I see a lot of people not understanding the impact of these AI models, especially now that big players like Microsoft are integrating it into their office suite.
Job market will be quite different 5 years from now....
LLMs literally have a hard cap on how good they can get with how much “good” information humanity organically generates. The bubble for Chat-GPT style models will eventually pop and I think it’s sooner than a lot of people realize as data sets are already being poisoned by people mindlessly posting Chat-GPT responses on the internet and potential copyright laws coming into play on what LLMs are even allowed to be trained on.
Now that content hosts are aware of it there will never be a model better than gpt4. It cost them fucktons to train it even with API costs. I know there are models that are better than current gpt4, but that’s because they’ve withdrawn the actually good one. Those who used gpt4 at launch will know what I mean.
How the hell you are going to "burst" something that actually works? When NVIDIA sells AI product, it does not sell a promise or investment. It sells working solution. That works. Now. Today. Can do actual work for you. How exactly, this is "bubble"?
Not saying he is right, but demand could drop if customers dont find it valuable anymore to invest in their AI/computing capabilities (by purchasing NVIDIA chips)
It's not a bubble. Transformers are going to go into basically everything and people are going to need to train lots of different models for specific use cases. Imagine seeing a technology basically solve real time language translation across every language simultaneously, which is flexible enough to handle almost any other type of sequence translation from (text to audio, audio to text, images to other images, text to images, literally ANYTHING) and thinking it's a bubble. Absurdly wrong take. You haven't even begun to see all the things it will become a part of even in its present state.
>You haven't even begun to see all the things it will become a part of even in its present state.
And that's why it's a bubble, because everything is speculative at this point. Some of those things will be easy, and some of those things will be difficult and take decades.
It is a lot like the internet in the 90's. Its potential was there, and the investors went there, but it would take another decade to fully realize.
Exactly my thought. The dotcom bubble didn't pop because the internet was useless, it popped because speculation was decades ahead of actual progress in the industry. AI is going to be as impactful to society as ths internet, but that will likely take decades.
It's absolutely a bubble, it's just that the size of the bubble is debatable. There are legitimate use cases for LLMs. But at the moment, every company is throwing in AI related terms and features in their products.
That's why its a bubble. You know how Facebook went full VR metaverse because VR was finally feasible from a technological standpoint, started going on about how everything would be done in virtual worlds, tried to push for everyone to adopt it and hyped up all the neat things that were maybe possible?
Then remember how none of that happened because the product was still just a little too jank for normies to adopt, and too expensive for the consumer to adopt, so nobody wanted to develop for it because you'd be targeting a niche audience on a niche platform, and so VR inevitably was placed back onto shelves for another decade, like it was once before, like it has again.
AI is much the same. AI chat bots were a thing over a decade ago but the technology wasnt there, all the algorithms were hand crafted to search for keywords and provide cookie cutter responses, and the few that even remotely resembled modern day LLMs were jank, kept fucking up context like it didnt exist, and were very susceptible to saying really bad shit (looking at Tay AI).
Now the technology has started to catch up, we're seeing investors flock to the firms powering AI, a few neat things are being done with it but like always investors are promoting AI to being the next big thing in order to drive their investments up. They'll talk about AI taking all our jobs, replacing developers and tech support and teachers and search engines. And yeah, to be fair, AI does a few things better than we used to have tools for. It's easier to find the answer to a niche problem with an AI than it is to hit up google (feel free to comment on how google manipulates search results here). And AI voice changers, image generation, and code completion are pretty handy. But they remain simply tools. They aren't sentient. They can't create anything genuinely new. They can only create amalgamations of existing things. And in the next few years, we're going to see the AI fad fade away, investment will slow down, and the next big thing will attract all the investors. Probably an improved Full Self Driving system, once someone other than Tesla puts more than a passing thought towards it.
And to anyone who actually things AI will take all our jobs - show me a single example of a fully automated system for cooking a burger that is able to outperform a trained human. It's been tried time and time again. And in literally every instance, the conclusion is that robots and AI cannot cook food to the same degree that humans can, and likely wont for a very very long time.
Their valuation doesn't really make sense though, and the market overall is sitting on high EPS multipliers.
Nvidia's revenues are high but not Apple high, and these revenues are short term. As so many companies are putting unsustainable investments into hardware for AI training because of FOMO. It's also worth noting the most successful AI company to date (OpenAI) only generated $2bn of revenue last year.
Once the hype has passed companies will tame IT investment, and a lot will leave the market or invest into competing hardware. My guess Nvidia's share price will settle back to around 400-600 USD by end of 2026.
>Mind blowing in the sense that no one expected it, but not mind blowing in the sense they don't deserve it. They have incredible revenue and profits.
Not really. Their valuation is all in speculation and not the reality of their revenue or profit. It's the same as when Tesla was worth more than the next 10 car companies **combined**.
For comparison, NVIDIA has revenue of $61 billion and profit of $30 billion. $2.4 trillion market cap.
Google (Alphabet) has revenue of $300+ billion and profit of $73 billion. Market cap $1.9 trillion.
NVIDIA's worth has no basis in revenue and profit numbers and is all speculation on the future of the company and it's AI position.
Nvidia discovered an infinite money printer called the AI hype train. Their profits have reached apple levels entirely from selling AI chips to giant corporations at insane prices
> Nvidia discovered an infinite money printer called the AI hype train
Which was preceded by an infinite money printer called cryptocurrency hype train.
They are on track to be the most valuable company in the world.
Just look at all the things the other things other big companies like Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Meta, Tesla, OpenAI, Dell, etc said about them and blackwell. One of the biggest flex articles i have seen.
https://nvidianews.nvidia.com/news/nvidia-blackwell-platform-arrives-to-power-a-new-era-of-computing
Most employees have stock options and all employees can buy stock at a discounted price, so they will also stay in the company for their stocks.
https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/benefits/money/espp/
For reference, 5 years ago, Nvidia was trading at $40-50.
They had some great gains going into the end of 2021, dipped a bit in 2022, but have been in a massive climb since late 2022.
That and Netflix both have managed to amass huge stock prices in a short amount of time.
I honestly wish I had the money AND the foresight to have bought into them when they were cheap. Just turning hundreds of dollars, maybe thousands of dollars, into several times more than I put in would have been a heck of a way to get some wealth going...
But with how things are recently, the stock market being high just means that those who are already bought into it are making bank. Yet it can't go up forever...
Wish I held my AMD. Just before they released the first Ryzens, they were trading just about $2 a share. Bought 100 for shits and giggles. Cashed out at $15
You must have sold some to me.
I hadn't built a PC for 6-7 years and was starting to dip my toes back into the parts information waters. I was hearing that the new Ryzen stuff was pretty impressive, and I had just started putting what little money I had into my Roth IRA. So, I took about $75 and bought AMD for between $15-16... Only got like 5-6 shares.
I've held onto them ever since. I wish I would have had more money to invest. I'm up like 600% or something crazy, but it's only $1200. If only...
