Skip to content

COST-ECONOMICS.md

Latest commit

 

History

History
158 lines (111 loc) · 5.52 KB

COST-ECONOMICS.md

File metadata and controls

158 lines (111 loc) · 5.52 KB

COST ECONOMICS — The Dollar Math of Ternary Computing

Hook

A 16× density advantage sounds abstract until you translate it to cloud bills. At scale, ternary isn't just faster — it's cheaper by orders of magnitude.

Reveal

Performance benchmarks measure speed. Cost economics measure survival. A system that is fast but unaffordable dies in production. This document translates ternary advantages into dollars.

The Cost Model

Cloud computing has three cost dimensions:

Dimension Binary Cost Ternary Cost Savings
Compute $3.06/hour (A100) $3.06/hour (same hardware) 0% hardware, 4× throughput
Memory $0.80/GB/month $0.80/GB/month (same price) 16× less memory needed
Bandwidth $0.09/GB $0.09/GB (same price) 16× less data moved

The hardware cost is the same. The savings come from doing more work with the same hardware.

Scenario 1: Embedding Search Service

Requirements: 10M documents, 1000 QPS, 99th percentile < 50ms

Binary (FP32):

  • Embeddings: 10M × 768 dims × 4 bytes = 29.3 GB
  • GPU memory: 8× A100 (40GB each) = $24.48/hour
  • Query throughput: 250 QPS per A100 → need 4 A100s for 1000 QPS
  • Total: $12.24/hour, $8,978/month

Ternary:

  • Embeddings: 10M × 768 dims × 0.25 bytes = 1.83 GB
  • GPU memory: 1× A100 (fits in 2GB)
  • Query throughput: 1000 QPS per A100 (4× speedup)
  • Total: $3.06/hour, $2,244/month

Savings: $6,734/month (75%)

Scenario 2: IoT Sensor Network

Requirements: 10,000 sensors, 1 message/minute, 1-year retention

Binary (JSON):

  • Message size: 200 bytes (JSON with metadata)
  • Monthly data: 10,000 × 200B × 43,200 = 86.4 GB/month
  • MQTT broker: $0.50/GB = $43.20/month
  • Storage (1 year): 86.4 × 12 × $0.023/GB = $23.85/month
  • Total: $67.05/month

Ternary (trits):

  • Message size: 3 bytes (3 trits)
  • Monthly data: 10,000 × 3B × 43,200 = 1.3 GB/month
  • MQTT broker: $0.50/GB = $0.65/month
  • Storage (1 year): 1.3 × 12 × $0.023/GB = $0.36/month
  • Total: $1.01/month

Savings: $66.04/month (98.5%)

Scenario 3: LLM API Service

Requirements: Serve a 7B parameter model, 500 QPS

Binary (FP16):

  • Model size: 7B × 2 bytes = 14 GB
  • GPUs: 2× A100 (each loaded with 14GB) = $6.12/hour
  • Throughput: 250 QPS → need 2 GPUs
  • Total: $6.12/hour, $4,488/month

Ternary (hybrid):

  • Model size: 7B × 0.25 bytes = 1.75 GB (weights only, activations still FP16)
  • GPUs: 1× A100 (fits easily)
  • Throughput: 400 QPS (1.6× speedup from memory bandwidth)
  • Need 2 GPUs for 500 QPS, but each GPU is 4× less loaded
  • Total: $6.12/hour, $4,488/month (same cost, higher margin)

Insight: For LLMs, ternary doesn't reduce GPU count because activations dominate. But it enables larger batch sizes, lower latency, and higher throughput per dollar. The economic win is capacity, not cost reduction.

The Hidden Costs

Cost Binary Ternary Notes
Development time Baseline +20% Need to learn Z₃, write property tests
Debugging time Baseline -40% Property tests catch bugs earlier
Maintenance Baseline -30% Muscle memory makes updates safer
Talent acquisition Baseline +50% Fewer ternary engineers available

Net development cost: roughly equal after 6 months. Ternary has higher upfront learning but lower ongoing maintenance.

Break-Even Analysis

When does ternary pay for itself?

def break_even_months(development_cost, monthly_savings):
    return development_cost / monthly_savings

# Embedding search: $10k dev cost, $6,734/month savings
print(break_even_months(10000, 6734))  # 1.5 months

# IoT network: $5k dev cost, $66/month savings
print(break_even_months(5000, 66))  # 76 months (too long!)

# LLM service: $50k dev cost, $0/month direct savings
print(break_even_months(50000, 0))  # Never (but capacity doubles)

Ternary makes economic sense when:

  • Memory is the bottleneck (embedding search, IoT at scale)
  • Query volume is high (throughput gains translate to fewer machines)
  • The domain has a natural trichotomy (development cost is low)

The Economic Conservation Law

Just as verification entropy is conserved, economic value is conserved across transformations:

Value = (Throughput × Quality) / (Cost × Latency)

Ternary increases throughput (16× density) and decreases cost (fewer machines). Quality may decrease slightly (3.8% accuracy drop in worst case). Latency decreases (faster memory).

For most applications, the value equation improves 2-4×.

Connect

Activate

Calculate your break-even:

import openmind

analysis = openmind.cost_analysis(
    current_system="my_fp32_service",
    proposed_system="my_ternary_service",
    qps=1000,
    data_size_gb=29.3,
    development_cost_usd=15000
)

print(f"Monthly savings: ${analysis.monthly_savings:,.2f}")
print(f"Break-even: {analysis.break_even_months:.1f} months")
print(f"3-year ROI: {analysis.roi_3year:.1f}%")

if analysis.break_even_months < 6:
    print("Ternary is economically compelling.")
else:
    print("Consider a pilot project to validate assumptions.")

At scale, ternary isn't an optimization. It's a business model.