NVIDIA Announces Financial Results for Third Quarter Fiscal 2025
Posted by BarKnight@reddit | hardware | View on Reddit | 132 comments
Posted by BarKnight@reddit | hardware | View on Reddit | 132 comments
rstune@reddit
Gross margin of 73.5% tells you all you need to know about his much they're overcharging
jv9mmm@reddit
Well according to supply and demand if a product is sold out it is priced too low. And Nvidia's data center GPUs have been completely sold out. If anything Nvidia is undercharging.
ExtendedDeadline@reddit
Thank god they don't do this in America for stuff like medicine! Only basic needs like on things like LLMs.
VenditatioDelendaEst@reddit
Indeed. Demand for medicine is effectively infinite because people are dumb and will gladly bankrupt themselves for a chance at one more day of life or (relative) health. In our enlightened land it is properly illegal to spend too much on medicine.
(Not saying there's a clear answer here, but I have rephrased the commie brainrot in a way to make it obvious that there is no clear answer here.)
KristinnK@reddit
You are being downvoted, but you are very right. In medicine monetary cost is absolutely considered as factor when deciding how to treat patients. Everywhere. There are plenty of advanced medication that isn't used in public medicine, even in the richest of countries, simply because the benefit isn't worth the extreme cost.
VenditatioDelendaEst@reddit
It's Reddit, lol. These people reason inside a moral framework where "profit" is theft from the worker and consumer, and gross margin is a measure of how gross the fat cats running the company are. They think inflation is caused by corporate greed.
The notion that on the other side of every $7,000 / month drug is either a person who will gladly pay any price to make their knee stop hurting, or an insurance company governed by laws that say No One Should Ever Have to Choose between treatment and rent... is completely beyond their consideration.
Then they turn 'round and say, "These right-wing chuds keep calling us communists and socialists! Aren't they stupid?" As if it's not in the fucking water supply. Outcome entirely predictable.
randylush@reddit
To be fair, there was a thread on fatFIRE yesterday that described the hellscape before the Affordable Care Act:
https://old.reddit.com/r/fatFIRE/comments/1gvhdo4/anyone_remember_the_pre_affordable_care_act_days/
Health insurance was really only for healthy people, or those working at big corporations, and pretty much any possible health problem would end in bankruptcy even if you paid into it.
It wasn't until very recently that health insurance became sort of fair for people. I think Americans generally think of healthcare as a wildly unfair scam because... for a long time, it was.
VenditatioDelendaEst@reddit
To preface, I'm not old enough to have experienced pre-ACA, but I am immensely skeptical of any Reddit community's ability to surface truthful accounts of politically sensitive recent history that would match the common experience at the time, and honestly compare them to the current day. That said,
A whole bunch of the complaints in that thread are about lifetime maximums, so the infinite potential demand theory -- "people are dumb and will gladly bankrupt themselves for a chance at one more day of life or (relative) health" -- is alive and well. If it is socially unthinkable to count the cost, the cost can get very large indeed.
If you think about it, the high end of healthcare is personalized consulting by a team of highly educated professionals who have hundreds of years of collective experience and face substantial legal risk (similar to PEs), equipped with specialized tools operated and maintained by techno-priests like the mainframe computers of old, and round-the-clock on-call monitoring, 24/7, for as long as the patient and their line of credit holds out. This is fundamentally extremely expensive. There is no cheap way to do it, and if there were, people would just do more. For example, in Modern America it is standard for each patient to have a private suite.
Imagine Elon Musk, or someone like him, is diagnosed with a rare chronic or fatal illness. The only things stopping that from consuming a Manhattan Project's worth of resources are 1) Musk's sense of propriety, and 2) the inductive reactance of deploying the money vis a vis Musk's remaining lifespan. For someone like Musk, the pool of specialists runs out before his money does and it takes years to train more, and to actually do fundamental research on his condition. It makes 100% sense that for normal people, this easily consumes the remainder of their net worth.
Healthcare cost is high because America is a wealthy nation and there's a lot of healthcare to buy. I suppose you could say that those professionals were motivated by Capitalist Greed when they pursued the education and accumulated the experience, and the scientists, engineers, and investors were acting with Capitalist Greed when they developed and manufactured the tools and trained the techno-priests. I suppose you could feel in your heart that it is wrong to do something because you expect to get paid. But I call that commie brainrot.
