The problem appears to be that Oracle is building today's DCs... Tomorrow. And by the time they come online, Vera Rubins will be out, with 5x efficiency gains. And Oracle is unlikely to want to drop the price of Blackwells 5x, despite them being 5x less efficient.
It's a little unclear to me how bad this is. Nvidia's "rack scale" machines like GB200-NVL72s and GB300-NVL72s are basically a fully built rack you roll into a DC and plug into power and network. In that case, Oracle should probably just buy the rack-scale Vera Rubins when they come out instead of Blackwells and roll them into their new DCs. Tada! Tomorrow's DCs, tomorrow.
OTOH it's possible someone at Oracle screwed up and committed to buying Blackwells at today's prices, delivered tomorrow. Or maybe construction of the physical DCs is behind schedule, so today's Blackwells are sitting around unused, waiting for power and networking tomorrow. Then they're in a bit of trouble.
Regardless, CNBC's reporting seems pretty unclear on what actually happened and whether this is actually bad or not.
Just to compare and contrast:
https://www.videocardbenchmark.net/power_performance.html
Here's a synthethic benchmark page listing every GPU in recent memory. True, its not AI, but if we look at the 1080 Ti, a 9 year old card at this point, and compare it with the 5090 we see the gains were 190/74=2.56x in that timespan that involved multiple die shrinks and uArch changes.
I think these numbers might not hold up on IRL workloads, and afaict older datacenter cards still hold up well and are being used in production.
E.g. the next gen might have hardware inference for lower bits, more memory bandwidth, etc.
"Those things are still flying! Introduced in 1955!"
"But that was the B version, all those that are still flying are the H version, so many iterations between them!"
"Welcome to 1962"
The efficiency is in other areas too e.g. memory, network, etc. It's TOTAL.
> Here's a synthethic benchmark page listing every GPU in recent memory
We don't have the GPU gains not because of process nodes. Nvidia and later AMD stopped investing in that direction. They started optimizing for AI not graphics.
You are right about the building of today's DC's. There is a small part of me that feels Oracle might be a bit toxic long term with all this debt him and his kid have taken on. And this could be the first reaction to it.
Meanwhile, commercial operators have already deployed their hardware for public workloads. Existing Blackwell capacity won’t just be shifted into classified environments—governments don’t repurpose hardware from unclassified infrastructure for secret/TS systems. That deployed stock will stay in the private sector for hosted AI workloads.
For many high-security use cases, new Blackwell systems may effectively be the only viable option, especially given the slow review cycles around new firmware and GPU software stacks. Newer chipsets will also be prioritized for training due to performance gains.
Oracle likely recognizes this dynamic and is betting competitors may eventually need to deploy in their data centers. Governments haven’t historically deployed GPU capacity at this scale-beyond ASIC/FPGA crypto workloads.. and likely don’t have large pools of pristine Blackwell hardware available.
They’re also purchasing late in the cycle, which may work in their favour.
> For data collected from the UI or other usage: We retain the personal information described in this privacy notice for as long as you use our Services
I have two quick questions:
1. Why are UI prompts and responses kept for the entire life of the account?
2. When an account is closed, is the data actually deleted or just de-identified?
This is what I don't understand. Why is the article making the assumption that the DC itself is tied to a particular GPU generation? AWS doesn't knock down a building and start over every time Intel releases a new Xeon.
It's like setting up a warehouse of GPUs to mine bitcoin while others are switching to ASICs.
A100 has 312 TFLOPS of FP16 for 250W, i.e., 1.25 TFLOPS/W.
B200 has 2250 TFLOPS of FP16 compute for 1000W, i.e., 2.25 TFLOPS/W.
This is ~34% growth per generation and ~14% per year. It's hard to believe it will be 400% per generation this time
Or we‘ll get a supply problem and they get nothing or not enough. Tomorrow’s DC, never. Tada!
Other reporting says this is very much the case. Stargate barely has some of the land cleared, but the buildings were supposed to be finished and have GPUs installed over the course of 2026.
There's also the indicator of Nvidia giving out billion-dollar deals to other companies such that they could commit to buying even more Blackwells to keep production going. The chips from those new deals don't have anywhere to go, everyone already spent their cash on getting shipped chips that they're still installing today (apparently some are even in warehouses)
I moved over from OpenRouter and it's been breezy. I hope you are sustainable at $30/month and are successful!
By the time Vera Rubins will be available on scale, will they immediately be put into DCs, or will tomorrows chips be running.. the day after tomorrow?
If the hardware refresh rate makes a substantial share of data center cost function more like opex than capex, the companies funding it out of operations (especially from operations of what are essentially monopoly businesses, in the sense pricing power), even if it isn’t the operations it power specifically, are fine in the near-to-intemediate term (barring exogenous shocks to those other businesses), whereas Oracle, funding it by a debt bonanza, is in a different position.
Nepo baby is coming with a political angle and wants control of the news media part of WB. The American media landscape is already without much competition nor diversity in political views, now there would practically be none.
Unfortunately there is no chance of that happening.
