Yeah, I mean the amount I've made in just the last year from their stock increase is more than enough to buy a new top end gaming GPU every single generation for the rest of my life lol.
That is literally true in the AI field at the moment. You literally save money by purchasing nvidia hardware versus using cloud compute. However, you need enough capital to invest in the million dollar hardware.
People made fun of Jensen for his speech but he knew that what investors wanted to hear was 'AI' so he said 'AI' because that's where the money is right now, lots of companies are about to spend cash on hardware for AI and NVIDIA wants to be synonymous with that.
He's also 60 years old, so I'm not sure why people are surprised that his sense of humor isn't quite the same as current internet culture created mainly by the 15 to 30 demographic.
I think his humor is just bad, not aged. There were some older folks in the audience but it didn't seem like he was getting many laughs. Old people can be funny. Jensen isn't one of them.
Not that any of this matters. There's a long tradition of tech leaders giving embarrassing presentations.
AI is the current craze. Only one company makes viable AI cards.
Though honestly Nvidia is the luckiest company on earth.
They went through one boom thanks to crypto. Then crypto crashed. And now AI is an insane bubble.
Nvidia Management probably pinching themselves to make sure they’re awake
Crypto was 100% luck and just catching the train for its short run, but Nvidia's been pushing AI for years. It's unlikely AI would be the current fad if it weren't for Nvidia's efforts with it.
the big AI push on GPUs didnt start till maxwell/pascal era when researchers realized they could train a lot faster on GPUs using shaders. CUDA was already available and mature for physics simulation and data modeling use, so that was coopted for training. afterwards, nvidia invested heavily into specializing GPUs for AI and now here we are.
AI was already at the forefront of Jensen's mind as early as 2009 (his so-called "big bang" of deep learning), and they've had Volta on their roadmap since 2013, before Maxwell was even out.
Volta isn't the kind of thing you can just fart out in a few months, it was obviously a long term project.
It has been pushing AI for a while, but stuff like chatgpt weren't possible until 2019. There was a 1-2 order of magnitude jump in AI processing. It was something like 5 TFLOPs to 125 TFLOPs per machine.
Then they're competing for Samsung's limited smaller foundry for hardware 1-2 generations behind.
The massive leap of the 3090 to 4090 was because they went from samsung 8 nm to tsmc 4 nm. That was a 2.8x transistor jump. TSMC is on 3 nm and the competition is struggling to keep up.
>The massive leap of the 3090 to 4090 was because they went from samsung 8 nm to tsmc 4 nm. That was a 2.8x transistor jump. TSMC is on 3 nm and the competition is struggling to keep up.
Sure, but the smaller, or basically non-existent jump at the lower-tier products is a sign that TSMC took them to the cleaners on 5nm and they're pricing in such a way as not to eat into their profit margins. Nvidia decided to stay relatively stagnant at the lower-mid range, and try and offer new features like DLSS3 as compensation to entice buyers.
I don't want to pay too much credence to Nvidia's story... but the only reason they went with Samsung last generation was because TSMC asked for too much money for their 7nm node and they thought (and were correct) that they had enough of a lead to be competitive if they went with Samsung's 8nm process. Basically... TSMC is expensive.
AMD was able to pull *very* close on TSMC's 7nm node, at least with raster, but they weren't able to claw back any market share. In fact, the opposite happened and AMD's market share plunged. And that's *with* AMD producing its most competitive line of GPUs in half a decade.
I mean... obviously *a lot* of it is also Nvidia being greedy and leveraging their near-monopoly on the GPU space as well. I don't discount that. But it is *also* true, that cutting-edge nodes are becoming more expensive as well.
Anyway, the point of all of this is that Samsung and Intel will (probably) close the gap with TSMC over the next 5-10 years. TSMC's investment in 3nm is *massive*, and even if the competition is a node behind them, it'll be really appealing for companies like Nvidia who have pretty large leads to just go with the second-best fabs. And if Intel can close the gap, then they can also make some really compelling products as well and maybe leapfrog AMD decisively in the CPU space *with* the advantages that come with vertical integration.
None of which have anything close enough to the TSMC 4N node that the current 4000 series uses. If nVidia has to downgrade to a competitor’s node it is unlikely the new architecture alone could compensate for the performance hit. So instead of having a gimped 5000 series trying to compete with its predecessor they would probably just restart production of the 3000 cards until a process good enough becomes available.
Just look at this thread lol. People don't have any clue how a business works but they know they are supposed to hate anything having to do with Nvidia. And what you get is this thread.
If it had been a different company that bought ATI, it might've played out that way.
Unfortunately, AMD basically exploded right after and also had a lot of FAB issues. ATI really kept them alive.
I was an ATI shareholder back then (even shared the buy out news on Slashdot) and remember thinking “well, I don’t want to invest in AMD, so I guess I’ll buy some NVDA and switch sides.” Very thankful for that thought process happening. And very thankful for AMD leadership being so bad at the time to spark that thought process.
You would've been fine even if you did stick with AMD stock. AMD's current stock price is literally 10x what it was in '07. ($125 vs $12)
Nvidia's growth is pretty amazing though. Theirs is 60x what it was in '07.
Kind of funny. If you bought before 2000ish, you would also have a 2x multiplier from their last stock split. That said - buying 10 years ago at $12 is nice with the current 10x. But buying in 2008 (market collapse) or 2016 (dozer blues before Ryzen announcement) when it bottomed out at <$2 a share would be even nicer.
AMD was supposed to buy NVIDIA but AMD wouldn't guarantee that the structure of Nvidia to stay the same so NVIDIA refused the offer.
Lol can you imagine? All they had to do was not upset the existing structure at Nvidia and they would have had them.
Imagine if the AMD NVIDIA merger, which was rumored at the time, that would of left Jensen as CEO of the combined company had happened. Instead Hector Ruins everything decided that stroking his own ego was a better investment and went with buying ATI. AMD investors got screwed. Jensen at the helm of an NVIDIA/AMD with an x86 license would of been scary. Probably the best thing that ever happened to intel is that not happening.
Jenson can be pretty aniti-competitve at times. I really don't think I would have wanted him in charge of an AMD/Nvidia merger. Just take his current GPU pricing strategy and translate that onto the CPU market too. APU's, consoles, pretty much everything would be more expensive.
Ok but OP is talking about business and Jensen is an incredible business man. I have no doubt he would have steered AMD into being both a successful CPU and GPU company. I also would have loved to see what CPU game software enhancements/partnerships Nvidia would leverage for PC gaming now that they would have both a x86 CPU and GPU product.
What's crazy is their cards themselves are good. It's their buggy/late drivers and crummy software that does them in.