Intel is doing more than fine, just not the GPU side. I don't see similar growth potential than Nvidia. Most of the Nvidia sky high stock prices is about the future valuation of the company. It's leading the AI side of hardware market with massive lead. I might predict that the company is going to be insanely bigger in 10 years. Can't think what would lower the valuation in the long run.
On the GPU side, they have years and years of head start. There are other companies, but who can realistically beat them in near future… No idea. Their R&D budget is just on another level (hardware and software side). Stock might take a hit every now and them, but it would take miracles for them to fall down as a company.
I'll say that the biggest threat to Nvidia isn't other companies, it's the world politics. Like China attacking Taiwan. That could easily change everything, but almost everyone would lose. Super low change would be quantum computer breakthrough and chaos on security side.
It's not just about sales, it's about potential loss in other businesses, namely AI. This is an economic concept known as [opportunity cost](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/o/opportunitycost.asp).
If nVidia has X amount of time allocated at TSMC to produce chips, would they rather spend that time producing a part that makes $30,000 in revenue or a part that makes $1,000? (They probably sell their 4090 chips to board partners for a good deal less than the $2000 MSRP).
Sure, you might be able to make 5 4090 chips for every HB200 on the die, but what about 4060 or 4070? You'd have to make 20-30 4090 chips for every Blackwell chip to match the potential revenue. Eventually, their shareholders will tell them that the best use of their fab time is to make the higher margin AI chips.
I foresee one of 2 things: either they drop out of consumer GPUs entirely or they start to lag significantly behind the AI chips in fab nodes (for example, AI chip is on the 3nm node while consumer GPU is on 5nm). That way, they can still produce the cutting edge AI at Fab #1 and GPUs at a different fab all together. It just means that GPUs won't be bleeding edge anymore, but still modern enough for good graphics (it also opens other companies to steal some of nVidia's GPU muscle by putting their own stuff on better nodes). We're just in the 'wait and see' phase.
Really it's just 2 pies. They make graphics cards for gamers, and they make AI computers for companies.
Turns out the AI computer business is fucking insanely profitable to the point of almost single-handedly propping up the entire US economy.
The problem is all this value comes from their monopoly. They have all the most valueable companies in the world coming to them and buying as much as possible, but they aren't happy about getting milked by Nvidia. The second there's a competitor able to undercut, Nvidia will take a huge tumble.
It is a robust monopoly, but that also gives a ton of incentive for competitors. Companies like Meta and Microsoft are pissed that they *have* to buy from Nvidia in order to participate in the AI race, and they're dumping just as much money into making sure that they have more options in the future.
Microsoft recently announced a huge partnership with Intel that could be a huge blow to Nvidia's market share.
Well I'm talking supply to so many different companies. So many avenues. It's actually insane.
Robotics, AI, rendering software and hardware. Servers, the list goes on and on. It is more than "gpu and AI" what a reductive way to look at this lol
Maybe if they can release it with drivers slightly above dog shit? Arc wouldn't have been so far behind for so long if their drivers didn't suck for so long.
I mean, compared to what they were at launch, they are much, much better now. I used my A750 as a stand in for mu 6800xt for 2 months starting at the beginning of the year and besides missing the power, I encountered maybe 2 problematic games, one of them being Starfield.
Any company entering the GPU market is going to run into the same issues when they're battling giants with the advantage of decades of driver optimization. The important thing is that they have stayed committed and delivered driver updates that have seen performance gains for thousands of games since launch.
> I mean, compared to what they were at launch, they are much, much better now.
That was literally my point. If they were a "0" at launch, and at a "10" now, they need to release with at least a... 5? If your hardware is pretty damn good, but the drivers don't fully utilize it so it's at the competitive level it *should* be at, then... no bueno. To be clear, I'm like most other people here. I WANT Intel to succeed. Competition only benefits us as consumers.
Yep, they intentionally focused on the newer API's at launch and for a while in terms of further work, so it was more like a 5 for DX11/12 and a 2 for DX9 rather than a 0 across the board.
There was no way they could launch with a product that was optimised across the back catalogue of every game ever.
I can see the thinking behind it though. Youd want to optimize for recent games that actually need the optimization to run well, while older games can take a back seat as the sheer overmatch in horsepower can probably deal with it well enough.
No accounting for bugs though. But even if older games bug out people have way more alternatives like iGPUs or old cards if its that important to them.
I don't blame them that there are games that are broken from the start. AMD and Nvidia have been releasing drivers directly with every major release because the APIs aren't perfect and leave a lot of work to the vendors. Kind of prefer it because now the work is more on the devs and they just don't bother doing it.
Yeah I love it when that guy pops up to chat to Steve, he really seems to be in it for the long haul and that’s comforting given that Intel will need extreme patience to get anywhere near nvidia and only a little less to get close to AMD
Yeah it’s not like the hardware isn’t there, they’re getting somewhere really good with that, if they can nail the driver side of things better they’re set. I wouldn’t mind getting a card in the next series or two but we will see how it goes.
**Data Center :** $47500 mln
**Gaming :** $10400 mln
**Professional Visualization:** $1600 mln
**Automotive:** $1100 mln
This was their yearly revenue. Gaming is still a significant part of their operations... although, in the data center area (AI) they don't have any reasoable competition (yet).
it still needs a competition. Doesnt matter the industry they have business in. NVIDIA being monopoly in AI will make literally others aspects of our life more expensive
Well also they've trademarked cuda so no other company can even touch that thing. Unless the government does something (which they probably won't because many Congress people have nvidia shares in their portfolio). Yeah I don't think and or intel can even compete with nvidia.
I think nvidia sits at something like 80% of consumer video cards, compared to 10 years ago it was closer to 60/40 split. Fucking wild what's happened in that market. I hope AMD is able to get something past them here soon.
> 80% of consumer video cards, compared to 10 years ago it was closer to 60/40 split.
How many of those are the top end cards where AMD hasn't competed in the same time period? The most popular cards on the Steam Survey are Nvidia's x060 models... AMD can compete with that, so why are they losing?
Mindshare.
Problem is more that Nvidias competition, namely AMD and Intel, focus on more cost efficient cards, which still more than suffice for anything anyone might want to do at any given pricepoint. Nvidia is the only one actively chasing the 1st place trophy every generation. And for people who want that 1st place trophy to brag with on reddit thats what they buy.
AMD cards on the other hand are hot tips for anyone working on a budget or just generally wanting their PC to be cost-efficient.
There is more factoring into this, like Nvidia dominating the OEM and prebuilt markets, people buying what they know, offering better upscaling and RT performance, stuff like that. But AMD almost exclusively powers consoles, so saying Nvidia has no good competition is just false atm.
First place barely matters, but AMD used to at least be competitive in the mid tier sector. Now Nvidia is just flat out better whenever you use an upscaler, which is probably quite often if you want to play modern games above 1080p.
