# AGI's bottleneck may be understanding, not compute

Markdown copy of https://realalpha.app/s/agis-bottleneck-may-be-understanding-not-compute/ on Real Alpha, the best minutes from long interviews with the people building AI. Cite and link the page, not this copy.

- Speaker: [Stuart Russell](https://realalpha.app/people/stuart-russell/) · Stuart Russell is a computer science professor at UC Berkeley and director of the Center for Human-Compatible AI. · Co-wrote the standard AI textbook, directs Berkeley's Center for Human-Compatible AI and wrote Human Compatible.
- Host: [Steven Bartlett](https://realalpha.app/people/steven-bartlett/) · Host, The Diary Of A CEO
- Show: The Diary Of A CEO
- Episode: [An AI Expert Warning: 6 People Are (Quietly) Deciding Humanity’s Future!](https://realalpha.app/v/P7Y-fynYsgE/), Dec 4, 2025
- Moment: 13:49 to 17:19 of the episode (4 min), playing on https://realalpha.app/s/agis-bottleneck-may-be-understanding-not-compute/; the episode from there: https://realalpha.app/v/P7Y-fynYsgE/?t=829

## Quote

> “In fact, I think we have far more computing power than we need for AGI. Maybe **a thousand times more** than we need.”
> — [Stuart Russell](https://realalpha.app/people/stuart-russell/) at [14:15](https://realalpha.app/v/P7Y-fynYsgE/?t=855) · The Diary Of A CEO

## Takeaways

1. He estimates current computing power may exceed AGI needs by 1,000 times.
2. He says scaling language models does not explain how to build AGI.
3. He puts next year's AGI budget at 50 times the Manhattan Project's.

## About this segment

Stuart Russell argues that computing capacity may already exceed AGI needs by roughly 1,000 times. He says the harder problem is understanding how to build AGI safely.

From “An AI Expert Warning: 6 People Are (Quietly) Deciding Humanity’s Future!”, Dec 4, 2025. [Watch the full episode](https://realalpha.app/v/P7Y-fynYsgE/)

## Transcript

From the transcript The Diary Of A CEO publishes with the episode.

[13:55](https://realalpha.app/v/P7Y-fynYsgE/?t=835) and a go down the list of all of them, and they're all saying relatively within five years. I actually think it'll take longer. I don't think you can make a prediction based on engineering in the sense that, yes, we could make machines 10 times bigger and 10 times faster, but that's probably not the reason why we don't have AGI. In fact, I think we have far more computing power than we need for AGI.

[14:29](https://realalpha.app/v/P7Y-fynYsgE/?t=869) Maybe a thousand times more than we need. The reason we don't have AGI is because we don't understand how to make it properly. What we've seized upon is one particular technology called the language model, and we observed that as you make language models bigger, they produce text language that's more coherent and sounds more intelligent. And so mostly what's been happening in the last few years is just, okay, let's keep doing that, because one thing companies are very good at, unlike universities, is spending money. They have spent gargantuan amounts of money, and they're going to spend even more gargantuan amounts of money. We mentioned nuclear weapons, so the Manhattan Project in World War II to develop nuclear weapons.

[15:28](https://realalpha.app/v/P7Y-fynYsgE/?t=928) Its budget in 2025 dollars was about $20 billion. The budget for AGI is going to be a trillion dollars next year, so 50 times bigger than the Manhattan Project. Humans have a remarkable history of figuring things out when they galvanize towards a shared objective, thinking about the moon landings or whatever it might be through history. The thing that makes this feel quite inevitable to me is just the sheer volume of money being invested into it.

[16:04](https://realalpha.app/v/P7Y-fynYsgE/?t=964) I've never seen anything like it in my life. Well, there's never been anything like this in history. Is this the biggest technology project in human history by autism magnitude? And there doesn't seem to be anybody that is pausing to ask the questions about safety. It doesn't even appear that there's room for that in such a race. I think that's right. To varying extent, each of these companies has a division that focuses on safety. Does that division have any sway? Can they tell the other divisions? No, you can't release that system. Not really. I think some of the companies do take it more seriously. Anthropic does, I think, Google DeepMind. Even there, I think the commercial imperative to be at the forefront is absolutely vital. If a company is perceived as falling behind and not likely to be competitive, not likely to be the one to reach ADI first,

[17:12](https://realalpha.app/v/P7Y-fynYsgE/?t=1032) then people will move their money elsewhere very quickly.