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

AWS raises GPU prices 15% on a Saturday, hopes you weren't paying attention

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 495 posts

Re: AWS raises GPU prices 15% on a Saturday, hopes you weren't paying attention

#431

Post by jacekm »

WhyNotHugo wrote: post #107
Tade0 wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More likely people will retain their current devices for longer and wait this whole thing out - there's less reason to upgrade than there was a decade ago. Processing power increases have noticeably plateaued, with e.g. Nvidia GPUs steadily increasing in TDP to make up for there not being enough gains from updated process nodes. The RTX 5080 is rated at 67% higher TDP than the RTX 2080, but you don't see such an incr…

> More likely people will retain their current devices for longer and wait this whole thing out Wait it out? The rich have realised that they can buy the entire stock of computing power and deprive the common folk of it, renting it to them instead. In practical terms, they have infinite resources. Definitely enough to long outlast our lifetimes and the next generation and the next. We can’t “wait out” until they run…

Something or someone will eventually fill the void. Chinese are trying to manufacture GPUs, they are very far from what Nvidia can offer, but they'll slowly get there. As for RAM - the new factories are being built and will hopefully become operational in 2028.

Re: AWS raises GPU prices 15% on a Saturday, hopes you weren't paying attention

#432

Post by FireBeyond »

conductr wrote: post #393
FireBeyond wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sure even if you pay a few thousand in rent, it may be the landlord only has a couple hundred of cash flow. Then, one repair on the home can easily wipe out a year or more of that. One bad tenants can wipe out a decade of it. I love how this conveniently ignores the equity you acquired in this year and almost certainly the appreciation. I went from renting for a decade plus to buying four years ago and while I have…

> I love how this conveniently ignores the equity you acquired in this year and almost certainly the appreciation. I love how I addressed both those things in my comment and you chose to ignore it or just didn't read Appreciation is a gamble that you bought at the low or just plan on holding for a very long time and even then, most economists will tell your real estate should appreciate at the rate of inflation - so…

> Most landlords have a mortgage to pay on that property and you should look into how an amortization schedule works. Your rent payment is mostly going to interest to the bank, not building equity for the landlord.

What? No. Explain to me how after putting 10% down, I was able to get out of PMI because I had 20% equity after the first 18 months of my mortgage? After all, at 18 months at 3.5% I've only paid down 2.1% of the principal. That's not how that works. Principal != Equity.

> The landlord is mostly taking on a huge risk in hopes the stars will align and 1) appreciation will happen 2) equity will be built

A "huge risk"? No, it's a pretty safe bet. Positive appreciation on home prices in the US has happened 28 out of the last 30 years.

And again, you build equity with each payment of your mortgage, 0.29% per month even factoring in that negative appreciation in, on average, 2 of the 30 years of your mortgage AND zero positive appreciation. Like I said, between May 2021 and November 2022 I was able to garner 4.8% equity due to appreciation alone (net zero I should have gained 5.2% - 18 months at 0.29%/month).

"Hoping the stars will align"? Come on now. Then why bother, if it's such a crap shoot that you're unlikely to ever make a profit on? Out of the sheer good of your heart? No.

Also, coming back to one of your original points:

> Sure even if you pay a few thousand in rent, it may be the landlord only has a couple hundred of cash flow. Then, one repair on the home can easily wipe out a year or more of that.

Then maybe you can't afford to be a landlord?

Re: AWS raises GPU prices 15% on a Saturday, hopes you weren't paying attention

#433

Post by Aachen »

lucketone wrote: post #410
Aachen wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then the claim above can never be falsified because there will always be a value you can plug into the equation at which it's cheaper to rent (like at 50% occupancy, at 5%, at 0.5%... so long as you're not the only person in the world who wants to use the device being offered for loan). I would assume we're talking about a common workload where one actually needs the device that one considers purchasing for some reas…

So in summary: - own the hardware, if you have constant load and have enough expertise (personally or a team) to use/maintain it at your required reliability level - rent the cloud, if your usage is opportunistic/ spike’y/rapidly changing - also rent the cloud, if required expertise/maintenance would cost you more than the hardware (if you want to have gazillion of nines, you need somebody who’s there to deal with sm…

That sounds like good common sense, though I'd reword the "constant" with like My question was (to what ozim wrote), how's that new in 2026

Re: AWS raises GPU prices 15% on a Saturday, hopes you weren't paying attention

#434

Post by acdha »

lucketone wrote: post #385
acdha wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Douglas Adams was a treasure, but I don’t think he was describing putting pricing information on the pricing page.