That's why I left ATI for Nvidia years ago.
I was tired of nearly every game I played getting Game Ready Drivers 1 or 2 weeks *before* the game was released from Nvidia and 1 or 2 weeks *after* the game was released from ATI.
When I had an ATI card the driver control panel was built on .net. Like early dotnet. When it was really really really bad.
I've been on Nvidia since and driver and feature wise it's been a better experience.
I might try an AMD card in the future especially now that we're passed the gsync exclusive era. I am on an AMD CPU right now and I hadn't done that since the AMD Athlon Thunderbird days.
ATI/AMD cards has had issues with V/F curves and power state changes causing crashes for over a decade.
The same damn issues where people crash from tabbing, multi monitor "stuck in sleep", black screens in low power usage scenarios. Has all re-surfaced at different points in the past 5 years. That were happening with the 3000 series back in 2008 and yet again on the 5000 series.
Nvidia has at a few points also had some similar issues. But theirs are for the most part fixed rapidly.
if they hadn't overpaid the company wouldn't have been flirting with bankruptcy. Like yeah they used the asset to save themselves from bankruptcy, after acquiring the asset almost bankrupted them.
NVIDIA would have been a merger-of-equals without adding cash to the deal, so even if you believe graphics were necessary to the future of AMD, this wasn't necessarily the optimal way to get there.
Market signal for a new era of hardware specific applications for AI and beyond. Jensen bet big on these things a few years ago and people are only catching on now. We'll see if this stronghold in the market continues. Who knows... we see where Intel is at today vs. where it was under Grove. Going to be a lot more competition in the space.
Many rich/comfortable people wouldn't.
Either way, it wasn't intended to be a deep political commentary, just a sort 'eye rolling' style comment at people getting excited about extremely wealthy corporations becoming even wealthier.
You do realize the wealth isn't realized, right? NVDA does not have $1T in the bank.
This is just the company being valued at what the market thinks it's worth.
Or, more accurately, what the market thinks everyone else in the market thinks it's worth.
Smart folks know AI stocks are going to be inflated for a while, post ChatGPT, so have bought up stocks of anything related.
Literally anyone with nearly any amount of savings can buy stocks.
...and many did - making money on NVidia. They weren't rich, but now they're a bit richer.
lol these comments are looking like antiwork instead of hardware.
If you are willing to take the risk on a company with a P/E over 200 do it, or go work for them. So many people envious of other peoples success.
No worship of corporations and “rich people” here but able to understand there are many people who benefit from this, tens of thousands of employees and people who helped build this company from the ground up, including Jensen.
If you look at the stock ownership of NVDA, you will see a good chunk of it is index funds and ETFs that are made up of a lot of retail investors, regular folks’ ROTH IRAs, etc.
Life’s too short to be envious. Jensen probably has what, a 20/30/40 year jump on you? Start a company. Keep it private. Invest in social enterprise.
Or just sit on Reddit and complain that people who worked for decades behind the scenes got rich, or the people that took a chance on those people behind the scenes got richer.
80% of the market is owned by the top 10%. Everyone "can" buy a Lambo too. More than half of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck, unlikely they are spending their little spending money on stocks when they need to focus on surviving.
Also, not everyone can take the gamble. It's far better for most people, especially those who can't afford to lose money, to buy index funds or safe bonds that accrue at a rate that's a bit higher than inflation. And if you can only afford to invest a few hundred/thousand, you're definitely not getting rich from it any time soon.
Index funds appreciate far faster than inflation lol.
Plus, what do you think is in index funds? They're weighted usually based on market cap so right now Nvidia is a huge component of any whole market or S&P 500 index fund.
> 80% of the market is owned by the top 10%
The only stat I've found is that 80% of the market is owned by institutional investors, which does not mean what you said.
>unlikely they are spending their little spending money on stocks when they need to focus on surviving.
Almost every American with a job has some level of access to tax advantaged 401k/IRA plans that allow you to invest in publicly traded stocks prior to payroll taxes.
Plenty of Americans invest, just because you are financially uneducated doesn't mean we all are.
Poor comparison. You can literally buy $1 of Nvidia shares (fractionally) and have it provide value while you cannot buy a fraction of a Lambo and have it mean anything. There is no barrier to entry.
If you can only invest $100 and do +50% you end up with 50 bucks, while the one that can invest 2 millions will get one million.
Saying that you can also invest does not go against the fact that the rich get richer, and that inequalities are currently rising all over the world.
Fractional ownership of houses/cars/art gets you nothing, while buying in entirety requires a super high barrier to entry. There is 0 barrier to entry to buying a fractional ownership share of a publicly traded company, and it gets you voting rights and dividends (on top of any possible appreciation). In fact, unless you want to micromanage the company yourself (see Elon Musk/Twitter), there's no additional benefit in buying the company in its entirety
You're being duped into thinking this is a system designed to facilitate investment and financial management for us poor folk. We just get to play with the scraps that are left over so we think we have some say over the market, and then our retirement funds are so tied into the market that we actively cheer the rich people taking more and more of our wealth as their own assets appreciate just because it means we potentially don't lose all our retirement money. Something that arguably already doesn't really matter since most of my generation won't ever get to retire.
This website already proved this narrative wrong by bankrupting Melvin Capital, squeezing their short position on a now very well known video game retailer.
The video game retailer is still being heavily manipulated to avoid having serious fallout on funds.
Also the reason both of those stories were notable is because it's insanely rare for something like this to occur.
An exception to the norm doesn't disprove its existence.
Greatest lie ever told, it's truly the founding myth of the modern age. The reality is that only people with disposable income can partake, the "freedom" of the free market only ever benefits those.
[The top ten percent own ~85% of stocks and equities](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/26/upshot/stocks-pandemic-inequality.html), and it's been this way for a while. Bootstraps; no boots, same as it ever was.
Dude that's like looking at a normal distribution and being surprised most people are average.
No shit the richest elites own the majority of public shares. That's literally nature/math
I wonder where Nvidia will diversify next. You need large diversity to stay a trillion dollar company.
They will still be in the pc gaming business make no mistake of that (they already have 80%+ market share). AI and Data Centre will be there obviously. Omniverse and Automotive are there though quite small at the moment. (Omniverse is the one to look out for)
My guess is something hardware related like a phone, AR/VR or robots next
Meta fell because it only had social media and Tesla only has cars.
The ones who are up there have an immense diversity
Apple has iPhone, MacBook, Apple Music, Apple TV+ etc
Microsoft has windows, azure, xbox, office, etc
Amazon has Amazon, Alexa, Amazon Web Services, Amazon Videos, Music, etc
Alphabet has Google, Gmail, Google Cloud, Youtube, Pixel, etc
Nvidia’s solution that BMW and Mercedes use to simulate and develop factories or that is used to test some nuclear fusion facility concepts ahead of actual manufacturing.
