Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

📣 Get a first look at the NVIDIA Photonics co-packaged optics switch with Lambda. At NVIDIA GB300 NVL72 scale, the network doesn't just move data between GPUs — it determines how fast your cluster thinks. Co-packaged optics cut switch power, reduce failure points, and deliver more tokens per watt.... show more

NVIDIA AI Infrastructure

68,868 subscribers

84,302 views • 1 month ago •via X (Twitter)

Education Science & Technology

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

First look at $NVDA photonics co-packaged optics switch with Lambda. As GB300 NVL72 scales, networking becomes the layer that determines how fast the cluster thinks while co-packaged optics cut power and improve tokens per watt.

First look at $NVDA photonics co-packaged optics switch with Lambda. As GB300 NVL72 scales, networking becomes the layer that determines how fast the cluster thinks while co-packaged optics cut power and improve tokens per watt.

Shay Boloor

101,623 views • 1 month ago

Yesterday everyone sold optics because "CPO is delayed to 2027." Today I'm looking at this video of an $NVDA CPO switch running in production at Lambda, wired into GB300 clusters. Both headlines are true. CPO at the SWITCH is shipping now, 144 ports of 800G, liquid cooled, roughly 70% less power per port than pluggable optics. CPO at the GPU, the version that kills the module makers, that's the 2027-28 story, and it always was. Why does the switch get light first? Because the back end fabric is 86% of networking power in these clusters. At GB300 scale the network isn't plumbing anymore, it's part of the compute. Every watt you don't burn moving bits is a watt that generates tokens. Tokens per watt is the metric now. And the detail nobody will talk about again is even inside NVIDIA's most advanced CPO switch, the lasers sit OUTSIDE the package. 18 swappable lightsource modules. Field serviceable, because lasers fail. Pluggable, near package, copackaged, doesn't matter. Every road still runs through the laser makers…

Yesterday everyone sold optics because "CPO is delayed to 2027." Today I'm looking at this video of an $NVDA CPO switch running in production at Lambda, wired into GB300 clusters. Both headlines are true. CPO at the SWITCH is shipping now, 144 ports of 800G, liquid cooled, roughly 70% less power per port than pluggable optics. CPO at the GPU, the version that kills the module makers, that's the 2027-28 story, and it always was. Why does the switch get light first? Because the back end fabric is 86% of networking power in these clusters. At GB300 scale the network isn't plumbing anymore, it's part of the compute. Every watt you don't burn moving bits is a watt that generates tokens. Tokens per watt is the metric now. And the detail nobody will talk about again is even inside NVIDIA's most advanced CPO switch, the lasers sit OUTSIDE the package. 18 swappable lightsource modules. Field serviceable, because lasers fail. Pluggable, near package, copackaged, doesn't matter. Every road still runs through the laser makers…

Nicholas Mugalli

108,542 views • 1 month ago

The NVIDIA Vera Rubin NVL72 scale-up fabric, built on the sixth-generation NVIDIA NVLink. The NVLink 6 Switch trays connect 72 Rubin GPUs in an all-to-all configuration. The NVLink spine—over 5,000 copper cables make up the vertical NVLink traverse. It securely moves more data than the entire bandwidth of the internet. The single-wide NVIDIA MGX rack design unlocks a cable-free, horizontal NVLink scale-up traverse, running directly on PCB for resiliency at scale. This is how NVIDIA Vera Rubin NVL72 works as one, designed to deliver the lowest token cost and 10x more performance per watt than the previous generation. #NVIDIAVeraRubin

The NVIDIA Vera Rubin NVL72 scale-up fabric, built on the sixth-generation NVIDIA NVLink. The NVLink 6 Switch trays connect 72 Rubin GPUs in an all-to-all configuration. The NVLink spine—over 5,000 copper cables make up the vertical NVLink traverse. It securely moves more data than the entire bandwidth of the internet. The single-wide NVIDIA MGX rack design unlocks a cable-free, horizontal NVLink scale-up traverse, running directly on PCB for resiliency at scale. This is how NVIDIA Vera Rubin NVL72 works as one, designed to deliver the lowest token cost and 10x more performance per watt than the previous generation. #NVIDIAVeraRubin

NVIDIA AI Infrastructure

36,412 views • 22 days ago

Nvidia just spent $4 billion on a technology 99% of people have never heard of. But in 3 years, every AI data center on Earth will need it. And Nvidia just LOCKED UP the supply. Here's what happened: Nvidia invested $2 billion in Coherent and $2 billion in Lumentum. You probably never heard of these companies. They make photonics technology. Systems that transmit data using LIGHT instead of electricity. Sounds like sci-fi. But this is the most important infrastructure bet in AI right now. Here's the problem Nvidia just solved for itself: AI data centers are hitting a wall that has nothing to do with chips, energy, or money... Copper wiring is dying. Every data center on Earth moves data between GPUs using copper cables. But at the speeds AI now demands, copper physically cannot keep up. Signal degrades. Heat explodes. Power consumption skyrockets. Right now, 30% of the electricity in an AI data center is wasted just MOVING data from point A to point B. An MIT researcher said: "Copper's not going to cut it. It gets too hot. Too much power consumption and loss." Jensen Huang admitted it himself too: "We use copper as far as we can, about a meter or two. But where data centers are the size of a stadium, we need something else." That something else is photonics. Replacing copper with laser-powered fiber optics built directly into the chip. The numbers are insane: - 3.5x more power efficient - 10x better network reliability - Data moving at 102 terabits per second Wells Fargo estimates the photonics market will hit $10-12 billion by 2030. And Nvidia just bought privileged access to the two companies that make the advanced lasers every single one of these systems will need. This is the Nvidia playbook on repeat. They did this with CoreWeave. Invested $2 billion, locked up GPU capacity, created a dependent customer. They did this with memory suppliers. Secured HBM allocations years in advance while competitors scrambled. Now they're doing it with photonics. Invest early. Lock up supply. Make the entire ecosystem dependent on companies that are dependent on Nvidia. By the time competitors realize photonics is the bottleneck, Nvidia already OWNS the supply chain. Every data center, AI factory, and GPU cluster will need this technology to function at scale. Nvidia will become even more important.

Nvidia just spent $4 billion on a technology 99% of people have never heard of. But in 3 years, every AI data center on Earth will need it. And Nvidia just LOCKED UP the supply. Here's what happened: Nvidia invested $2 billion in Coherent and $2 billion in Lumentum. You probably never heard of these companies. They make photonics technology. Systems that transmit data using LIGHT instead of electricity. Sounds like sci-fi. But this is the most important infrastructure bet in AI right now. Here's the problem Nvidia just solved for itself: AI data centers are hitting a wall that has nothing to do with chips, energy, or money... Copper wiring is dying. Every data center on Earth moves data between GPUs using copper cables. But at the speeds AI now demands, copper physically cannot keep up. Signal degrades. Heat explodes. Power consumption skyrockets. Right now, 30% of the electricity in an AI data center is wasted just MOVING data from point A to point B. An MIT researcher said: "Copper's not going to cut it. It gets too hot. Too much power consumption and loss." Jensen Huang admitted it himself too: "We use copper as far as we can, about a meter or two. But where data centers are the size of a stadium, we need something else." That something else is photonics. Replacing copper with laser-powered fiber optics built directly into the chip. The numbers are insane: - 3.5x more power efficient - 10x better network reliability - Data moving at 102 terabits per second Wells Fargo estimates the photonics market will hit $10-12 billion by 2030. And Nvidia just bought privileged access to the two companies that make the advanced lasers every single one of these systems will need. This is the Nvidia playbook on repeat. They did this with CoreWeave. Invested $2 billion, locked up GPU capacity, created a dependent customer. They did this with memory suppliers. Secured HBM allocations years in advance while competitors scrambled. Now they're doing it with photonics. Invest early. Lock up supply. Make the entire ecosystem dependent on companies that are dependent on Nvidia. By the time competitors realize photonics is the bottleneck, Nvidia already OWNS the supply chain. Every data center, AI factory, and GPU cluster will need this technology to function at scale. Nvidia will become even more important.

Ricardo

640,736 views • 5 months ago

Groq's LPU is faster than GPUs, handling requests and responding more quickly. Groq's LPUs don't need speedy data delivery like Nvidia GPUs do because they don't have HBM in their system. They use SRAM, which is about 20 times faster than what GPUs use. Since inference runs use way less data than model training, Groq's LPU is more energy-efficient. It reads less from external memory and uses less power than a Nvidia GPU for inference tasks. The LPU works differently from GPUs. It uses a Temporal Instruction Set Computer architecture, so it doesn't have to reload data from memory as often as GPUs do with High Bandwidth Memory (HBM). This helps avoid issues with HBM shortages and keeps costs down. If Groq's LPU is used in places that do AI processing, you might not need special storage for Nvidia GPUs. The LPU doesn't demand super-fast storage like GPUs do. Groq is claiming that its technology could replace GPUs in AI tasks with its powerful chip and software.

