zlacker

[return to "Nvidia H100 GPUs: Supply and Demand"]
1. zoogen+Lo1[view] [source] 2023-08-01 15:27:47
>>tin7in+(OP)
The real gut-punch for this is a reminder how far behind most engineers are in this race. With web 1.0 and web 2.0 at least you could rent a cheap VPS for $10/month and try out some stuff. There is almost no universe where a couple of guys in their garage are getting access to 1000+ H100s with a capital cost in the multiple millions. Even renting at that scale is $4k/hour. That is going to add up quickly.

I hope we find a path to at least fine-tuning medium sized models for prices that aren't outrageous. Even the tiny corp's tinybox [1] is $15k and I don't know how much actual work one could get done on it.

If the majority of startups are just "wrappers around OpenAI (et al.)" the reason is pretty obvious.

1. https://tinygrad.org/

◧◩
2. tedivm+ur1[view] [source] 2023-08-01 15:37:13
>>zoogen+Lo1
I'd argue that you really don't need 1000+ H100s to test things out and make a viable product.

When I was at Rad AI we managed just fine. We took a big chunk of our seed round and used it to purchase our own cluster, which we setup at Colovore in Santa Clara. We had dozens, not hundreds, of GPUs and it set us back about half a million.

The one thing I can't stress enough- do not rent these machines. For the cost of renting a machine from AWS for 8 months you can own one of these machines and cover all of the datacenter costs- this basically makes it "free" from the eight month to three year mark. Once we decoupled our training from cloud prices we were able to do a lot more training and research. Maintenance of the machines is surprisingly easy, and they keep their value too since there's such a high demand for them.

I'd also argue that you don't need the H100s to get started. Most of our initial work was on much cheaper GPUs, with the A100s we purchased being reserved for training production models rapidly. What you need, and is far harder to get, is researchers who actually understand the models so they can improve the models themselves (rather than just compensating with more data and training). That was what really made the difference for Rad AI.

◧◩◪
3. wing-_+tA1[view] [source] 2023-08-01 16:10:33
>>tedivm+ur1
>What you need, and is far harder to get, is researchers who actually understand the models so they can improve the models themselves

Serious question: Where does an aspiring AI/ML dev get that expertise. From looking at OMCS I'm not convinced even a doctorate from Georgia Tech would get me the background I need...

◧◩◪◨
4. tedivm+bB1[view] [source] 2023-08-01 16:13:30
>>wing-_+tA1
Everyone I've met with these skills has either a masters degree or a PhD. I do know several people who got their PhD earlier in their careers who are really into AI now, but they had the foundational math skills to keep current as new papers were published.

I can't tell you if one program is better than another, as it's a bit out of my area of expertise.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. KRAKRI+wE1[view] [source] 2023-08-01 16:26:18
>>tedivm+bB1
The foundational math skills are linear algebra, calculus, and statistics. They are bog standard math anyone with a university education in the sciences should be comfortable with. The only math that's possibly more obscure are the higher level statistics tricks like graphical models, but those can be picked up from a textbook.
[go to top]