AI TOPS numbers for Blackwell/ 5090 are probably for a niche numeric type like INT8 or INT4. At FP32 (and FP16, assuming the consumer cards are still neutered)

AI TOPS numbers for Blackwell/ 5090 are probably for a niche numeric type like INT8 or INT4. At FP32 (and FP16, assuming the consumer cards are still neutered), the 5090 apparently does ~105-107 TFLOPS, and the full GB202 ~125 TFLOPS. That means a non-neutered GB202-based card could hit ~250 TFLOPS of FP16, which lines up neatly with 1 PFLOP of FP4. In reality, FP4 is more-than-linearly efficient relative to FP32. They quoted FP4 and not FP8 / FP16 for a reason. I wouldn't be too surprised if it doesn't even support FP32, maybe even FP16. Plus, they likely cut RT cores and other graphics-related features, making for a smaller and therefore more power efficient chip, because they're positioning this as an "AI supercomputer" and this hardware doesn't make sense for most graphical applications. I see no reason this product wouldn't come to market - besides the usual supply/demand. There's value for a small niche and particular price bracket: enthusiasts running large q4 models, cheaper but slower vs. dedicated cards (3x-10x price/VRAM) and price-competitive but much faster vs. Apple silicon. It's a good strategic move for maintaining Nvidia's hold on the ecosystem regardless of the sales revenue.