Companies are going all-in on artificial intelligence right now, investing millions or even billions into the area while slapping the AI initialism on their products, even when doing so seems strange and pointless.
Heavy investment and increasingly powerful hardware tend to mean more expensive products. To discover if people would be willing to pay extra for hardware with AI capabilities, the question was asked on the TechPowerUp forums.
The results show that over 22,000 people, a massive 84% of the overall vote, said no, they would not pay more. More than 2,200 participants said they didn’t know, while just under 2,000 voters said yes.
Any “ai” hardware you but today will be obsolete so fast it will make your dick bleed
it will just be not as fast as the newer stuff
it will just be
not as fasteven more slow as the newer stuff
Depends on what kind of AI enhancement. If it’s just more things nobody needs and solves no problem, it’s a no brainer. But for computer graphics for example, DLSS is a feature people do appreciate, because it makes sense to apply AI there. Who doesn’t want faster and perhaps better graphics by using AI rather than brute forcing it, which also saves on electricity costs.
But that isn’t the kind of things most people on a survey would even think of since the benefit is readily apparent and doesn’t even need to be explicitly sold as “AI”. They’re most likely thinking of the kind of products where the manufacturer put an “AI powered” sticker on it because their stakeholders told them it would increase their sales, or it allowed them to overstate the value of a product.
Of course people are going to reject white collar scams if they think that’s what “AI enhanced” means. If legitimate use cases with clear advantages are produced, it will speak for itself and I don’t think people would be opposed. But obviously, there are a lot more companies that want to ride the AI wave than there are legitimate uses cases, so there will be quite some snake oil being sold.
well, i think a lot of these cpus come with a dedicated npu, idk if it would be more efficient than the tensor cores on an nvidia gpu for example though
edit: whatever npu they put in does have the advantage of being able to access your full cpu ram though, so I could see it might be kinda useful for things other than custom zoom background effects
But isn’t ram slower then a GPU’s vram? Last year people were complaining that suddenly local models were very slow on the same GPU, and it was found out it’s because a new nvidia driver automatically turned on a setting of letting the GPU dump everything on the ram if it filled up, which made people trying to run bigger models very annoyed since a crash would be preferable to try again with lower settings than the increased generation time a regular RAM added.
I agree that we shouldn’t jump immediately to AI-enhancing it all. However, this survey is riddled with problems, from selection bias to external validity. Heck, even internal validity is a problem here! How does the survey account for social desirability bias, sunk cost fallacy, and anchoring bias? I’m so sorry if this sounds brutal or unfair, but I just hope to see less validity threats. I think I’d be less frustrated if the title could be something like “TechPowerUp survey shows 84% of 22,000 respondents don’t want AI-enhanced hardware”.
No, but I would pay good money for a freely programmable FPGA coprocessor.
If the AI chip is implemented as one, and is useful for other things I’m sold.
I think manufacturers need to get a lot more creative about simplified computing. The RPi Pico’s GPIO engine is powerful yet simple, and a good example of what is possible with some good application analysis and forethought.
I have few pi pico but i didn’t knew about it, can you please elaborate, because I’ve been using them just like any other esp32 stm32 esp8266 i have
Problem for the big market is that it’s hardly profitable. In fact make things too easily multipurpose and you undercut your specialized devices opportunities. Why buy a smart device for 500 dollars that requires a monthly subscription when you could get a 100 dollar device with a popular preload of a solution on it?
Like when the WRT54G came out in the day and OpenWRT basically drove Cisco to buy out Linksys to neuter the “home router” to stop it displacing expensive products in the business sector. The WRT54G was the best product for the market, but not the best product to exist for vendor profitablity.
Whichnoart of the pico are you referring to specifically? Never heard the term “GPIO engine” before. Is that sort of like the USB stack but for GPIO?
I think they meant PIO (programmable IO). It’s like a small processor tied to some of the IO pins. There’s a very small set of instructions and some state machines.
It can be used to implement your own IO protocols without worrying about the issues that come with bit-banging from the cpu.
There’s really no point unless you work in specific fields that benefit from AI.
Meanwhile every large corpo tries to shove AI into every possible place they can. They’d introduce ChatGPT to your toilet seat if they could
Which would be approptiate, because with AI, theres nothing but shit in it.
Imagining a chatgpt toilet seat made me feel uncomfortable
Don’t worry, if Apple does it, it will sell a like fresh cookies world wide
Idk, they can’t even sell VR.
Aw maaaaan. I thought you were going to link that youtube sketch I can’t find anymore. Hide and go poop.
“Shits are frequently classified into three basic types…” and then gives 5 paragraphs of bland guff
It’s seven types, actually, and it’s called the Bristol scale, after the Bristol Royal Infirmary where it was developed.
With how much scraping of reddit they do, there’s no way it doesn’t try ordering a poop knife off of Amazon for you.
Someone did a demo recently of AI acceleration for 3d upscaling (think DLSS/AMDs equivilent) and it showed a nice boost in performance. It could be useful in the future.
I think it’s kind of a ray tracing. We don’t have a real use for it now, but eventually someone will figure out something that it’s actually good for and use it.
AI acceleration for 3d upscaling
Isn’t that not only similar to, but exactly what DLSS already is? A neural network that upscales games?
But instead of relying on the GPU to power it the dedicated AI chip did the work. Like it had it’s own distinct chip on the graphics card that would handle the upscaling.
I forget who demoed it, and searching for anything related to “AI” and “upscaling” gets buried with just what they’re already doing.
That’s already the nvidia approach, upscaling runs on the tensor cores.