At his level of personal wealth there is no realistic scenario that leads to personal bankruptcy. In our current capitalist society once you're into the billions you're "too big to fail" and you have unlocked the infinite money glitch.
The only consolation is the lawnmower is 81 and thus is going to be dead soon (even the mega-wealthy can't plastic surgery themselves out of this outcome, at least not yet) and he can't take any of it with him. But all indications point to his progeny having aspirations to be even more damaging to society than he has been.
Reminder to lay up your treasures in heaven.
Haven't been following Bryan Johnson, eh?
That's not how any of this works. "Too big to fail" can be applied to companies, but I don't know of any examples of it being applied to people.
This is plainly false. There are plenty of example, even recently, of billionaires losing their fortunes or going bankrupt. Often they come with criminal prosecution because they get desperate and try illegal ways to hang on to their wealth. Sam Bankman-Fried, Elizabeth Holmes, and several other examples come to mind.
There are a lot of stories of billionaires getting too risky with their investments or too concentrated in businesses and losing the majority of their wealth. The Barclay story, Jim Justice, the old Peloton CEO.
It’s not a common outcome because you have to try hard to screw up that badly when you have over a billion dollars in wealth. Parking it anywhere in common investments would leave you and your ancestors set forever.
Some of the reason for the high density is that you need devices physically close to each other to share such bandwidth. It’s not because we’re limited by the physical building space, because we can construct buildings all day long. Sending bits around at ultra high speed is hard and you need to keep all of the devices physically close to avoid having your interconnect costs explode.
There has to be some theory to explain the story to be consistent with this comment.
To use the hit HBO TV show silicon valley analogy, it is far more likely that "the bear is sticky with honey" will happen at Oracle than at Open AI. Some kind of game of telephone gone wrong at some point and now the people responsible at Oracle must double down in order to kick the can to the next quarter and not appear clueless.
Statutory disclaimer: I am not affiliated with either Open AI or Oracle and have no insider information. All of this is mere conjecture and has no basis in reality.
Don't forget the possibility that it's AI slop.
That sounds about right.
> People at openai are lying to cnbc?
Remove "to cnbc" and that's a yes.
> cnbc are fabricating stories while drunk?
Maybe not drunk but likely high.
I could see Nvidia adding terms of sale requiring disposal rather than resale.
I also don't think companies are going to have mandatory replacement cycles for GPU hardware the same way they do for everything else, because:
1. It is an order or magnitude (or more) more expensive.
2. It isn't clear whether Moore's law will apply to the AI GPU space the same way it has for everything else.
Unless Nvidia can launch a new chip every 2-3 years with massively improved performance-per-watt at a lower price no one is going to rush to recycle the old one.
There are PCIe versions of these right? And another comment is saying there are PCI adapters too. It "only" requires 600 to 700W. It's not out of reach for everybody.
If the used regular server market is any indication, you can find, after a few years, a lot of enterprise gear at totally discounted prices. CPU costing $4K brand new for $100 after a few years: stuff like that.
A friend has got a 42U rack and so do some homelab'ers. People have been running GPU farms mining cryptocurrencies or doing "transcoding" (for money).
It's not just CPUs at 1/40th of their brand new price: network gear too. And ECC RAM (before the recent RAM craze).
I'm pretty sure that if H200 begin to flood the used market, people shall quickly adapt.
> Unless Nvidia can launch a new chip every 2-3 years with massively improved performance-per-watt at a lower price no one is going to rush to recycle the old one.
I agree with that. But if they resell old H200s, people are resourceful and shall find a way to run these.
That's exactly the point.
Performance/watt is increasing so much gen-to-gen that it makes no longer sense to run older hardware.
Not my words, Jensen's.
My last employer is still running a bunch of otherwise discontinued g3 instances with 2015 era GPUs.
I bought a used NEC SX Aurora TSUBASA (PCIe x16 board that looks like a GPU board) and realized it has no fans. The server case it is designed to fit into is pressurized by fans forcing air through eight cards on a special 4 + 4 slot motherboard. I have to stack and mount three 40mm fans on the back.
In order to take advantage of that, someone needs to be positioned to process all that material economically, and to make the logistics achievable by the big players. If it costs Facebook $10million to store and transport phased out gpus vs just sending them to a landfil, they're not going to do it. If they get $100k for recycling - probably not going to do it. If they pocket $5 million, they will definitely contract that out, especially if it costs $50 million to build out the infrastructure to handle it.
Probably a good company idea - transport, disposal, refurbishment of out of cycle GPUs and datacenter assets, creating a massive recycling pipeline for recapturing all the valuable elements is a pretty good niche.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1H3xQaf7BFI&t=1577s
in the States.
Would be interested to know if others have takes on this.
A couple real world points:
1. They generally don't just fail. More likely a repairable component on a board fails and you can send it out to be repaired.
2. For my current stuff, I have a 3 year pro support contract that can be extended. Anything happens, Dell goes and fixes it. We also haven't had someone in our cage at the DC in over 6 months now.
