• tunetardis
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    2 months ago

    They’re going to keep making more powerful hardware either way, since parallel processing capability supports graphics and AI just fine.

    It’s not quite as simple as that. AI needs less precision than regular graphics, so chips developed with AI in mind do not necessarily translate into higher performance for other things.

    In science/engineering, people want more—not less—precision. So we look for GPUs with capable 64-bit processing, while AI is driving the industry in the other direction, from 32 down to 16.

    • catloaf@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      For science and engineering, workstation cards like the A6000 aren’t going anywhere.

      • henfredemars@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        That’s true, but I would like to see improvements driven along the consumer segment also. AI rendering is a nice software addition but I could easily see it becoming a distraction from hardware improvements.

        Consumers generally can’t just throw more money at a problem in the way that professional and business can.

    • averyminya@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s funny because we don’t even need GPU’s. There’s tech that offloads the model’s “search” to an analog computer which is ~98% accurate for a fraction of the energy.

      I imagine NVIDIA isn’t too excited about that side of AI, though.