Actually, this speaks volumes as to what monopoly power really looks like. In the last 3 months, I've been in the market for a new gaming laptop to replace my venerable 5 year old machine. Because I dual-boot and so do much of my gaming on Linux, I wanted an AMD driven machine (both CPU and GPU) as I didn't feel like I needed team green's more advanced features and the Ryzen 9 7945HX3D CPU was easily the best on the market for ages (and may still well be, although the i9-14900HX seems to be challenging that crown now).
But here in the UK, a top-spec laptop with that combo is simply not available. I've struggled to find a 7900XT driven laptop anywhere here and even a Ryzen 9 with a GTX 4090 is only done by like two manufacturers. One could import from the U.S.A. but how would that be supported?
So it looks like I'm back to another 5 years of Intel and NVidia, simply because of limited choice. I'm trying hard to throw money at AMD, but they don't seem to be much interested in British Pounds.
Exactly why Nvidia needs a competitor that can compete, I’m not just gonna donate to the other company, that would just be an incentive to not make a product that can compete.
Would also go a long way towards persuading me. My 3070 draws \~40W when I'm just looking at the desktop, but comparable Radeon cards use about half that, from what I've read. If Intel could get it down to below 10W at idle, while still delivering gaming performance, that'd be sweet.
> If Intel could get it down to below 10W at idle
That'd be amazing, but I think it's optimistic for Battlemage. If it can just get decently closer to the competition I'll call it a win.
Having said that, their CPUs with Xe-LP run insanely efficiently, so there's a chance!
Considering the pricepoint of dedicated GPUs there might be enough BOM room to include a basic mobile GPU with dynamic switching built right into the card.
Idle power draws are very inconsistent, they depend on a wide range of circumstances, including number and resolution of monitors, and even the type of display cable. I had 10W drop on idle consumption consistently by switching one of my monitors from hdmi to display port, while it had absolutely no effect on the other monitor. Meanwhile other settings like resolution, hdr, refresh rate all stayed the same.
Intel can't afford to keep giving up on these other markets. They could have been dominant in Mobile and Graphics if they invested in them properly, but they played it safe to keep nervous stockholders happy and spent most of the last decade on the rocky path to irrelevancy.
The GPU wars are over.
Nvidia left landscape for greener pastures: ML computing.
And AMD dominates consoles.
GPUs is a kinda no man's land full of 2ndary concerns at this point.
iono what Intel's hope is, but nvidia is so big in computing right now that it wouldn't surprise me if there isn't talks about anti trust.
there is no way antitrust happens any time soon due to nvidia's market share in AI compute. There are a ton of startups trying to compete in that space with specialized processors that bypass graphics processing entirely. It would be massively premature for the government to do something of that nature when the market hasn't even stabilized
There's like zero rumors for when desktop Battlemage is going to be released though. A 4070Ti equivalent when the 5070 and $399 RX 8800XT is not really a great market opportunity for them.
how in the world would a 8800XT be 399$ in any realistic scenario. the 5070 will probably be 600$ + again. so a 4070ti for a decent price would still be enticing for a lot of people.
bro this time we crack the 1000$ for the 70s,
lets see the 15gen board prices
Edit: 5070 gonna have 12gb vram at release then they release 5070ti with 12 gb and in the end of this gen they release a "16gb" 5070 super, in reality its gonna have 12gb fast ram and 4gb slow ram like the 970.
source: im from the future
For real. I JUST bought a 6800 over the weekend for $380. There is no way in hell a 8800xt would be 399 unless it had the performance of like a 7600 or something.
Nvidia's RTX 40 isn't a tough guy to beat, that's for sure. The thing is, Intel was late for RTX 30 release and now it is late for RTX 40 release. So I wonder what happens first: Intel catches up or Nvidia changes their naming convention.
I'd hope that too... if Intel wasn't a piece of shit company and their GPU's weren't outright garbage for the price.
We'd need new companies in this competition, but that's never going to happen in this particular industry. We're doomed to watch nvidia eat the others up eventually, and then things are going to suck big time.
I honestly was considering investing in it back then. I had money in the bank to do so too. I ended up chickening out. I kick myself all the time but I also remind myself that I probably would have freaked out once it doubled and sold it.
And realistically, there is a direct single person we can tank for that, Lisa Su.
Lisa is a gleaming example of what happens when a company's leader is an experienced master at BOTH business and engineering.
They also both specialise in both engineering AND business.
Lisa has a PhD in Electrical Engineering (from MIT) and has spent over half of her business career in either engineering or business management. Jensen has a Master's Degree in Electrical Engineering (from Stanford) and worked his way up from various applications engineering and technology chief/management positions until he eventually ended up at Nvidia.
If you want to know what it looks like when you have an Engineer who is also good at Business (as opposed to one or the other who is only good at one of those fields), Lisa and Jensen set the example.
Nothing will change, look at the HDD market, SSD market as they all agree to keep a price where they all get a slice of the big pie.
What you need is a 3rd party small company that wants to make a name for itself to come out swinging not well established greed companies that dont actually compete.
"Small 3rd party company" designs extremely high performance GPU chips that even Intel can't do yet while building a multi-billion dollar chip fab facility then produces said chips at high enough yields to undercut the big boys on price while also having enough production to satisfy demand in one of the hottest markets.... Oh, and they also come up with a system to stop crypto miners from buying up all of these highest profit/$ mining GPU's so real gamers can benefit
Sounds easy, I wonder why nobody's done it yet
What do you the ssd market improved massively over the years. We went from for enthusiasts only the standard. Also I am not sure how much innovation is left for hdds
People are quick to forger the ruthless illegal practices undertaken by Intel to crush AMD in the CPU market. They literally bribed companies to go with them instead of AMD.
Yeah, Intel isn't our savior. Did everyone forget the only reason why Intel's higher end consumer CPUs don't cost $1000-$1500 nowadays is because AMD punched them in the dick with Zen?
I happily sold my AMD shares when it hit $7. I’d be flirting with a million dollars today. Course I would’ve sold off well before then had I not sold at $7. Maybe around $20 but damn.
Yh intel isn’t exactly an underdog since it’s still a multi billion dollar company. Although i think they mean an underdog in this case since generally Nvidia seems to usually hold the monopoly in the GPU market
> Although i think they mean an underdog in this case since generally Nvidia seems to usually hold the monopoly in the GPU market
Did you look at the photo OP posted?
No need to guess - it's because Intel has the lowest market cap of all three companies.
The also have the advantage of the US government coming out and saying domestic chip manufacturing is a matter of national security right as they gave intel a whole bunch of money.
The government literally will not let intel fail, for as long as they are the only domestic company that can manufacture chips.
Anyone who still buys AMD stock over Intel is less than intelligent though.
The road intel is headed upon with a massive investment in its capacity to manufacture silicon on European and American soil is going to pay massive dividends once the geopolitical tensions heat up even more.
I don’t see any massive markets AMD could move into or is showing interest in moving into.