The only way to reduce healthcare cost is to, by hook or by crook, get people to by-and-large act as if it is not such a good idea to burn a substantial fraction of their lifetime earnings at the very end trying to eke out (at most) a few more years when their physical and mental acuity is mostly shot.
I pulled the data and plotted healthcare cost as a % of GDP. Maybe the ACA at least slowed the rate of the problem getting worse?
As for only being available to healthy people, at that point you're not talking about health insurance. Can't insure something you don't have.
On the subject of drugs, I recommend this 90-minute podcast if you feel like it. Alas, the host uses complicated syntax, so it's difficult to understand above 1.75 or 2x speed.
randylush@reddit
This is a very reductive view. It is not the only way. The problem is much more nuanced.
What you said implies that everyone exhausts their money on healthcare when they die, which is simply untrue, as evidenced by the fact that inheritance exists, and healthcare is not the only end-of-life expense. For many, assisted living will overshadow actual healthcare expenses. And modern medicine is not an efficient machine where money goes in and lifespan comes out. It does not work that way. You cannot just pay someone to keep you alive for X days or years. Just like it won’t take 9 women one month to make a baby.
It also ignores the inefficiency of insurance companies. Insurance companies do keep healthcare costs down by negotiating down prices. But they also inflate costs by… just existing and paying employees and shareholders. At the end of the day it sucks up a whopping 29% of healthcare costs. That’s insane! There must be a cheaper overall system than paying almost 30% to health insurance companies. If only some other countries have maybe tried different systems…
Oh, and by the way, why is it that insurance companies give you a free checkup every year? Is it because they are so generous? No, it’s because preventative care is cheaper than emergency care. Getting people in front of a doctor more often is objectively cheaper than going to the emergency room with really bad problems. It turns out that insuring more people actually brings the cost down of the whole system. But you need legislation to do that, because insurance companies wouldn’t do that on their own. Without government intervention, insurance companies wouldn’t insure someone who is poor, so that person ends up going to the emergency room, increasing their costs and passing it to the hospital (and ultimately to taxpayers anyway)
VenditatioDelendaEst@reddit
What I said implies that the average person exhausts more than us armchair policy architects would prefer on healthcare before they die. AFAICT that just definitionally falls out if you say, "healthcare is too expensive," whether or not it feels like that's what you're saying or whether you want to say it.
A strong social norm of leaving an inheritance (and having someone to leave it to) instead of bankrupting yourself was in fact one of the possible hooks I had in mind.
As is, modal inheritance is $0.
I tried to dig up a source for this, and I think you may have misread. 29% of healthcare spending goes through private insturance not to it. What you're looking for is the medical loss ratio, which is floored by statute at either 80% or 85% depending on market segment (!). Given the ranges in that article, we're looking at the fraction of healthcare spending going to private insurance at 4-6%.
Two interesting things there. First, the danger of using percent overhead as a metric. The most lucrative market segment by gross margin, i.e., dollars/customer, is Medicare Advantage by a landslide, despite its 87% loss ratio (that is, 13% take for the insurance company). Living in the US this would be intuitively obvious, owing to the absurd saturation advertising for Medicare Advantage in both broadcast media and spam telephone calls.
Second, the perverse incentive created by statutory profit margin caps. The only way for private insurers to increase their profits is by increasing healthcare spending. If they were to negotiate better and get lower prices for their customers, or discourage unnecessary procedures, they would be required by law to spend proportionately less on themselves.
I would've thought so too, until 15 minutes ago when I learned about the medical loss ratio cap. Now I don't know. It seems like the only incentive to reduce costs is indirect and mediated by competition, with insurers who pay out less and charge less being able to capture a larger number of customers. But of course they can't all capture a larger number of customers.
In the sense that charging higher prices is "greedy" (which I believe was the ideological precept that started this whole tangent), charging lower prices should be the opposite, so perhaps it is because they are so generous =P
Perhaps, but if so it should be seen as a surprising reversal at the 2nd order. In other context this is, "The more you buy, the more you save."
Nether-state@reddit
Better die to own the capitalist lol
INITMalcanis@reddit
But why don't people do the fiscally responsible thing and sell their own bodies to the Soylent plant the day they can't earn any more? I just don't understand it!
