Watt isn’t a measure of energy. Without how long it takes for a human and ChatGPT to solve the task then the comparison doesn’t teach anything

You're absolutely right — watt is a unit of power, not energy. To make a meaningful comparison, we need to estimate how much energy (in joules) each system uses to solve the same task.

Let’s define a representative task: answering a moderately complex question.

1. Human Brain Power use: ~20 watts (on average while awake)

Time to think: ~10 seconds to answer a question

Energy used: 20

watts × 10

seconds = 200

joules 20watts×10seconds=200joules

2. ChatGPT (GPT-4) Estimate per query: Based on research and datacenter estimates, GPT-4 may use:

Around 2–3 kWh per 1000 queries, which is 7.2–10.8 megajoules

Per query: 7.2

MJ 1000 = 7200

joules 1000 7.2MJ

=7200joules per response (lower bound) 10.8

MJ 1000 = 10 , 800

joules 1000 10.8MJ

=10,800joules per response (upper bound)

Comparison Human: ~200 joules

ChatGPT: ~7,200 to 10,800 joules

Conclusion: The human brain is about 36–54 times more energy-efficient than ChatGPT at answering a single question.

Or in percent: 3,600% to 5,400% more efficient

Watt is not a unit of energy but instead a unit of power. A brain may need 20 watts, but it may use 20 watts for a lot more time than ChatGPT would.

The brain may ultimately be more power-efficient, but the units you want are watt-hours.

This is fascinating. I mean it's not an argument against LLMs (I have only one brain, even though I'd like to have more). But I really hope that we'll learn much more about how our brains work.

The brain is more efficient because it physically is a neural network, as opposed to a software simulation of one.

You should then probably count the whole body, which consumes approximately 200 watts last time I checked.

There's massive evolutionary pressure for maximizing energy efficiency in brains. I'd like to see LLMs procreate and select for energy efficiency while, ideally, minimizing insanity and maintaining g-factor.