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

591–600 of 1001 posts

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#591

Post by diamond559 »

chatmasta wrote: post #550
kd913 wrote: post #394

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 c…

Why is there this implicit assumption that more efficient training/inference will reduce GPU demand? It seems more likely - based on historical precedent in the computing industry - that demand will expand to fill the available hardware. We can do more inference and more training on fewer GPUs. That doesn’t mean we need to stop buying GPUs. Unless people think we’re already doing the most training/inference we’ll eve…

Over the long run maybe, but for the next 2 years the market will struggle to find a use for all this possible extra gpus. There is no real consumer demand for AI products and lots of backlash whenever implemented eg: that Coca Cola ad. It's going to be a big hit to demand in the short to medium term as the hyperscalers cut back/reasses.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#592

Post by tonyhart7 »

ezoe wrote: post #584

I really don't understand the market thinks Nvidia is losing its value. If DeepSeek reduce the required computational resources, we can pour more computational resources to improve it further. There's nothing bad about more resources.

- "I really don't understand the market thinks Nvidia is losing its value."

because the less GPU need to train, the less money to be made

- "If DeepSeek reduce the required computational resources, we can pour more computational resources to improve it further. There's nothing bad about more resources."

thats why you are not hedgefund manager, these guys job is to ensure that the HYPETRAIN for company to buy as many nvidia gpu to sell no matter what, if we can produce comparable model without using B (as it stands billions of dollar), it means there are less billions of dollar to be made and the HYPETRAIN is near the end

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#593

Post by dgemm »

01100011 wrote: post #586
yalogin wrote: post #565

Nvidia has gotten lucky repeatedly. The GPUs were great for PC gaming and they were the top dog. The crypto boom was such an unexpected win for them partly because Intel killed off their competition by acquiring it. Then the AI boom is also a direct result of Intel killing off their competition but the acquisition is too far removed to credit it to that event. Unlike the crypto boom though, two factors make me think…

> the models are going to get better/smaller/faster overtime reducing our reliance on the GPU Yes, because we've seen that with other software. I no longer want a GPU for my computer because I play games from the 90s and the CPU has grown powerful enough to suffice... except that's not the case at all. Software grew in complexity and quality with available compute resources and we have no reason to think "AI" will be…

I think the point was not that we won't still use a lot of hardware, it's that it won't necessarily always be Nvidia. Nvidia got lucky when both crypto and AI arrived because it had the best available ready-made thing to do the job, but it's not like it's the best possible thing. Crypto eventually got its ASICs that made GPUs uncompetitive after all.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#594

Post by amluto »

nl wrote: post #417
paxys wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nvidia's annual revenue in 2024 was $60B. In comparison, Apple made $391B. Microsoft made $245B. Amazon made $575B. Google made $278B. And Nvidia is worth more than all of them. You'd have to go very far down the list to find a company with a comparable ratio of revenue or income to market cap as Nvidia.

Nvidia's revenue growth rate was 94% and income growth rate was 109% for the Oct 2024 quarter. This compares to Apple's 6% and -35%. Nvidia is growing profits faster than income. Nvidia's net profit margin is 55% (vs Apple 15%) and they have an operating income of $21B vs Apple's $29.5 These are some pretty impressive financial results - those growth rates are the reason people are bullish on it.

One might argue that very high margins could be a bad sign. If you assume that Apple is efficient at being Apple, then there is not a whole lot of room for someone else to undercut them at similar cost of goods sold. But there is a lot of room to undercut Nvidia with similar COGS — Nvidia is doing well because it’s difficult to compete for various reasons, not that it’s expensive to compete.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#595

Post by atrus »

01100011 wrote: post #586
yalogin wrote: post #565

Nvidia has gotten lucky repeatedly. The GPUs were great for PC gaming and they were the top dog. The crypto boom was such an unexpected win for them partly because Intel killed off their competition by acquiring it. Then the AI boom is also a direct result of Intel killing off their competition but the acquisition is too far removed to credit it to that event. Unlike the crypto boom though, two factors make me think…

> the models are going to get better/smaller/faster overtime reducing our reliance on the GPU Yes, because we've seen that with other software. I no longer want a GPU for my computer because I play games from the 90s and the CPU has grown powerful enough to suffice... except that's not the case at all. Software grew in complexity and quality with available compute resources and we have no reason to think "AI" will be…

Honestly, you'd be shocked at how much gaming you can get done on the integrated gpus that are just shoved in these days. Sure, you won't be playing the most graphically demanding things, but think of platforms like the Switch, or games like Stardew. You can easily go without a dedicated GPU and still have a plethora of games.