Caffdy@reddit
yeah, but you get other problems like Ozempic pricing
College_Prestige@reddit
Huge difference. Medicine demand is inelastic. If you don't take it you die. People are actively paying a premium for Nvidia when other (albeit more inefficient) options exist.
3ebfan@reddit
It’s not overcharging if people are paying
StickiStickman@reddit
Those things aren't mutually exclusive at all.
3ebfan@reddit
They actually are mutually exclusive and the reason is supply and demand. If they were overcharging then demand would go down, but demand just keeps increasing.
They could be charging even more.
GenZia@reddit
Supply and demand rules don't apply to companies like Apple and as of late, Nvidia.
In they thrive in their own bubble of exclusivity, practically immune to external market trends.
Why else, do you think, women pay thousands of dollars for... I dunno, Prada bags?!
Exclusivity, bragging rights, virtue signaling, take your pick.
Strazdas1@reddit
Of course these rules apply. GPU market has high elasticity and is very applicable to supply and demand.
anival024@reddit
Supply and demand applies whether or not you think the demand is rational.
Edgaras1103@reddit
People don't buy 4090 for bragging rights or status.
jason2306@reddit
I mean.. some definitely do tbh lol
StickiStickman@reddit
That doesnt apply to effective monopolies.
3ebfan@reddit
It in fact does.
ShowBoobsPls@reddit
Supply and demand work completely differently in a monopoly. An increase of the supply doesn't automatically drive the price down like it would in a non-monopolistic scenario.
zacker150@reddit
It absolutely is.
Golbar-59@reddit
Let's say a child abductor abducts a child and asks for a ransom. The parents pay the ransom and get the child back.
Did the parents overpay for their child? Yes, because the child didn't have a reasonable justification to be abducted in the first place.
The moral of the story is the people can be willing to pay for something even if the price lacks a reasonable justification. In general, it's the result of an extortion, where a threat is given to incentivise making the payment.
Nvidia is also committing a form of extortion, but it's a lot more difficult to understand why than a child abduction.
anival024@reddit
Is a GPU as important as your child to you?
zacker150@reddit
Nvidia is literally selling a money printer. Customers are lining up for gpus because they can make boatloads of money using them. Why shouldn't NVIDIA get a tiny portion of the value their products generate?
GenZia@reddit
That's exactly what a monopolistic company would say.
Danne660@reddit
It is also what a non-monopolistic company would say, because it is correct.
shalol@reddit
Scalpers aren’t overcharging either if people are paying their prices, by that logic
ThankGodImBipolar@reddit
How can you claim that they’re overcharging when their competitors are practically giving away their products in comparison but are still losing marketshare? People aren’t paying extra money for nothing.
(not an Nvidia fan to be clear)
zippopwnage@reddit
What competitors are giving away their products? Last time I checked, in my country at least, AMD counter part of Nvidia cards are around 100$ less at most. So of course people gonna buy an nvidia which most of the time may have better tech.
ThankGodImBipolar@reddit
The 7900XTX was 200 dollars less than the 4080 at MSRP, despite (allegedly) being more expensive to make. I think the situation is even worse in the data center. Maybe the situation is slightly better in the low end, but there’s much less margin in that segment in the first place.
SolaceInScrutiny@reddit
I know I'll get blown up for this but hatt price disparity exists because they are not equivalent products. Nvidia is far ahead in terms of value adds and refinement.
AffectionatePound383@reddit
Yeah at this point with how many games are coming with ray tracing forced plus dlss anything amd makes would have to be far far cheaper for me to consider it. At much lower brackets I can understand it but man giving up dlss is a rough sell.
niglor@reddit
Funny how Nvidia turned upscaling from something PC gamers wouldn’t touch with a 10 foot pole into a must have feature.
AffectionatePound383@reddit
Well it wasn't with dlss 1 that's for sure. But it's mostly just proof of how good it looks for what it does. Personally I'll turn on quality mode even if I don't need the performance because most of the time it looks better than the default taa while running faster.
YNWA_1213@reddit
Yeah, it's actually not so much DLSS actually looking better than a native resolution output but that it's AA smoothing looke leagues better than the TAA application the devs used. If we still got clear AA output on native res the gap would be larger, but we haven't since the end of UE4, so DLSS will end up giving a clearer picture than native res. DLAA is now the holy grail of clarity, but for whatever reason it's implementation is hit and miss by devs.
Strazdas1@reddit
Thats what DLAA is for.