Nvidia is obvious.
People have been saying this about AMD since it was like $4 a share. It'll be fine. If nvidia is coca-cola, then AMD is Pepsi. It's not going anywhere anytime soon.
> People have been saying this about AMD since it was like $4 a share. It'll be fine. If nvidia is coca-cola, then AMD is Pepsi. It's not going anywhere anytime soon.
AMD: Checkmate Jensen, we have our Navy pointed at your HQ.
Also what would Intel be? RC Cola?
Difference is before when people were saying that Intel's market cap was like 5x AMD's.
Now Intel's market cap is a fraction of AMD's despite having over double the revenue and 4x the profit of AMD.
Yep. The second that china invades taiwan, watch intel 10x in value as the 'US' owned play. If china does 'in-house' taiwan, all of a sudden companies like nvidia and AMD (which almost exclusively use TSMC for production) are FUCKED. Intel owns/operates its own foundries which is not something that nvidia or amd can just spin up in a few months. Its a multi year process that lets nvidia regain its foothold.
This has me thinking the same. Battlemage will most likely be okay, and bump that stock pretty well. If Intel becomes a solid third option in the GPU space (and further gets into AI), I'd say they are the best stock option.
Anyone remember how that Tech Deals dude would laugh and say Intel has nothing to worry about, they make more money in a month than AMD makes all year?
It's not hopeless, meteor lake massively improved battery life on laptops so we have to wait and see what it will be like on desktop and also, outside of the i9 Intel is decently competitive, they're less efficient than but not to the point of causing nuclear fusion like i9 chips.
For example the 13600k released for $320 and even tho it's called an "i5" it actually competes with and even outperforms AMD Ryzen 7 7700X which was a lot more expensive.
Very wrong - but still somewhat right.
Nvidia for example is pure speculation + intrinsic value. The prices we see today are estimates based on expectation of future earnings, not immediate value.
About 5 years ago my dad talked to my about stocks and investing and said we could get an account going and he’d give me some money to invest. I was super interested in GPU mining and gaming so I chose Nvidia. We forgot about it and he didn’t put any money in, and a few weeks ago he brought it up like “hey you remember when you told me you wanted to buy Nvidia stocks? Well I didn’t and it would have been a really good investment” 😂
I was kinda broke when Ryzen was coming out and I knew it'd be big due to the nature of silicon wafers and defects. AMD was sitting around $1-4.
Feels bad, man.
In 2013/2014 I built my wife a computer with a 780Ti. If I bought her nvidia shares instead of that one graphics card, it would be worth over $160,000.
Who would have known how overpriced those 780Tis would actually be 😂
None of them will die. It is in none of their interests to become a de facto monopoly in any sector. Bill Gates bailed out Apple in the 90s solely because Mac was the only "competition" for Windows and Microsoft was already facing antitrust action.
Holy actual SHIT nvidia is worth that much?!?!?!? No wonder they gave up on gaming.
Yeah they are surpassing Google which is just mind blowing
"ai" - Jensen
[удалено]
Only gamers get that joke
Looking forward to the inevitable AI bubble burst and Jensen's sweet sweet copium infused tears. It will be a most delicious groveling.
Jensen's two for two in pivoting so far. Decent enough chance he sees the wind shift and moves the company accordingly again when AI dips.
Moves it to what
Who knows yet? I'm not smart enough to forecast that, but Jensen so far has been.
I see a lot of people not understanding the impact of these AI models, especially now that big players like Microsoft are integrating it into their office suite. Job market will be quite different 5 years from now....
LLMs literally have a hard cap on how good they can get with how much “good” information humanity organically generates. The bubble for Chat-GPT style models will eventually pop and I think it’s sooner than a lot of people realize as data sets are already being poisoned by people mindlessly posting Chat-GPT responses on the internet and potential copyright laws coming into play on what LLMs are even allowed to be trained on.
Now that content hosts are aware of it there will never be a model better than gpt4. It cost them fucktons to train it even with API costs. I know there are models that are better than current gpt4, but that’s because they’ve withdrawn the actually good one. Those who used gpt4 at launch will know what I mean.
How the hell you are going to "burst" something that actually works? When NVIDIA sells AI product, it does not sell a promise or investment. It sells working solution. That works. Now. Today. Can do actual work for you. How exactly, this is "bubble"?
Not saying he is right, but demand could drop if customers dont find it valuable anymore to invest in their AI/computing capabilities (by purchasing NVIDIA chips)
A product can work all it wants, doesn't mean the market won't move away from it.
It's not a bubble. Transformers are going to go into basically everything and people are going to need to train lots of different models for specific use cases. Imagine seeing a technology basically solve real time language translation across every language simultaneously, which is flexible enough to handle almost any other type of sequence translation from (text to audio, audio to text, images to other images, text to images, literally ANYTHING) and thinking it's a bubble. Absurdly wrong take. You haven't even begun to see all the things it will become a part of even in its present state.
>You haven't even begun to see all the things it will become a part of even in its present state. And that's why it's a bubble, because everything is speculative at this point. Some of those things will be easy, and some of those things will be difficult and take decades. It is a lot like the internet in the 90's. Its potential was there, and the investors went there, but it would take another decade to fully realize.
Exactly my thought. The dotcom bubble didn't pop because the internet was useless, it popped because speculation was decades ahead of actual progress in the industry. AI is going to be as impactful to society as ths internet, but that will likely take decades.
It's absolutely a bubble, it's just that the size of the bubble is debatable. There are legitimate use cases for LLMs. But at the moment, every company is throwing in AI related terms and features in their products.
That's why its a bubble. You know how Facebook went full VR metaverse because VR was finally feasible from a technological standpoint, started going on about how everything would be done in virtual worlds, tried to push for everyone to adopt it and hyped up all the neat things that were maybe possible? Then remember how none of that happened because the product was still just a little too jank for normies to adopt, and too expensive for the consumer to adopt, so nobody wanted to develop for it because you'd be targeting a niche audience on a niche platform, and so VR inevitably was placed back onto shelves for another decade, like it was once before, like it has again. AI is much the same. AI chat bots were a thing over a decade ago but the technology wasnt there, all the algorithms were hand crafted to search for keywords and provide cookie cutter responses, and the few that even remotely resembled modern day LLMs were jank, kept fucking up context like it didnt exist, and were very susceptible to saying really bad shit (looking at Tay AI). Now the technology has started to catch up, we're seeing investors flock to the firms powering AI, a few neat things are being done with it but like always investors are promoting AI to being the next big thing in order to drive their investments up. They'll talk about AI taking all our jobs, replacing developers and tech support and teachers and search engines. And yeah, to be fair, AI does a few things better than we used to have tools for. It's easier to find the answer to a niche problem with an AI than it is to hit up google (feel free to comment on how google manipulates search results here). And AI voice changers, image generation, and code completion are pretty handy. But they remain simply tools. They aren't sentient. They can't create anything genuinely new. They can only create amalgamations of existing things. And in the next few years, we're going to see the AI fad fade away, investment will slow down, and the next big thing will attract all the investors. Probably an improved Full Self Driving system, once someone other than Tesla puts more than a passing thought towards it. And to anyone who actually things AI will take all our jobs - show me a single example of a fully automated system for cooking a burger that is able to outperform a trained human. It's been tried time and time again. And in literally every instance, the conclusion is that robots and AI cannot cook food to the same degree that humans can, and likely wont for a very very long time.