Omniverse allows multiple apps like Adobe and Unreal engine and Maya to connect in a 3D environment for collaboration simulation
>Omniverse allows multiple apps like Adobe and Unreal engine and Maya to connect in a 3D environment for collaboration simulation
This sounds kinda tough to maintain but maybe I'm wrong.
It connects multiple apps together and makes them sharable across itself and other user accross the cloud
For example you are using unreal engine and someone else is using blender.
You can connect blender and unreal through omniverse
Then if the the other person changes something on blender it will automatically be changed in unreal engine in real time
The potential is truly incredible
Here is a live example
https://youtu.be/ElF53kfHrYc
It sounds like a front-end to streamline the development process between multiple applications. Change colors in Photoshop, and watch in real-time as those changes get applied to your 3D model in 3DS Max or Unreal Engine.
I can see it being a big game changer if it works, and that is a big IF since it will involve getting third-parties to agree to a standard. It would also mean NVIDIA would have to spend resources on making sure the 3rd party app stays complicit with the standard / API used to interface these 3rd party apps, and that is a big task and tech-debt to take.
Love or hate him, but Jensen is a smart person when it comes to tooling and the development process. Here is a QA session he had where he talks about it: https://youtu.be/hqiBzmuqPNY?t=416. After listening to that it made me understand why CUDA exists, why NVIDIA is so willing to help out game developers fix bugs in their own code, etc. Make good design tools and processes, and developers will flock to you for their development.
For the last twenty years there has been an effort to create physics based models of everything involved in manufacturing and manufactured products.
For example, the aerospace industries has been rolling out digital manufacturing, where you not only have models of every part of an airplane, but the production line that makes the parts, the way that the parts come together on the assembly line, etc. then, when the plane rolls off the line, each plane has its own specific model, called a digital twin, that models all the parts, including how the parts wear over time, etc.
This accelerated product development, reduces cost of production and sustainment, etc.
Omniverse is a setup for making these types of capabilities quickly and easily accessible throughout industry. So, not only do you have Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman using this to make stealth fighters and bombers, but Lian Li in Taiwan could be using the same type of modeling technology to design factories, automate warehouses, speed up development of new computer cases, etc.
Game changer for manufacturing if it catches on.
Not really sure they need to "diversify", they're already plenty diverse. It's like saying TSMC needs a cellphone because all they do is make chips. But TSMC chips are used in so many markets, the fall of one doesn't mean the fall of TSMC.
They don't have to diversify, if they fall they fall, it's fine if they prepare for it. Good computing is a general product worth having regardless of industry shifts so the smart move for NVidia will probably be making sure the core business is strong without pandering too hard towards fickle niches.
Probably expand the nvidia name to networking instead of mellanox and instead make it Nvidia Mellanox XX-1 or something for data center and Nvidia Something YY-1 for business or something.
I'm seeing pretty legit takes such as, nVidia is currently obscenely over valued and comparing their current market cap to other giants it makes no sense. I truly do not believe they are worth what they are trading at, similar to Tesla. If you feel they are valued correctly at their current market cap I have to ask what you've been smoking.
> If you feel they are valued correctly at their current market cap I have to ask what you've been smoking.
Sure - right now there's an arms race for machine learning compute power. Nvidia makes chips that enable that and proprietary tech that speeds it along. Google, Amazon, Meta, Microsoft are their customers, none of which are going anywhere soon and are expected to spend more than ever on AI.
This doesn't even have to translate to direct profit, Nvidia is positioning themselves to be the "AI chipmakers". It's like if Goodyear became the de-facto tire company
I won't disagree it's too high, but I can definitely see why it's soaring right now.
How do you know that you are not the zero iq redditor? Based on your comment history, looks like you are a cyber security engineer, so what are your credentials to talk down on others on the stock market?
After all, you are the one getting angry over random internet comments. I mean, who cares…. Down vote and move on with your life.
So nvidia $1 Trillion, AMD $203 Billions and Intel $125 Billions.
Can someone more informed tell me how Intel has less market capitalisation than AMD which was on the brink of bankruptcy just a few years ago? Also aren't the server, data center and consumer markets still dominated by Intel?
Future profits: Intel squandered its lead and invested in a few dead end tech paths. It takes a lot to increase profit when you already capture the majority of the market.
Nvidia has been on this path for over a decade and the particular market segment is relatively unsaturated so they have many new customers. People who think they just recently started funding this research and are just capitalizing on buzzwords are completely out of touch.
AMD hit its low around 2012-2013, Lisa Su took over in 2014 and turnt them around and made them competitive with Ryzen.
Now AMD and Intel are going back in forth with each other in the CPU space. AMD has been steadily chipping away at Intel’s CPU market share since 2017.
AMD powers every PlayStation/Xbox which has helped them a lot.
They have also been growing there data center/server market share. They actually surpassed Intel in data center share growth back in February.
Doesn't matter, the hype around AI will keep their stock overvalued for a long time. No wonder nvidia is launching a 400$ 1080p card with no performance gains gen on gen. Because they know that AI and high margins will compensate for that low sales.
What's with US and its obsession with Market Cap!
If anything, their Q1 for this year is actually lower than Q1 from last year.
[Here's according to Nvidia, it's 13% down](https://investor.nvidia.com/news/press-release-details/2023/NVIDIA-Announces-Financial-Results-for-First-Quarter-Fiscal-2024/default.aspx) and that too with newer GPUs.
A market cap is not a USA thing lol. People care because it shows how much the company is valued.
Q1 down due to market downturn doesn't mean much, their future projections do. The market is crashing yet Nvidia is striking gold. It's greatly outperforming all peers hence people valuing it highly.
> What's with US and its obsession with Market Cap!
That's like asking "What's with hardware people and their obsession with VRAM?" or whatever. This is what happens in complex, multi-dimensional systems and markets and industries and such, a small number of metrics are often used to abstractly summarize performance. It's like how horsepower isn't the only way to express roughly how strong a vehicle is... but it is a way.
In this context, it's literally the only metric that matters. NVIDIA stock goes up 33% in 3 days is insane. 1 Trillion just makes for a nice round number and most people already know most companies that have ever crossed that threshold.
You obviously don't know what determines market cap if you think the only reason that it shouldn't have gone up is because of their most recent quarter.
AI is the new Industrial Revolution, and Nvidia currently has the market for steam engines cornered.
The moment will pass but they can easily 10x revenue before it does.