Dressieren@reddit
The biggest benefit to AMD is that their biggest selling points could be swung by the community. DLSS is great and AMD has two different competitors with FSR and fidelityFX. Both of which are open source and have GitHub repos. AMD also has quite a few open source GPU drivers and are quite helpful to the community. If a community wants to see something do well and they have the skills it can and will find a way to be done.
Nvidia is just behind on that front with their drivers just this year moving to an open source driver for Linux.
Another thing is driver issues that still has a bad taste in people’s mouths. AMD has had quite a few bad driver releases or just weird driver issues in the past and so has Nvidia but the internet hivemind focuses in on AMDs failures which mostly took place before the adrenaline software dropped which was still somewhat fresh after the purchase of ATI.
AffectionatePound383@reddit
To me open source is cool sure, but amd mostly seem to use it in the "here community! Go do our job for us!" Kind of way. At the end of the day if it isn't in as many games and doesn't look as good I personally don't really care if it's open source. Intel caught up to them on upscaling so fast.
I think amds biggest issue is they can't ever have back to back to back good releases. That's what it takes to win back good will. They've done good in the past doing that. But a one off good series doesn't mean as much if you shit the bed next time.
Dressieren@reddit
I feel like open source is best when they give you the tools and you can do whatever you want with it. Very much more in the Linux mindset. Perfect example is DXVK which might be a stretch but it all stemmed from open source offshoot from mantle.
You’re absolutely right with needing back to back wins. Objectively Nvidia will hit a point when monolithic dies will start to become prohibitively expensive and AMDs chiplet design is not as strong as a monolithic die. There will become a point where AMD can throw more and more chiplets until it is toe to toe with Nvidia. That’s my prediction is when this happens the following release will be what wins back the goodwill when they can show how their model scales better.
That’s also not even talking about the data center market which makes up majority of Nvidias income. All of that is due to CUDA and they are extra vigilant in making sure that they are the only name in the game for it. If AMD gets an official way to compete it will have a good step forward. I am adamantly against monopoly and anti competition in companies. Nvidia pulled the massive bullshit card when they added in the clause of “You may not reverse engineer, decompile or disassemble any portion of the output generated using SDK elements for the purpose of translating such output artifacts to target a non-NVIDIA platform” to their EULA. Not sure how well that would hold up in court but it’s bullshit that translation layers like ZLUDA have been nixed as a result.
Wendek@reddit
Well I'm just one random guy but I had huge issues in 2022 with my AMD Adrenalin drivers (RX 5700 XT) that caused a complete computer freeze (even in non-demanding games when the card was at like 10% power and 50°C) that needed a hard reboot. Thought something was wrong with my PC itself but after reverting to the May 2022 drivers, the problem completely disappeared.
So... that's still pretty recent as far as I'm concerned and definitely a cause for concern when looking at my next card.
Dressieren@reddit
I personally have no brand allegiance and will use whatever performs the best. I have been on Nvidia for years and also used AMD and ATI before in the past. No company is immune to bad drivers. The frequency of the drivers that are flops is much lower now than it was before. I mean two months ago Nvidia also had a pretty big mistake and the only fix was to limit vram usage.
AMDs drivers on Linux usually tend to be pretty solid and easily able to be swapped. Nvidias are a massive pain in the ass and come with a lot more headaches especially if you’re using Wayland in my experience.
On the windows side of things AMD has had way more small issues that lead to a ton of annoyances but much less massive unusable crashes. They are relatively easy to detect and thankfully people on AMD subreddits are pretty quick to list what causes the issues and what to do to get your system working again.
Nvidia issues tend to be more drastic especially when you’re talking about the high end like the 4090 going into overcurrent protections specifically due to the 12HVPWR cable. Some versions would cause some spikes to go over certain breakpoints and trip the overcurrent protection causing the fans to ramp up all due to a faulty cable that isn’t the easiest to diagnose unless you’re knowing what to look for. I mean I have a 4090 and was getting my whole system crashing sitting on my desktop, but I could play through games for hours and be totally fine.
Both sides have bad drivers and in 90% of situations you can resolve any issue by DDU and downloading the most recent or second most recent drivers.
ResponsibleJudge3172@reddit
And despite for a year 4080 super MSRP being equivalent (with 7900XTX selling somewhat but not consistently below), Nvidia margins stayed the same and AMD margins went down.
