Generating Energy-Efficient Code via Large-Language Models - Where are we now?
Radu Apsan, Vincenzo Stoico, Michel Albonico, Rudra Dhar, Karthik Vaidhyanathan, Ivano Malavolta
Abstract
Context. The rise of Large Language Models (LLMs) has led to their widespread adoption in development pipelines. Goal. We empirically assess the energy efficiency of Python code generated by LLMs against human-written code and code developed by a Green software expert. Method. We test 363 solutions to 9 coding problems from the EvoEval benchmark using 6 widespread LLMs with 4 prompting techniques, and comparing them to human-developed solutions. Energy consumption is measured on three different hardware platforms: a server, a PC, and a Raspberry Pi for a total of ≈881h (36.7 days). Results. Human solutions are 16% more energy-efficient on the server and 3% on the Raspberry Pi, while LLMs outperform human developers by 25% on the PC. Prompting does not consistently lead to energy savings, where the most energy-efficient prompts vary by hardware platform. The code developed by a Green software expert is consistently more energy-efficient by at least 17% to 30% against all LLMs on all hardware platforms. Conclusions. Even though LLMs exhibit relatively good code generation capabilities, no LLM-generated code was more energy-efficient than that of an experienced Green software developer, suggesting that as of today there is still a great need of human expertise for developing energy-efficient Python code.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 88eb37eb-1a2c-490f-b821-b9ea1319e400Builds on9
- Large Language Models are Zero-Shot ReasonersTakeshi Kojima, Shixiang Shane Gu, Machel Reid, Yutaka Matsuo et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 8,168 citations
- Is Your Code Generated by ChatGPT Really Correct? Rigorous Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code GenerationJiawei Liu, Chunqiu Steven Xia, Yuyao Wang, Lingming ZhangNeurIPS 2023 · 2,317 citations
- WizardCoder: Empowering Code Large Language Models with Evol-InstructZiyang Luo, Can Xu, Pu Zhao, Qingfeng Sun et al.ICLR 2024 · 945 citations
- An Aligned Rank Transform Procedure for Multifactor Contrast TestsLisa A. Elkin, Matthew Kay, James J. Higgins, Jacob O. WobbrockUIST 2021 · 671 citations
- Grounded Copilot: How Programmers Interact with Code-Generating ModelsShraddha Barke, Michael B. James, Nadia PolikarpovaOOPSLA 2023 · 408 citations
Related papers
- ECCO: Can We Improve Model-Generated Code Efficiency Without Sacrificing Functional Correctness?Siddhant Waghjale, Vishruth Veerendranath, Zhiruo Wang, Daniel FriedEMNLP 2024 · 3 citations
- Instruct or Interact? Exploring and Eliciting LLMs' Capability in Code Snippet Adaptation Through Prompt EngineeringTanghaoran Zhang, Yue Yu, Xinjun Mao, Shangwen Wang et al.ICSE 2025 · 3 citations
- When Faster Isn't Greener: The Hidden Costs of LLM-Based Code OptimizationTristan Coignion, Clément Quinton, Romain RouvoyASE 2025
- Evaluating Large Language Models in Class-Level Code GenerationXueying Du, Mingwei Liu, Kaixin Wang, Hanlin Wang et al.ICSE 2024 · 118 citations
- On the Evaluation of Large Language Models in Unit Test GenerationLin Yang, Chen Yang, Shutao Gao, Weijing Wang et al.ASE 2024 · 42 citations
