Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout • Hacker News Board

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#641

Post by aurareturn » Tue, Jan 28, 2025, 4:55 AM UTC

fldskfjdslkfj wrote: post #618

aurareturn wrote: post #608

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you’re wrong and Wallstreet got Deepseek’s impact wrong. You say DeepSeek should decrease Nvidia demand. Wallstreet agreed today. I say DeepSeek should increase Nvidia’s demand due to Jevon’s Paradox.

The increase in efficiency is usually accompanied with the process of commoditization as stuff get cheaper to develop, which is very bad news for nvidia. If you dont need the super high end chips than Nvidia loses it's biggest moat and ability to monopolize the tech, CUDA isn't enough.

Anthropic doesn’t train on Nvidia as far as I know. Google doesn’t either.

I don’t see how DeepSeek changes things.

By the way, DeepSeek trains on Nvidia.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#642

Post by hattmall » Tue, Jan 28, 2025, 4:55 AM UTC

puppymaster wrote: post #549

elihu wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jevon's paradox would imply that there's good reason to think that demand for shovels will increase. AI doesn't seem to be one of those things where society as a whole will say, "we have enough of that; we don't need any more". (Many individual people are already saying that, but they aren't the people buying the GPUs for this in the first place. Steam engines weren't universally popular either when they were introdu…

I also dont get how this is bearish for NVDA. Before this, small to mid companies would give up on finetuning their own model because openai is just so much better and cheaper. Now deepseek SOTA model gives them much better quality baseline model to train on. Wouldn't more people want to RAG on top of deepseek? or some startups accountant would run the numbers and figures we can just inference the shit out of deepsee…

Because their biggest buyer(s) just ran into a buzzsaw. NVDA's stratospheric valuation is based on a few select customer's unrestrained ability to purchase the latest products. That unrestrained spending ability was fueled by the "AI" arms race. If those companies see their ability to be profitable with "AI" as diminished then their ability to continue spending with NVDA is probably going to be diminished as well. Anything considered bad for NVDA's top spenders is going to be viewed as bad for NVDA as well.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#643

Post by asdff » Tue, Jan 28, 2025, 4:56 AM UTC

cortesoft wrote: post #395

pokstad wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Because most people's trips are the commute and they haven't been given more time and money to go and road trip more. That isn't analogous to computing though. People do the same things broadly they've always had with computing, but we've figured out how to create a system where your computer today running microsoft word is 100x as powerful as your computer in 1995 also running microsoft word and you feel the need to upgrade your hardware every couple of years so you can continue running microsoft word. It is the perfect model for exponentially dumping raw compute power into the void to perpetuate value creation. It will not stop in our lifetimes I expect. In 25 years our computers will be 100x more powerful still and we will still have MS word.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#644

Post by nycdatasci » Tue, Jan 28, 2025, 4:57 AM UTC

puppymaster wrote: post #549

elihu wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jevon's paradox would imply that there's good reason to think that demand for shovels will increase. AI doesn't seem to be one of those things where society as a whole will say, "we have enough of that; we don't need any more". (Many individual people are already saying that, but they aren't the people buying the GPUs for this in the first place. Steam engines weren't universally popular either when they were introdu…

I also dont get how this is bearish for NVDA. Before this, small to mid companies would give up on finetuning their own model because openai is just so much better and cheaper. Now deepseek SOTA model gives them much better quality baseline model to train on. Wouldn't more people want to RAG on top of deepseek? or some startups accountant would run the numbers and figures we can just inference the shit out of deepsee…

NVDA can't really "churn out more CUDAs" because CUDA is a software platform/framework, not a physical product.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#645

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Jan 28, 2025, 4:57 AM UTC

plaidfuji wrote: post #640

Here’s a take I haven’t seen yet: If training and inference just got 40x more efficient, but OpenAI and co. still have the same compute resources, once they’ve baked in all the DeepSeek improvements, we’re about to find out very quickly whether 40x the compute delivers 40x the performance / output quality, or if output quality has ceased to be compute-bound.

[deleted]

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#646

Post by r00fus » Tue, Jan 28, 2025, 4:57 AM UTC

esafak wrote: post #626

yo-cuddles wrote: post #448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably not. If the price of Nvidia is dropping, it's because investors see a world where Nvidia hardware is less valuable, probably because it will be used less. You can't do the distill/magnify cycle like you do with alphago. LLM models have basically stalled in their base capabilities, pre training is basically over at this point, so the news arms race will be over marginal capability gains and (mostly) making th…

So you're saying we're close to AGI? Because the game doesn't stop until we get there.

I don't think LLMs lead to AGI. It's a local maxima.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#647

Post by mindwok » Tue, Jan 28, 2025, 5:00 AM UTC

nejsjsjsbsb wrote: post #315

plaidfuji wrote: post #160

The part of this that doesn’t jibe with me is the fact that they also released this incredibly detailed technical report on their architecture and training strategy. The paper is well-written and has a lot of specifics. Exactly the opposite of what you would do if you had truly made an advancement of world-altering magnitude. All this says to me is that the models themselves have very little intrinsic value / are hig…

I always thought AMZN is the winner since I looked into Bedrock. When I saw Claude on there it added a fuck yeah, and now the best models being open just takes it to another level. AMZN: no horse picked, we host anything MSFT: Open AI GOOGLE: Google AI AMZN is in the strongest position.

You can also use Claude, Mistral, Llama and others on Google Vertex, similar to Bedrock.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#648

Post by BenFranklin100 » Tue, Jan 28, 2025, 5:00 AM UTC

plaidfuji wrote: post #640

Here’s a take I haven’t seen yet: If training and inference just got 40x more efficient, but OpenAI and co. still have the same compute resources, once they’ve baked in all the DeepSeek improvements, we’re about to find out very quickly whether 40x the compute delivers 40x the performance / output quality, or if output quality has ceased to be compute-bound.

That seems to be the key question.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#649

Post by hattmall » Tue, Jan 28, 2025, 5:03 AM UTC

deeviant wrote: post #569

addicted wrote: post #561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you are missing is that it turns out the gold isn’t actually gold. It’s bronze. So earliest, the shovelers were willing to spend thousands of dollars for a single shovel because they were expecting to get much more valuable gold out the other end. But now that it’s only bronze, they can’t spend that much money on their tools anymore to make their venture profitable. A lot of shovelers are gonna drop out of the r…

Wait, so AI might become 25x cheaper to train and run, and your thesis is... no one will make money on AI now?!?!

Sort of, it means there's less of a chance for massive market domination and a monopoly.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#650

Post by thw09j9m » Tue, Jan 28, 2025, 5:08 AM UTC

I think the big picture that many people are missing here is the motivation that all these AI/tech companies have for buying up so many GPU's in the first place: achieving AGI/ASI.

And while some still try to portray a dedication/duty to AI Alignment, I think most have either secretly or more publicly moved away from it in the race to become the first to achieve it.

And I think, given that inference time compute is so much cheaper than pre-training, the first to achieve AGI might have enough compute on hand from having been to first to build it that they would not need to purchase many more GPU's from Nvidia. So at some point, Nvidia's revenues are going to decline precipitously.

So the question is: how far away are we from AGI? Seems like most experts estimate 3-10 years. Did that timeline just shrink by 50x (or at least by some multiple) from these new optimizations from DeepSeek?

I think Nvidia's revenue is going to continue to grow at its current pace (or faster) until AGI is achieved. Just sell your positions right before that happens.

(Not an expert. Not even an amateur)