Also true that they definitely calculated that only x% of customers will read the pricing page or the email. (X probably being below 10)

I would be very surprised if that’s true for anyone using enough GPU capacity to be reserving it in bulk. There’s so much time and attention to cost optimization and that’s going to be one of the top drivers for anyone doing AI.

Re: AWS raises GPU prices 15% on a Saturday, hopes you weren't paying attention

#435

Post by supertrope »

nradov wrote: post #285
kllrnohj wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on how much you play. geforcenow is limited to 100 hours a month, with additional hours sold at a 200% premium. This dramatically changes the economics ( https://www.techpowerup.com/344359/nvidia-puts-100-hour-mont... has a handy chart for this )

Yikes. If you're playing more than 100 hours a month then it's time to touch grass.

The business model of Facebook, YouTube, traditional TV, app stores, and yes video games depend on people not touching grass.

Re: AWS raises GPU prices 15% on a Saturday, hopes you weren't paying attention

#436

Post by Dylan16807 »

cruffle_duffle wrote: post #284
jerf wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An immense amount of abuse is being done to "consumers" because most people don't have a mental model for how expensive subscriptions are and end up counting them as nearly free, because they are not even tomorrow's problem, but next month's problem. Entire industries run on that principle, like the burgeoning buy now pay later space (which promise no interest but I promise you they're not making money on a whole bun…

“I've been annualizing all my subscription fees for a long time now and dealing with the resulting number, but that's still an unpopular approach.” This is my trick. I simply take the monthly price and multiply am by ten to quickly get a crude imperfect annual cost (adding two more months if I wanted to be exact) Then I’ll look and go gee is this thing actually worth $150 or whatever the value is and ask “or more” as…

A year helps but that's still really underselling the cost. For most things I'll look at 5 years.

Re: AWS raises GPU prices 15% on a Saturday, hopes you weren't paying attention

#437

Post by bigstrat2003 »

cortesoft wrote: post #425
SoftTalker wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's normally an option in my experience. I have mine set for charges over $100. I don't want a notification every time I buy gas (I do check my statements every month though).

What is the harm in being notified when you buy gas? It doesn’t hurt anything, and I DO want to be notified if someone else buys gas on my card! The discussion started as a way to avoid forgetting to cancel subscriptions or to catch subscription price increases; if you are setting your limit to $100, you aren’t going to be seeing charges for almost all your subscriptions. I have my minimum set to $0, so I see all the…

Alert fatigue. Most people, if they get an alert for every single purchase they make, will learn to ignore the alerts as they are useless 99% of the time. Then when an alert comes through that would be useful, they won't see that either.

Anyone who has had the misfortune to work on monitoring systems knows the very fine line you have to walk when choosing what alerts to send. Too few, or too many, and the system becomes useless.

Re: AWS raises GPU prices 15% on a Saturday, hopes you weren't paying attention

#438

Post by 9rx »

mrguyorama wrote: post #428
9rx wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and is not capitalism and communism in opposition. Hard to say. The prevailing assumption, and basis for the Communist Party (on paper, at least), is that capitalists will try to block reaching a state of post-scarcity — the necessary precondition for communism. This is why they are sometimes considered to be at odds with each other. They don't have to be. And thus far they don't seem to be. Capitalism, and especia…

>American capitalism, has done far more to getting us closer to post-scarcity than anything else, with US-centric agriculture innovation being the shining example Uh, the American food industry, like nearly every first world food industry, is super state run. We stopped letting capitalism run farms because regular famine was awful. Have you seen how much we pay per bushel of corn? Our beef is not cheaper because of c…

> Uh, the American food industry, like nearly every first world food industry, is super state run.