Groq's LPU is faster than GPUs, handling requests and responding more quickly. Groq's LPUs don't need speedy data delivery like Nvidia GPUs do because they don't have HBM in their system. They use SRAM, which is about 20 times faster than what GPUs use. Since inference runs use way less data than model training, Groq's LPU is more energy-efficient. It reads less from external memory and uses less power than a Nvidia GPU for inference tasks. The LPU works differently from GPUs. It uses a Temporal Instruction Set Computer architecture, so it doesn't have to reload data from memory as often as GPUs do with High Bandwidth Memory (HBM). This helps avoid issues with HBM shortages and keeps costs down. If Groq's LPU is used in places that do AI processing, you might not need special storage for Nvidia GPUs. The LPU doesn't demand super-fast storage like GPUs do. Groq is claiming that its technology could replace GPUs in AI tasks with its powerful chip and software.

Brian Roemmele

87,188 views • 2 years ago

Nvidia will now pay you to put a mini AI data center on your house It looks like a normal AC unit in the yard. But inside sits 16 Nvidia Blackwell GPUs and Dell servers. A startup called Span builds them, backed by Nvidia. They bolt onto your home and you get paid for the power and Wi-Fi. Some estimates put that around $1,000 a month in your pocket. That is rent money just for hosting a box outside. Span says it deploys way faster and cheaper than a real data center. The AI boom is literally moving into the suburbs. Save this, the grid is getting rebuilt in real time.

Nvidia will now pay you to put a mini AI data center on your house It looks like a normal AC unit in the yard. But inside sits 16 Nvidia Blackwell GPUs and Dell servers. A startup called Span builds them, backed by Nvidia. They bolt onto your home and you get paid for the power and Wi-Fi. Some estimates put that around $1,000 a month in your pocket. That is rent money just for hosting a box outside. Span says it deploys way faster and cheaper than a real data center. The AI boom is literally moving into the suburbs. Save this, the grid is getting rebuilt in real time.

winkle.

8,382,622 views • 2 months ago

Jensen Huang is investing in every photonics company he can find and the reason why tells you everything about where AI is headed (Save this). Lip-Bu Tan, the CEO of Intel says, when he looks for investment opportunities, he looks for the bottleneck and right now, the bottleneck is the interconnect, the pipes that move data between chips inside an AI data center. That is why he backed Credo Semiconductor, Astera Labs and Celestial AI on the optical side. Here is the simple version of what the interconnect bottleneck actually means. Think of an AI data center like a city, the GPUs are the buildings where all the work happens but for those buildings to function, you need roads connecting them, fast roads that can carry enormous traffic without congestion. And those roads are now the single biggest constraint on AI performance. As clusters scale to hundreds of thousands of GPUs, traditional copper wiring is hitting its physical limits and that is where this entire sector comes in. Credo Semiconductor (CRDO) is the most direct pure play on this theme, Credo makes high speed cables and optical chips that connect GPUs inside data center racks. Their revenue tripled in fiscal 2026 to $1.3 billion, growing 272% year over year at its peak and four of the world's largest hyperscalers each individually account for more than 10% of Credo's revenue. Astera Labs (ALAB) solves the connection problem between different chip types. Astera makes the PCIe and connectivity chips that manage data flow between GPUs, CPUs, and memory without errors or slowdowns. Their revenue grew 93% year over year to $308 million in Q1 2026 alone. The optical companies are where the longer-term and potentially larger opportunity lives. Copper has physical limits, you can only push electrical signals so far before the signal degrades, the heat spikes and power consumption explodes. The solution is light, fiber optic connections that move data using photons instead of electrons which is faster, cooler and far more energy efficient. Jensen Huang made this clear at Computex 2026 because copper works as long as physically possible but at greater distances and larger scale, optics takes over. Coherent (COHR) is the most established optical company in this space. Coherent makes the lasers, transceivers, and optical components at the foundation of all fiber optic communications. Nvidia signed a multibillion-dollar purchase commitment and invested $2 billion directly into the company and their customer order books are already extending out to 2028. Marvell (MRVL) is the most comprehensive bet across the entire connectivity stack. Marvell makes chips for optical networking, PCIe switching and custom AI silicon. Jensen Huang called Marvell the next trillion dollar company at Computex 2026 and backed it with a $2 billion Nvidia investment. Marvell also acquired Celestial AI, the exact company Lip-Bu Tan backed for $3.25 billion, gaining photonic fabric technology delivering 16 terabits per second of bandwidth. Lumentum (LITE), Corning (GLW), and Ciena (CIEN) round out the major public names. Lumentum received a $2 billion Nvidia investment for laser and photonics components. Corning known mostly for phone glass received $500 million from Nvidia for optical connectivity work and is up over 100% year to date. Ciena runs the optical networking systems between data centers and is seeing analyst price targets raised on the back of the AI optics boom. Every time a hyperscaler spends a billion dollars on Nvidia GPUs, the surrounding infrastructure, cables, switches, transceivers, optical components has to be upgraded to match. The smarter the GPU gets, the more the interconnect matters. Nvidia has committed at least $6.5 billion to photonics companies in the past 4 months alone and the companies building the roads between the GPUs may end up being just as valuable as the companies building the GPUs themselves. Follow me Melvin for more AI, semis and the next big market themes.

Jensen Huang is investing in every photonics company he can find and the reason why tells you everything about where AI is headed (Save this). Lip-Bu Tan, the CEO of Intel says, when he looks for investment opportunities, he looks for the bottleneck and right now, the bottleneck is the interconnect, the pipes that move data between chips inside an AI data center. That is why he backed Credo Semiconductor, Astera Labs and Celestial AI on the optical side. Here is the simple version of what the interconnect bottleneck actually means. Think of an AI data center like a city, the GPUs are the buildings where all the work happens but for those buildings to function, you need roads connecting them, fast roads that can carry enormous traffic without congestion. And those roads are now the single biggest constraint on AI performance. As clusters scale to hundreds of thousands of GPUs, traditional copper wiring is hitting its physical limits and that is where this entire sector comes in. Credo Semiconductor (CRDO) is the most direct pure play on this theme, Credo makes high speed cables and optical chips that connect GPUs inside data center racks. Their revenue tripled in fiscal 2026 to $1.3 billion, growing 272% year over year at its peak and four of the world's largest hyperscalers each individually account for more than 10% of Credo's revenue. Astera Labs (ALAB) solves the connection problem between different chip types. Astera makes the PCIe and connectivity chips that manage data flow between GPUs, CPUs, and memory without errors or slowdowns. Their revenue grew 93% year over year to $308 million in Q1 2026 alone. The optical companies are where the longer-term and potentially larger opportunity lives. Copper has physical limits, you can only push electrical signals so far before the signal degrades, the heat spikes and power consumption explodes. The solution is light, fiber optic connections that move data using photons instead of electrons which is faster, cooler and far more energy efficient. Jensen Huang made this clear at Computex 2026 because copper works as long as physically possible but at greater distances and larger scale, optics takes over. Coherent (COHR) is the most established optical company in this space. Coherent makes the lasers, transceivers, and optical components at the foundation of all fiber optic communications. Nvidia signed a multibillion-dollar purchase commitment and invested $2 billion directly into the company and their customer order books are already extending out to 2028. Marvell (MRVL) is the most comprehensive bet across the entire connectivity stack. Marvell makes chips for optical networking, PCIe switching and custom AI silicon. Jensen Huang called Marvell the next trillion dollar company at Computex 2026 and backed it with a $2 billion Nvidia investment. Marvell also acquired Celestial AI, the exact company Lip-Bu Tan backed for $3.25 billion, gaining photonic fabric technology delivering 16 terabits per second of bandwidth. Lumentum (LITE), Corning (GLW), and Ciena (CIEN) round out the major public names. Lumentum received a $2 billion Nvidia investment for laser and photonics components. Corning known mostly for phone glass received $500 million from Nvidia for optical connectivity work and is up over 100% year to date. Ciena runs the optical networking systems between data centers and is seeing analyst price targets raised on the back of the AI optics boom. Every time a hyperscaler spends a billion dollars on Nvidia GPUs, the surrounding infrastructure, cables, switches, transceivers, optical components has to be upgraded to match. The smarter the GPU gets, the more the interconnect matters. Nvidia has committed at least $6.5 billion to photonics companies in the past 4 months alone and the companies building the roads between the GPUs may end up being just as valuable as the companies building the GPUs themselves. Follow me Melvin for more AI, semis and the next big market themes.