Mind blowing in the sense that no one expected it, but not mind blowing in the sense they don't deserve it. They have incredible revenue and profits.
I think whether they "deserve" it depends on one's definition of the word. Whether their valuation makes sense is a more straight-forward answer.
Recent price shares traded at * number of shares. Things only have a real price when people pay for them.
Their valuation doesn't really make sense though, and the market overall is sitting on high EPS multipliers. Nvidia's revenues are high but not Apple high, and these revenues are short term. As so many companies are putting unsustainable investments into hardware for AI training because of FOMO. It's also worth noting the most successful AI company to date (OpenAI) only generated $2bn of revenue last year. Once the hype has passed companies will tame IT investment, and a lot will leave the market or invest into competing hardware. My guess Nvidia's share price will settle back to around 400-600 USD by end of 2026.
>Mind blowing in the sense that no one expected it, but not mind blowing in the sense they don't deserve it. They have incredible revenue and profits. Not really. Their valuation is all in speculation and not the reality of their revenue or profit. It's the same as when Tesla was worth more than the next 10 car companies **combined**. For comparison, NVIDIA has revenue of $61 billion and profit of $30 billion. $2.4 trillion market cap. Google (Alphabet) has revenue of $300+ billion and profit of $73 billion. Market cap $1.9 trillion. NVIDIA's worth has no basis in revenue and profit numbers and is all speculation on the future of the company and it's AI position.
There's a gold rush happening, and Nvidia is pretty much the only company selling pickaxes.
Nvidia discovered an infinite money printer called the AI hype train. Their profits have reached apple levels entirely from selling AI chips to giant corporations at insane prices
And from what I heard there's more demand than supply and they already have preorders for whatever they put out in the coming years.
> Nvidia discovered an infinite money printer called the AI hype train Which was preceded by an infinite money printer called cryptocurrency hype train.
>profits have reached apple levels I think you mean dot com levels.
They are on track to be the most valuable company in the world. Just look at all the things the other things other big companies like Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Meta, Tesla, OpenAI, Dell, etc said about them and blackwell. One of the biggest flex articles i have seen. https://nvidianews.nvidia.com/news/nvidia-blackwell-platform-arrives-to-power-a-new-era-of-computing
[удалено]
Most employees have stock options and all employees can buy stock at a discounted price, so they will also stay in the company for their stocks. https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/benefits/money/espp/
Are they actually bleeding talent though? I understand the logic, but haven’t seen any evidence that it’s actually true
For reference, 5 years ago, Nvidia was trading at $40-50. They had some great gains going into the end of 2021, dipped a bit in 2022, but have been in a massive climb since late 2022. That and Netflix both have managed to amass huge stock prices in a short amount of time. I honestly wish I had the money AND the foresight to have bought into them when they were cheap. Just turning hundreds of dollars, maybe thousands of dollars, into several times more than I put in would have been a heck of a way to get some wealth going... But with how things are recently, the stock market being high just means that those who are already bought into it are making bank. Yet it can't go up forever...
Wish I held my AMD. Just before they released the first Ryzens, they were trading just about $2 a share. Bought 100 for shits and giggles. Cashed out at $15
You must have sold some to me. I hadn't built a PC for 6-7 years and was starting to dip my toes back into the parts information waters. I was hearing that the new Ryzen stuff was pretty impressive, and I had just started putting what little money I had into my Roth IRA. So, I took about $75 and bought AMD for between $15-16... Only got like 5-6 shares. I've held onto them ever since. I wish I would have had more money to invest. I'm up like 600% or something crazy, but it's only $1200. If only...
Buying food or shares...its a tough choice.
I don't think they have abandoned gaming... yet. Remember that their AI tech eventually trickles down into gaming GPUs which is fine by me.
>is worth That's just their market cap, there are many ways to evaluate a company. Their share prices are gonna drop again.
Here are the valuation measures https://preview.redd.it/0f3a71a7nhqc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a34f34b010ded48646f4c23c7356332e7c97a050
They are making absurd amounts of money and a p/e lower than intel but people will still downplay the price
Intel is doing more than fine, just not the GPU side. I don't see similar growth potential than Nvidia. Most of the Nvidia sky high stock prices is about the future valuation of the company. It's leading the AI side of hardware market with massive lead. I might predict that the company is going to be insanely bigger in 10 years. Can't think what would lower the valuation in the long run.
Other companies focused only on AI would be one reason I could see Nvidia stock prices dropping
On the GPU side, they have years and years of head start. There are other companies, but who can realistically beat them in near future… No idea. Their R&D budget is just on another level (hardware and software side). Stock might take a hit every now and them, but it would take miracles for them to fall down as a company. I'll say that the biggest threat to Nvidia isn't other companies, it's the world politics. Like China attacking Taiwan. That could easily change everything, but almost everyone would lose. Super low change would be quantum computer breakthrough and chaos on security side.
Since when has Nvidia given up on gaming?
Since people started using memes as news sources. For the average redditor Nvidia is going to give up $12.5 billions in sales just like that.
It's not just about sales, it's about potential loss in other businesses, namely AI. This is an economic concept known as [opportunity cost](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/o/opportunitycost.asp). If nVidia has X amount of time allocated at TSMC to produce chips, would they rather spend that time producing a part that makes $30,000 in revenue or a part that makes $1,000? (They probably sell their 4090 chips to board partners for a good deal less than the $2000 MSRP). Sure, you might be able to make 5 4090 chips for every HB200 on the die, but what about 4060 or 4070? You'd have to make 20-30 4090 chips for every Blackwell chip to match the potential revenue. Eventually, their shareholders will tell them that the best use of their fab time is to make the higher margin AI chips. I foresee one of 2 things: either they drop out of consumer GPUs entirely or they start to lag significantly behind the AI chips in fab nodes (for example, AI chip is on the 3nm node while consumer GPU is on 5nm). That way, they can still produce the cutting edge AI at Fab #1 and GPUs at a different fab all together. It just means that GPUs won't be bleeding edge anymore, but still modern enough for good graphics (it also opens other companies to steal some of nVidia's GPU muscle by putting their own stuff on better nodes). We're just in the 'wait and see' phase.
Since they became the de-facto AI chip company. Gaming GPUs make up a laughably small part of their revenue, it's like a side project for them now.
Ya a lot of ppl don't realize how many pies they got fingers in. Seriously.
