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.
One of our helpdesk told me about his amazing idea for our software the other day.
“We should integrate AI into it…”
“Right? And have it do what?”
“Uh, I don’t know”
This from the same man who came up with an idea for orange juice pumped directly into your home, and you pay with crypto.
And the scary thing is, I can imaging these things coming out of the mouths of people in actual positions of power, where laughing at them might actually get people fired…
This fucker seriously proposed brawndo on tap. Except perishable. Jesus fucking Christ.
orange juice pumped directly into your home, and you pay with crypto
[Furiously taking notes]
who came up with an idea for orange juice pumped directly into your home
That maybe not as cool, but pneumatic city-wide mail system would be cool. Too expensive and hard to maintain, not even talking about pests and bacteria which would live there, but imagine ordering a milkshake with some fries and in 10 minutes hearing “thump”, opening that little door in the wall of your apartment and seeing a package there (it’ll be a mess inside though).
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
40% of translators report having lost income due to it :0
deleted by creator
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”.
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.
I just want good voice to text that runs on my own phone offline
FUTO Keyboard & voice input?
Fr, this one is great
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
Imagining a chatgpt toilet seat made me feel uncomfortable
Aw maaaaan. I thought you were going to link that youtube sketch I can’t find anymore. Hide and go poop.
Don’t worry, if Apple does it, it will sell a like fresh cookies world wide
Idk, they can’t even sell VR.
Which would be approptiate, because with AI, theres nothing but shit in it.
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.
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.
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.
“Shits are frequently classified into three basic types…” and then gives 5 paragraphs of bland guff
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.
It’s seven types, actually, and it’s called the Bristol scale, after the Bristol Royal Infirmary where it was developed.
Personally I would choose a processor with AI capabilities over a processor without, but I would not pay more for it
I have no clue why any anybody thought I would pay more for hardware if it goes with some stupid trend that will be blow up in our faces soon or later.
I don’t get they AI hype, I see a lot of companies very excited, but I don’t believe it can deliver even 30% of what people seem to think.
So no, definitely not paying extra. If I can, I will buy stuff without AI bullshit. And if I cannot, I will simply not upgrade for a couple of years since my current hardware is fine.
In a couple of years either the bubble is going to burst, or they really have put in the work to make AI do the things they claim it will.
They want you to buy the hardware and pay for the additional energy costs so they can deliver clippy 2.0, the watching-you-wank-edition.
If you unbend him, clippy could be very useful 🍆📎
God damn you.
Sound advice.
I hate that I understood this
Well, NPU are not in pair with modern GPU. General GPU has more power than most NPUs, but when you look at what electricity cost, you see that NPU are way more efficient with AI tasks (which are not only chatbots).
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.
deleted by creator
“enhanced”
I would pay for a power efficient AI expansion card. So I can self host AI services easily without needing a 3000€ gpu that consumes 10 times more than the rest of my pc.
I would consider it a reason to upgrade my phone a year earlier than otherwise. I don’t know what ai will stick as useful, but most likely I’ll use it from my phone, and I want there to be at least a chance of on-device ai rather than “all your data are belong to us” ai
AI for IT companies is looking more and more like 3D was for movie industry
All fanfare and overhype, a small handful of examples that do seem a solid step forward with millions others that are just a polished turd. Massive investment for something the market has not demanded
It’s just a gimmick, a new “feature” to justify higher product prices.
barely a feature, just a buzzword
Why would I pay more for x company to have a robot half ass the work of all the employees they’re gonna cut?
So the trades have been unknowingly fucking with AI for decades, because of the time honored tradition of fucking with apprentices.
A lot of forums are filled with absolutely unhinged advice, and sprinkled in there is some good advice. If you know what you’re doing, you can spot the bullshit.
But if you don’t know anything about it, the advice seems perfectly reasonable. There’s a skill in giving unhinged advice. Literally you can’t get your master cert without convincing at least one apprentice to ask where the board stretcher is.
Do I actually have a dedicated vise for Vaseline when I run a tap cycle or is that old timer bullshit? HOW WOULD YOU POSSIBLY KNOW??
…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.