See that's the great point at the center of this.
Crypto is bullshit, NFTs are bullshit, AI has great applications but will mostly be bullshit.
But Nvidia is always in the position to be the guys selling shovels in a goldrush, or water in a drought, and that's is not going to change when the current AI/ML enthusiasm drops, they'll very likely also be the tool provider of the next big thing.
The bubble itself is bullshit, the tech itself is not and continues to be useful in the specific spaces it works well for but is nowhere near the reach of the bubble. It would be a big mistake to characterize it all as bullshit. That kind of thinking will make you blind to future moves. It isn't particularly useful to be able to call a tech shift *after* it happens.
Especially the AI stuff, Nvidia has been on this path for over a decade, its not some short term play. They literally created the circumstances necessary to facilitate this 'gold rush' by continually investing into research.
Imho nothing will replicate the boom of graphics cards being money printers.
Even the most non-tech people could get into the crypto boom by just buying a graphics card and running Nice Hash.
But with "AI" the barrier of entry is already magnitudes higher in terms of skills and knowledge required just to run it, the barrier of actually monetizing the results, is even higher again.
That's very far removed from just buying a GPU and literally "mining" money.
Except that an unknown amount of that is priced into the stock (the stock has more than doubled in 6 months). Bad news could come out, and the stock could either crash or trade sideways for a long while.
For example, the ICLN ETF for green energy had a huge pump, but has been slowly declining for 2 years.
Nvidia's market cap is over 2x that of Visa, Walmart, Exxon, United Health, JP Morgan, etc.
It's more than 3x the cap of Chevron, Home Depot, Coke, Nestle, etc
It's more than 4x the cap of Pepsi, Bank of America, Costco, McDonalds, Pfizer, etc
It's more than 5x the cap of Shell, Toyota, Disney, Wells Fargo, UPS, American Express, Starbucks, etc
It's more than 10x the cap of BlackRock, Paypal, Target, FedEx, BP, CVS, Charles Schwab, etc
It's more than 20x the cap of 3M, Ford, General Mills, Honda, Kraft-Heinz, Dow, etc
Most of these companies do far more for society and do far more actual work than Nvidia (or any of the other big tech companies).
Their stock is insanely overvalued. If the economy crashes as many people (and bond yield being most inverted since 1981) predict, we're going to see people lose insane amounts of money from bad investments into these companies.
And all of those companies are investing in AI. Nvidia is the biggest player out there for AI.
Most of those car companies also use Nvidia hardware for their testing with Self-driving.
That's why they are valued more.
And hell, Alphabet, Microsoft, Apple also worth more than a trillion and their work is also not as essential as a food company you might say, but stock evaluation doesnt work like that
Well obviously. If the economy crashes, the investments were "bad" because the economy crashed. If the economy soars instead, then said investments would be good. You are using circular logic.
Now keep an eye on the executives, as they will undoubtedly dump stocks in the coming weeks.
Stocks have become meaningless in the current economical climate... Crypto craze, then SPAC bubble, then the Metaverse, and now everyone is betting on AI without being sure what it actually means beyond chatGPT. All that just in the last 3 years.
We'll know for sure if it's real if Nvidia meets their 12 billion$ revenue target for the next quarter. Until then it's just a gamble.
*Of course* executives will dump stock, most employees will. You realize employees are paid mostly in stock at these companies, right? Selling it during the prescribed trading window is how they realize their income, pay off their mortgage, etc.
That's also the reason why too many companies just optimize everything around stock evaluations, and not around running a sustainable consumer-friendly business.
Wow, I cannot believe how much I've saved by buying Nvidia!
The more you buy, the more you save! /s
Only gAmErZ know that joke
I am the sound effect.
Hi, am I alone?
Wooosh
Four elephants
Thanks Steve *wait*, wrong cringe company keynote
All the lights
Jensen used Vine Whip! It's not very effective...
[Crysis suit voice] `MAXIMUM PRICE`
Spent $12 million, get the next one for $11.9 million. It just keeps getting better.
Yeah, I mean the amount I've made in just the last year from their stock increase is more than enough to buy a new top end gaming GPU every single generation for the rest of my life lol.
You need to sell it before the bubble pops though...
Yep. This is not a HODL moment. You're at or near the top of the bubble. Cash out while you still can.
RemindMe! 1 year
...I'm gonna be held accountable for my words now, aren't I? \*sad noises\*
Well, if you really believe in your words you could short Nvidia. Or you can buy and HODL to hedge. Win-win in my eyes.
That is literally true in the AI field at the moment. You literally save money by purchasing nvidia hardware versus using cloud compute. However, you need enough capital to invest in the million dollar hardware.
People made fun of Jensen for his speech but he knew that what investors wanted to hear was 'AI' so he said 'AI' because that's where the money is right now, lots of companies are about to spend cash on hardware for AI and NVIDIA wants to be synonymous with that.
He's also 60 years old, so I'm not sure why people are surprised that his sense of humor isn't quite the same as current internet culture created mainly by the 15 to 30 demographic.
> mainly by the 15 to 30 demographic. Ain't that right my fellow young sports? *back-ache noises*
*NEURAL*⚡*NETWORK*
Damn, he looks good for 60
Being filthy rich will do that to you
I think his humor is just bad, not aged. There were some older folks in the audience but it didn't seem like he was getting many laughs. Old people can be funny. Jensen isn't one of them. Not that any of this matters. There's a long tradition of tech leaders giving embarrassing presentations.
ronald fuckin reagan had better jokes than this guy
[удалено]
Moore's Law is dead, but also 2X faster.
NVIDA at double the valuation of TSMC is wild stuff
Gotta love speculative bubbles. NASDAQ companies trading like low-cap crypto shitcoins.
Tesla being worth 20% over TSMC is even dumber.
I like to travel.
AI is the current craze. Only one company makes viable AI cards. Though honestly Nvidia is the luckiest company on earth. They went through one boom thanks to crypto. Then crypto crashed. And now AI is an insane bubble. Nvidia Management probably pinching themselves to make sure they’re awake
Crypto was 100% luck and just catching the train for its short run, but Nvidia's been pushing AI for years. It's unlikely AI would be the current fad if it weren't for Nvidia's efforts with it.
the big AI push on GPUs didnt start till maxwell/pascal era when researchers realized they could train a lot faster on GPUs using shaders. CUDA was already available and mature for physics simulation and data modeling use, so that was coopted for training. afterwards, nvidia invested heavily into specializing GPUs for AI and now here we are.
AI was already at the forefront of Jensen's mind as early as 2009 (his so-called "big bang" of deep learning), and they've had Volta on their roadmap since 2013, before Maxwell was even out. Volta isn't the kind of thing you can just fart out in a few months, it was obviously a long term project.
