4 ms·
NVIDIA is, and will be for at least the next year or two, supply constrained. They only have so much capacity at TSMC for all the chips, and the lion's share of
by snitty 1y ago
NVIDIA is, and will be for at least the next year or two, supply constrained. They only have so much capacity at TSMC for all the chips, and the lion's share of that is going to be going enterprise chips, which sell for an order of magnitude more than the consumer chips.
It's hard to get too offended by them shirking the consumer marker right now when they're printing money with their enterprise business.
- wmf 1y agoThey could be more honest about it though.
- davidee 1y agoNot personally offended, but when a company makes a big stink around several gross exaggerations (performance, price, availability) it's not hard to understand why folks are kicking up their own stink. Nvidia could have said "we're prioritizing enterprise" but instead they put on a big horse and pony show about their consumer GPUs. I really like the Gamer's Nexus paper launch shirt. ;)
- nicce 1y agoThey could rapidly build new own factories but they don’t.
- axoltl 1y agoAre you saying Nvidia could spin up their own chip fabs in short order?
- benreesman 1y agoIf they believed they were going to continue selling AI chips at those margins they would: - outbid Apple on new nodes - sign commitments with TSMC to get the capacity in the pipeline - absolutely own the process nodes they made cards on that are still selling way above retail NVIDIA has been posting net earnings in the 60-90 range over the last few years. If you think that's going to continue? You book the fab capacity hell or high water. Apple doesn't make those margins (which is what on paper would determine who is in front for the next node).
- ksec 1y agoAnd what if Nvidia booked but the order didn't come. What if Nvidia's customer isn't going to commit? How expensive and how much prepayment is needed for TSMC to break a new Fab? These are the same question Apple Fans asking Apple to buy TSMC. The fact is isn't so simple. And even if Nvidia were willing to pay for it TSMC wouldn't do it just for Nvidia alone.
- benreesman 1y agoYeah, I agree my "if" is doing a lot of lifting there. As in, "if Jensen were being candid and honest when he goes on stage and said things". Big if, I I get that.
- nicce 1y agoYes, if they wanted. They have had years to make that decision. They have enough knowledge. Their profits are measured in billions. But in order to maximize profits, that is not good because it is better to throttle supply.
- selectodude 1y agoSomebody should let Intel know.
- xp84 1y agoMy (uninformed) perception is that their “gaming” marketing department does their best to hype their gaming stuff that they have, while their senior leadership is in charge of whether they ship reasonable quantities of it, and, as an NVDA investor, they’re clearly making the right choices there. It sucks for gamers that the same silicon is useful for both gaming and AI, but that’s the situation.
- scrubs 1y ago"It's hard to get too offended by them shirking the consumer" BS! Nvidia isn't entitled. I'm not obligated. Customer always has final say. The problem is a lot of customers can't or don't stand their ground. And the other side knows that. Maybe you're a well trained "customer" by Nvidia just like Basil Fawlty was well trained by his wife ... Stop excusing bs.
- msgodel 1y agoI was under the impression that a ton of their sales growth last quarter was actually from consumers. DC sales growth was way lower than I expected.