This obviously means that margins are 99% reflecting the data center market and almost have nothing to do with the gaming GUs that sell a small fraction of the revenue
CalmSpinach2140@reddit
The 4080 is more expensive as it only uses N4, where the 7900XTX uses N5 and N6
From-UoM@reddit
4080 is 4N which is a custom N5 node
4N and N4 are not the same. They are both variants of the N5 node.
ThankGodImBipolar@reddit
I can only find this Hardwaretimes article about the subject but it seems to support what I’ve said.
CalmSpinach2140@reddit
Depends, it doesn’t factor in the cost of N4 and the more expensive GDDR6X
TwelveSilverSwords@reddit
Nvidia's margins are coming from datacenter, not gaming.
ThankGodImBipolar@reddit
That’s what I said; the situation is even worse in the datacenter. The same pattern is occurring top-down though.
shimszy@reddit
Intel certainly does.
PaulTheMerc@reddit
Got a link? I need an upgrade
shimszy@reddit
Their GPUs are certainly sold at a loss overall (if not for the bill of materials, definitely after R&D). But the question is whether you want them.
MumrikDK@reddit
When I bought a 4070, I didn't want to buy Nvidia, but everything else felt lower value to me, including the 6950XT which then was being sold at the same price as the 4070.
Nobody is giving their products away or anything even close to it, you're just ignoring the value of everything but raw non-RT game performance.
I didn't want to deal with the power/heat/noise of the 6950XT, and I wanted all the software support that AMD sadly has been lagging so incredibly far behind in.
DehydratedButTired@reddit
Because it’s a gross margin when you take it all on its own. They don’t care how much they sell, they care how much they sell it for and they keep the price artificially high by tightly controlling stock release.
ToughHardware@reddit
so go and make a better product then! you can only have that margin if you have a moat around the product... and they do
rstune@reddit
With blackjack and hookers?
Oafah@reddit
Business is not a social service. They have something people want, and people are clearly willing to pay for it.
4514919@reddit
No, gross margin tells you nothing.
CJKay93@reddit
How does a high profit margin mean somebody is overcharging for something? Things are worth what people are willing to pay for them; high-performance gaming graphics cards are a luxury product.
teh_drewski@reddit
Basic human rights like gaming GPUs shouldn't be subject to corporate profiteering!
Leave that to luxuries like housing, food and healthcare.
Bombadilo_drives@reddit
Swing and a miss.
azn_dude1@reddit
I know most people are mostly talking about gaming here but it's such a small part of their financial report.
Adromedae@reddit
Overcharging?
No_Resolve608@reddit
NVidia gaming sector up 15% compared to a year ago, mean while AMD gaming sector down 69% compared to a year ago, now NVidia gaming sector revenue is 7.14 times of AMD gaming sector revenue. Consider the AMD gaming sector, which is mainly console soc, and NVIDIA, which is mainly RTX GPUs. The revenue of the RTX GPU should be 20 to 30 times larger than the revenue of the radeaon GPU. From those reports, we should say Nvidia dominance in the gaming GPU is history record high, and the AMD Radeon GPU sector is struggling to compile Nvidia.
scrndude@reddit
Does their gaming sector not include the x3D processors?
No_Resolve608@reddit
No, only radeon gpu and customer soc like console and steam deck soc, X3D processors belong to the AMD client sector, and this sector growth in Q3 too.
TheJohnnyFlash@reddit
Basically anything that was ATi.
Vb_33@reddit
AMD ruined ATI. Can you believe how much ATI was worth in 2006 compared to how much Radeon is worth now?
Jack-of-the-Shadows@reddit
Without ATI AMD would never have been selected for PS4 and XBox. Which means the bulldozer fallout might have ruined them...
Strazdas1@reddit
I think you are both in agreement. ATI helped AMD, AMD didnt help ATI.
auradragon1@reddit
Considering that Radeon turned into CDNA as well, I’m guessing ATi is worth considerably more now than when AMD bought it.
Most of AMD’s stock market speculation is that they’re positioning themselves as #2 in AI GPUs after Nvidia and that has everything to do with ATi purchase.
dabocx@reddit
The PE ratio isn't exactly accurate, its inflated by the Xilinx acquisition method. Its closer to 30 which is still pretty high however.