And no it’s not something magical it’s just matrix math. AI workloads are lots of convolutions on gigantic, low-precision, floating point matrices. Low-precision because neural networks are robust against random perturbation and more rounding is exactly that, random perturbations, there’s no point in spending electricity and heat on high precision if it doesn’t make the output any better.
The kicker? Those tensor cores are less complicated than ordinary GPU cores. For general-purpose hardware and that also includes consumer-grade GPUs it’s way more sensible to make sure the ALUs can deal with 8-bit floats and leave everything else the same. That stuff is going to be standard by the next generation of even potatoes: Every SoC with an included GPU has enough oomph to sensibly run reasonable inference loads. And with “reasonable” I mean actually quite big, as far as I’m aware e.g. firefox’s inbuilt translation runs on the CPU, the models are small enough.
Nvidia OTOH is very much in the market for AI accelerators and figured it could corner the upscaling market and sell another new generation of cards by making their software rely on those cores even though it could run on the other cores. As AMD demonstrated, their stuff also runs on nvidia hardware.
What’s actually special sauce in that area are the RT cores, that is, accelerators for ray casting though BSP trees. That’s indeed specialised hardware but those things are nowhere near fast enough to compute enough rays for even remotely tolerable outputs which is where all that upscaling/denoising comes into play.
Nvidia’s tensor cores are inside the GPU, this was outside the GPU, but on the same card (the PCB looked like an abomination). If I remember right in total it used slightly less power, but performed about 30% faster than normal DLSS.
Found it.
I can’t find a picture of the PCB though, that might have been a leak pre reveal and now that it’s revealed good luck finding it.
Having to send full frames off of the GPU for extra processing has got to come with some extra latency/problems compared to just doing it actually on the gpu… and I’d be shocked if they have motion vectors and other engine stuff that DLSS has that would require the games to be specifically modified for this adaptation. IDK, but I don’t think we have enough details about this to really judge whether its useful or not, although I’m leaning on the side of ‘not’ for this particular implementation. They never showed any actual comparisons to dlss either.
As a side note, I found this other article on the same topic where they obviously didn’t know what they were talking about and mixed up frame rates and power consumption, its very entertaining to read
The NPU was able to lower the frame rate in Cyberpunk from 263.2 to 205.3, saving 22% on power consumption, and probably making fan noise less noticeable. In Final Fantasy, frame rates dropped from 338.6 to 262.9, resulting in a power saving of 22.4% according to PowerColor’s display. Power consumption also dropped considerably, as it shows Final Fantasy consuming 338W without the NPU, and 261W with it enabled.
I’ve been trying to find some better/original sources [1] [2] [3] and from what I can gather it’s even worse. It’s not even an upscaler of any kind, it apparently uses an NPU just to control clocks and fan speeds to reduce power draw, dropping FPS by ~10% in the process.
So yeah, I’m not really sure why they needed an NPU to figure out that running a GPU at its limit has always been wildly inefficient. Outside of getting that investor money of course.
Personally I would choose a processor with AI capabilities over a processor without, but I would not pay more for it
Can’t help but think of it as a scheme to steal the consumers’ compute time and offload AI training to their hardware…
Most people won’t pay for it because a lot of AI stuff is done cloud side. Even stuff that could be done locally is done in the cloud a lot. If that wasn’t possible, probably more people would wand the hardware. It makes more sense for corporations to invest in hardware.
a lot of AI stuff is done cloud side.
If it’s done in the cloud then there’s no need for them to buy “AI-accelerated hardware”
They’ll pay for it. When the tech companies decide, it’s a thing to make money off & advertise it, all the good ants will buy, buy, buy and the rest of the time they will work, work, work for it.
this goes to show just how far the current grift has gone.
AI enhanced hardware? Jesus Fuck take all my money that’s amazing.
Dedicated LLM chatbot hardware? Die in a fire for even suggesting this is AI.
AI enhanced anything is pointless when everything seems intended to separate you from your money.
It just doesn’t really do anything useful from a layman point of view, besides being a TurboCyberQuantum buzzword.
I’ve apparently got AI hardware in my tablet, but as far as I’m aware, I’ve never/mostly never actually used it, nor had much of a use for it. Off the top of my head, I can’t think of much that would make use of that kind of hardware, aside from some relatively technical software that is almost as happy running on a generic CPU. Opting for AI capabilities would be paying extra for something I’m not likely to ever make use of.
And the actual stuff that might make use of AI is pretty much abstracted out so far as to be invisible. Maybe the autocorrecting feature on my tablet keyboard is in fact powered by the AI hardware, but from the user perspective, nothing has really changed from the old pre-AI keyboard, other than some additions that could just be a matter of getting newer, more modern hardware/software updates, instead of any specific AI magic.
…just under 2,000 voters said “yes.”
And those people probably work in some area related to LLMs.
It’s practically a meme at this point:
Nobody:
Chip makers: People want us to add AI to our chips!
The even crazier part to me is some chip makers we were working with pulled out of guaranteed projects with reasonably decent revenue to chase AI instead
We had to redesign our boards and they paid us the penalties in our contract for not delivering so they could put more of their fab time towards AI
That’s absolutely crazy. Taking the Chicago School MBA philosophy to things as time consuming and expensive to setup as silicon production.
I guarantee most this AI bullshit is nothing but a backdoor to harvest more user info, anyway.
I don’t mind the hardware. It can be useful.
What I do mind is the software running on my PC sending all my personal information and screenshots and keystrokes to a corporation that will use all of it for profit to build user profile to send targeted advertisement and can potentially be used against me.