And as for AI, there's probably so much room for improvement on the software side that it will probably be the case that the smarter, more performant AIs will not necessarily have to be on the top of the line hardware.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#596

Post by dylan604 »

01100011 wrote: post #586
yalogin wrote: post #565

Nvidia has gotten lucky repeatedly. The GPUs were great for PC gaming and they were the top dog. The crypto boom was such an unexpected win for them partly because Intel killed off their competition by acquiring it. Then the AI boom is also a direct result of Intel killing off their competition but the acquisition is too far removed to credit it to that event. Unlike the crypto boom though, two factors make me think…

> the models are going to get better/smaller/faster overtime reducing our reliance on the GPU Yes, because we've seen that with other software. I no longer want a GPU for my computer because I play games from the 90s and the CPU has grown powerful enough to suffice... except that's not the case at all. Software grew in complexity and quality with available compute resources and we have no reason to think "AI" will be…

because that's what history shows us. back in the 90s, MPEG-1/2 took dedicated hardware expansion cards to handle the encoding because software was just too damn slow. eventually, CPUs caught up, and dedicated instructions were added to the CPU to make software encoding multiple times faster than real-time. Then, H.264 came along and CPUs were slow for encoding again. Special instructions were added to the CPU again, and software encoding is multiple times faster again. We're now at H.265 and 8K video where encoding is slow on CPU. Can you guess what the next step will be?

Not all software is written badly where it becomes bloatware. Some people still squeeze everything they can, admittedly, the numbers are becoming smaller. Just like the quote, "why would I spend money to optimize Windows when hardware keeps improving" does seem to be group think now. If only more people gave a shit about their code vs meeting some bonus accomplishment

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#597

Post by flashman »

eigenvalue wrote: post #567

90% of the comments in this thread make it clear that knowing about technology does not in any way qualify someone to think correctly about markets and equity valuations.

I think it's entirely possible that one categorically can't think correctly about markets and equity valuations since they are vibes-based. Post hoc, sure, but not ahead of time.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#598

Post by skellington »

ezoe wrote: post #584

I really don't understand the market thinks Nvidia is losing its value. If DeepSeek reduce the required computational resources, we can pour more computational resources to improve it further. There's nothing bad about more resources.

Markets aren't rational.

NVidia is currently a hype stock which means LOTS of speculation, probably with lots of leverage. So, the people who have made large gains and/or are leveraged are highly incentivized to panic sell on any PERCEIVED bad news. It doesn't even matter if the bad news will materially impact sales. What matters is how the other gamblers will react to the news and getting in front of them.

:)

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#599

Post by tw1984 »

yalogin wrote: post #565

Nvidia has gotten lucky repeatedly. The GPUs were great for PC gaming and they were the top dog. The crypto boom was such an unexpected win for them partly because Intel killed off their competition by acquiring it. Then the AI boom is also a direct result of Intel killing off their competition but the acquisition is too far removed to credit it to that event. Unlike the crypto boom though, two factors make me think…

> Unlike crypto there is no mathematical lower bound for computation

this is what I feel, but is there any scientific proof on that?

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#600

Post by daveguy »

nailer wrote: post #583
yalogin wrote: post #565

Nvidia has gotten lucky repeatedly. The GPUs were great for PC gaming and they were the top dog. The crypto boom was such an unexpected win for them partly because Intel killed off their competition by acquiring it. Then the AI boom is also a direct result of Intel killing off their competition but the acquisition is too far removed to credit it to that event. Unlike the crypto boom though, two factors make me think…

Money isn’t fringe, and the target for crypto is all transactions, rather than the existing model where you pay between two and 3.5% to a card company or other middleman.

Credit card companies averaged over 22,000 transactions per second in 2023 without ever having to raise the fee. How many is crypto even capable of processing? Processing without the fee going up? What fraud protection guarantees are offered to the parties of crypto transactions?
Post reply on HN