this post was submitted on 09 Feb 2025
73 points (83.5% liked)

Technology

62005 readers
4308 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
73
DeepSeek might not be such good news for energy after all (archive.today)
submitted 2 days ago by Aatube@kbin.melroy.org to c/technology@lemmy.world
19 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Overall, when tested on 40 prompts, DeepSeek was found to have a similar energy efficiency to the Meta model, but DeepSeek tended to generate much longer responses and therefore was found to use 87% more energy.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jacksilver@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

Longer!=Detailed

Generally what they're calling out is that DeepSeek currently rambles more. With LLMs the challenge is how to get the right answer most sussinctly because each extra word is a lot of time/money.

That being said, I suspect that really it's all roughly the same. We've been seeing this back and forth with LLMs for a while and DeepSeek, while using a different approach, doesn't really break the mold.