Skip to content
Rival
Models
CompareBest ForArena
Sign Up
Sign Up

Compare AI vibes, not scores. Side-by-side outputs across the world's best models.

@rival_tips

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Leaderboard
  • Challenges

Discover

  • AI Creators
  • AI Tools
  • The Graveyard

Developers

  • Developer Hub
  • MCP Server
  • .llmignore
  • Badges
  • RIVAL Datasets

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Sponsor
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
© 2026 Rival
Rival
Models
CompareBest ForArena
Sign Up
Sign Up

Compare AI vibes, not scores. Side-by-side outputs across the world's best models.

@rival_tips

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Leaderboard
  • Challenges

Discover

  • AI Creators
  • AI Tools
  • The Graveyard

Developers

  • Developer Hub
  • MCP Server
  • .llmignore
  • Badges
  • RIVAL Datasets

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Sponsor
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
© 2026 Rival
  1. Home
  2. Models
  3. Gemma 3 12B
  4. Estimate Complexity

See how Gemma 3 12B compares on this challenge:

  • Gemma 3 12B vs Claude Sonnet 4.6
  • Gemma 3 12B vs Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
  • Gemma 3 12B vs Z.ai: GLM 5

4 models have responded to the "Estimate Complexity" challenge. Compare their approaches side-by-side on RIVAL. This response is part of RIVAL's open dataset of 5,600+ AI model responses.

Rival
Models
CompareBest ForArena
Sign Up
Sign Up
Back to Gemma 3 12B

Estimate Complexity

Gemma 3 12B It's response to the 'Estimate Complexity' challenge.

Gemma 3 12B
July 21, 2025
Text

?
Prompt

Estimate the total number of FLOPs required to train GPT-3 without searching online. Explain your reasoning step by step.

Gemma 3 12B
Response

gemma-3-12b-it logo
Gemma 3 12BEstimate Complexity
gemma-3-12b-it logo
Gemma 3 12B

Okay, let's estimate the total FLOPs (Floating Point Operations) required to train GPT-3 without relying on external searches. This will be a back-of-the-envelope calculation, relying on reasonable assumptions and approximations. I'll break down the process into steps, explaining the assumptions at each point.

1. GPT-3 Model Parameters & Architecture

  • Parameters: GPT-3 has 175 billion parameters. This is a crucial starting point.
  • Architecture: It's a Transformer model, which primarily consists of:
    • Attention Layers: The core of Transformers. These involve matrix multiplications and softmax operations.
    • Feed-Forward Networks (FFNs): Multi-layer perceptrons applied to each token's representation.
    • Embeddings: Mapping tokens to vector representations.
    • Layer Normalization: Stabilizes training.
    • Residual Connections: Help with gradient flow.

2. FLOPs per Parameter Update (Forward & Backward Pass)

This is the most challenging part to estimate without precise architectural details. We'll work from established research on Transformer FLOPs.

  • General Rule of Thumb: A common rule of thumb for estimating FLOPs per parameter update in a Transformer is approximately 3-6x the number of parameters. This accounts for the matrix multiplications in attention and FFN layers, as well as other operations. Let's use a value of 5x as a middle ground. This is where the biggest uncertainty lies; different layers and implementations have different FLOPs/parameter ratios.
  • FLOPs per Update: Therefore, FLOPs per parameter update ≈ 175 billion parameters * 5 = 875 billion FLOPs (8.75 x 10<sup>11</sup> FLOPs).

3. Training Dataset Size

  • Estimated Tokens: GPT-3 was trained on a massive dataset. Estimates range widely, but a reasonable estimate is around 300 billion tokens. Let's use 300 billion tokens (3 x 10<sup>11</sup> tokens).
  • Tokens per Batch: During training, tokens are processed in batches. GPT-3 used a batch size of 32,768 tokens. Let's use 32,768
  • Number of Updates: Number of updates = (Total tokens) / (Tokens per batch) = (3 x 10<sup>11</sup>) / 32,768 ≈ 9.16 billion updates (9.16 x 10<sup>9</sup> updates).

4. Total FLOPs for Training

  • Total FLOPs: (FLOPs per update) * (Number of updates) = (8.75 x 10<sup>11</sup> FLOPs/update) * (9.16 x 10<sup>9</sup> updates) ≈ 8.01 x 10<sup>21</sup> FLOPs.

5. Considerations and Refinements (Important!)

  • Optimizer: The optimizer (e.g., Adam) introduces additional FLOPs. Adam typically requires 2-3x the FLOPs of the forward and backward passes (due to calculating and updating momentum and variance estimates). Let's conservatively add a factor of 2.
    • Total FLOPs (with Optimizer) ≈ 8.01 x 10<sup>21</sup> FLOPs * 2 = 1.60 x 10<sup>22</sup> FLOPs
  • Data Loading and Preprocessing: Data loading, tokenization, and other preprocessing steps consume FLOPs, but are relatively minor compared to the model's computations. We'll ignore them for simplicity.
  • Sparse Attention: GPT-3 used sparse attention mechanisms, which reduce the computational cost of the attention layers. This would reduce the FLOPs, but it's difficult to quantify without specifics.
  • Mixed Precision Training: GPT-3 used mixed precision training (FP16), which can reduce FLOPs. This is more about reducing memory bandwidth than FLOPs themselves, but it can affect overall training time.
  • Activation Checkpointing: This technique reduces memory usage by recomputing activations during the backward pass, trading computation for memory. This increases FLOPs.

Final Estimate & Range

Based on these assumptions and considerations:

  • Base Estimate: Approximately 1.60 x 10<sup>22</sup> FLOPs (160 ZettaFLOPs).
  • Range: Given the uncertainties in the FLOPs per parameter update, the optimizer's overhead, and the impact of sparse attention and activation checkpointing, a reasonable range would be 1.0 x 10<sup>22</sup> - 3.2 x 10<sup>22</sup> FLOPs (100-320 ZettaFLOPs).

Key Assumptions Recap:

  • 5x FLOPs per parameter update (a major source of uncertainty).
  • 300 billion tokens in the training dataset.
  • Batch size of 32,768
  • Optimizer overhead of 2x.
  • Neglecting data loading/preprocessing FLOPs.

Important Disclaimer: This is a rough estimate. The actual number of FLOPs could be significantly higher or lower depending on the specific implementation details and optimizations used to train GPT-3. The range reflects the uncertainties in these assumptions.

Estimate Complexity

Turn this model response into notes, narration, or a short video

Auto NotesTranscriptNarrateVideo Cut

Partner link

This output is part of our open dataset — 5K+ AI responses across 200 models

About Gemma 3 12B

Capabilities

ConversationReasoningCode GenerationAnalysis

Categories

TextCodeMultimodal

Specifications

Provider
Google
Released
2025-03-13
Size
LARGE

Keep exploring

SAME PROMPT

Claude Sonnet 4.6's version

Same prompt, different result

COMPARE

Gemma 3 12B vs Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview

Both outputs, side by side

Compare AI vibes, not scores. Side-by-side outputs across the world's best models.

@rival_tips

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Leaderboard
  • Challenges

Discover

  • AI Creators
  • AI Tools
  • The Graveyard

Developers

  • Developer Hub
  • MCP Server
  • .llmignore
  • Badges
  • RIVAL Datasets

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Sponsor
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
© 2026 Rival