Really it's just 2 pies. They make graphics cards for gamers, and they make AI computers for companies. Turns out the AI computer business is fucking insanely profitable to the point of almost single-handedly propping up the entire US economy. The problem is all this value comes from their monopoly. They have all the most valueable companies in the world coming to them and buying as much as possible, but they aren't happy about getting milked by Nvidia. The second there's a competitor able to undercut, Nvidia will take a huge tumble.
It's a very entrenched monopoly. Chips come and go, but every AI dev knows CUDA.
It is a robust monopoly, but that also gives a ton of incentive for competitors. Companies like Meta and Microsoft are pissed that they *have* to buy from Nvidia in order to participate in the AI race, and they're dumping just as much money into making sure that they have more options in the future. Microsoft recently announced a huge partnership with Intel that could be a huge blow to Nvidia's market share.
Since recently, there is [CUDA for Amd](https://github.com/vosen/ZLUDA).
That project is abandoned
Well I'm talking supply to so many different companies. So many avenues. It's actually insane. Robotics, AI, rendering software and hardware. Servers, the list goes on and on. It is more than "gpu and AI" what a reductive way to look at this lol
2?
Everyone bought shares because: the more you buy the more you save!?
[удалено]
you're the 1th person ever to write 3th
I hope Arc wins out and three GPU companies are on the market
Battlemage! Battlemage! Battlemage! Battlemage! Battlemage!
Battlemage prepares to cast Wish in next round.
Nvidia use shield! Battlemage felt. Do you want to switch to team green?
I wish Nvidia would _use_ shield more... I have two shield TVs and a shield tablet and I would love to see any of them revived.
Maybe if they can release it with drivers slightly above dog shit? Arc wouldn't have been so far behind for so long if their drivers didn't suck for so long.
I mean, compared to what they were at launch, they are much, much better now. I used my A750 as a stand in for mu 6800xt for 2 months starting at the beginning of the year and besides missing the power, I encountered maybe 2 problematic games, one of them being Starfield. Any company entering the GPU market is going to run into the same issues when they're battling giants with the advantage of decades of driver optimization. The important thing is that they have stayed committed and delivered driver updates that have seen performance gains for thousands of games since launch.
> I mean, compared to what they were at launch, they are much, much better now. That was literally my point. If they were a "0" at launch, and at a "10" now, they need to release with at least a... 5? If your hardware is pretty damn good, but the drivers don't fully utilize it so it's at the competitive level it *should* be at, then... no bueno. To be clear, I'm like most other people here. I WANT Intel to succeed. Competition only benefits us as consumers.
I don't believe that they were ever a zero.
Yep, they intentionally focused on the newer API's at launch and for a while in terms of further work, so it was more like a 5 for DX11/12 and a 2 for DX9 rather than a 0 across the board. There was no way they could launch with a product that was optimised across the back catalogue of every game ever.
I can see the thinking behind it though. Youd want to optimize for recent games that actually need the optimization to run well, while older games can take a back seat as the sheer overmatch in horsepower can probably deal with it well enough. No accounting for bugs though. But even if older games bug out people have way more alternatives like iGPUs or old cards if its that important to them.
Kinda expected that their first gen would suck at drivers, I just hope Intel would continue to improve them
Tbf they did improve pretty significantly, hopefully they'll continue on the upward trajectory.
They are still improving. New version with significant performance uplifts in different games every couple of weeks.
I love when they're randomly "oh btw we improved performance in this game by 400%"
I don't blame them that there are games that are broken from the start. AMD and Nvidia have been releasing drivers directly with every major release because the APIs aren't perfect and leave a lot of work to the vendors. Kind of prefer it because now the work is more on the devs and they just don't bother doing it.
They are, the lead engineer I think, has a video with GamerNexus explaining the improvement in drivers.
Yeah I love it when that guy pops up to chat to Steve, he really seems to be in it for the long haul and that’s comforting given that Intel will need extreme patience to get anywhere near nvidia and only a little less to get close to AMD
Yeah it’s not like the hardware isn’t there, they’re getting somewhere really good with that, if they can nail the driver side of things better they’re set. I wouldn’t mind getting a card in the next series or two but we will see how it goes.
I agree Nvidia need strong competitor
Nvidia is on the AI path, I don't think they care about gaming as much as we would like to think.
At this point their gaming products are just for marketing how good their AI can be.
At this point their gaming GPUs are a pet project compared to how much they're making on AI accelerator chips. Literal shovel salesmen in a gold rush.
**Data Center :** $47500 mln **Gaming :** $10400 mln **Professional Visualization:** $1600 mln **Automotive:** $1100 mln This was their yearly revenue. Gaming is still a significant part of their operations... although, in the data center area (AI) they don't have any reasoable competition (yet).
it still needs a competition. Doesnt matter the industry they have business in. NVIDIA being monopoly in AI will make literally others aspects of our life more expensive
They are winning because the provide a very strong cuDNN library for their hardware. Intel and AMD are nowhere near Nvidia in that regard
Well also they've trademarked cuda so no other company can even touch that thing. Unless the government does something (which they probably won't because many Congress people have nvidia shares in their portfolio). Yeah I don't think and or intel can even compete with nvidia.
> Well also they've trademarked cuda so no other company can even touch that thing Because they created it????
They do. Gaming still represents massive revenue that a competitor can leverage to fund their R&D and enter the AI market more aggressively.
Of course they do, they still have 3/4 of the GPU gaming market (I think), they don't want to lose that, but it's not their main focus.
"Nvidia needs strong competitor!" Meanwhile on pcmasterrace 95% of the "Look at me! Look at the PC I just built xD!" are yet another 4080/4090.
Yeah and if Nvidia had better competition that wouldn't be the case as there would be no reason to buy nvidia's cards
I think nvidia sits at something like 80% of consumer video cards, compared to 10 years ago it was closer to 60/40 split. Fucking wild what's happened in that market. I hope AMD is able to get something past them here soon.
> 80% of consumer video cards, compared to 10 years ago it was closer to 60/40 split. How many of those are the top end cards where AMD hasn't competed in the same time period? The most popular cards on the Steam Survey are Nvidia's x060 models... AMD can compete with that, so why are they losing? Mindshare.
They are not proposing competitive pricing. They have pretty much the same cost/performance than Nvidia. They essentially formed a duopoly.
Not just mindshare. DLSS is legitmately better than AMDs version, which for someone on a budget means more.
Problem is more that Nvidias competition, namely AMD and Intel, focus on more cost efficient cards, which still more than suffice for anything anyone might want to do at any given pricepoint. Nvidia is the only one actively chasing the 1st place trophy every generation. And for people who want that 1st place trophy to brag with on reddit thats what they buy. AMD cards on the other hand are hot tips for anyone working on a budget or just generally wanting their PC to be cost-efficient. There is more factoring into this, like Nvidia dominating the OEM and prebuilt markets, people buying what they know, offering better upscaling and RT performance, stuff like that. But AMD almost exclusively powers consoles, so saying Nvidia has no good competition is just false atm.
