really care about
The error with the measuring units is so grotesque it looks like bad faith to ride the AI bad wave but who knows
Are they not the same number?
Different by one decimal place.
So 0.3GPT?
Is the benefit provided by ChatGPT worth 3 million electric cars? Can we maybe scrap something else, like 1% of fast fashion, to equal out the capacity?
No to the first part, but we should still do the second part.
no, because line needs to go up
Seriously though, I agree with you. It’s just so wasteful. It’s really disheartening to try and do my eco friendly bit to reduce waste (particularly of power) and then data centres just piss away the ground we’ve collectively made.
ChatGPT, how do you make a meme wothout chaGPT?
turbowafflz@lemmy.world 4 hours ago
It bothers me so much that the two numbers are in different units
callouscomic@lemmy.zip 22 minutes ago
Hmm, great point. I simply copied the figures from the sources. I dunno why I didn’t consider converting one of them.
Skua@kbin.earth 4 hours ago
0.0003 of anything should not be measured in kilo-units
NochMehrG@feddit.org 4 hours ago
Samesies
DarkCloud@lemmy.world 3 hours ago
Aren’t they both in Watt Hours?
bus_factor@lemmy.world 3 hours ago
Yes, but it’s obviously done that way to make the numbers look more different at first glance