This site apparently sources ex-enterprise(-only) systems and puts them into desktop style enclosures.
Why would them sell it cheaper to the 2nd market??
It will hurt the sales of new ones. This is the way even with food, let alone technology. Don't expect to buy cheaper 2nd GPU any century soon.
Their databases are heavily used in government, banking and other large industries which have been slower to adapt to change and strugglyto migrate away. At what point does purchasing oracle to gain customer share, existing data centres and the opportunity to migrate to your cloud platform make more sense than competing?
They still have a high market value. However, the debt they will need to service will result in ongoing price increases which will encourage people to migrate away. Over time they will struggle to service the debt and a buyout will be the best of the bad options.
An interesting perspective of IBM is its relative position. It's leveled off at about $60b/y, after a lengthy decline. It is far overmatched by many big tech companies today in terms of revenue.
It's a niche business, serving niche demands. I think IBM's moat is that most of its business is highly uninteresting: industrialized box ticking work, deeply entangled by contracts and a strong need for continuity by its customers.
I actually had a recent encounter with one of IBM's products. A commercial B2B REST API I created was analyzed by an IBM vulnerability scanning platform on behalf of a major US municipality. It didn't find anything actually critical, but there were some worthwhile points in the report, and working around a false positive was a frustration. The product, in this case, is diffusion of responsibility.
On the Big Iron end, IBM isn't really selling hardware. They selling an ecosystem: services, software, support, continuity (over decades,) etc. It pleases me that they chose to stick to Power: it's nice to know Itanium didn't kill off every enterprise RISC platform.
Maybe, one day, some major quantum computing breakthrough happens at IBM. As far as I can see, that's the only play they have that could change their trajectory. In the meantime, they have a large software portfolio and plenty of institutions that will keep signing contracts long after I'm gone.
They do a lot of stuff. Also own Hashicorp now, so they have things like: Ansible / RedHat Linux (already owned), Terraform, Consul, Nomad, Packer, etc. A lot of "let's build modern infra" tooling.
Oracle is heavily tied to the government and as a result is a 'too big to fail' company. They will never be taken over or go bankrupt.
If it's built in stages each state will have never variants of hardware I imagine.
Stargate is backed by the US gvt hence why they're comfortable to put that under debt financing
That stopped being true many years ago though, and the divergence has only accelerated with the advent of AI datacenter usage. The form factor is now fundamentally different (SXM instead of PCIe); you can adapt an SXM card to PCIe with some effort [1], but that may not even be worthwhile because 1. the power and cooling requirements for the SXM cards are radically different than a desktop part and more importantly 2. the dies are no longer even close to being the same. IIRC, Blackwell AI chips straight up don't have rasterization hardware onboard at all; internally they look like a moderate number of general SMs attached to a huge number of tensor core. Modern AI GPUs are fundamentally optimized for, well, mat-mults, which is not at all what you want for gaming or really any non-AI application.
[1] https://l4rz.net/running-nvidia-sxm-gpus-in-consumer-pcs/
So they have to hope they’re a part of the future in the AI capacity because their SaaS business is going to take a big hit.
YTD performance didn’t fully bake this reality in. It was seen as them having 2 huge revenue streams, the market is realizing that AI is a threat to SaaS and baking that into stonks
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/general/as-oracle-plans-thou...
Are they? Unless you are Nvidia that is very far from the case.
OpenAI's current revenue is $25 billion a year. They are expected to spend $600 billion on infrastructure in the next 4 years to sustain and grow that revenue.
Amazon, Google, Microsoft and Meta are spending a combined $650 billion on infrastructure in 2026 alone.
The story is the same across the rest of the industry.
None of these investments are immediately profitable. And it remains to be seen whether they eventually will be or not.
If you're OpenAI spending $100M on a training run they're not.
But if you're Oracle renting out GPUs to little guys doing inference, they are.
David Ellison is fueling his buying spree with debt guaranteed by his dad's oracle shares. The various assets David has bought are already suffering losses of viewership because viewers are turned off by their new ideological slant.
Usually debt investors are not worried if the stock price is high. Debt has precedence over equity, so if the stock price is riding high, the CEO can always be convinced to print more shares to service the debt. The Oracle stock price has not been doing that hot lately, however. As the article said, it is 50% down. Still ORCL has 430 Billion market cap in comparison with 130 Billion of debt. It seems manageable. But stock prices can move very fast. Ironically, the war in Iran, which David's new news sources keep supporting is causing ORCL stock to go down which can bring down David's new media empire.
David just purchased Warner Bros for about 110. A lot of that (40 billion) is also guaranteed by daddy's ORCL shares. Warner Bros owns Comedy Central, which sadly has been one of Americas most dependable news sources.
The house of cards is still standing but its getting awfully wobbly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_Macintosh_7100
Sagan sued. Engineers at Apple changed the name to BHA: "Butt-Head Astronomer".
He sued again. The final codename was "LAW: Lawyers are Wimps".
The way Nvidia does it is actually super respectful and it's honestly better to use names like these instead of ULTRA PRO MAX 5x etc.