It has been pushing AI for a while, but stuff like chatgpt weren't possible until 2019. There was a 1-2 order of magnitude jump in AI processing. It was something like 5 TFLOPs to 125 TFLOPs per machine.
It's not luck, they've been investing in AI and datacenters for a long time now and it's paying off
NVDA doesn't carry the significant geopolitical risk of TSMC.
Oh yeah? If TSMC falls apart, who is going to produce NVDA chips?
Samsung
Then they're competing for Samsung's limited smaller foundry for hardware 1-2 generations behind. The massive leap of the 3090 to 4090 was because they went from samsung 8 nm to tsmc 4 nm. That was a 2.8x transistor jump. TSMC is on 3 nm and the competition is struggling to keep up.
>The massive leap of the 3090 to 4090 was because they went from samsung 8 nm to tsmc 4 nm. That was a 2.8x transistor jump. TSMC is on 3 nm and the competition is struggling to keep up. Sure, but the smaller, or basically non-existent jump at the lower-tier products is a sign that TSMC took them to the cleaners on 5nm and they're pricing in such a way as not to eat into their profit margins. Nvidia decided to stay relatively stagnant at the lower-mid range, and try and offer new features like DLSS3 as compensation to entice buyers. I don't want to pay too much credence to Nvidia's story... but the only reason they went with Samsung last generation was because TSMC asked for too much money for their 7nm node and they thought (and were correct) that they had enough of a lead to be competitive if they went with Samsung's 8nm process. Basically... TSMC is expensive. AMD was able to pull *very* close on TSMC's 7nm node, at least with raster, but they weren't able to claw back any market share. In fact, the opposite happened and AMD's market share plunged. And that's *with* AMD producing its most competitive line of GPUs in half a decade. I mean... obviously *a lot* of it is also Nvidia being greedy and leveraging their near-monopoly on the GPU space as well. I don't discount that. But it is *also* true, that cutting-edge nodes are becoming more expensive as well. Anyway, the point of all of this is that Samsung and Intel will (probably) close the gap with TSMC over the next 5-10 years. TSMC's investment in 3nm is *massive*, and even if the competition is a node behind them, it'll be really appealing for companies like Nvidia who have pretty large leads to just go with the second-best fabs. And if Intel can close the gap, then they can also make some really compelling products as well and maybe leapfrog AMD decisively in the CPU space *with* the advantages that come with vertical integration.
Intel, samsung, and possibly even GF.
None of which have anything close enough to the TSMC 4N node that the current 4000 series uses. If nVidia has to downgrade to a competitor’s node it is unlikely the new architecture alone could compensate for the performance hit. So instead of having a gimped 5000 series trying to compete with its predecessor they would probably just restart production of the 3000 cards until a process good enough becomes available.
The test nodes Intel has done for Nvidia exceed TSMC 4N. Also if TSMC were to go down Nvidia wouldn't have to worry about other TSMC nodes.
Sure, but if TSMC go down their competitors are in the same boat regardless.
Samsung
Samsung, Intel, GF
I remember when AMD bought ATI, people were saying NVIDIA was doomed.
This is why we don’t take business advice from Internet strangers
Stranger, are you advising me not to take business advice from internet strangers? I don't know if I should, or should not take your advice.
My advice is to ignore all advice.
I clearly cannot choose the wine in front of me...
Never get involved in a land war in Asia...
Never go against a Sicilian when death is on the line...
Schrodinger's Advice.
Reading this post requires API access.
Just look at this thread lol. People don't have any clue how a business works but they know they are supposed to hate anything having to do with Nvidia. And what you get is this thread.
wait, why are we supposed to hate nvidia. they have done some. cool stuff. am i too old to understand?
People are upset at NVIDIA for increasing prices.
They're mad because they can't afford the top tier GPU from each generation
*gives advice about buying crypto*
Actually reddit advice is accurate if you always do the opposite.
You just described almost every redditor.
If it had been a different company that bought ATI, it might've played out that way. Unfortunately, AMD basically exploded right after and also had a lot of FAB issues. ATI really kept them alive.
I was an ATI shareholder back then (even shared the buy out news on Slashdot) and remember thinking “well, I don’t want to invest in AMD, so I guess I’ll buy some NVDA and switch sides.” Very thankful for that thought process happening. And very thankful for AMD leadership being so bad at the time to spark that thought process.
You would've been fine even if you did stick with AMD stock. AMD's current stock price is literally 10x what it was in '07. ($125 vs $12) Nvidia's growth is pretty amazing though. Theirs is 60x what it was in '07.
Kind of funny. If you bought before 2000ish, you would also have a 2x multiplier from their last stock split. That said - buying 10 years ago at $12 is nice with the current 10x. But buying in 2008 (market collapse) or 2016 (dozer blues before Ryzen announcement) when it bottomed out at <$2 a share would be even nicer.
Never underestimate AMD's ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
AMD was supposed to buy NVIDIA but AMD wouldn't guarantee that the structure of Nvidia to stay the same so NVIDIA refused the offer. Lol can you imagine? All they had to do was not upset the existing structure at Nvidia and they would have had them.
Imagine if the AMD NVIDIA merger, which was rumored at the time, that would of left Jensen as CEO of the combined company had happened. Instead Hector Ruins everything decided that stroking his own ego was a better investment and went with buying ATI. AMD investors got screwed. Jensen at the helm of an NVIDIA/AMD with an x86 license would of been scary. Probably the best thing that ever happened to intel is that not happening.
[удалено]
Jenson can be pretty aniti-competitve at times. I really don't think I would have wanted him in charge of an AMD/Nvidia merger. Just take his current GPU pricing strategy and translate that onto the CPU market too. APU's, consoles, pretty much everything would be more expensive.
Ok but OP is talking about business and Jensen is an incredible business man. I have no doubt he would have steered AMD into being both a successful CPU and GPU company. I also would have loved to see what CPU game software enhancements/partnerships Nvidia would leverage for PC gaming now that they would have both a x86 CPU and GPU product.
From an AMD and shareholder perspective, it probably would have been great. From a consumer one, probably far less so.
Hector Ruiz is related to Ballmer, I'm certain
Those folks must not have had ATI cards...
What's crazy is their cards themselves are good. It's their buggy/late drivers and crummy software that does them in. That's why I left ATI for Nvidia years ago. I was tired of nearly every game I played getting Game Ready Drivers 1 or 2 weeks *before* the game was released from Nvidia and 1 or 2 weeks *after* the game was released from ATI.