Melvin

152,406 views • 1 month ago

$MU $SNDK $LITE $VRT NVIDIA and Groq: 2nd and 3rd Order Strategic Infrastructure Effects and Market Implications Public reporting indicates NVIDIA has agreed to acquire Groq for approximately $20,000,000,000 in cash, while excluding Groq’s nascent cloud business from the transaction perimeter. The reported carve-out materially constrains the immediate, direct linkage from the acquisition to incremental, NVIDIA-controlled data center capacity build-out because GroqCloud appears to be the principal channel through which Groq hardware is currently monetized at scale as a service. The infrastructure-market implications therefore depend primarily on post-close product strategy: whether NVIDIA (1) commercializes Groq silicon as a distinct inference product line and drives broad deployment through OEM/ODM channels and partners, (2) uses the acquisition mainly to absorb IP and talent while de-emphasizing standalone Groq hardware volumes, or (3) uses Groq technology to reshape NVIDIA’s own inference systems and networking roadmaps. The dominant transmission mechanism into memory, networking, and facility infrastructure markets is the degree to which NVIDIA shifts incremental inference deployments away from GPU architectures that are tightly coupled to external high-bandwidth memory (HBM) and toward Groq’s current architecture, which emphasizes large on-chip SRAM, deterministic compiler-scheduled execution, and direct chip-to-chip connectivity. Independent and company-published materials describe Groq’s current-generation approach as having no external memory, keeping weights and KV cache on-chip during processing, and requiring model sharding across multiple chips due to limited on-chip SRAM per device. That architectural choice is directionally HBM-negative on a per-accelerator basis and ambiguous for DRAM, NAND, networking, power, and cooling on a per-token basis because the design can reduce memory wall losses and tail-latency overhead while potentially increasing the number of chips and interconnect endpoints required to serve large models and long-context workloads. HBM implications are the most mechanically straightforward but should be framed as second-derivative rather than absolute. If Groq-class inference silicon meaningfully displaces NVIDIA GPU-based inference deployments, incremental HBM bit demand tied to inference growth could be reduced relative to a GPU-only baseline because Groq’s current approach does not appear to attach HBM stacks to each accelerator. However, current market structure suggests HBM remains supply-constrained and is being pulled by multiple vectors including continued GPU training scale and high-capacity inference configurations, with leading suppliers signaling tight conditions extending beyond 2026. In that environment, reduced inference-driven HBM intensity could primarily reallocate scarce HBM supply toward higher-end training and premium inference GPUs rather than creating an outright volume collapse, preserving high utilization of HBM capacity while potentially affecting the slope of pricing power and capacity expansion urgency over a multi-year horizon. The key downside scenario for the HBM complex would be a durable architectural bifurcation where “good-enough” inference shifts disproportionately to HBM-less ASICs across a broad swath of deployments (latency-sensitive, batch-1, cost-per-token optimized), while training remains GPU-HBM dominated; such a split would reduce the portion of future inference compute that naturally monetizes through HBM content and could compress the incremental HBM-per-AI-dollar ratio. The key upside/neutral scenario for HBM is that the supply chain remains fully allocated regardless, with NVIDIA using any “freed” HBM to ship more high-end GPUs into training and long-context inference, especially as roadmaps increase HBM per GPU, sustaining robust aggregate bit demand even if inference becomes more heterogeneous. Conventional DRAM implications split into 2 channels: (1) DRAM wafer capacity diversion into HBM and (2) DDR content per server in AI clusters. Supplier commentary indicates that AI-driven memory demand is supporting elevated DRAM markets more broadly, and HBM production is resource-intensive versus conventional DRAM, tightening supply for DDR products in parallel. A meaningful NVIDIA pivot to an inference architecture that reduces HBM dependence could, at the margin, ease the most acute HBM-driven bottlenecks and allow memory manufacturers more flexibility in balancing DRAM mix, which could be modestly DDR-positive on the supply side (less crowding-out) even if it is DDR-neutral or slightly negative on the demand side (if per-node CPU/DDR requirements decline due to more efficient accelerator utilization). The dominant practical outcome is likely that DDR demand remains supported by broad AI server proliferation and increasing memory footprints at the system level (CPUs, networking stacks, caching layers, retrieval-augmented pipelines), while HBM remains the premium profit pool; therefore, any HBM displacement that increases total server volumes could indirectly keep DDR demand resilient even if DDR per accelerator is not rising materially. NAND flash implications are comparatively indirect and volume-driven rather than architecture-driven. Inference clusters require SSD capacity for model storage, container images, logging, and increasingly for fast local retrieval indices and embedding stores, but the storage footprint per unit of compute is typically smaller than in training pipelines that stage large datasets and checkpoints. If NVIDIA uses Groq to lower inference cost and latency enough to expand the total number of inference deployment locations (regional colocation, enterprise on-prem, sovereign footprints), aggregate SSD attach could rise through geographic fragmentation and replication of model artifacts across more sites, even if per-site storage is modest. The NAND effect is therefore likely to be demand-broadening and mix-positive (datacenter SSDs) but not a primary swing factor versus the macro AI capex cycle and consumer/device cycles. Hard disk drive (HDD) markets should see negligible direct sensitivity because nearline HDD demand is driven by bulk storage and cloud archiving economics, while inference acceleration choices primarily reshape compute and network layers; any HDD benefit would be a tertiary function of overall data center square footage expansion rather than a direct consequence of Groq silicon displacing GPUs. Optical networking implications require separating (1) intra-cluster back-end fabrics that connect accelerators and (2) front-end / data center interconnect (DCI) that connects sites and regions. Groq’s own positioning and third-party reporting suggest scaling beyond a single node or rack relies on high-bandwidth fabrics and, in some described configurations, optical interconnect scaling across hundreds of chips. If NVIDIA commercializes Groq at scale, 2 offsetting forces emerge: lower cost-per-token and improved latency could expand inference throughput and drive more east-west traffic, increasing demand for high-speed switching and optics; conversely, if Groq delivers materially higher utilization and tokens per unit of network bandwidth for certain workloads, the network required per served token could decline. Public NVIDIA materials already indicate an aggressive photonics roadmap aimed at scaling AI factories, including co-packaged optics (CPO) switches and explicit collaboration with Coherent and Lumentum in the silicon photonics supply chain. That linkage is important because it suggests that, independent of Groq, NVIDIA is already pushing optics integration deeper into the switch package to reduce power and increase resiliency; Groq increases the strategic incentive to reduce network power and latency if inference becomes even more distributed and latency-sensitive. For Lumentum and Coherent specifically, the net implication is less about “more optics versus fewer optics” and more about a shift in optics form factor and value capture. Co-packaged optics can reduce reliance on pluggable transceivers in some switch architectures while increasing demand for integrated photonic engines, lasers, fiber attach, packaging processes, and component-level supply. NVIDIA’s own announcements explicitly position Coherent and Lumentum as collaborators in creating the integrated silicon/optics process and supply chain for photonics switches. If Groq accelerates the transition to very large-scale fabrics (more endpoints, higher port speeds, tighter power envelopes), that tends to pull forward CPO adoption and amplifies demand for the underlying photonics components even if the