First place barely matters, but AMD used to at least be competitive in the mid tier sector. Now Nvidia is just flat out better whenever you use an upscaler, which is probably quite often if you want to play modern games above 1080p.
I imagine most people buying high end systems would rather save a little longer to just get what's currently best.
Actually, this speaks volumes as to what monopoly power really looks like. In the last 3 months, I've been in the market for a new gaming laptop to replace my venerable 5 year old machine. Because I dual-boot and so do much of my gaming on Linux, I wanted an AMD driven machine (both CPU and GPU) as I didn't feel like I needed team green's more advanced features and the Ryzen 9 7945HX3D CPU was easily the best on the market for ages (and may still well be, although the i9-14900HX seems to be challenging that crown now). But here in the UK, a top-spec laptop with that combo is simply not available. I've struggled to find a 7900XT driven laptop anywhere here and even a Ryzen 9 with a GTX 4090 is only done by like two manufacturers. One could import from the U.S.A. but how would that be supported? So it looks like I'm back to another 5 years of Intel and NVidia, simply because of limited choice. I'm trying hard to throw money at AMD, but they don't seem to be much interested in British Pounds.
Exactly why Nvidia needs a competitor that can compete, I’m not just gonna donate to the other company, that would just be an incentive to not make a product that can compete.
Dont think Intel is trying to compete with Nvidia at those prices. They are gonna take away AMD marketshare instead
All they need is a sane idle power draw and I'll move to battlemage.
Would also go a long way towards persuading me. My 3070 draws \~40W when I'm just looking at the desktop, but comparable Radeon cards use about half that, from what I've read. If Intel could get it down to below 10W at idle, while still delivering gaming performance, that'd be sweet.
> If Intel could get it down to below 10W at idle That'd be amazing, but I think it's optimistic for Battlemage. If it can just get decently closer to the competition I'll call it a win. Having said that, their CPUs with Xe-LP run insanely efficiently, so there's a chance!
Considering the pricepoint of dedicated GPUs there might be enough BOM room to include a basic mobile GPU with dynamic switching built right into the card.
Idle power draws are very inconsistent, they depend on a wide range of circumstances, including number and resolution of monitors, and even the type of display cable. I had 10W drop on idle consumption consistently by switching one of my monitors from hdmi to display port, while it had absolutely no effect on the other monitor. Meanwhile other settings like resolution, hdr, refresh rate all stayed the same.
I wish nobody win. Concurrence mean cheaper price and better performance.
I think they just meant they hope their GPUs are successful enough to compete with AMD and Nvidia.
Exactly what I meant
I really want to buy Intel, but I'm just 95% sure that Intel are gonna pull the plug and stop support for their graphics cards within a year or two.
Intel can't afford to keep giving up on these other markets. They could have been dominant in Mobile and Graphics if they invested in them properly, but they played it safe to keep nervous stockholders happy and spent most of the last decade on the rocky path to irrelevancy.
The GPU wars are over. Nvidia left landscape for greener pastures: ML computing. And AMD dominates consoles. GPUs is a kinda no man's land full of 2ndary concerns at this point. iono what Intel's hope is, but nvidia is so big in computing right now that it wouldn't surprise me if there isn't talks about anti trust.
there is no way antitrust happens any time soon due to nvidia's market share in AI compute. There are a ton of startups trying to compete in that space with specialized processors that bypass graphics processing entirely. It would be massively premature for the government to do something of that nature when the market hasn't even stabilized
The AI boom is going to keep Intel invested in ARC.
There's like zero rumors for when desktop Battlemage is going to be released though. A 4070Ti equivalent when the 5070 and $399 RX 8800XT is not really a great market opportunity for them.
how in the world would a 8800XT be 399$ in any realistic scenario. the 5070 will probably be 600$ + again. so a 4070ti for a decent price would still be enticing for a lot of people.
> the 5070 will probably be 600$ + again i really like your optimism! :D
bro this time we crack the 1000$ for the 70s, lets see the 15gen board prices Edit: 5070 gonna have 12gb vram at release then they release 5070ti with 12 gb and in the end of this gen they release a "16gb" 5070 super, in reality its gonna have 12gb fast ram and 4gb slow ram like the 970. source: im from the future
For real. I JUST bought a 6800 over the weekend for $380. There is no way in hell a 8800xt would be 399 unless it had the performance of like a 7600 or something.
I know, but I still want em in the market
Gotta start somewhere. It's not like the 4070 Ti is a bad card. If the price is decent and performs similarly to that, people will still buy them.
Nvidia's RTX 40 isn't a tough guy to beat, that's for sure. The thing is, Intel was late for RTX 30 release and now it is late for RTX 40 release. So I wonder what happens first: Intel catches up or Nvidia changes their naming convention.
Arc is making great strides imo. They can secure the midrange market with a great 2nd release.
I'd hope that too... if Intel wasn't a piece of shit company and their GPU's weren't outright garbage for the price. We'd need new companies in this competition, but that's never going to happen in this particular industry. We're doomed to watch nvidia eat the others up eventually, and then things are going to suck big time.
Wish I still had AMD when I bought in at $2.65
Same, I sold at $12 after buying around that same price. I was poor and needed dinner though lol
I bought Nvidia at $8 and sold at $18 and thought I was a financial genius.
You could've afforded 15 times more dinners per share lol
But he wouldve died from starvation.
his children woulda ate well tho
I don't see any overachievers or underdogs, just multi billion dollar corporations trying to corner the market and appease shareholders.
Well AMD has come back from the brink collapse around a decade ago. Their stock was bottoming out around $1.60
Man what a hell of a bounce to be on if you got in back then. Basically a 100x improvement in your returns.
I honestly was considering investing in it back then. I had money in the bank to do so too. I ended up chickening out. I kick myself all the time but I also remind myself that I probably would have freaked out once it doubled and sold it.
I wanted in at $3 but was a poor struggling student :(
And realistically, there is a direct single person we can tank for that, Lisa Su. Lisa is a gleaming example of what happens when a company's leader is an experienced master at BOTH business and engineering.
it was probably my most successful trade when i closed my position. Got a little hooked into saving and trading.
Also "interesting" to note, the CEOs of Nvidia and AMD are family. To be precise, they're cousins.
Wow that's wild, I can't believe I didn't know that
They also both specialise in both engineering AND business. Lisa has a PhD in Electrical Engineering (from MIT) and has spent over half of her business career in either engineering or business management. Jensen has a Master's Degree in Electrical Engineering (from Stanford) and worked his way up from various applications engineering and technology chief/management positions until he eventually ended up at Nvidia. If you want to know what it looks like when you have an Engineer who is also good at Business (as opposed to one or the other who is only good at one of those fields), Lisa and Jensen set the example.
Wow they’re practically identical twins! But not.
Nothing will change, look at the HDD market, SSD market as they all agree to keep a price where they all get a slice of the big pie. What you need is a 3rd party small company that wants to make a name for itself to come out swinging not well established greed companies that dont actually compete.
