> 100000x lower unit production volume than GPUs means higher unit costs Two points. Nvidia's RTX 3000 series (3060 Ti, 3080, and many other flavors) ships 6

> 100000x lower unit production volume than GPUs means higher unit costs Two points. Nvidia's RTX 3000 series (3060 Ti, 3080, and many other flavors) ships 6 or more flavors per generation. The related silicon has names like the GA102, GA103, GA104, GA106, and GA107. So only 1/6th of the consumer market for Nvidia silicon can be amortized over any single design. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Google making the TPUs by the million. I found a vague reference to 9 exaflops and single facilities (one of many) costing $4 billion to $8 billion. So I wouldn't assume that the consumer GPU market/number of silicon designs is 100,000 times larger than the TPUv4 market. > Slow iteration cycle True. Then again generations make much less difference than they used to. Gone are the days where even after a multiple generations that average performance increases by 2x. Sure nvidia's 4000 series claims 2x ... on raytracing. But normal game performance seems to be more like 15%. Sure various trickery like DLSS helps, but similar tricks are increasing the performance of older cards as well. Similarly apple's a14 -> a15 -> a16 (or m1 -> m2 if you prefer) chips have had modest performance increases and mostly have increases in perf/watt. > 4.5yrs of Moore's Law It's dead Jim.