Caffdy@reddit
can you expand on this?
dabocx@reddit
They did with stock and are amortizing it over time. From what I understand it’s a way of lowering the tax burden on it. pe will go down over time. It was actually 500 at one point. There’s probably some better written explanations from accounting people
I think I read it’ll be done in 2026. But like I said their real pe right now is around 30.
No-Actuator-6245@reddit
ATI was shit. There drivers and support made the hardware nearly unusable. The worth of AMD is 15+ years of being behind NVidia and NVidia developing faster and to date blocking AMD from getting even 1 foot ahead.
nicholsml@reddit
I went back and forth between voodoo, ATI and Nvidia GPU's from the very begging. Sometimes my ATI cards had issues, but unusable? Nah, that's a load of bullshit. People tend to have one bad experience or some issue with a game... and then turn it into...
Silly.
No-Actuator-6245@reddit
Every new game was a bug fest. You would wait 2 months for a driver update that didn’t fix it or made it worse. If lucky 6 months later the game might be playable. Then their cards with video capture were so buggy and would constantly crash, they never fixed these. Between me and friends we had several ATI cards and systems and all suffered headaches. It made gaming frustrating and not enjoyable.
nicholsml@reddit
That's bullshit. Played tons of games on various ATI cards. I'm not saying ATI was better, but you are exaggerating.
No-Actuator-6245@reddit
Not in my experience. They were terrible.
MumrikDK@reddit
I think you're remembering early ATi.
Strazdas1@reddit
No. All processors including x3D are considered client sector. AMDs gaming revenue are GPUs and consoles.
kingwhocares@reddit
Nvidia is also making the GPU for Switch 2. You can expect that to contribute to gaming GPUs increase.
animealt46@reddit
It's impact might be pretty small in Nvidia's scale. Switch sells a boatload but they are cheap and the chips themselves a relatively small portion of the cost.
Cryptic0677@reddit
AMD gaming is way more dependent on console sales and not on discrete GPUs
ExtendedDeadline@reddit
Isn't AMD's gaming revenue tied to consoles too?
My other theory:
Whales buy Nvidia and they're not price sensitive, also AI junkies. Nvidia charges more, they pay more, they make more revenue.
Amd caters to more budget segments. Budget people are more stretched financially. So they buy less. So AMD rev goes down?
JimmyJuly@reddit
From the comment you're responding to:
"Consider the AMD gaming sector, which is mainly console soc..."
Your question was answered before you asked it.
ExtendedDeadline@reddit
I think I got a wire crossed, I don't know how I missed that.
BarKnight@reddit (OP)
Of course what we care about....
No_Resolve608@reddit
nvdia gaming sector only 9.4% of their Q3 revenue(in 2021 it worth 46% of nvdia totallyrevenue), i guess nextyear, the gaming sector will be only 5% of nvdia totally revenue.
rstune@reddit
At this point they're just doing us a favor by using their fab allocation on gaming. They would make a lot more if they used it for their data center products!
We should be eternally grateful to Jensen and be glad they're not charging even more for GPUs!
Adromedae@reddit
Some of y'all seem to confuse this sub with r/gaming.
Caffdy@reddit
I mean, 99% of the time there's no difference to be honest
KristinnK@reddit
I'm pretty sure that regardless of what subreddit this is the vast majority of users here will only ever use Nvidia's products for gaming, so being "eternally grateful", however hyperbolic this statement is, is still applicable.
tukatu0@reddit
Pretty sure thats a troll
imaginary_num6er@reddit
Honestly Jensen is the biggest supporter of gamers since if he was not the CEO, Nvidia would not be making gaming cards now and technologies like DLSS and RTX would not be available as an option.
animealt46@reddit
The entire company of Nvidia are gamers lol. They've always pursued pro stuff but the AI boom is so new that everyone important at the company is still from the era that gaming was number 1. There's no movement within the company to abandon it.
Artoriuz@reddit
DLSS et al was just the way they found to make their ML prowess translate into better gaming products.
jigsaw1024@reddit
Nvidia is not fab limited in their ability to make data center products.
Nvidias' biggest bottlenecks are packaging and final assembly.
The 50 series still being a monolithic design may be a little blessing in disguise for gamers, as anything chiplet or tile based would be competing with data center for packaging.