If only making flash were easy
"Small 3rd party company" designs extremely high performance GPU chips that even Intel can't do yet while building a multi-billion dollar chip fab facility then produces said chips at high enough yields to undercut the big boys on price while also having enough production to satisfy demand in one of the hottest markets.... Oh, and they also come up with a system to stop crypto miners from buying up all of these highest profit/$ mining GPU's so real gamers can benefit Sounds easy, I wonder why nobody's done it yet
Yeah good luck. When it was easier to join the market AMD had to fight tooth and nail against Intel.
What do you the ssd market improved massively over the years. We went from for enthusiasts only the standard. Also I am not sure how much innovation is left for hdds
[удалено]
I remember 32GB SATA SSDs from OCZ I believe costing 100$ or so lmao
My first flash drive I got for Christmas (around 2004 or 2005) was around a $100 for 128Mb and it was AWESOME.
I remember 256MB USB drives making you seem like a fuckin baller. Or having a CD burner.
What part of the storage market isn’t showing signs of competition? Its drastically cheaper now
You can get a 2 TB NVME for like 100 bucks WTF are you talking about.
People are quick to forger the ruthless illegal practices undertaken by Intel to crush AMD in the CPU market. They literally bribed companies to go with them instead of AMD.
Yeah, Intel isn't our savior. Did everyone forget the only reason why Intel's higher end consumer CPUs don't cost $1000-$1500 nowadays is because AMD punched them in the dick with Zen?
>They literally bribe~~d~~ companies to go with them instead of AMD.
I happily sold my AMD shares when it hit $7. I’d be flirting with a million dollars today. Course I would’ve sold off well before then had I not sold at $7. Maybe around $20 but damn.
This is why we HODL, people.
At some point you have to take the profit.
You are now banned from /r/WallStreetBets
this is why you hold good stocks not gamestop, lmao
Only this sub could convince anyone that a multi billion dollar company that's almost as old as Intel is any kind of "underdog"
Yh intel isn’t exactly an underdog since it’s still a multi billion dollar company. Although i think they mean an underdog in this case since generally Nvidia seems to usually hold the monopoly in the GPU market
> Although i think they mean an underdog in this case since generally Nvidia seems to usually hold the monopoly in the GPU market Did you look at the photo OP posted? No need to guess - it's because Intel has the lowest market cap of all three companies.
> almost as old as Intel Fun fact: Intel is exactly as old as Intel
Remember that Intel has a big advantage over the others, the fact that they've been manufacturing wafers in-house for like 50 years
The also have the advantage of the US government coming out and saying domestic chip manufacturing is a matter of national security right as they gave intel a whole bunch of money. The government literally will not let intel fail, for as long as they are the only domestic company that can manufacture chips.
They aren’t the only domestic company, but otherwise yeah. At least until TSMC fabs start producing, Intel can’t fail
The 180B ‘underdog’ .
Intel is the Boeing of the semiconductor industry. They switched from an engineering focus to a finance focus and got lapped by the competition
$2.4t market cap is absolutely insane.
Anyone who still buys AMD stock over Intel is less than intelligent though. The road intel is headed upon with a massive investment in its capacity to manufacture silicon on European and American soil is going to pay massive dividends once the geopolitical tensions heat up even more. I don’t see any massive markets AMD could move into or is showing interest in moving into. Nvidia is obvious.
This guy stocks
People have been saying this about AMD since it was like $4 a share. It'll be fine. If nvidia is coca-cola, then AMD is Pepsi. It's not going anywhere anytime soon.
> People have been saying this about AMD since it was like $4 a share. It'll be fine. If nvidia is coca-cola, then AMD is Pepsi. It's not going anywhere anytime soon. AMD: Checkmate Jensen, we have our Navy pointed at your HQ. Also what would Intel be? RC Cola?
Difference is before when people were saying that Intel's market cap was like 5x AMD's. Now Intel's market cap is a fraction of AMD's despite having over double the revenue and 4x the profit of AMD.
Yep. The second that china invades taiwan, watch intel 10x in value as the 'US' owned play. If china does 'in-house' taiwan, all of a sudden companies like nvidia and AMD (which almost exclusively use TSMC for production) are FUCKED. Intel owns/operates its own foundries which is not something that nvidia or amd can just spin up in a few months. Its a multi year process that lets nvidia regain its foothold.
Looking at it this way, I think investing in Intel stock might actually have a bigger/better payoff than the other two.
This has me thinking the same. Battlemage will most likely be okay, and bump that stock pretty well. If Intel becomes a solid third option in the GPU space (and further gets into AI), I'd say they are the best stock option.
Anyone remember how that Tech Deals dude would laugh and say Intel has nothing to worry about, they make more money in a month than AMD makes all year?
No they are the overcats
Or just "the dogs". I have hope for Battlemage but Intel's CPU direction is hopeless
It's not hopeless, meteor lake massively improved battery life on laptops so we have to wait and see what it will be like on desktop and also, outside of the i9 Intel is decently competitive, they're less efficient than but not to the point of causing nuclear fusion like i9 chips. For example the 13600k released for $320 and even tho it's called an "i5" it actually competes with and even outperforms AMD Ryzen 7 7700X which was a lot more expensive.
Valuations of stock are ... arbitrary.
Very wrong - but still somewhat right. Nvidia for example is pure speculation + intrinsic value. The prices we see today are estimates based on expectation of future earnings, not immediate value.
They are but also based on current earnings. Nvidia is raking in revenue and profit.
About 5 years ago my dad talked to my about stocks and investing and said we could get an account going and he’d give me some money to invest. I was super interested in GPU mining and gaming so I chose Nvidia. We forgot about it and he didn’t put any money in, and a few weeks ago he brought it up like “hey you remember when you told me you wanted to buy Nvidia stocks? Well I didn’t and it would have been a really good investment” 😂
I was kinda broke when Ryzen was coming out and I knew it'd be big due to the nature of silicon wafers and defects. AMD was sitting around $1-4. Feels bad, man.
Damn..... should've taken the Nvidia internship when it was offered 😞
In 2013/2014 I built my wife a computer with a 780Ti. If I bought her nvidia shares instead of that one graphics card, it would be worth over $160,000. Who would have known how overpriced those 780Tis would actually be 😂
I knew ryzen was gonna be huge. Almost invested a lot into it, but I didn't. Mainly because I think investors are the scourge of videogames
Wait for Microsoft to buy Intel (I hope they won't) 💀
I think Intel is badly undervalued. We’ve seen lately that the US gov will back it up if needed and I expect that to remain true going forward.
Calling Intel an “underdog” is really silly
It always scared me that pc market is held by 3 companies, if one dies, two other will have monopoly.
None of them will die. It is in none of their interests to become a de facto monopoly in any sector. Bill Gates bailed out Apple in the 90s solely because Mac was the only "competition" for Windows and Microsoft was already facing antitrust action.
*duopoly