(www.reuters.com)
There's a release from DoE about it: https://www.energy.gov/articles/fact-sheet-department-energy...
That's a horrible amount of gas energy generation.
https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/openai-in-talks-t... has more details. The whole campus build could be as much as $500B.
Would that be the most expensive single thing ever built? The ISS cost around $150B and is commonly said to be the most expensive single item, but that does include running costs.
If shit hits the fan, the companies collapse, then Nvidia gets their money from the investors anyways.
If Nvidia sells hardware for $100B with 75% cross margin, and provides $50 billion in backstop for that same hardware, it would be still be nicely profitable deal ($25B) if the backstop capacity would be a total write-off recovering $0. Reselling that capacity in some large discount below already low backstop price would increase the profits.
It's all those pension funds, sovereign wealth funds and Softbank getting into that $500 billion deal that will be hurt.
Others have played it fairly smart in terms of insulating potential issues.
Basically what i am saying is maybe there is a better buyer than openai.
It is not the first time, either; the capital cycle will prevail.
You pay Apple for a MacBook, Apple uses it to develop a better MacBook.
What goes wrong is leverage. We haven't seen much hint of the 10x leverage kind of deals that brought down the house in 2008.
A Toyota dealership arranges a loan for you. Through a bank for a used vehicle, sometimes through Toyota itself for new cars.
A house builder will routinely take on part of the loan providing burden to get some of the interest.
Even someone selling you their thirty year old house will often provide seller financing.
You may have ideological opinions against this, which is fine. There are billions of people, for example that are fundamentally opposed to the idea of interest. But like it or not, this is how it has worked for the last ~500ish years.
It's almost a given that whatever is frontier intelligence today will run on a potato in a few years.
I'm pointing out that there's no known information theoretic constraint about the impossibility of frontier AI models being improved to fit/run on a small GPU.
Please do not make up plausible sounding science facts.
There are constraints of course- training takes way longer.
People will claim to have “enough” even though they already have the equivalent of last years capabilities locally.
the biggest winner in that scenario would be ai providers, who suddenly have a capable model that they can serve much more efficiently. and the incumbents have a whole lot of compute. wouldn't anthropic and openAI just start offering that open weights model at prices that nobody else could compete with?
RTX 5070 prices go up ~N times. Nvidia makes more money because it's easier to make these things than it's to make a GB300.
Even if it did, it still doesn't make much economic sense running a model locally vs on a datacentre.
For example, I managed to just about squeeze a Q2 quant of Qwen 3.7 27b on my 9070XT. I get around 60tps decode (slightly faster prefill). _but_ it uses 300W of power to do so. At UK electricity rates of 30c/kWh this works out at something like 42c/MTok. I can get far far better models on openrouter cheaper than that, plus I'm not horrendously constrained on context length.
Like even if you run it in a datacenter in this scenario, you could do it on a cheap GPU instance in Azure, you still wouldnt need OpenAI or Anthropic specific clouds.
>uses 300W of power to do so.
There are plenty of people with phat electricity pipes in their on prem server rooms that have been vacated for cloud. Companies who want the benefits of AI but dont want the risk of sending their data to foreign API endpoints.
If it does happen then NVidia will sell a lot of 5070s though!