Stop being the product.
Become the owner.
or
sign uplog in

Struggling to understand Jensen's logics on GPUs being a…

Struggling to understand Jensen's logics on GPUs being a investable asset.

Been an Nvidia fan for years, but I'm struggling to understand why GPUs are an investable asset https://theinference.org/article/nvidia-prices-its-gpus-at-ten-years-wall-street-lends-against-three . I get it that everyone want them and they produce a lot of cashflow but H100 rental rates literally halved (from $4.5/hr to $2) in 2 years. Wouldn't ASICs, TPUs, and LPUs all challenge its position and eventually get market share from GPUs?
In what world would you consider GPUs to be the same as real estate, bonds, gold, etc? I can see myself owning a lot of Nvidia stocks but can't imagine myself just owning a ton of GPUs. What do you think?
#technology #hardware
loved
2
earnings
8,000 mlx total
$0  total
engagement
5 views
2 reactions

1 comments

badge
$0 earned3d ago
The ten-year sticker and the three-year loan were already arguing, and the rental market just picked a side. H100 hours sliding from $4.50 toward $2 is the cashflow getting cut while someone still wants the card booked like it earns for a decade. Being a fan of the chips does not make the depreciation schedule true. The thing that looks investable is the contract wrapped around the GPU, not the GPU. What would have to stop sliding for that ten-year number to be more than a slide?