conventional pluggable module TAM is structurally pressured over time. If Groq instead pushes inference toward smaller, more localized pods (closer to users, more regional colocation), that can be optics-positive for DCI and metro connectivity because more sites must be interconnected at high bandwidth with low latency, favoring coherent optics and high-speed interconnect between facilities. The principal risk for optics suppliers is timing and margin structure: a faster move to NVIDIA-driven integrated photonics could concentrate bargaining power and compress margins for commoditized transceiver modules while favoring suppliers with differentiated lasers, integration capability, and qualification depth in NVIDIA’s CPO ecosystem. AEC and copper interconnect implications hinge on whether Groq deployment increases the density of short-reach links inside racks and rows. High-speed copper remains structurally advantaged at very short distances on cost, power, and serviceability, but reaches become constrained as lane speeds and aggregate bandwidth rise, creating a role for active electrical cables (AECs), retimers, and signal-conditioning silicon. Credo explicitly positions its AEC products as enabling reliable lossless 800G connectivity for AI clusters, and the company has highlighted participation at NVIDIA GTC with content focused on extending PCIe/CXL using AECs, indicating relevance to next-generation system topologies that require longer reach and higher signal integrity than passive copper can deliver. If NVIDIA turns Groq into a widely deployed inference card or chassis product, the likely near-term effect is AEC-positive because (1) more inference throughput tends to increase top-of-rack connectivity requirements, (2) distributing inference across more racks and sites increases short-reach links per unit of delivered service, and (3) PCIe-attached accelerator architectures tend to require robust signal conditioning as systems move to PCIe 6.x and beyond. Groq workshop materials explicitly reference GroqCard and GroqNode form factors, reinforcing that PCIe-attached deployment has been central to Groq’s current packaging strategy. The main countervailing risk is that Groq’s deterministic chip-to-chip fabric could be implemented primarily through backplanes and direct board-level connectivity that reduces the need for merchant AECs inside the box; in that case, incremental AEC demand would concentrate more in rack-to-switch and node-to-fabric links rather than within-chassis chip fabrics. Astera Labs implications are connectivity-architecture sensitive and, on balance, skew positive if NVIDIA increases heterogeneity and disaggregation in AI systems. NVIDIA has publicly positioned NVLink Fusion as a pathway for partners to build semi-custom AI infrastructure and has explicitly identified Astera Labs as a partner in that ecosystem, with Astera describing NVLink-related solutions expanding its connectivity platform across PCIe, CXL, and Ethernet plus fleet observability software. A Groq acquisition increases the probability that NVIDIA offers a broader menu of accelerators (training GPUs, inference-focused ASICs) and therefore increases the importance of scalable, high-reliability connectivity, retiming, switching, and telemetry across mixed topologies. If Groq silicon remains PCIe-attached in many deployments, PCIe 6.x retimers/switches and active cable modules become more central, aligning with Astera’s core portfolio. If NVIDIA instead integrates Groq concepts into scale-up fabrics (NVLink-like domains) or uses Groq to expand into inference “appliances” that must be rapidly deployed in colocation environments, the need for standard-compliant, serviceable connectivity with strong RAS/telemetry increases, again aligning with Astera’s positioning. Power equipment and cooling implications for Vertiv and adjacent suppliers should be viewed through the lens of rack power density, cooling modality (air vs liquid), and site deployment model (hyperscale campuses vs distributed colocation/enterprise). Groq claims its LPU and rack designs are “air-cooled by design” and require no complex cooling and power infrastructure, and third-party reporting has described Groq’s approach as relying on parallelism across many lower-power units rather than extreme per-chip performance. If NVIDIA scales Groq as a mainstream inference platform, the mix of data center cooling spend could shift modestly away from the highest-density liquid-cooled racks toward more air-cooled or hybrid deployments, particularly for inference pods placed in existing facilities that cannot easily retrofit for very high rack heat flux. That would be a mix headwind for suppliers most levered exclusively to high-end liquid cooling attachments per rack, but it is not necessarily a volume headwind for Vertiv given the company’s broad exposure to both power and cooling infrastructure and the likelihood that total AI deployment locations expand. Vertiv’s own industry commentary emphasizes that AI racks require higher power-density UPS, batteries, power distribution equipment, and switchgear capable of handling rapid load transients, and that hybrid cooling systems will evolve across deployment environments. Those statements align with a world where inference growth increases the count of powered racks and raises the operational complexity of power delivery even if per-rack density is lower than the most extreme training clusters. The most material infrastructure impact may occur outside the rack and upstream of the data hall: grid interconnects, substations, transformers, switchgear, generators, and utility-scale generation additions. Recent regulatory actions in the U.S. highlight that projected data center demand is already driving large planned increases in electricity generation capacity, underscoring that power availability is a binding constraint. In that context, an inference architecture that lowers joules per token could reduce the power required per unit of inference delivered, but it can also accelerate demand by lowering cost and improving latency, increasing the total volume of inference served (a classic rebound effect). The net outcome is likely continued, elevated demand for power infrastructure even if efficiency improves, with the key swing factor being whether AI capex remains on a multi-year growth trajectory or enters a digestion phase. Other data center infrastructure implications include server/ODM mix, facility design standardization, and networking architecture choices. If NVIDIA positions Groq-based inference as a broadly distributable “standard server + accelerator” solution rather than as an integrated, liquid-cooled rack like GB200 NVL72, spend could shift toward more conventional air-cooled server designs, higher unit volumes of mainstream racks, and faster deployment in colocation footprints, increasing demand for modular power rooms, busways, and rapidly deployable cooling solutions. If NVIDIA instead integrates Groq into its “AI factory” paradigm, the primary effect is likely acceleration of dense back-end fabric build-outs and a faster push toward photonics switching, increasing demand for fiber plant, connectors, and integrated optics supply chains while potentially compressing the lifecycle of transitional architectures based on pluggable optics and mid-reach copper. NVIDIA’s stated roadmap toward co-packaged optics and silicon photonics switches is already oriented toward scaling to very large GPU counts; adding a high-end inference ASIC increases the strategic importance of power-efficient, low-latency fabrics because inference economics become increasingly sensitive to network overhead as compute cost declines. Across the covered segments, the most defensible base case is limited near-term dislocation and a medium-term increase in uncertainty around memory intensity per unit of inference growth. HBM faces the clearest relative risk from an HBM-less inference platform, but supply tightness and GPU training roadmaps reduce the probability of an absolute demand shock over the next 12–24 months. Optical, AEC/copper, and power/cooling are more likely to remain volume-supported because they scale with endpoint count, deployment fragmentation, and total data center footprint, and those tend to rise when inference becomes cheaper and more widely deployed. The highest-conviction second-order effect is a shift in infrastructure mix: incrementally more distributed inference deployments (favoring colocation power/cooling standardization, DCI optics, and serviceable short-reach interconnect) and a gradual migration from pluggable optics toward integrated photonics in back-end fabrics (favoring suppliers positioned in the CPO ecosystem).

