• kerrigan778@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    6 months ago

    In this context it is being used to reduce rendering load and therefore be less intensive on computer resources.

      • halendos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Not really, AMD’s FSR upscaling can increase visual quality/fidelity while using less power than rendering at full resolution. This can be easily seen in Steam Deck’s battery life improvement when enabling it. Scaling this to millions of devices can indeed reduce energy usage.

        When you read about “AI power consumption”, its mostly about training the models, not as much the usage after it’s trained.

          • doggle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            14
            ·
            6 months ago

            Training an AI is intensive, but using them after the fact is relatively cheap. Cheaper than traditional rendering to reach the same level of detail. The upfront cost of training is offset by the savings on every video card running the tech from then on. Kinda like how railroads are expensive to build but much cheaper to operate after the fact.

            It’s pretty simple. If you can’t understand delayed gratification, then you’re right: school did fail you.

            Ps.: the railroad comparison really breaks down when you consider that they’re cheaper to build than the highways that trucks use and that we don’t, in fact, need to truck in the resources anyway. We’ve been building railroads longer than trucks have existed, after all.

            • meseek #2982@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              18
              ·
              6 months ago

              Thanks for the totally made up figures. I’m glad we agree that training itself is quite costly. No data on how much energy AI will save vs rendering (as we don’t know how much we can avoid rendering; there has to be a cap) so can’t really keep riding that horse.

              You’re right tho, the rail analogy sucks. Not for the reasons you list tho, but rather because they will never stop training AI. Unless you feel AI will stop learning and needing to evolve.

          • SpacetimeMachine@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            14
            ·
            6 months ago

            FSR in this case doesn’t need to be trained more. It’s already a complete dataset, so now it can be released to run on MILLIONS of devices and reduce their load. And then you knock railroads which are one of the most efficient forms of land transportation we have. Just full of bad takes here.

          • kerrigan778@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            15
            ·
            6 months ago

            No, I’m saying you are fundamentally misunderstanding what technology they’re talking about and are thinking every type of AI is the same. In this article she is talking about graphics AI running on the local system as part of the graphics pipeline. It is less performance and therefore power intensive. There is no “vast AI network” behind AMDs presumptive work on a competor to DLSS/frame generation.