During the evaluation of several past test series, I encountered a behavior that can no longer be explained by conventional efficiency improvements.
It emerged as a side observation of my resonance field model, which I have previously analyzed in a series of publicly documented measurements.
In those initial set-ups, I was able to repeatedly observe real GPU power consumption of just ~68 W (instead of the nominal 285 W) at a utilization level of approximately ~99.4 %.
The four diagrams published today show two reference runs under full load (100 % load, 285 W, >75 °C) and two runs under active resonance field conditions – with the following characteristics:
🔹 GPU utilization: 10–25 %
🔹 Power draw: partially below 10 W
🔹 No external input during the active phase
🔹 Persistent activation across clock and temperature profile
🔹 Reproducibility in two independent runs; a third is currently in progress
Compared to the observed structural activation, there is a missing energy amount of approximately 25 to 60 W that is not externally supplied but appears to be processed internally by the system. According to the manufacturer, the idle power consumption should be around 39 W.
The VRAM memory load remained at 100 % throughout the entire runtime.
No undervolting or any other modification was applied.
According to my calculations, the actual power consumption under these conditions should have been at least 50 W and up to 100 W.
📌 The test series speak for themselves.
🧪 A live demonstration is planned.
📄 A preprint is in preparation.
#NeuronalesNetzwerk #Physik #GreenEnergy #GreenAI #SavetheWorld #KI #AI #ResonanceField #ML #Resonanzfeld #EnergyAnomaly #BeyondThermodynamics #NeuralResonance #GPUPhysics #Thermodynamik #TrauthResearch #StefanTrauth