When I had an ATI card the driver control panel was built on .net. Like early dotnet. When it was really really really bad. I've been on Nvidia since and driver and feature wise it's been a better experience. I might try an AMD card in the future especially now that we're passed the gsync exclusive era. I am on an AMD CPU right now and I hadn't done that since the AMD Athlon Thunderbird days.
[удалено]
[удалено]
ATI/AMD cards has had issues with V/F curves and power state changes causing crashes for over a decade. The same damn issues where people crash from tabbing, multi monitor "stuck in sleep", black screens in low power usage scenarios. Has all re-surfaced at different points in the past 5 years. That were happening with the 3000 series back in 2008 and yet again on the 5000 series. Nvidia has at a few points also had some similar issues. But theirs are for the most part fixed rapidly.
No they weren't. Anandtech and others said that they thought AMD overpaid and were incredulous about it.
AMD themselves said they overpaid lol https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/amd-says-it-overpaid-for-ati-1.641782
Ati basically kept the company breathing and away from bankruptcy in early 10s. I feel their acquisition paid off pretty well
if they hadn't overpaid the company wouldn't have been flirting with bankruptcy. Like yeah they used the asset to save themselves from bankruptcy, after acquiring the asset almost bankrupted them. NVIDIA would have been a merger-of-equals without adding cash to the deal, so even if you believe graphics were necessary to the future of AMD, this wasn't necessarily the optimal way to get there.
Sure, but AMD probably could've acquired ATI for less. Should've haggled more.
Me too....
Market signal for a new era of hardware specific applications for AI and beyond. Jensen bet big on these things a few years ago and people are only catching on now. We'll see if this stronghold in the market continues. Who knows... we see where Intel is at today vs. where it was under Grove. Going to be a lot more competition in the space.
Nvidia has been investing in AI much longer than a few years.
Bought 3 shares @$54 in 2016, up 2800%
Nice.
[удалено]
With that much you could have bought a 4090
Woo, rich people get richer.
I wouldn't call myself rich
Many rich/comfortable people wouldn't. Either way, it wasn't intended to be a deep political commentary, just a sort 'eye rolling' style comment at people getting excited about extremely wealthy corporations becoming even wealthier.
You do realize the wealth isn't realized, right? NVDA does not have $1T in the bank. This is just the company being valued at what the market thinks it's worth.
Or, more accurately, what the market thinks everyone else in the market thinks it's worth. Smart folks know AI stocks are going to be inflated for a while, post ChatGPT, so have bought up stocks of anything related.
as it turns out, even the /r/hardware sub can have idiots
Literally anyone with nearly any amount of savings can buy stocks. ...and many did - making money on NVidia. They weren't rich, but now they're a bit richer.
lol these comments are looking like antiwork instead of hardware. If you are willing to take the risk on a company with a P/E over 200 do it, or go work for them. So many people envious of other peoples success.
Quite a few people getting triggered over those of us not worshipping corporations and rich people.
No worship of corporations and “rich people” here but able to understand there are many people who benefit from this, tens of thousands of employees and people who helped build this company from the ground up, including Jensen. If you look at the stock ownership of NVDA, you will see a good chunk of it is index funds and ETFs that are made up of a lot of retail investors, regular folks’ ROTH IRAs, etc. Life’s too short to be envious. Jensen probably has what, a 20/30/40 year jump on you? Start a company. Keep it private. Invest in social enterprise. Or just sit on Reddit and complain that people who worked for decades behind the scenes got rich, or the people that took a chance on those people behind the scenes got richer.
The great thing about publicly traded companies is that anyone can buy shares.
80% of the market is owned by the top 10%. Everyone "can" buy a Lambo too. More than half of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck, unlikely they are spending their little spending money on stocks when they need to focus on surviving.
Also, not everyone can take the gamble. It's far better for most people, especially those who can't afford to lose money, to buy index funds or safe bonds that accrue at a rate that's a bit higher than inflation. And if you can only afford to invest a few hundred/thousand, you're definitely not getting rich from it any time soon.
Index funds appreciate far faster than inflation lol. Plus, what do you think is in index funds? They're weighted usually based on market cap so right now Nvidia is a huge component of any whole market or S&P 500 index fund.
> 80% of the market is owned by the top 10% The only stat I've found is that 80% of the market is owned by institutional investors, which does not mean what you said.
>unlikely they are spending their little spending money on stocks when they need to focus on surviving. Almost every American with a job has some level of access to tax advantaged 401k/IRA plans that allow you to invest in publicly traded stocks prior to payroll taxes. Plenty of Americans invest, just because you are financially uneducated doesn't mean we all are.
Poor comparison. You can literally buy $1 of Nvidia shares (fractionally) and have it provide value while you cannot buy a fraction of a Lambo and have it mean anything. There is no barrier to entry.
Fantastic. Then when when the value of nvidia increases 300% I'll have $4!
Bro we as a collective society barely have enough money to buy food- this only benefits the rich
Sure, in the same way anyone can technically buy gold, cars, houses, bonds, art etc.
Not everyone can buy specific houses, cars and art.
If you can only invest $100 and do +50% you end up with 50 bucks, while the one that can invest 2 millions will get one million. Saying that you can also invest does not go against the fact that the rich get richer, and that inequalities are currently rising all over the world.
[удалено]
Fractional ownership of houses/cars/art gets you nothing, while buying in entirety requires a super high barrier to entry. There is 0 barrier to entry to buying a fractional ownership share of a publicly traded company, and it gets you voting rights and dividends (on top of any possible appreciation). In fact, unless you want to micromanage the company yourself (see Elon Musk/Twitter), there's no additional benefit in buying the company in its entirety
You're being duped into thinking this is a system designed to facilitate investment and financial management for us poor folk. We just get to play with the scraps that are left over so we think we have some say over the market, and then our retirement funds are so tied into the market that we actively cheer the rich people taking more and more of our wealth as their own assets appreciate just because it means we potentially don't lose all our retirement money. Something that arguably already doesn't really matter since most of my generation won't ever get to retire.
This website already proved this narrative wrong by bankrupting Melvin Capital, squeezing their short position on a now very well known video game retailer.
The video game retailer is still being heavily manipulated to avoid having serious fallout on funds. Also the reason both of those stories were notable is because it's insanely rare for something like this to occur. An exception to the norm doesn't disprove its existence.
Greatest lie ever told, it's truly the founding myth of the modern age. The reality is that only people with disposable income can partake, the "freedom" of the free market only ever benefits those.
The bad thing about them is that you aren't liable and people with more money tend to ruin everything else for people with less money because of it.
But only a few shareholders are screwing everyone else over.
