Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

finance.yahoo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 1001 posts

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#121

Post by belter »

dogma1138 wrote: post #58
Etheryte wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While everything you say may be true, this shows a fundamental misunderstanding about how the modern stock market functions. How much value a company creates is at best tangential and often completely orthogonal to how much the stock is worth. The stock market has always been a Keynesian beauty contest, but in the past few decades, strongly shaped and morphed by attention economies. A good example of this is DJT, a c…

I understand that part, hence why this is very much buy the dip for me.

Don't try to catch a falling knife...bla bla...

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#122

Post by nejsjsjsbsb »

LittleTimothy wrote: post #117
junon wrote: post #78

Not sure what the fuss is. I tried Deepseek earlier today for the first time and it was even worse than o1 when it came to reasoning skills and following my requests for how I wanted to engage with it. o1 at least gives it to me straight. When I ask it to engage in more back and forth before assuming what I'm after, it tends to follow through. Deepseek seemed immediately eager to (very slowly) feed me a bunch of made…

The excitement isn't the capabilities of the model, it's how efficiently it was created. One of the major lessons in AI in the last couple of years was that scale mattered - you would want to throw more and more compute at a problem and that has turned into incredible share prices for Nvidia and incredible investments in data centre and energy generation. If it turns out that actually we didn't need quite such incred…

Which doesn't make sense. If anything it has the chance to make AI finally profitable and financially sustainable. Maybe that is the fear!

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#123

Post by diggan »

sschueller wrote: post #99
thelastgallon wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

You can ban the company but are you going to ban any US company from using the open model and running it on their own hardware [1]? The cat is out of the bag and there is no going back. [1] https://apxml.com/posts/gpu-requirements-deepseek-r1

> You can ban the company but are you going to ban any US company from using the open model and running it on their own hardware [1]?

Just for the people who might not have been around the last time, this has precedent :) US government (and others) have been trying to outlaw (open source) cryptography, for various reasons, for decades at this point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crypto_Wars

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#124

Post by FergusArgyll »

fancyfredbot wrote: post #31

The people writing market commentary are simply making it up. The news about DeepSeek is not new and doesn't reduce the value of ASML. People are selling now because they are scared because the number went down.

Yes! and this applies to all market commentary. Market goes down .7% and you have talking heads saying "fear of tariffs" "middle east tensions" "Hurricane season" whatever, next day market goes up .6% "talk of tax cuts" "Jobs numbers" whatever. There's no way anyone knows why "the market" behaves the way it does. The free market is the OG "Decentralized" project, it's 1 billion different decisions being made in a day each with their personal reasons. Yes, sometimes it's fairly obvious that something caused it (plane blows up, stock goes down) but that still doesn't explain the entirety of it

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#126

Post by PeterStuer »

randomcarbloke wrote: post #35
diegocg wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nvidia is way too overvalued regardless of deepseek or the success of AI. This is just some correction (not even too big even considering the current bubble), these traders are not stupid.

agreed but ASML has been chronically undervalued forever.

Have you priced in the extremely limited freedom to operate they have? There is an extreme systemic risk to being a monopoly in a strategic position. It's an extreme beneficial position to be in, until it isn't.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#127

Post by NitpickLawyer »

InkCanon wrote: post #20
Discordian93 wrote: post #5

It's funny the bubble seems popping because the tech can be made better or cheaper instead due to loss of enthusiasm for the tech itself. AI is here to stay I suppose then.

If anything Meta and other foundation model companies should be dropping. What's the moat? DeepSeek is releasing stuff for free.

> If anything Meta

I don't follow. Meta has been the only US big dog that released open-whatever variants of their models. They did that intending to minimise the gap between them and other big dogs. Their stated goal is to give open access to the community, while at the same time develop the models for internal uses (on their many platforms).

Meta doesn't sell API access. They are not losing on "cheaper" anything. If anything, they get to implement whatever others release under open terms into their stacks. And they still have all the GPUs to further train and serve on whatever improved stack comes next.

I don't see how meta loses here. In fact I think it is one of the only big players in this space that will come out better.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#128

Post by nabla9 »

esperent wrote: post #13
nabla9 wrote: post #2

Nvidia -13% in Frankfurt stock market just now. Valuations of private unicorns like OpenAi and Anthropic must be in free fall. DeepSeek spends $6 million in old H800 hardware to develop open source model that overtakes ChatGPT. AI gets better, but profit margins sink with strong competition. Chinese AI startup DeepSeek overtakes ChatGPT on Apple App Store https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42839656 Edit: Nvidia now…

> DeepSeek spends $6 million in old H800 hardware to develop open source model that overtakes ChatGPT. DeepSeek claims that's what they spent. They're under a trade embargo, and if they had access to any more than that it would have been obtained illegally. They might be telling the truth, but let's wait until someone else replicates it before we fully accept it.

Huggingface is currently replicating it.

Replications of small models indicate that they don't lie any significant amount. The architecture is cheap to train.

Berkeley Researchers Replicate DeepSeek R1's Core Tech for Just $30: A Small Model RL Revolution https://xyzlabs.substack.com/p/berkeley-researchers-replicat...

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#129

Post by omgJustTest »

dogma1138 wrote: post #6

Good time to buy then, I don’t understand how stupid some traders can be. A more efficient model is better for NVIDIA not worse. More compute is still better given the same model. And as more efficient models proliferate it means more edge computing which means more customers with lower negotiating power than Meta and Google… This is like thinking that if people need to dig only 1 day instead of an entire month to ge…

> Good time to buy then, I don’t understand how stupid some traders can be.

Likely a "how solid is the technical moat" evaluation - this could be a one-off or could be that there are an avalanche of advancements to continue along the efficiency side of the process.

Given the style and hype of logic in the AI space, I fully believe resources are not well allocated in compute and _actual_ thinking as to how they are spent.

Deepseek's apparent 10x more efficient per inference token... implies a lot of other hardware meets the general use-case. We also know that reasoning should be about 10W for human speed-of-thought... maybe another 1-2 orders of power efficiency.

"Pre-Training: Towards Ultimate Training Efficiency

We design an FP8 mixed precision training framework and, for the first time, validate the feasibility and effectiveness of FP8 training on an extremely large-scale model. Through co-design of algorithms, frameworks, and hardware, we overcome the communication bottleneck in cross-node MoE training, nearly achieving full computation-communication overlap. This significantly enhances our training efficiency and reduces the training costs, enabling us to further scale up the model size without additional overhead. At an economical cost of only 2.664M H800 GPU hours, we complete the pre-training of DeepSeek-V3 on 14.8T tokens, producing the currently strongest open-source base model. The subsequent training stages after pre-training require only 0.1M GPU hours." [1]

[1] https://huggingface.co/deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-V3

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#130

Post by diggan »

bythreads wrote: post #49
nabla9 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their model is open and they published paper describing it https://arxiv.org/pdf/2412.19437 The can't be far off, or it would be noticed. Even if they are heavily government subsidized for energy and hardware, I don see how the cost of training in the US would be more than double.

Doesnt that say they based it on llama?, sooooo not really a bottoms up training - since the cost of llama is 100% surely not part of their quote.

I did a quick search for "llama" and didn't find anywhere they outright state they just fine-tuned some llama weights.

Is it possible that they based their model architecture on the llama model architecture? Rather than just fine-tuned already training llama weights? In that case, they'd still have to do "bottoms up" training.

Post reply on HN