$MU $SNDK $LITE $VRT NVIDIA and Groq: 2nd and 3rd Order Strategic Infrastructure Effects and Market Implications Public reporting indicates NVIDIA has agreed to acquire Groq for approximately $20,000,000,000 in cash, while excluding Groq’s nascent cloud business from the transaction perimeter. The reported carve-out materially constrains the immediate, direct linkage from the acquisition to incremental, NVIDIA-controlled data center capacity build-out because GroqCloud appears to be the principal channel through which Groq hardware is currently monetized at scale as a service. The infrastructure-market implications therefore depend primarily on post-close product strategy: whether NVIDIA (1) commercializes Groq silicon as a distinct inference product line and drives broad deployment through OEM/ODM channels and partners, (2) uses the acquisition mainly to absorb IP and talent while de-emphasizing standalone Groq hardware volumes, or (3) uses Groq technology to reshape NVIDIA’s own inference systems and networking roadmaps. The dominant transmission mechanism into memory, networking, and facility infrastructure markets is the degree to which NVIDIA shifts incremental inference deployments away from GPU architectures that are tightly coupled to external high-bandwidth memory (HBM) and toward Groq’s current architecture, which emphasizes large on-chip SRAM, deterministic compiler-scheduled execution, and direct chip-to-chip connectivity. Independent and company-published materials describe Groq’s current-generation approach as having no external memory, keeping weights and KV cache on-chip during processing, and requiring model sharding across multiple chips due to limited on-chip SRAM per device. That architectural choice is directionally HBM-negative on a per-accelerator basis and ambiguous for DRAM, NAND, networking, power, and cooling on a per-token basis because the design can reduce memory wall losses and tail-latency overhead while potentially increasing the number of chips and interconnect endpoints required to serve large models and long-context workloads. HBM implications are the most mechanically straightforward but should be framed as second-derivative rather than absolute. If Groq-class inference silicon meaningfully displaces NVIDIA GPU-based inference deployments, incremental HBM bit demand tied to inference growth could be reduced relative to a GPU-only baseline because Groq’s current approach does not appear to attach HBM stacks to each accelerator. However, current market structure suggests HBM remains supply-constrained and is being pulled by multiple vectors including continued GPU training scale and high-capacity inference configurations, with leading suppliers signaling tight conditions extending beyond 2026. In that environment, reduced inference-driven HBM intensity could primarily reallocate scarce HBM supply toward higher-end training and premium inference GPUs rather than creating an outright volume collapse, preserving high utilization of HBM capacity while potentially affecting the slope of pricing power and capacity expansion urgency over a multi-year horizon. The key downside scenario for the HBM complex would be a durable architectural bifurcation where “good-enough” inference shifts disproportionately to HBM-less ASICs across a broad swath of deployments (latency-sensitive, batch-1, cost-per-token optimized), while training remains GPU-HBM dominated; such a split would reduce the portion of future inference compute that naturally monetizes through HBM content and could compress the incremental HBM-per-AI-dollar ratio. The key upside/neutral scenario for HBM is that the supply chain remains fully allocated regardless, with NVIDIA using any “freed” HBM to ship more high-end GPUs into training and long-context inference, especially as roadmaps increase HBM per GPU, sustaining robust aggregate bit demand even if inference becomes more heterogeneous. Conventional DRAM implications split into 2 channels: (1) DRAM wafer capacity diversion into HBM and (2) DDR content per server in AI clusters. Supplier commentary indicates that AI-driven memory demand is supporting elevated DRAM markets more broadly, and HBM production is resource-intensive versus conventional DRAM, tightening supply for DDR products in parallel. A meaningful NVIDIA pivot to an inference architecture that reduces HBM dependence could, at the margin, ease the most acute HBM-driven bottlenecks and allow memory manufacturers more flexibility in balancing DRAM mix, which could be modestly DDR-positive on the supply side (less crowding-out) even if it is DDR-neutral or slightly negative on the demand side (if per-node CPU/DDR requirements decline due to more efficient accelerator utilization). The dominant practical outcome is likely that DDR demand remains supported by broad AI server proliferation and increasing memory footprints at the system level (CPUs, networking stacks, caching layers, retrieval-augmented pipelines), while HBM remains the premium profit pool; therefore, any HBM displacement that increases total server volumes could indirectly keep DDR demand resilient even if DDR per accelerator is not rising materially. NAND flash implications are comparatively indirect and volume-driven rather than architecture-driven. Inference clusters require SSD capacity for model storage, container images, logging, and increasingly for fast local retrieval indices and embedding stores, but the storage footprint per unit of compute is typically smaller than in training pipelines that stage large datasets and checkpoints. If NVIDIA uses Groq to lower inference cost and latency enough to expand the total number of inference deployment locations (regional colocation, enterprise on-prem, sovereign footprints), aggregate SSD attach could rise through geographic fragmentation and replication of model artifacts across more sites, even if per-site storage is modest. The NAND effect is therefore likely to be demand-broadening and mix-positive (datacenter SSDs) but not a primary swing factor versus the macro AI capex cycle and consumer/device cycles. Hard disk drive (HDD) markets should see negligible direct sensitivity because nearline HDD demand is driven by bulk storage and cloud archiving economics, while inference acceleration choices primarily reshape compute and network layers; any HDD benefit would be a tertiary function of overall data center square footage expansion rather than a direct consequence of Groq silicon displacing GPUs. Optical networking implications require separating (1) intra-cluster back-end fabrics that connect accelerators and (2) front-end / data center interconnect (DCI) that connects sites and regions. Groq’s own positioning and third-party reporting suggest scaling beyond a single node or rack relies on high-bandwidth fabrics and, in some described configurations, optical interconnect scaling across hundreds of chips. If NVIDIA commercializes Groq at scale, 2 offsetting forces emerge: lower cost-per-token and improved latency could expand inference throughput and drive more east-west traffic, increasing demand for high-speed switching and optics; conversely, if Groq delivers materially higher utilization and tokens per unit of network bandwidth for certain workloads, the network required per served token could decline. Public NVIDIA materials already indicate an aggressive photonics roadmap aimed at scaling AI factories, including co-packaged optics (CPO) switches and explicit collaboration with Coherent and Lumentum in the silicon photonics supply chain. That linkage is important because it suggests that, independent of Groq, NVIDIA is already pushing optics integration deeper into the switch package to reduce power and increase resiliency; Groq increases the strategic incentive to reduce network power and latency if inference becomes even more distributed and latency-sensitive. For Lumentum and Coherent specifically, the net implication is less about “more optics versus fewer optics” and more about a shift in optics form factor and value capture. Co-packaged optics can reduce reliance on pluggable transceivers in some switch architectures while increasing demand for integrated photonic engines, lasers, fiber attach, packaging processes, and component-level supply. NVIDIA’s own announcements explicitly position Coherent and Lumentum as collaborators in creating the integrated silicon/optics process and supply chain for photonics switches. If Groq accelerates the transition to very large-scale fabrics (more endpoints, higher port speeds, tighter power envelopes), that tends to pull forward CPO adoption and amplifies demand for the underlying photonics components even if the conventional pluggable module TAM is structurally pressured over time. If Groq instead pushes inference toward smaller, more localized pods (closer to users, more regional colocation), that can be optics-positive for DCI and metro connectivity because more sites must be interconnected at high bandwidth with low latency, favoring coherent optics and high-speed interconnect between facilities. The principal risk for optics suppliers is timing and margin structure: a faster move to NVIDIA-driven integrated photonics could concentrate bargaining power and compress margins for commoditized transceiver modules while favoring suppliers with differentiated lasers, integration capability, and qualification depth in NVIDIA’s CPO ecosystem. AEC and copper interconnect implications hinge on whether Groq deployment increases the density of short-reach links inside racks and rows. High-speed copper remains structurally advantaged at very short distances on cost, power, and serviceability, but reaches become constrained as lane speeds and aggregate bandwidth rise, creating a role for active electrical cables (AECs), retimers, and signal-conditioning silicon. Credo explicitly positions its AEC products as enabling reliable lossless 800G connectivity for AI clusters, and the company has highlighted participation at NVIDIA GTC with content focused on extending PCIe/CXL using AECs, indicating relevance to next-generation system topologies that require longer reach and higher signal integrity than passive copper can deliver. If NVIDIA turns Groq into a widely deployed inference card or chassis product, the likely near-term effect is AEC-positive because (1) more inference throughput tends to increase top-of-rack connectivity requirements, (2) distributing inference across more racks and sites increases short-reach links per unit of delivered service, and (3) PCIe-attached accelerator architectures tend to require robust signal conditioning as systems move to PCIe 6.x and beyond. Groq workshop materials explicitly reference GroqCard and GroqNode form factors, reinforcing that PCIe-attached deployment has been central to Groq’s current packaging strategy. The main countervailing risk is that Groq’s deterministic chip-to-chip fabric could be implemented primarily through backplanes and direct board-level connectivity that reduces the need for merchant AECs inside the box; in that case, incremental AEC demand would concentrate more in rack-to-switch and node-to-fabric links rather than within-chassis chip fabrics. Astera Labs implications are connectivity-architecture sensitive and, on balance, skew positive if NVIDIA increases heterogeneity and disaggregation in AI systems. NVIDIA has publicly positioned NVLink Fusion as a pathway for partners to build semi-custom AI infrastructure and has explicitly identified Astera Labs as a partner in that ecosystem, with Astera describing NVLink-related solutions expanding its connectivity platform across PCIe, CXL, and Ethernet plus fleet observability software. A Groq acquisition increases the probability that NVIDIA offers a broader menu of accelerators (training GPUs, inference-focused ASICs) and therefore increases the importance of scalable, high-reliability connectivity, retiming, switching, and telemetry across mixed topologies. If Groq silicon remains PCIe-attached in many deployments, PCIe 6.x retimers/switches and active cable modules become more central, aligning with Astera’s core portfolio. If NVIDIA instead integrates Groq concepts into scale-up fabrics (NVLink-like domains) or uses Groq to expand into inference “appliances” that must be rapidly deployed in colocation environments, the need for standard-compliant, serviceable connectivity with strong RAS/telemetry increases, again aligning with Astera’s positioning. Power equipment and cooling implications for Vertiv and adjacent suppliers should be viewed through the lens of rack power density, cooling modality (air vs liquid), and site deployment model (hyperscale campuses vs distributed colocation/enterprise). Groq claims its LPU and rack designs are “air-cooled by design” and require no complex cooling and power infrastructure, and third-party reporting has described Groq’s approach as relying on parallelism across many lower-power units rather than extreme per-chip performance. If NVIDIA scales Groq as a mainstream inference platform, the mix of data center cooling spend could shift modestly away from the highest-density liquid-cooled racks toward more air-cooled or hybrid deployments, particularly for inference pods placed in existing facilities that cannot easily retrofit for very high rack heat flux. That would be a mix headwind for suppliers most levered exclusively to high-end liquid cooling attachments per rack, but it is not necessarily a volume headwind for Vertiv given the company’s broad exposure to both power and cooling infrastructure and the likelihood that total AI deployment locations expand. Vertiv’s own industry commentary emphasizes that AI racks require higher power-density UPS, batteries, power distribution equipment, and switchgear capable of handling rapid load transients, and that hybrid cooling systems will evolve across deployment environments. Those statements align with a world where inference growth increases the count of powered racks and raises the operational complexity of power delivery even if per-rack density is lower than the most extreme training clusters. The most material infrastructure impact may occur outside the rack and upstream of the data hall: grid interconnects, substations, transformers, switchgear, generators, and utility-scale generation additions. Recent regulatory actions in the U.S. highlight that projected data center demand is already driving large planned increases in electricity generation capacity, underscoring that power availability is a binding constraint. In that context, an inference architecture that lowers joules per token could reduce the power required per unit of inference delivered, but it can also accelerate demand by lowering cost and improving latency, increasing the total volume of inference served (a classic rebound effect). The net outcome is likely continued, elevated demand for power infrastructure even if efficiency improves, with the key swing factor being whether AI capex remains on a multi-year growth trajectory or enters a digestion phase. Other data center infrastructure implications include server/ODM mix, facility design standardization, and networking architecture choices. If NVIDIA positions Groq-based inference as a broadly distributable “standard server + accelerator” solution rather than as an integrated, liquid-cooled rack like GB200 NVL72, spend could shift toward more conventional air-cooled server designs, higher unit volumes of mainstream racks, and faster deployment in colocation footprints, increasing demand for modular power rooms, busways, and rapidly deployable cooling solutions. If NVIDIA instead integrates Groq into its “AI factory” paradigm, the primary effect is likely acceleration of dense back-end fabric build-outs and a faster push toward photonics switching, increasing demand for fiber plant, connectors, and integrated optics supply chains while potentially compressing the lifecycle of transitional architectures based on pluggable optics and mid-reach copper. NVIDIA’s stated roadmap toward co-packaged optics and silicon photonics switches is already oriented toward scaling to very large GPU counts; adding a high-end inference ASIC increases the strategic importance of power-efficient, low-latency fabrics because inference economics become increasingly sensitive to network overhead as compute cost declines. Across the covered segments, the most defensible base case is limited near-term dislocation and a medium-term increase in uncertainty around memory intensity per unit of inference growth. HBM faces the clearest relative risk from an HBM-less inference platform, but supply tightness and GPU training roadmaps reduce the probability of an absolute demand shock over the next 12–24 months. Optical, AEC/copper, and power/cooling are more likely to remain volume-supported because they scale with endpoint count, deployment fragmentation, and total data center footprint, and those tend to rise when inference becomes cheaper and more widely deployed. The highest-conviction second-order effect is a shift in infrastructure mix: incrementally more distributed inference deployments (favoring colocation power/cooling standardization, DCI optics, and serviceable short-reach interconnect) and a gradual migration from pluggable optics toward integrated photonics in back-end fabrics (favoring suppliers positioned in the CPO ecosystem).