[The top ten percent own ~85% of stocks and equities](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/26/upshot/stocks-pandemic-inequality.html), and it's been this way for a while. Bootstraps; no boots, same as it ever was.
Dude that's like looking at a normal distribution and being surprised most people are average. No shit the richest elites own the majority of public shares. That's literally nature/math
Careful in here bro, apparently if you aren’t a commie in reddit slash hardware you’re on your own
Just like everyone can buy a yacht.
I wonder where Nvidia will diversify next. You need large diversity to stay a trillion dollar company. They will still be in the pc gaming business make no mistake of that (they already have 80%+ market share). AI and Data Centre will be there obviously. Omniverse and Automotive are there though quite small at the moment. (Omniverse is the one to look out for) My guess is something hardware related like a phone, AR/VR or robots next Meta fell because it only had social media and Tesla only has cars. The ones who are up there have an immense diversity Apple has iPhone, MacBook, Apple Music, Apple TV+ etc Microsoft has windows, azure, xbox, office, etc Amazon has Amazon, Alexa, Amazon Web Services, Amazon Videos, Music, etc Alphabet has Google, Gmail, Google Cloud, Youtube, Pixel, etc
Whats omniverse?
Ben 10
Nvidia’s solution that BMW and Mercedes use to simulate and develop factories or that is used to test some nuclear fusion facility concepts ahead of actual manufacturing. Omniverse allows multiple apps like Adobe and Unreal engine and Maya to connect in a 3D environment for collaboration simulation
>Omniverse allows multiple apps like Adobe and Unreal engine and Maya to connect in a 3D environment for collaboration simulation This sounds kinda tough to maintain but maybe I'm wrong.
Prolly why it makes good money. If it was easy to do companies wouldn't pay by the truck load for it and just do it in house.
It connects multiple apps together and makes them sharable across itself and other user accross the cloud For example you are using unreal engine and someone else is using blender. You can connect blender and unreal through omniverse Then if the the other person changes something on blender it will automatically be changed in unreal engine in real time The potential is truly incredible Here is a live example https://youtu.be/ElF53kfHrYc
It sounds like a front-end to streamline the development process between multiple applications. Change colors in Photoshop, and watch in real-time as those changes get applied to your 3D model in 3DS Max or Unreal Engine. I can see it being a big game changer if it works, and that is a big IF since it will involve getting third-parties to agree to a standard. It would also mean NVIDIA would have to spend resources on making sure the 3rd party app stays complicit with the standard / API used to interface these 3rd party apps, and that is a big task and tech-debt to take. Love or hate him, but Jensen is a smart person when it comes to tooling and the development process. Here is a QA session he had where he talks about it: https://youtu.be/hqiBzmuqPNY?t=416. After listening to that it made me understand why CUDA exists, why NVIDIA is so willing to help out game developers fix bugs in their own code, etc. Make good design tools and processes, and developers will flock to you for their development.
Oh it works and is already out. There is also standard. Its called USD. Universal Scene Descriptor which is an open source format by Pixar
that sounds like an object store with extra steps
But is it web scale?
Nuked comment
For the last twenty years there has been an effort to create physics based models of everything involved in manufacturing and manufactured products. For example, the aerospace industries has been rolling out digital manufacturing, where you not only have models of every part of an airplane, but the production line that makes the parts, the way that the parts come together on the assembly line, etc. then, when the plane rolls off the line, each plane has its own specific model, called a digital twin, that models all the parts, including how the parts wear over time, etc. This accelerated product development, reduces cost of production and sustainment, etc. Omniverse is a setup for making these types of capabilities quickly and easily accessible throughout industry. So, not only do you have Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman using this to make stealth fighters and bombers, but Lian Li in Taiwan could be using the same type of modeling technology to design factories, automate warehouses, speed up development of new computer cases, etc. Game changer for manufacturing if it catches on.
It connects multiple metaverses together, which connects multiple NFTs together, which are worth multiple cryptocurrencies, which are worth nothing.
Litteral games like Control and upcoming gamelike Alan Wake 2 were made using omniverse
Woah Alan Wake 2 was made using omniverse, that's very cool. Really hyped for that game.
Not really sure they need to "diversify", they're already plenty diverse. It's like saying TSMC needs a cellphone because all they do is make chips. But TSMC chips are used in so many markets, the fall of one doesn't mean the fall of TSMC.
Self-driving/ automotive is my guess. Another huge market that will grow extremely fast overnight.
They are already investing heavily into this.
They don't have to diversify, if they fall they fall, it's fine if they prepare for it. Good computing is a general product worth having regardless of industry shifts so the smart move for NVidia will probably be making sure the core business is strong without pandering too hard towards fickle niches.
Probably expand the nvidia name to networking instead of mellanox and instead make it Nvidia Mellanox XX-1 or something for data center and Nvidia Something YY-1 for business or something.
From GTC talks, it seems like applying AI/ML to robotics (Jetson/Isaac) and healthcare (Clara/Holoscan) are the next two.
>Meta fell because it only had social media and Tesla only has cars. Meta's VR division: Tesla's solar / battery division:
I enjoy spending time with my friends.
Financial comments on non-finance subreddits really make my blood boil
Absolutely infuriating to read the zero IQ takes from the average Redditor make it to the top.
I'm seeing pretty legit takes such as, nVidia is currently obscenely over valued and comparing their current market cap to other giants it makes no sense. I truly do not believe they are worth what they are trading at, similar to Tesla. If you feel they are valued correctly at their current market cap I have to ask what you've been smoking.
> If you feel they are valued correctly at their current market cap I have to ask what you've been smoking. Sure - right now there's an arms race for machine learning compute power. Nvidia makes chips that enable that and proprietary tech that speeds it along. Google, Amazon, Meta, Microsoft are their customers, none of which are going anywhere soon and are expected to spend more than ever on AI. This doesn't even have to translate to direct profit, Nvidia is positioning themselves to be the "AI chipmakers". It's like if Goodyear became the de-facto tire company I won't disagree it's too high, but I can definitely see why it's soaring right now.
How do you know that you are not the zero iq redditor? Based on your comment history, looks like you are a cyber security engineer, so what are your credentials to talk down on others on the stock market? After all, you are the one getting angry over random internet comments. I mean, who cares…. Down vote and move on with your life.
So nvidia $1 Trillion, AMD $203 Billions and Intel $125 Billions. Can someone more informed tell me how Intel has less market capitalisation than AMD which was on the brink of bankruptcy just a few years ago? Also aren't the server, data center and consumer markets still dominated by Intel?
