61–70 of 114 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is insanely stupid that '4B' with a B, is 'too small' of an operating space.
The absolute value is irrelevant - it's the opportunity cost that determines this. It doesn't matter if the consumer market is 4T, if the AI market is 60T!
Nvidia could flip a switch and start competing with former customers. They have the talent, the models, the HW, and they know how to quickly build out DCs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The absolute value is irrelevant - it's the opportunity cost that determines this. It doesn't matter if the consumer market is 4T, if the AI market is 60T!
“I wouldn’t pick up $20 if there was $100 on the ground!” Most people would pick up both. These economic proclamations don’t seem to make sense, when applied to different contexts — which suggests what you’re saying might be folk wisdom rather than sound theory (and greatly over simplifying the problem). You’re also discounting ecosystem effects — gaming GPUs driving demand for datacenter and workstation GPUs as hobb…
No, it’s more like there’s a massive pile of both $20s and $100s on the ground. You wouldn’t waste time running between the two, you’d focus on the $100s
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And why should a business do that? Limited chip production capacity be spent on most profitable ventures.
If I were Nvidia, I would give more attention to consumer GPUs to hedge my bets. When (not if) this AI bubble pops, their AI customers will become worthless to them very quickly as they won't be buying more GPUs. And when that day comes, I would want to still have consumers to sell to, rather than have them all buying from AMD because I ignored them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
5 billion doesn't look like much when OpenAI just raised $110b though. And how sustainable is NVDA's immense profits if this bubble actually bursts?
> 5 billion doesn't look like much when OpenAI just raised $110b though. Just about all of the AI providers "raises" are a fraction of the reported "raise", like this one. They didn't "raise" $100b. They got commitments for $35b, with said commitments being dependent on meeting certain criteria. Every "raise of $FOO" I've seen in the past year or two has not resulted in them getting their hands on $FOO in cash to spe…
Everyone knows the bubble is bursting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The absolute value is irrelevant - it's the opportunity cost that determines this. It doesn't matter if the consumer market is 4T, if the AI market is 60T!
One strategic reason is to remove oxygen from competitors. Otherwise someone will scoop up the gaming market and put the proceeds into developing technology to compete with NVIDIA in the more lucrative AI space.
As long as both companies remain stable and viable, there's probably limited upside to pouring more money into them. If they fail, and bring down the AI ecosystem with them, that is very bad news for Nvidia. So they've been there nurturing their success and providing capital to backstop their exponential growth. You can see Nvidia stepping in throughout the ecosystem with confidence boosting investments where needed.…
> Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang said his company’s recent investments in OpenAI and Anthropic are likely to be its last in both, saying that once they go public as anticipated later this year, the opportunity to invest closes ok, sounds obvious > Nvidia, for its part, isn’t offering much more on the matter ok, so no more news from nvidia > Still, a few other dynamics might also explain the pullback.. Wait it's a pullback?…