RawbGun@reddit
I'm actually genuinely surprised it's that much considering how many (and how expensive) data center/ML GPUs they've been selling for the past 2 years and that we're at the end of a 2-year long gen for gaming GPUs
Gaff_Gafgarion@reddit
they can't make enough for all that demand
pmjm@reddit
I honestly wouldn't be surprised to see the % of gaming go down next year. Not because gaming is shrinking but because datacenter is exploding.
NeroClaudius199907@reddit
Dc is exploding right now and increasing gaming rev. Its almost like not everyone can access these products so they go for the next best thing.
randomkidlol@reddit
the 46% was inflated because they lumped crypto GPU sales with gaming. they were already fined, and are currently being sued for it.
https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2022/5/6/nvidia-pays-5-5m-us-fine-over-crypto-mining-disclosures
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/nvidia-tells-us-supreme-court-173420757.html
Mas_Turbesi@reddit
Time to buy a new leather jacket Jensen?
norcalnatv@reddit
Come on Mods. Remove this now.
Just like every other Nvidia related post that isn't strictly about your very narrow definition of what appropriate.
OP no offense
Top_Independence5434@reddit
For some reason earning report is considered hardware-related for this subs.
I call this out long ago, but the other doesn't took that kindly. Even some tech news outlet that this subs look down upon doesn't post financial news.
I guess Reddit will always be Reddit.
peternickelpoopeater@reddit
I am quite interested to see this as I keep waiting to see when the big customers of NVIDIA might start making them in-house. Given that the margins NVIDIA is charging is 60%+.
ResponsibleJudge3172@reddit
They already have long made chips in house. Nvidia just aims to be better than them in turn.
Look at Tesla Dojo Google with 5 generations of in house accelrators Amazon with several gens of accelerators
Kryohi@reddit
What? Only Google has experience making AI accelerators, the others have just started or were never serious about it. And the vast majority of compute Google has indeed comes from their TPUs.
norcalnatv@reddit
Amazon has Trainium and Inferentia
Microsoft has Maia Accelerator
Baidu has Kunlun
Many of these have been around for years
ResponsibleJudge3172@reddit
And the AMD ones too. And Intel for that matter
IshTheFace@reddit
The book cooking continues.
ToughHardware@reddit
supermic?
SomniumOv@reddit
ah yes, the book cooking trick of "selling everything you can produce in your most profitable segment", why didn't we think of that before ?
NeroClaudius199907@reddit
Lovelace is selling well even though everyone at r/gaming got priced out. 5060 8gb is going to hit bigly. But in all honesty, its over Jensen won. Once he gets his arm cpu for consumer & woa becomes good, theres nothing stopping him.
ToughHardware@reddit
the leather jacket and sensible taiwanesse aunts will keep him grounded.
rohitandley@reddit
Well done nvidia. Invest in it lads. Use its profit to buy your next gpu
ToughHardware@reddit
this is the way
Neofarm@reddit
Blackwell doesn't seem to ramp well due to overheating problem. Revenue growth overall is slowing despite "insane" demand. This might be the top for Nvidia for a while.
Long_Restaurant2386@reddit
Your knowledge of that "overheating problem" clearly didn't come from anything but the headline.
Neofarm@reddit
I started to put things apart & together for a living about 20 years ago. So i believe i should know a thing or 2.
poopnip@reddit
This is r/hardware
Who here isn’t taking things apart and putting them together?
Neofarm@reddit
I know right. My eyes got so weak lately i have to use microscope to do it ;-)
Long_Restaurant2386@reddit
Too bad your computer building skills didn't teach you how to read and article.
From-UoM@reddit
Increase is the same. Rate has been slowing because % decreases with higher values.
Lets say you add 4 billion each quarter.
10 to 14 billion is 40% more
14 to 18 billion is 28% more
18 to 22 billion is 22% more
22 to 26 billion is 18% more
26 to 30 billion is 15%
Same increase, decreasing growth.
30 needs go to 42 billion to get thag 40% back but that impractical.
BausTidus@reddit
Outlook is 37.5 billion for next quarter is propably what he is talking about.
From-UoM@reddit
Nvidia outlook has been beaten by huge amounts every time.
Q3 was initially 32.5 billion. Actual was 35.1 billion. Watch Q4 land between 39-40 billion.
Another point is that nvidia expects gaming to decrease due to supply decrease. This lines with the 40 series supply decrease to make room for the RTX 50 series launch in January
b-maacc@reddit
Dolla dolla bills ya’ll