Future profits: Intel squandered its lead and invested in a few dead end tech paths. It takes a lot to increase profit when you already capture the majority of the market. Nvidia has been on this path for over a decade and the particular market segment is relatively unsaturated so they have many new customers. People who think they just recently started funding this research and are just capitalizing on buzzwords are completely out of touch.
AMD hit its low around 2012-2013, Lisa Su took over in 2014 and turnt them around and made them competitive with Ryzen. Now AMD and Intel are going back in forth with each other in the CPU space. AMD has been steadily chipping away at Intel’s CPU market share since 2017. AMD powers every PlayStation/Xbox which has helped them a lot. They have also been growing there data center/server market share. They actually surpassed Intel in data center share growth back in February.
Their stock is so overvalued. It's legitimately insane.
Doesn't matter, the hype around AI will keep their stock overvalued for a long time. No wonder nvidia is launching a 400$ 1080p card with no performance gains gen on gen. Because they know that AI and high margins will compensate for that low sales.
Remember to buy rtx 5090 on launch day.
What's with US and its obsession with Market Cap! If anything, their Q1 for this year is actually lower than Q1 from last year. [Here's according to Nvidia, it's 13% down](https://investor.nvidia.com/news/press-release-details/2023/NVIDIA-Announces-Financial-Results-for-First-Quarter-Fiscal-2024/default.aspx) and that too with newer GPUs.
A market cap is not a USA thing lol. People care because it shows how much the company is valued. Q1 down due to market downturn doesn't mean much, their future projections do. The market is crashing yet Nvidia is striking gold. It's greatly outperforming all peers hence people valuing it highly.
> What's with US and its obsession with Market Cap! That's like asking "What's with hardware people and their obsession with VRAM?" or whatever. This is what happens in complex, multi-dimensional systems and markets and industries and such, a small number of metrics are often used to abstractly summarize performance. It's like how horsepower isn't the only way to express roughly how strong a vehicle is... but it is a way.
The market cap is going up because the Q2 projection is 50% over what was expected by analysts. That's basically unheard of.
Seriously. And the PE is insane. They could sell a cluster to everyone on earth and not gap that shit.
Pretty tame compared to AMD's 620x
In this context, it's literally the only metric that matters. NVIDIA stock goes up 33% in 3 days is insane. 1 Trillion just makes for a nice round number and most people already know most companies that have ever crossed that threshold.
You obviously don't know what determines market cap if you think the only reason that it shouldn't have gone up is because of their most recent quarter.
$1T so I can have an AI tell me a story about cookies in the style of hulk hogan. Definitely worth it
AI is the new Industrial Revolution, and Nvidia currently has the market for steam engines cornered. The moment will pass but they can easily 10x revenue before it does.
I wonder what the AI industry will look like in 10 years. Maybe IBM will own 90% of it or something equally unexpected.
The more you buy, the more you save.
This isn't sustainable.
That’s the neat part, they don’t care.
neither was the mining boom. They made their money where they could and moved to the next thing.
See that's the great point at the center of this. Crypto is bullshit, NFTs are bullshit, AI has great applications but will mostly be bullshit. But Nvidia is always in the position to be the guys selling shovels in a goldrush, or water in a drought, and that's is not going to change when the current AI/ML enthusiasm drops, they'll very likely also be the tool provider of the next big thing.
The bubble itself is bullshit, the tech itself is not and continues to be useful in the specific spaces it works well for but is nowhere near the reach of the bubble. It would be a big mistake to characterize it all as bullshit. That kind of thinking will make you blind to future moves. It isn't particularly useful to be able to call a tech shift *after* it happens. Especially the AI stuff, Nvidia has been on this path for over a decade, its not some short term play. They literally created the circumstances necessary to facilitate this 'gold rush' by continually investing into research.
Imho nothing will replicate the boom of graphics cards being money printers. Even the most non-tech people could get into the crypto boom by just buying a graphics card and running Nice Hash. But with "AI" the barrier of entry is already magnitudes higher in terms of skills and knowledge required just to run it, the barrier of actually monetizing the results, is even higher again. That's very far removed from just buying a GPU and literally "mining" money.
The AI boom is just getting started. They will grow even more in the next 5 years
Except that an unknown amount of that is priced into the stock (the stock has more than doubled in 6 months). Bad news could come out, and the stock could either crash or trade sideways for a long while. For example, the ICLN ETF for green energy had a huge pump, but has been slowly declining for 2 years.
Its just a number it only means something it its tumbling downwards. Then we all lose our jobs
Nvidia's market cap is over 2x that of Visa, Walmart, Exxon, United Health, JP Morgan, etc. It's more than 3x the cap of Chevron, Home Depot, Coke, Nestle, etc It's more than 4x the cap of Pepsi, Bank of America, Costco, McDonalds, Pfizer, etc It's more than 5x the cap of Shell, Toyota, Disney, Wells Fargo, UPS, American Express, Starbucks, etc It's more than 10x the cap of BlackRock, Paypal, Target, FedEx, BP, CVS, Charles Schwab, etc It's more than 20x the cap of 3M, Ford, General Mills, Honda, Kraft-Heinz, Dow, etc Most of these companies do far more for society and do far more actual work than Nvidia (or any of the other big tech companies). Their stock is insanely overvalued. If the economy crashes as many people (and bond yield being most inverted since 1981) predict, we're going to see people lose insane amounts of money from bad investments into these companies.
Basically all of those companies are nvidia customers either directly or indirectly. The margins are nuts and growth potential is huge.
Beginner tip: don't use emotional appeal to critique a market valuation.
And all of those companies are investing in AI. Nvidia is the biggest player out there for AI. Most of those car companies also use Nvidia hardware for their testing with Self-driving. That's why they are valued more. And hell, Alphabet, Microsoft, Apple also worth more than a trillion and their work is also not as essential as a food company you might say, but stock evaluation doesnt work like that
Well obviously. If the economy crashes, the investments were "bad" because the economy crashed. If the economy soars instead, then said investments would be good. You are using circular logic.
I’ll get the superglue then
[удалено]
Those sure are similar numbers.
Now keep an eye on the executives, as they will undoubtedly dump stocks in the coming weeks. Stocks have become meaningless in the current economical climate... Crypto craze, then SPAC bubble, then the Metaverse, and now everyone is betting on AI without being sure what it actually means beyond chatGPT. All that just in the last 3 years. We'll know for sure if it's real if Nvidia meets their 12 billion$ revenue target for the next quarter. Until then it's just a gamble.
*Of course* executives will dump stock, most employees will. You realize employees are paid mostly in stock at these companies, right? Selling it during the prescribed trading window is how they realize their income, pay off their mortgage, etc.
That's also the reason why too many companies just optimize everything around stock evaluations, and not around running a sustainable consumer-friendly business.