[matwood]

I agree with Aswath Damodaran here. NVDA is priced for perfection in AI, but also whatever is next.

In addition, IMO NVDA’s margins are a gift and a curse. They look great to investors, but also mean all their customers are aggressively looking to produce their own GPUs.

[api]

They are also priced on the idea that nothing will challenge them. If AMD, Intel, or anyone else comes out with a challenger for their top GPUs at competitive prices, that’s a problem.

I’m surprised they haven’t yet.

[matwood]

The biggest challengers are likely the hyperscalers and companies like Meta. It sort of flew under the radar when Meta released an update on their GPU plans last year and said their cluster would be as powerful as X NVDA GPUs, and not that it would have X NVDA GPUs [1].

Also, I should add that Deepseek just showed the top GPUs are not necessary to deliver big value.

[1] https://engineering.fb.com/2024/03/12/data-center-engineerin...

This announcement is one step in our ambitious infrastructure roadmap. By the end of 2024, we’re aiming to continue to grow our infrastructure build-out that will include 350,000 NVIDIA H100 GPUs as part of a portfolio that will feature compute power equivalent to nearly 600,000 H100s.

[goeiedaggoeie]

Exactly. gpu's have become too profitable and of strategic importance, to not see several deep pocketed existing technology companies invest more and try and acquire market share. there is a mini moat here with cuda and existing work, but some the start of commodification must be on the <10 year horizon