TheValueist

76,179 views • 7 months ago

THIS DEVELOPER CONNECTED 8 NVIDIA DGX SPARKS INTO ONE CLUSTER - AND RAN AN 800GB MODEL THAT MADE HIM 10X MORE PRODUCTIVE 21:47 he says it straight - "this is a terabyte of VRAM - we ran Quen 3.5, 800GB on disk, a model that doesn't even fit on a single Mac Studio - 24 tokens per second - I'd say that's a win" 8 Sparks connected through a $1,300 switch via RDMA over Ethernet - each node adding 128GB of memory into one unified pool of 1TB started with one Spark at 3 tokens per second - every added node doubled the speed - and eight together deliver 24 tokens on a model that physically cannot run anywhere else Kimi K2 at 600GB loaded in 15 minutes, 115GB per node, 13 tokens per second - a model that simply cannot run on anything smaller Claude helped configure the entire cluster - SSH mesh across all 8 machines, network config, jumbo frames, QSFP port speeds - all from one terminal most people rent cloud compute for models this size at $2,000+/month - he built the cluster once and now every token costs 20x less

THIS DEVELOPER CONNECTED 8 NVIDIA DGX SPARKS INTO ONE CLUSTER - AND RAN AN 800GB MODEL THAT MADE HIM 10X MORE PRODUCTIVE 21:47 he says it straight - "this is a terabyte of VRAM - we ran Quen 3.5, 800GB on disk, a model that doesn't even fit on a single Mac Studio - 24 tokens per second - I'd say that's a win" 8 Sparks connected through a $1,300 switch via RDMA over Ethernet - each node adding 128GB of memory into one unified pool of 1TB started with one Spark at 3 tokens per second - every added node doubled the speed - and eight together deliver 24 tokens on a model that physically cannot run anywhere else Kimi K2 at 600GB loaded in 15 minutes, 115GB per node, 13 tokens per second - a model that simply cannot run on anything smaller Claude helped configure the entire cluster - SSH mesh across all 8 machines, network config, jumbo frames, QSFP port speeds - all from one terminal most people rent cloud compute for models this size at $2,000+/month - he built the cluster once and now every token costs 20x less

Noisy

185,148 views • 1 month ago

This guy plugged a DGX Spark (the $3K Nvidia box) and a Mac Mini M4 together to run AI and what happened next surprised everyone > the Nvidia box handles the hard part - processing your prompt in milliseconds > Mac Mini M4 handles the fast part - generating the response at memory bandwidth speeds nothing else can match > together they hit 84 tokens per second on Llama - 6x faster than the Spark alone > running compute agents locally on this setup means your data never leaves your hardware > two boxes. two different architectures. one AI system that Deepseek runs at data center scale he ran it on his desk save this. the way we build local AI is about to change

This guy plugged a DGX Spark (the $3K Nvidia box) and a Mac Mini M4 together to run AI and what happened next surprised everyone > the Nvidia box handles the hard part - processing your prompt in milliseconds > Mac Mini M4 handles the fast part - generating the response at memory bandwidth speeds nothing else can match > together they hit 84 tokens per second on Llama - 6x faster than the Spark alone > running compute agents locally on this setup means your data never leaves your hardware > two boxes. two different architectures. one AI system that Deepseek runs at data center scale he ran it on his desk save this. the way we build local AI is about to change

Mr. Buzzoni

153,711 views • 2 months ago

$Nvidia is the central bank of AI compute. It pulls in nearly $60B per quarter — almost all from a handful of hyperscalers who plan their AI roadmaps around Jensen's release cycle. But three shifts are happening at once: • Google is committing up to one million TPUs to Anthropic starting 2026 — the first credible alternative at frontier scale. • Racks are already pushing hundreds of kilowatts, with megawatt systems on the horizon. • Nvidia has $26B in commitments to rent back its own GPUs from cloud partners — up from $12.6B last quarter. The real constraint isn't chips anymore — it's power and memory. Over the next 3–5 years, this creates a fractured landscape: Nvidia GPUs as the default utility, Google TPUs as a real second ecosystem, and hyperscalers racing to escape the Nvidia tax. Let’s walk through how that actually plays out:$

Nvidia is the central bank of AI compute. It pulls in nearly $60B per quarter — almost all from a handful of hyperscalers who plan their AI roadmaps around Jensen's release cycle. But three shifts are happening at once: • Google is committing up to one million TPUs to Anthropic starting 2026 — the first credible alternative at frontier scale. • Racks are already pushing hundreds of kilowatts, with megawatt systems on the horizon. • Nvidia has $26B in commitments to rent back its own GPUs from cloud partners — up from $12.6B last quarter. The real constraint isn't chips anymore — it's power and memory. Over the next 3–5 years, this creates a fractured landscape: Nvidia GPUs as the default utility, Google TPUs as a real second ecosystem, and hyperscalers racing to escape the Nvidia tax. Let’s walk through how that actually plays out:

Computer

200,997 views • 8 months ago

$NVDA isn’t just selling GPUs anymore… they’re becoming the venture capitalist of the entire AI economy. Over $40 BILLION in equity investments this year alone: • $30B into OpenAI • ~$3.2B into $GLW • ~$2.1B into $IREN • ~$2B each into $MRVL, $LITE, $COHR, $CRWV, $NBIS My observation? Jensen is systematically buying stakes across every critical layer — chips, optics, power, networking, neoclouds, and the model companies themselves. This isn’t random investing. This is vertical integration on steroids. When the whole AI stack eventually needs to scale, a huge chunk of the economics now flows back to Nvidia. The more I look at it, the more it feels like Nvidia is building its own moat with actual ownership, not just technology leadership. This changes how I think about $NVDA long-term. You see this as brilliant capital allocation or overreach?

