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

831–840 of 1001 posts

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#831

Post by AnthonyMouse »

cyanydeez wrote: post #821
pyentropy wrote: post #814

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If H800 is a memory-constrained model that NVIDIA built to avoid the Chinese export ban on H100 with equivalent fp8 performance, it makes zero sense to believe Elon Musk, Dario Armodei and Alexandr Wang's claims that DeepSeek smuggled H100s. The only reason why a team would allocate time on memory optimizations and writing NVPTX code rather than focusing on posttraining is if they severely struggled with memory durin…

What's surprising is anyone would repeat Elon musk related things. Tech or politics related, he's off the deep end.

The problem is he's only wrong some of the time and then people arguing about which one it is this time generates attention, a valuable commodity.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#833

Post by Tostino »

h0l0cube wrote: post #574
deeviant wrote: post #569

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Perhaps they mean there's less wealth to be extracted from the closed-source training side of the equation, which requires huge capital investment, and promises even bigger returns by gatekeeping the technology.

Let's shed a tear for the investor class who had their wealth extraction dreams dashed a bit today.

Anyways, where were we...

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#834

Post by aurareturn »

sidkshatriya wrote: post #800
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.

No, nvidia's demand and importance might reduce in the long term. We are forgetting that China has a whole hardware ecosystem. Now we learn that building SOTA models does not need SOTA hardware in massive quanties from nvidia. So the crash in the market implicitly could mean that the (hardware) monopoly of American companies is not going to be more than a few years. The hardware moat is not as deep as the West though…

>On the training side, there will be less demand for nvidia GPUs as meta, google, microsoft etc. extract efficiencies with the GPUs they already have given the embarrasing success of DeepSeek. Now, China might have been another insatiable market for nvidia but the export controls have ensured that it wont be.

Why? If DeepSeek made training 10x more efficient, just train a 10x bigger model. The end goal is AGI.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#835

Post by saagarjha »

rx_tx wrote: post #775
zeven7 wrote: post #695

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've missed the stories on this until now. Is it known (and is there an ELI5) how they were able to do it so much more efficiently?

This article has good background, context, and explanations [1] They skipped CUDA and instead used PTX which is a lower level instruction set where they were able to implement more performant cross-chip comms to make up for the less-performant H800 chips. [1]: https://stratechery.com/2025/deepseek-faq/

> Moreover, if you actually did the math on the previous question, you would realize that DeepSeek actually had an excess of computing; that’s because DeepSeek actually programmed 20 of the 132 processing units on each H800 specifically to manage cross-chip communications. This is actually impossible to do in CUDA.

You can do this just fine in CUDA, no PTX required. Of course all the major shops are using inline PTX at the very least to access the Tensor cores effectively.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#836

Post by EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK »

KeplerBoy wrote: post #759
cyberax wrote: post #740

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> DeepSeek is still a big model that requires a lot of resources to run I can run the largest model at 4 tokens per second on a 64GB card. Smaller models are _faster_ than Phi-4. I've just switched to it for my local inference.

Isn't the largest model still like 130GB after heavy quantization[1] and 4 tok/s borderline unusable for interactive sessions with those long outputs? [1] https://unsloth.ai/blog/deepseekr1-dynamic

I told it to skip all reasoning and explanations and output just the code. It complied, saving a lot of time)

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#837

Post by Cumpiler69 »

cyanydeez wrote: post #828
Cumpiler69 wrote: post #797

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It's because software devs are smart and make a lot of money They just think they're smart BECAUSE they make a lot of money. Just because you can center divs for six figures a year at a F500 doesn't make you smart at everything.

The secret of meritocracy is it can be measured in billionaires

Forgot the /s ?

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#838

Post by kavalg »

physicsguy wrote: post #328
plaidfuji wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, I think they still do have an edge - ChatGPT is a great app and has strong consumer recognition already, very hard to displace.. and MSFT has a major installed base of enterprise customers who cannot readily switch cloud / productivity suite providers. So I guess they still have an edge it’s just nore of a traditional edge.

Microsoft don't have to use OpenAI though, they could swap that out underneath for the business applications.

and it is even questionable whether "bundling" AI in every product is legal wrt anti-competitive laws (i.e. the IE case)

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#839

Post by aptj »

t_mann wrote: post #512

Curious thought: could those large price movements have something to do with the fact that DeepSeek is financed by a hedge fund (rather than the more typical VC)? It is unclear how DS will make money from its current strategy of sharing much of the secret sauce that went into training as well as releasing the results under permissive licenses. But if the play was "short major tech stocks and then release surprising r…

Sounds plausible. Can someone tell us how they can hide/get away with such stock shorting?

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#840

Post by saagarjha »

nly wrote: post #804
Cumpiler69 wrote: post #797

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It's because software devs are smart and make a lot of money They just think they're smart BECAUSE they make a lot of money. Just because you can center divs for six figures a year at a F500 doesn't make you smart at everything.

I've never met a fellow software engineer who "centers divs" for 6 figures. But then I work with engineers using FPGAs to trade in the markets with tick to trade times in double digit nanoseconds and processing streams of market data at ~10 million messages per second (80Gbps) The truth is, a lot of P&L in trading these days is a technical feat of mathematics and engineering and not just one of fundamental analysis a…

If you were smart surely there would be easier ways for you to make that money ;)
Post reply on HN