Earlier quoted context omitted.
AMD P/E ratio is 109, NVDA is 56. Which stock is overvalued?
That is extraordinarily simplistic. If NVDA is slowing and AMD has gains to realize compared to NVDA, then the 10x difference in market cap would imply that AMD is the better buy. Which is why I am long in AMD. You can't just look at the current P/E delta. You have to look at expectations of one vs the other. AMD gaining 2x over NVDA means they are approximately equivalently valued. If there are unrealized AI related…
The impact of competition and DeepSeek on Nvidia
71–80 of 500 posts
Re: The impact of competition and DeepSeek on Nvidia
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
I want the NVIDIA monopoly to end, but there is no real competition still. * George Hotz has basically given up on AMD: https://x.com/__tinygrad__/status/1770151484363354195 * Groq can't produce more hardware past their "demo". It seems like they haven't grown capacity in the years since they announced, and they switched to a complete SaaS model and don't even sell hardware anymore. * I dont know enough about MLX, Tr…
That George Hotz tweet is from March last year. He's gone back and forth on AMD a bunch more times since then.
Re: The impact of competition and DeepSeek on Nvidia
#73> The beauty of the MOE model approach is that you can decompose the big model into a collection of smaller models that each know different, non-overlapping (at least fully) pieces of knowledge. I was under the impression that this was not how MoE models work. They are not a collection of independent models, but instead a way of routing to a subset of active parameters at each layer. There is no "expert" that is load…
Not sure about DeepSeek R1, but you are right in regards to previous MoE architectures. It doesn’t reduce memory usage, as each subsequent token might require different expert buy it reduces per token compute/bandwidth usage. If you place experts in different GPUs, and run batched inference you would see these benefits.
I could be very wrong on how experts work across layers though, I have only done a naive reading on it so far.
Re: The impact of competition and DeepSeek on Nvidia
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not saying it is as simple as looking at P/E
My point is that you have to make the case for anything being over/undervalued. The null hypothesis is that the market has correctly valued it, after all.
Re: The impact of competition and DeepSeek on Nvidia
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
That George Hotz tweet is from March last year. He's gone back and forth on AMD a bunch more times since then.
is that good or bad?
Re: The impact of competition and DeepSeek on Nvidia
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is extraordinarily simplistic. If NVDA is slowing and AMD has gains to realize compared to NVDA, then the 10x difference in market cap would imply that AMD is the better buy. Which is why I am long in AMD. You can't just look at the current P/E delta. You have to look at expectations of one vs the other. AMD gaining 2x over NVDA means they are approximately equivalently valued. If there are unrealized AI related…
glad you are not my financial adviser :)
Re: The impact of competition and DeepSeek on Nvidia
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
He's setting up a case for shorting the stock, ie if the growth or margins drop a little from any of these (often well-funded) threats. The accuracy of the article is a function of the current valuation.
Exactly. You just need to see a slight deceleration in projected revenue growth (which has been running 120%+ YoY recently) and some downward pressure on gross margins, and maybe even just some market share loss, and the stock could easily fall 25% from that.
Re: The impact of competition and DeepSeek on Nvidia
#78The one thing from the article that sticks out to me is that the author/people are assuming that deepseek needing 1/45th the amount of hardware means that the other 44/45ths large tech companies have invested were wasteful.
Does software not scale to meet hardware? I don't see this as 44/45ths wasted hardware, but as a free increase in the amount of hardware people have. Software needing less hardware means you can run even _more_ software without spending more money, not that you need less hardware, right? (for the top-end, non-embedded use cases).
---
As an aside, the state of the "AI" industry really freaks me out sometimes. Ignoring any sort of short or long term effects on society, jobs, people, etc, just the sheer amount of money and time invested into this one thing is, insane?
Tons of custom processing chips, interconnects, compilers, algorithms, _press releases!_, etc all for one specific field. It's like someone taking the last decade of advances in computers, software, etc, and shoving it in the space of a year. For comparison, Rust 1.0 is 10 years old - I vividly remember the release. And even then it took years to propagate out as a "thing" that people were interested in and invested significant time into. Meanwhile deepseek releases a new model (complete with a customer-facing product name and chat interface, instead of something boring and technical), and in 5 days it's being replicated (to at least some degree) and copied by competitors. Google, Apple, Microsoft, etc are all making custom chips and investing insane amounts of money into different compilers, programming languages, hardware, and research.
It's just, kind of disquieting? Like everyone involved in AI lives in another world operating at breakneck speed, with billions of dollars involved, and the rest of us are just watching from the sidelines. Most of it (LLMs specifically) is no longer exciting to me. It's like, what's the point of spending time on a non-AI related project? We can spend some time writing a nice API and working on a cool feature or making a UI prettier and that's great, and maybe with a good amount of contributors and solid, sustained effort, we can make a cool project that's useful and people enjoy, and earns money to support people if it's commercial. But then for AI, github repos with shiny well-written readmes pop up overnight, tons of text is being written, thought, effort, and billions of dollars get burned or speculated on in an instant on new things, as soon as the next marketing release is posted.
How can the next advancement in graphics, databases, cryptography, etc compete with the sheer amount of societal attention AI receives?
Where does that leave writing software for the rest of us?
Re: The impact of competition and DeepSeek on Nvidia
#79Part of the reason Musk, Zuckerberg, Ellison, Nadella and other CEOs are bragging about the number of GPUs they have (or plan to have) is to attract talent. Perplexity CEO says he tried to hire an AI researcher from Meta, and was told to ‘come back to me when you have 10,000 H100 GPUs’ See https://www.businessinsider.nl/ceo-says-he-tried-to-hire-an-...
Re: The impact of competition and DeepSeek on Nvidia
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly. You just need to see a slight deceleration in projected revenue growth (which has been running 120%+ YoY recently) and some downward pressure on gross margins, and maybe even just some market share loss, and the stock could easily fall 25% from that.
AMD P/E ratio is 109, NVDA is 56. Which stock is overvalued?