$NVDA isn’t just selling GPUs anymore… they’re becoming the venture capitalist of the entire AI economy. Over $40 BILLION in equity investments this year alone: • $30B into OpenAI • ~$3.2B into $GLW • ~$2.1B into $IREN • ~$2B each into $MRVL, $LITE, $COHR, $CRWV, $NBIS My observation? Jensen is systematically buying stakes across every critical layer — chips, optics, power, networking, neoclouds, and the model companies themselves. This isn’t random investing. This is vertical integration on steroids. When the whole AI stack eventually needs to scale, a huge chunk of the economics now flows back to Nvidia. The more I look at it, the more it feels like Nvidia is building its own moat with actual ownership, not just technology leadership. This changes how I think about $NVDA long-term. You see this as brilliant capital allocation or overreach?

Penny

15,365 views • 2 months ago

What are the physics constraints holding back AI infrastructure? Meltem Demirors and Kelly Greer: "AI is basically just taking electrons from the ground and running them through GPUs, you get tokens out of your computer." "Power is the ultimate constraint, gigawatts of backlog to connect to the grid. How do we consume less power but spit out more tokens?" "When a computer consumes power, it generates heat. We're literally melting racks, Sam Altman tweeted about his GPUs melting at OpenAI." "The third constraint is information. It hasn't changed since Claude Shannon's seminal paper in 1941, we're still using the physics he uncovered then." "The next frontier is optics, computing done through light. But what's beyond the speed of light?"

What are the physics constraints holding back AI infrastructure? Meltem Demirors and Kelly Greer: "AI is basically just taking electrons from the ground and running them through GPUs, you get tokens out of your computer." "Power is the ultimate constraint, gigawatts of backlog to connect to the grid. How do we consume less power but spit out more tokens?" "When a computer consumes power, it generates heat. We're literally melting racks, Sam Altman tweeted about his GPUs melting at OpenAI." "The third constraint is information. It hasn't changed since Claude Shannon's seminal paper in 1941, we're still using the physics he uncovered then." "The next frontier is optics, computing done through light. But what's beyond the speed of light?"

MTS

22,835 views • 2 months ago

If your Uber driver asked what Flare ☀️ is, you could simply tell them: "It’s a layer one chain that treats data like a first-class citizen" Co-Founder Hugo Philion ☀️ and the team at Flare aren’t just decentralizing data access - they’re rethinking how it's validated, scaled, and used across all corners of web3. With price feeds, cross-chain event data, and web2 inputs built into the network itself, every validator is also a data oracle. It’s not just another smart contract chain. It’s infrastructure for a more connected, data-native DeFi world.

If your Uber driver asked what Flare ☀️ is, you could simply tell them: "It’s a layer one chain that treats data like a first-class citizen" Co-Founder Hugo Philion ☀️ and the team at Flare aren’t just decentralizing data access - they’re rethinking how it's validated, scaled, and used across all corners of web3. With price feeds, cross-chain event data, and web2 inputs built into the network itself, every validator is also a data oracle. It’s not just another smart contract chain. It’s infrastructure for a more connected, data-native DeFi world.

MR SHIFT 🦁

16,788 views • 9 months ago

ELON MUSK: "The AI 5 chip which is going to be a great chip. All of Tesla hinges on that chip. That's the chip that going to our next gen self driving cars and it's also essential for Optimus. So that chip program was in bad shape. It wasn't on the path to success and we also had the DOJO program which was also doing okay but not on a path to be competitive with NVIDIA. So I collapsed the two programs into just one program to get everyone focused on the AI5 chip. It's performance per watt is extremely good. It is probably going to be at least 2-3 times better than NVIDIA performance per watt and 10% cost of the NVIDIA chip something like that."

ELON MUSK: "The AI 5 chip which is going to be a great chip. All of Tesla hinges on that chip. That's the chip that going to our next gen self driving cars and it's also essential for Optimus. So that chip program was in bad shape. It wasn't on the path to success and we also had the DOJO program which was also doing okay but not on a path to be competitive with NVIDIA. So I collapsed the two programs into just one program to get everyone focused on the AI5 chip. It's performance per watt is extremely good. It is probably going to be at least 2-3 times better than NVIDIA performance per watt and 10% cost of the NVIDIA chip something like that."

DogeDesigner

265,257 views • 8 months ago

Jensen Huang just doubled NVIDIA's demand forecast to $1 Trillion through 2027 🤯 Then spent two hours explaining why that number is conservative… Here's everything today from GTC: - NemoClaw: NVIDIA's open-source enterprise AI agent stack built around OpenClaw. Jensen called OpenClaw "the operating system for personal AI" and said every company needs a strategy for it. - Space-1: NVIDIA is putting Vera Rubin data centers in orbit. Not a concept. An actual system being designed for space deployment right now. - DLSS 5: 3D-guided neural rendering that blends raw graphics with generative AI. Jensen called it the future of real-time rendering. - AWS: Deploying 1 million+ NVIDIA GPUs starting this year. Azure was the first hyperscaler to power up Vera Rubin. - Vera Rubin: NVIDIA's next-gen AI supercomputer. 10x more performance per watt than Blackwell, 700 million tokens per second, shipping later this year. - Groq 3 LPU: First chip from NVIDIA's $20B Groq acquisition. A purpose-built inference accelerator that ships Q3. NVIDIA now owns training AND inference. -Feynman: The architecture after Rubin, coming 2028. New GPU, new LPU, new CPU. NVIDIA is on a 12-month chip cadence and the treadmill never stops. - Autonomous driving: BYD, Hyundai, Nissan, and Geely building Level 4 vehicles on NVIDIA. Uber deploying NVIDIA-powered robotaxis across 28 cities by 2028. The man doubled his demand forecast to a trillion dollars, announced data centers in space, and closed the show with a robot singing country music. This is NVIDIA's world. Everyone else is just renting compute in it.

Jensen Huang just doubled NVIDIA's demand forecast to $1 Trillion through 2027 🤯 Then spent two hours explaining why that number is conservative… Here's everything today from GTC: - NemoClaw: NVIDIA's open-source enterprise AI agent stack built around OpenClaw. Jensen called OpenClaw "the operating system for personal AI" and said every company needs a strategy for it. - Space-1: NVIDIA is putting Vera Rubin data centers in orbit. Not a concept. An actual system being designed for space deployment right now. - DLSS 5: 3D-guided neural rendering that blends raw graphics with generative AI. Jensen called it the future of real-time rendering. - AWS: Deploying 1 million+ NVIDIA GPUs starting this year. Azure was the first hyperscaler to power up Vera Rubin. - Vera Rubin: NVIDIA's next-gen AI supercomputer. 10x more performance per watt than Blackwell, 700 million tokens per second, shipping later this year. - Groq 3 LPU: First chip from NVIDIA's $20B Groq acquisition. A purpose-built inference accelerator that ships Q3. NVIDIA now owns training AND inference. -Feynman: The architecture after Rubin, coming 2028. New GPU, new LPU, new CPU. NVIDIA is on a 12-month chip cadence and the treadmill never stops. - Autonomous driving: BYD, Hyundai, Nissan, and Geely building Level 4 vehicles on NVIDIA. Uber deploying NVIDIA-powered robotaxis across 28 cities by 2028. The man doubled his demand forecast to a trillion dollars, announced data centers in space, and closed the show with a robot singing country music. This is NVIDIA's world. Everyone else is just renting compute in it.

Josh Kale

45,875 views • 4 months ago

$THIS CLUSTER OF 4 MAC STUDIOS USES LESS POWER THAN ONE NVIDIA CHIP - AND COSTS 5X LESS 17:30 the number hits hard - 600 watts for all four Mac Studios - less than one H200 that costs $30,000 on its own instead of one $30,000 GPU you get 4 machines with 1.5TB of memory, 3x more performance and models that simply cannot run on a single chip Apple quietly added RDMA over Thunderbolt in a beta update - latency dropped 99% and the same cluster became 3x faster without buying any new hardware before the update: 5 tokens per second. after: 15.5 - a free upgrade through a software update 8 Nvidia DGX Sparks for the same memory would cost $32,000 - this cluster costs a fraction and gets faster with every update 10x more productive at half the price - and the only thing you need is knowing where to look$

THIS CLUSTER OF 4 MAC STUDIOS USES LESS POWER THAN ONE NVIDIA CHIP - AND COSTS 5X LESS 17:30 the number hits hard - 600 watts for all four Mac Studios - less than one H200 that costs $30,000 on its own instead of one $30,000 GPU you get 4 machines with 1.5TB of memory, 3x more performance and models that simply cannot run on a single chip Apple quietly added RDMA over Thunderbolt in a beta update - latency dropped 99% and the same cluster became 3x faster without buying any new hardware before the update: 5 tokens per second. after: 15.5 - a free upgrade through a software update 8 Nvidia DGX Sparks for the same memory would cost $32,000 - this cluster costs a fraction and gets faster with every update 10x more productive at half the price - and the only thing you need is knowing where to look

