“In 10 years, computers will be doing this a million times faster.” The head of Nvidia does not believe that there is a need to invest trillions of dollars in the production of chips for AI::Despite the fact that Nvidia is now almost the main beneficiary of the growing interest in AI, the head of the company, Jensen Huang, does not believe that

kingthrillgore
link
fedilink
English
38M

“But if you invest this money, I can eat prime rib all week.”

@nodsocket@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
18M

Bet

@BetaDoggo_@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
15
edit-2
8M

This isn’t necessarily about just hardware. Current ML architectures and inference engines are far from being at peak efficiency. Just last year we saw 20x speedups for llm inference on some hardware. “a million times” is obviously hyperpole though.

Literally reading preprint papers daily on more efficient implementations of self attention approximations.

@Buffalox@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
11
edit-2
8M

Sorry I have doubts, because that would require a factor 4x increase every year for 10 years! 4x^10 = 1,048,576x
Considering they historically have had problems achieving just twice the speed per year, it does not seem likely.

Despite the fact that Nvidia is now almost the main beneficiary of the growing interest in AI, the head of the company, Jensen Huang, does not believe that additional trillions of dollars need to be invested in the industry.

*Because of

You heard it, guys. There’s no need to create competition to Nvidia’s chips. It’s perfectly fine if all the profits go to Nvidia, says Nvidia’s CEO.

@eleitl@lemmy.ml
link
fedilink
English
88M

So a Cerebras wafer will be 10^6 faster for the same computation as now, for the same price, in just 10 years? Not after Moore scaling ended many years ago and neural hardware architecture has matured. You can sure go analog, but that’s not the same computation. And that’s the end of the line, not without true 3d integration.

It depends what you call AI.

True artificial intelligence likely requires quantum computing because there’s some quantum stuff happening our brains and probably the smartest living human (Sir Roger Penrose) thinks that’s where the secret to consciousness is hiding after spending the last couple decades investigating that after helping Hawking finish up Einstein’s work

If you just mean a chat bot that can pass the Turing test, then yeah we can just wait a decade instead of developing special tech for AI.

I mean, if we really develop artificial intelligence before we understand our own consciousness, we’re probably fucked anyways.

It’d be like somehow inventing a nuclear bomb before understanding what radiation was. We’d have no idea what we’re creating or what the consequences of flipping the switch would be.

@NOSin@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
28M

Do you know if there are, or if there are plans for a “new” Turing test ?

@jackalope@lemmy.ml
link
fedilink
English
68M

The turing test is a rhetorical tool by turing to outline his logical positivist beliefs. Turing did believe in its use as an actual test but it’s not a discrete test, it’s a test of hypothetically infinite time.

Roger Penrose is a mathematician who made important contributions to theoretical physics in the 1960ies, for which he received a Nobel Prize. In later decades, he published speculative books on consciousness, quantum physics, and neurobiology. These ideas have been out there for about 30 years now but have not been able to convince scientists in general. Rather, they are generally considered implausible or outright contradicted by the evidence. Simply put: It’s wrong.

The idea that quantum physics plays a direct role in brain function is very much on the fringes of science.

No offense meant. I know these ideas are very important to many spiritual people, but I felt the casual reader should know that it is not important in science.

@someacnt_@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
18M

Yeah really, semiconductor has begun stagnating in progress recently due to fundamental limits. I’m gonna call bull on this one, I think they are rather forecasting pluging demand.

@Buffalox@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
6
edit-2
8M

It requires 4X speed increase every year, production quality scale can’t provide even close to half of that, maybe 25%, then another 25% from design, and regarding increasing die sizes they are already close to the end. So the only way to get from 150% to 400% per year is by using multi chip designs, meaning they will have to use 2.5x more chips per year. so the multi chip package in 10 years will probably have to have almost 10,000 chips! All of them bleeding edge!!!

The H200 is estimated to cost $40K, the future 10 year chip will be more like $40 million. Or maybe more like impossible to achieve.

If chips = cpus, here, then I imagine that will hit a limit also (Amdahl’s law).

@Buffalox@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
48M

A chip is also called a die, it’s the piece cut out from the wafer, which is then packaged onto a chip package.
Since traditionally there were always 1 chip per chip package, the 2 words were used almost synonymously.
I this case it’s basically GPU chips, which AFAIK AMD has already figured out how to use in multi chip packages. Meaning one package contains multiple chips that work “almost” as well as a single chip of similar size.

The advantage of multichip packages are obvious, production costs are way lower because smaller dies causes lower percentage of flawed dies, and allows for better binning of higher end parts.
Additionally it allows designs of way more complex packages, than would be possible with monolithic chips. This is the reason AMD has been taking marketshare in server markets from Intel. Because Intel has not been able to match the multichip design AMD introduced with Epyc in 2016/17, which originally was 4 Ryzen chiplets/chips/dies packaged together as one big 32 core server chip. Where the biggest Intel could make was 28 cores.

But packaging almost 10000 GPU chips together is completely different, and I don’t think that will be relevant within 10 years.

Amdahls law however is part obvious and part bullshit. Everything your mind is able to do semi efficiently, can be multithreaded, it is very few things that can’t.
Amdahls law is basically irrelevant with regard to AI, as AI has a lot of patten recognition, and pattern recognition is perfect for multi threading.

And to add: currently TSMC nodes have a reticle limit of 858mm². I.e. that’s the largest chips you can make on their wafers. Then in the real world you do it slightly below that.

Future nodes are reducing this to the 350-450mm² range.

High end GPUs/HPC cards basically have to go to multi-die, even in the fantasy world of 100% perfect yields.

@DNU@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
28M

So, for a bit more tech illiterate, their claim is bs?

@DNU@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
28M

I mean 1mio x is a big claim anyway.

Can we just pray for the poor engineers who actually have to build these million times faster machines

@JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
68M

Because the ceos copy has to sound good for the shareholders on either side.

@Coreidan@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
28M

Oh well. The world is going to burn anyway. Fuck this shit hole we call earth

Create a post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


  • 1 user online
  • 186 users / day
  • 583 users / week
  • 1.37K users / month
  • 4.49K users / 6 months
  • 1 subscriber
  • 7.41K Posts
  • 84.7K Comments
  • Modlog