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

391–400 of 1001 posts

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#391

Post by energy123 »

paxys wrote: post #383
energy123 wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a cookie cutter comment that appears to have been copy pasted from a thread about Gamestop or something. DeepSeek R1 allegedly being almost 50x more compute efficient isn't just a "vague rumor". You do this community a disservice by commenting before understanding what investors are thinking at the current moment.

Has anyone verified DeepSeek's claims about R1? They have literally published one single paper and it has been out for a week. Nothing about what they did changed Nvidia's fundamentals. In fact there was no additional news over the weekend or today morning. The entire market movement is because of a single statement by DeepSeek's CEO from over a week ago. People sold because other people sold. This is exactly how a p…

They have not verified the claims but those claims are not a "vague rumor". Expectations of discounted cash flows, which is primarily what drives large cap stock prices, operates on probability, not strange notions of "we must be absolutely certain that something is true".

A credible lab making a credible claim to massive efficiency improvements is a credible threat to Nvidia's future earnings. Hence the stock got sold. It's not more complicated than that.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#392

Post by aurareturn »

kiratp wrote: post #370

This is really dumb. Deepseek showing that you can do pure online RL for LLMs means we now have a clear path to just keep throwing more compute at the problem! If anything we made the whole "we are hitting a data wall" problem even smaller. Additionally, its yet another proof point that scaling inference compute is a way forward. Models that think for hours or days are the future. As we move further into the regime o…

Nvidia chip demand should increase from DeepSeek's release.

This market doesn't make any sense.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#393

Post by c0redump »

pokstad wrote: post #377
bcrosby95 wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If people are bullish on Nvidia because the hot new thing requires tons of Nvidia hardware and someone releases a paper showing you need 1/45th of Nvidia's hardware to get the same results, of course there's going to be pullback. Whether its justified or not is outside my wheelhouse. There's too many "it depends" involved that, best case, only people working in the field can answer, worst case, no one can answer righ…

Or you could argue you can now do 45x greater things with the same hardware. You can take an optimistic stance on this.

Except it’s not clear at all that this is actually the case. It’s entirely conjecture on your part.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#394

Post by kd913 »

The biggest discussion I have been on having this is the implications on Deepseek for say the RoI H100. Will a sudden spike in available GPUs and reduction in demand (from efficient GPU usage) dramatically shock the cost per hour to rent a GPU. This I think is the critical value for measuring the investment value for Blackwell now.

The price for a H100 per hour has gone from the peak of $8.42 to about $1.80.

A H100 consumes 700W, lets say $0.10 per kwh?

A H100 costs around $30000.

Given deepseek, can the price of this drop further given a much larger supply of available GPUs can now be proven to be unlocked (Mi300x, H200s, H800s etc...).

Now that LLMs have effectively become commodity, with a significant price floor, is this new value ahead of what is profitable for the card.

Given the new Blackwell is $70000, is there sufficient applications that enable customers to get a RoI on the new card?

Am curious about this as I think I am currently ignorant of the types of applications that businesses can use to outweigh the costs. I predict that the cost per hour of the GPU dropping such that it isn't such a no-brainer investment compared to previously. Especially if it is now possible to unlock potential from much older platforms running at lower electricity rates.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#395

Post by cortesoft »

pokstad wrote: post #377
bcrosby95 wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If people are bullish on Nvidia because the hot new thing requires tons of Nvidia hardware and someone releases a paper showing you need 1/45th of Nvidia's hardware to get the same results, of course there's going to be pullback. Whether its justified or not is outside my wheelhouse. There's too many "it depends" involved that, best case, only people working in the field can answer, worst case, no one can answer righ…

Or you could argue you can now do 45x greater things with the same hardware. You can take an optimistic stance on this.

For the overall economy, sure... for Nvidia, no

A huge increase in fuel efficiency is great for the economy, horrible for fuel companies

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#396

Post by futureshock »

amazingamazing wrote: post #374
magic_hamster wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the idea that SOTA models can run on limited hardware makes people think that Nvidia sales will take a hit. But if you think about it for two more seconds you realize that if SOTA was trained on mid level hardware, top of the line hardware could still put you ahead, and DeepSeek is also open source so it won't take long to see what this architecture could do on high end cards.

there's no reason to believe that performance will continue to scale with compute, though. that's why there's a rout. more simply, if you assume maximum performance with the current LLM/transformer architecture is say, twice as good as what humanity is capable of now, then that would mean that you're approaching 50%+ performance with orders of magnitude less compute. there's just no way you could justify the amount o…

Wait no, there is actually PLENTY of evidence that performance continues to scale with more compute. The entire point of the o3 announcement and benchmark results of throwing a million bucks of test time compute at ARC-AGI is that the ceiling is really really high. We have 3 verified scaling laws of pre-training corpus size, parameter count, and test time compute. More efficiency is fantastic progress, but we will always be able to get more intelligence by spending more. Scale is all you need. DeepSeek did not disprove that.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#397

Post by jonatron »

brokencode wrote: post #376
DiscourseFan wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, because what this implies is that the Chinese have better labor power in the tech-sector than the US, considering how much more efficient this technology is. Which means that even if US companies adopt these practices, the best workers will still be in China, communicating largely in Chinese, building relationships with other Chinese-speaking people purchasing chinese speaking labor. These relationships are alrea…

What a stretch. One Chinese model makes a breakthrough in efficiency and suddenly China has all the best people in the world? What about all the people who invented LLMs and all the necessary hardware here in the US? What about all the models that leapfrog each other in the US every few months? One breakthrough implies that they had a great idea and implemented it well. It doesn’t imply anything more than that.

I can't say about how good they are, but over 400,000 CS graduates in China [1] per year sounds like a lot. https://www.ctol.digital/news/chinas-it-boom-slows-computer-...

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#398

Post by rpcope1 »

zozbot234 wrote: post #388
Analemma_ wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree hype is a big portion of it, but if DeepSeek really has found a way to train models just as good as frontier ones for a hundredth of the hardware investment, that is a substantial material difference for Nvidia's future earnings.

> if DeepSeek really has found a way to train models just as good as frontier ones for a hundredth of the hardware investment Frontier models are heavily compute constrained - the leading AI model makers have got way more training data already than they could do anything with. Any improvement in training compute-efficiency is great news for them, no matter where it comes from. Especially since the DeepSeek folks have…

> leading AI model makers have got way more training data already than they could do anything with.

Citation needed.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#399

Post by KiwiJohnno »

paxys wrote: post #341

IMO this is less about DeepSeek and more that Nvidia is essentially a bubble/meme stock that is divorced from the reality of finance and business. People/institutions who bought on nothing but hype are now panic selling. DeepSeek provided the spark, but that's all that was needed, just like how a vague rumor is enough to cause bank runs.

Not quite, I believe this sell off was caused by DeepSeek showing with their new model that the hardware demands of AI are not necessarily as high as everyone has assumed (as required by competing models).

I've tried their 7b model, running locally on a 6gb laptop GPU. Its not fast, but the results I've had have rivaled GPT4. Its impressive.

Post reply on HN