ATRIUMsearch → argument graph
MechanismVideo · 51:11 — 52:41

Even if rival AI chips (ASICs/accelerators) were given away for free, a customer would still choose Nvidia because Nvidia's superior performance-per-watt generates far more revenue from the same fixed power budget, making the opportunity cost of using a lower-performance free chip too high.

Jensen argues Nvidia's performance-per-watt advantage (e.g., 30x Blackwell-vs-Hopper) is so large that under a fixed power budget, a competitor's chip would need to be free — and still wouldn't be worth it, because the revenue lost from lower tokens-per-watt vastly exceeds any price discount. ✦ AI generated

Jensen Huang · BG2 Pod · 2025-09-26 · original ↗

starts at this moment · 51:11

Elicited by

How could it possibly be that you were pricing your competitor's chips at zero given the expense of your chips and it still is a better bet?

Let's say you were able to secure two more gigawatts of power... your performance or tokens per watt was twice as high as somebody else's token per watt because you did deep and extreme code design, and my performance was much higher per unit energy, then my customer can produce twice as much revenues from their data center. And who doesn't want twice as much revenues?... Black Wall's 30 times. So you've got to give up 30x revenues in that one gigawatt... even if they gave it to you for free, your opportunity cost is so insanely high. You would always choose the best perf per watt.

verbatim transcript · starts at 51:11

Transcript · around this moment

50:53>> right? >> Yeah. >> So, we've taken a crack at kind of the math on that. But walk us through your math because I think for people who don't spend as much time here that it just doesn't compute. How could it possibly be that you were pricing your competitor's chips at zero given the expense of your chips and it still is a better bet? There's two ways to think

51:11about it. Um, one way is um, uh, let's just think about it from a perspective of revenues. >> Yes. >> Okay. So everybody's power limited and let's say uh you were able to secure two more gigawatts of power. >> Well, that two gawatts of power you would like to have translate to revenues. >> Yes. >> So your performance or tokens per watt was twice as high as somebody else's

51:40token per watt because you did I did deep and extreme code design, >> right? and my performance was much higher per unit energy, >> then my customer can produce twice as much revenues >> from their data center. >> And who doesn't want twice as much revenues? and and and if somebody gave them a 15% discount, >> you know, the difference between our gross margins, which is called the 75

52:08points, and somebody else's gross margins, call it the 50 to 65 points, is not so much as to make up for the 30 times difference between Black Wall and Hopper. Let's pretend Hopper Hopper is an amazing chip, an amazing system. Let's pretend somebody else's ASIC is Hopper. >> Yeah. >> Black Wall's 30 times. So you've got to give up 30x revenues in that one gigawatt. >> Mhm.

52:34>> It's too much to give up. So even if they gave it to you for free, you you you only have 2 gigawatts to work with. Your opportunity cost is so insanely high. >> You would always choose the best perf per watt. So I heard this from one of the CFOs at one of the hyperscalers that given the performance improvement right that's coming out of your chips again

52:57precisely to that point tokens per per gig um and power being the limiting factor right that they had to upgrade uh to the new cycle so when you look ahead at Ruben at Ruben Ultra at Fineman >> does that trajectory continue >> we're building what six seven chips a year now >> yeah and and each one >> that's part of that system. >> That's right. And those that system

Around this claim