4 ms·
serving models is very profitable (70%+) but the issue is you need to invest in training the next iteration. but so far all of anthropics models have been profi
by vanuatu 26d ago
serving models is very profitable (70%+) but the issue is you need to invest in training the next iteration. but so far all of anthropics models have been profitable fully loaded
the vast majority of the labs revenue is from enterprise api usage (theres public sources from the information and ramp). but the risk there is customer concentration, where most of the revenue comes from other tech companies and a chunk of it is from foreign labs distilling
so i am drawing a conclusion that the labs' business model is good, maybe not as great as boosters think it is. if they make real progress on the biosciences like drug discovery that could turn it into an amazing business
- surgical_fire 26d ago> serving models is very profitable (70%+) All your argument hangs on this. I see no evidence of this being true.
- vanuatu 26d agohttps://www.seangoedecke.com/ai-inference-is-obviously-profitable/ https://www.seangoedecke.com/ai-inference-is-obviously-profi... https://www.mindstudio.ai/blog/anthropic-inference-margins-70-percent-api-costs https://www.mindstudio.ai/blog/anthropic-inference-margins-7... its even higher depending on the model, how optimized it is, and the chips! I wouldnt die on this hill
- surgical_fire 25d agoThis is not evidence. This is random people speculating on Anthropic's margins without any real evidence. Just because it is on some blog post, it does not make it true. I wasted the time to read the first blog post. It considers 100% utilization over the course of years to calculate an estimation, and it did not consider depreciation for the model itself. That thing is extremely extensive to create, and after a relatively short amount of time is considered outdated.
- aurareturn 25d agoHow much work did you go into looking for evidence?