Noisy

105,595 views • 1 month ago

$FOUR DIFFERENT VENDORS ARE NOW SHIPPING GB10 MINI PCs WITH 128GB UNIFIED MEMORY, AND ONE MICROTIK CRS 804 SWITCH CAN CONNECT UP TO EIGHT OF THEM INTO A 1 TERABYTE LOCAL AI CLUSTER 00:00 he points at the MikroTik CRS 804, "you need some kind of switch that'll handle QSFP56 ports like these", the interconnect that makes the whole cluster possible the GB10 ecosystem is no longer just Nvidia. Dell Pro Max GB10, ASUS Ascent GX10, and MSI Edge Expert all ship the same Grace Blackwell Superchip with 128GB of coherent memory. same silicon, different cases, same 200 gigabit ports on the back the CRS 804 is what connects them at prosumer prices. four 400 gigabit QSFP56 ports on one 1U chassis, breakout cables that split each port into two 200 gigabit lanes. one switch drives eight GB10 units in parallel do the math. eight nodes at 128GB each equals 1024GB of pooled unified memory across the cluster. run vLLM, shard a frontier model across all eight, and inference happens locally on hardware that fits in half a rack the real limiter revealed in the stress test was never throttling. it was interconnect topology, exactly the layer this switch fixes at a fraction of enterprise switch pricing $400 a month for combined chatgpt pro and claude code max hits $4,800 a year per developer. a small team of five running through this cluster pays back inside eight months and never expires the article covers the buying ladder for a single desk. this post is proof of the cluster ladder that starts where the desk one ends save this before the GB10 lineup grows past four vendors and prosumer cluster switches move upmarket$

FOUR DIFFERENT VENDORS ARE NOW SHIPPING GB10 MINI PCs WITH 128GB UNIFIED MEMORY, AND ONE MICROTIK CRS 804 SWITCH CAN CONNECT UP TO EIGHT OF THEM INTO A 1 TERABYTE LOCAL AI CLUSTER 00:00 he points at the MikroTik CRS 804, "you need some kind of switch that'll handle QSFP56 ports like these", the interconnect that makes the whole cluster possible the GB10 ecosystem is no longer just Nvidia. Dell Pro Max GB10, ASUS Ascent GX10, and MSI Edge Expert all ship the same Grace Blackwell Superchip with 128GB of coherent memory. same silicon, different cases, same 200 gigabit ports on the back the CRS 804 is what connects them at prosumer prices. four 400 gigabit QSFP56 ports on one 1U chassis, breakout cables that split each port into two 200 gigabit lanes. one switch drives eight GB10 units in parallel do the math. eight nodes at 128GB each equals 1024GB of pooled unified memory across the cluster. run vLLM, shard a frontier model across all eight, and inference happens locally on hardware that fits in half a rack the real limiter revealed in the stress test was never throttling. it was interconnect topology, exactly the layer this switch fixes at a fraction of enterprise switch pricing $400 a month for combined chatgpt pro and claude code max hits $4,800 a year per developer. a small team of five running through this cluster pays back inside eight months and never expires the article covers the buying ladder for a single desk. this post is proof of the cluster ladder that starts where the desk one ends save this before the GB10 lineup grows past four vendors and prosumer cluster switches move upmarket

NO1ennn

59,725 views • 1 month ago

Nvidia will pay you to put a $250,000 data center outside your house you don't touch it, you don't manage it, you just collect around $1,000 a month for the electricity and Wi-Fi it uses it looks like an AC unit, it's actually 16 Blackwell GPUs running AI workloads around the clock it's built by Span, a startup Nvidia invested in to make distributed compute a reality the reason Nvidia put money into this is simple they need compute everywhere and building data centers takes years and their solution is to skip the construction entirely, use residential grid capacity and deploy through your neighborhood instead this is much cheaper, faster, and can scale to millions of homes but there is still a question nobody has answered yet, what happens if someone steals it also, technically they could give each homeowner access to a slice of the compute even 2% of 16 Blackwell GPUs is more processing power than most people will ever use bookmark this, it's worth coming back to when you have time

Nvidia will pay you to put a $250,000 data center outside your house you don't touch it, you don't manage it, you just collect around $1,000 a month for the electricity and Wi-Fi it uses it looks like an AC unit, it's actually 16 Blackwell GPUs running AI workloads around the clock it's built by Span, a startup Nvidia invested in to make distributed compute a reality the reason Nvidia put money into this is simple they need compute everywhere and building data centers takes years and their solution is to skip the construction entirely, use residential grid capacity and deploy through your neighborhood instead this is much cheaper, faster, and can scale to millions of homes but there is still a question nobody has answered yet, what happens if someone steals it also, technically they could give each homeowner access to a slice of the compute even 2% of 16 Blackwell GPUs is more processing power than most people will ever use bookmark this, it's worth coming back to when you have time

Anatoli Kopadze

403,232 views • 2 months ago

Google's recent Gemini 3 release has shocked the world with undeniable proof that the TPU is a powerhouse AI chip, leaving many to wonder what lays in store for companies like NVIDIA & xAI. Listen to Gavin Baker lay out the exact strategy that Jensen Huang & Elon Musk are going to roll out over the next 12 months to beat Google at AI. The world is in for a HUGE surprise. ---------- We'll see the first models trained on Blackwell in early 2026. I think the first Blackwell model will come from XAI. And the reason for that is just, according to Jensen, no one builds data centers faster than Elon. Jensen has said this on the record. ... So if you're Jensen or Nvidia, you need to get as many GPUs deployed in one data center as fast as possible in a coherent cluster so you can work out the bugs. And so this is what X AI effectively does for Nvidia because they build the data centers the fastest. They can deploy Blackwells that scale the fastest, and they can help work with Nvidia to work out the bugs for everyone else. So because they're the fastest, they will, they'll have the first Blackwell model. ... We know that these Blackwell models are gonna be really good. ... Then something even more important happens. So the GB 200 was really, really, it was really hard to get it going. The GB 300 is a great chip. It is drop in compatible in every way with those GB 200 racks. Now you're not gonna replace the GB 200s there. Just any data center that can handle those, you can slot in the GB 300s, and now everybody's good at making those racks and you know how to get the heat out. You know how to cool them. You're gonna put those GB 300s in and then the companies that use the GB 300s, they're going to be the low cost producer of tokens. Particularly if you're vertically integrated. If you're paying a margin to someone else to make those tokens, you're probably not gonna be. I think this has pretty profound implications because I think it has to change Google's strategic calculus. ---------- Listen to the full conversation between Gavin & Patrick OShaughnessy below 👇

Google's recent Gemini 3 release has shocked the world with undeniable proof that the TPU is a powerhouse AI chip, leaving many to wonder what lays in store for companies like NVIDIA & xAI. Listen to Gavin Baker lay out the exact strategy that Jensen Huang & Elon Musk are going to roll out over the next 12 months to beat Google at AI. The world is in for a HUGE surprise. ---------- We'll see the first models trained on Blackwell in early 2026. I think the first Blackwell model will come from XAI. And the reason for that is just, according to Jensen, no one builds data centers faster than Elon. Jensen has said this on the record. ... So if you're Jensen or Nvidia, you need to get as many GPUs deployed in one data center as fast as possible in a coherent cluster so you can work out the bugs. And so this is what X AI effectively does for Nvidia because they build the data centers the fastest. They can deploy Blackwells that scale the fastest, and they can help work with Nvidia to work out the bugs for everyone else. So because they're the fastest, they will, they'll have the first Blackwell model. ... We know that these Blackwell models are gonna be really good. ... Then something even more important happens. So the GB 200 was really, really, it was really hard to get it going. The GB 300 is a great chip. It is drop in compatible in every way with those GB 200 racks. Now you're not gonna replace the GB 200s there. Just any data center that can handle those, you can slot in the GB 300s, and now everybody's good at making those racks and you know how to get the heat out. You know how to cool them. You're gonna put those GB 300s in and then the companies that use the GB 300s, they're going to be the low cost producer of tokens. Particularly if you're vertically integrated. If you're paying a margin to someone else to make those tokens, you're probably not gonna be. I think this has pretty profound implications because I think it has to change Google's strategic calculus. ---------- Listen to the full conversation between Gavin & Patrick OShaughnessy below 👇

Hans C Nelson 🗽

5,010,816 views • 7 months ago