| "The cost performance ratio reflects this." But the TPUs are half the cost per this article? Plus Google does the entire stack and can better optimize the hardware versus Nvidia. So it seem Google can improve faster I would think. If there ever was a huge advantage doing the entire stack it is with neural networks. A perfect example is Google new speech doing 16k samples a second with a NN. https://cloudplatform.googleblog.com/2018/03/introducing-Clo... Do not think Google could offer this service as a competitive cost without the TPUs. This new method is replacing the method that was far less compute intensive so to offer at a competitive price requires lowering compute cost which suspect is only possible with the TPUs. |
Exactly. Nvidia can match the performance already without 100% specialized processor. It's the just the price they need to cut by optimizing their architecture for tensor processing and reducing their profits when competition emerges.
Google is not in the business of becoming a major chip maker or competing with Nvidia head on. Putting hundreds of millions into new microarchitecture every second year eats lots of resources. They just want competitive market and the prices to go down.