The topic is capitalism. It only speaks to ownership. If you want to talk about who is running the show, you'd need to change the subject to command/market economies. But there is absolutely no reason to change the subject. So, getting us back on track: What agriculture-related capital do you think these first-world states own, exactly? The Canadian government used to own some grain elevators, but even that was sold off to private interests many years ago.

> Have you seen how much we pay per bushel of corn?

How could I not? What a curious question.

> It's cheaper from enormous state subsidies that are designed to ensure we grow shitloads of certain crops regardless of economic or market factors.

I have no idea what you are trying to say here. Post-scarcity, by very definition, is approached through technical innovation. There is a case to be made that subsidies have helped compel people to develop that technology, I guess, but subsidies and capitalism are in no way at odds with each other anyway. This seems to have absolutely no applicability to the conversation at hand.

Re: AWS raises GPU prices 15% on a Saturday, hopes you weren't paying attention

#439

Post by conductr »

FireBeyond wrote: post #432
conductr wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I love how this conveniently ignores the equity you acquired in this year and almost certainly the appreciation. I love how I addressed both those things in my comment and you chose to ignore it or just didn't read Appreciation is a gamble that you bought at the low or just plan on holding for a very long time and even then, most economists will tell your real estate should appreciate at the rate of inflation - so…

> Most landlords have a mortgage to pay on that property and you should look into how an amortization schedule works. Your rent payment is mostly going to interest to the bank, not building equity for the landlord. What? No. Explain to me how after putting 10% down, I was able to get out of PMI because I had 20% equity after the first 18 months of my mortgage? After all, at 18 months at 3.5% I've only paid down 2.1%…

> What? No. Explain to me how after putting 10% down, I was able to get out of PMI because I had 20% equity after the first 18 months of my mortgage? After all, at 18 months at 3.5% I've only paid down 2.1% of the principal. That's not how that works. Principal != Equity.

So there was appreciation, that's great but it's difficult to bank it until you sell the property. Investors usually don't qualify for sub 20% down so PMI is never even a factor. This is timing, which I've also explained. If you buy low and appreciation follows that's great, but it can also go the reverse which is a risk for an investor.

> A "huge risk"? No, it's a pretty safe bet. Positive appreciation on home prices in the US has happened 28 out of the last 30 years.

Positive appreciation is great. But it's doesn't always exceed inflation and if it does you have no control of that and are just hoping it does. I already mentioned it's timing the market in terms of appreciation. If you bought a rental in 2007, you likely didn't appreciate for a decade. That's a long time to have your money locked up and be exposed to risk for nothing. The money down, the risk of bad tenants, the risk of the government ban evictions, squatters, just normal risk of owning a maintaining a property (roof, foundation, plumbing, etc), so much more that you're ignoring.

> Then maybe you can't afford to be a landlord?

No, that takes us back to my original point of why landlords need to make a profit. They're not guaranteed a profit, almost no business is, but it needs to be a part of their calculus. That whole point is actually my counterpoint to your comment about how of landlords shouldn't have profit and are leeches and how they should be forced to sell there property to you after you rented it without risk for a few years - just get a mortgage if that's what you want. It's not the landlords fault if you individually can't afford to buy that property. Go live in rural Nevada, it's cheap.

Re: AWS raises GPU prices 15% on a Saturday, hopes you weren't paying attention

#440

Post by Dylan16807 »

lossolo wrote: post #409
y0ssar1an wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Taiwan is being invaded, the annexation is happening. There's no longer any reason to disincentivize annexation. Destroying the fabs is about denying China a major prize.

Did Hong Kong destroy its financial sector to deny China a "major prize"? If someone were going to invade and occupy your country, would you destroy your huge source of revenue so they couldn't claim it as a "major prize"? And then what? Stay poor? I feel like people who repeat this view (something they read somewhere) haven't really analyzed it in a social, economic, historical, and geopolitical context. Because if…

Committing to threats/promises "illogically" gives you a better negotiating position.

Acting "illogically" to spite bad behavior leads to less bad behavior.

Post reply on HN