Nvidia explains its ambitious shift from graphics leader to AI infrastructure provider

Bob O'Donnell

Posts: 110   +2
Staff member
The big picture: A big challenge in analyzing a rapidly growing company like Nvidia is making sense of all the different businesses it participates in, the numerous products it announces, and the overall strategy it's pursuing. Following the keynote speech by CEO Jensen Huang at the company's annual GTC Conference this year, the task was particularly daunting. As usual, Huang covered an enormous range of topics over a lengthy presentation and, frankly, left more than a few people scratching their heads.

However, during an enlightening Q&A session with industry analysts a few days later, Huang shared several insights that suddenly made all the various product and partnership announcements he covered, as well as the thinking behind them, crystal clear.

In essence, he said that Nvidia is now an AI infrastructure provider, building a platform of hardware and software that large cloud computing providers, tech vendors, and enterprise IT departments can use to develop AI-powered applications.

Needless to say, that's an extraordinarily far cry from its role as a provider of graphics chips for PC gaming, or even from its efforts to help drive the creation of machine learning algorithms. Yet, it unifies several seemingly disparate announcements from recent events and provides a clear indication of where the company is heading.

Nvidia is moving beyond its origins and its reputation as a semiconductor design house into the critical role of an infrastructure enabler for the future world of AI-powered capabilities – or, as Huang described it, an "intelligence manufacturer."

In his GTC keynote, Huang discussed Nvidia's efforts to enable efficient generation of tokens for modern foundation models, linking these tokens to intelligence that organizations will leverage for future revenue generation. He described these initiatives as building an AI factory, relevant to an extensive range of industries.

While it's a bit of a heady vision, the signs of an emerging information-driven economy – and the efficiencies AI brings to traditional manufacturing are starting to become clear. From businesses built solely on AI services (think ChatGPT) through the robotic manufacturing and distribution of traditional goods, there's little doubt we're moving into an exciting new economic era.

In this context, Huang extensively outlined how Nvidia's latest offerings facilitate faster and more efficient token creation. He initially addressed AI inference, commonly considered simpler than the AI training processes that initially brought Nvidia into prominence.

However, Huang argued that inference, particularly when used with new chain-of-thought reasoning models such as DeepSeek R1 and OpenAI's o1, will require approximately 100 times more computing resources than current one-shot inference methods. In other words, there's no reason to worry that more efficient large language models will reduce the demand for computing infrastructure and we're still in the early stages of the AI factory infrastructure buildout.

One of Huang's most important yet least understood announcements was a new software tool called Nvidia Dynamo, designed to enhance the inference process for advanced models.

Dynamo, an upgraded version of Nvidia's Triton inference server software, dynamically allocates GPU resources for various inference stages, such as prefill and decode, each with distinct computing requirements. It also creates dynamic information caches, managing data efficiently across different memory types.

Operating similarly to Docker's orchestration of containers in cloud computing, Dynamo intelligently manages resources and data necessary for token generation in AI factory environments. Nvidia has dubbed Dynamo the "OS of AI factories." Practically speaking, Dynamo enables organizations to handle up to 30 times more inference requests with the same hardware resources.

Of course, it wouldn't be GTC if Nvidia didn't also have chip and hardware announcements and there were plenty this time around. Huang presented a roadmap for future GPUs, including an update to the current Blackwell series called Blackwell Ultra (GB300 series), offering enhanced onboard HBM memory for improved performance.

He also unveiled the new Vera Rubin architecture, featuring a new Arm-based CPU called Vera and a next-generation GPU named Rubin, each incorporating significantly more cores and advanced capabilities. Huang even hinted at the generation beyond that – named after mathematician Richard Feynman – projecting Nvidia's roadmap into 2028 and beyond.

During the subsequent Q&A session, Huang explained that revealing future products well in advance is crucial for ecosystem partners, enabling them to prepare adequately for upcoming technological shifts.

Huang also emphasized several partnerships announced at this year's GTC. The significant presence of other tech vendors demonstrated their eagerness to participate in this growing ecosystem. On the compute side, Huang explained that fully maximizing AI infrastructure required advancements in all traditional computing stack areas, including networking and storage.

To that end, Nvidia unveiled new silicon photonics technology for optical networking between GPU-accelerated server racks and discussed a partnership with Cisco. The Cisco partnership enables Cisco silicon in routers and switches designed for integrating GPU-accelerated AI factories into enterprise environments, along with a shared software management layer.

For storage, Nvidia collaborated with leading hardware providers and data platform companies, ensuring their solutions could leverage GPU acceleration, thus expanding Nvidia's market influence.

And finally, building on the diversification strategy, Huang introduced more work that the company is doing for autonomous vehicles (notably a deal with GM) and robotics, both of which he described as part of the next big stage in AI development: physical AI.

Nvidia knows that being an infrastructure and ecosystem provider means that they can benefit both directly and indirectly as the overall tide of AI computing rises, even as their direct competition is bound to increase

Nvidia has been providing components to automakers for many years now and, similarly, has had robotics platforms for several years as well. What's different now, however, is that they're being tied back to AI infrastructure that can be used to better train the models that will be deployed into those devices, as well as providing the real-time inferencing data that's needed to operate them in the real world.

While this tie back to infrastructure is arguably a relatively modest advance, in the bigger context of the company's overall AI infrastructure strategy, it does make more sense and helps tie together many of the company's initiatives into a cohesive whole.

Making sense of all the various elements that Huang and Nvidia unveiled at this year's GTC isn't simple, particularly because of the firehose-like nature of all the different announcements and the much broader reach of the company's ambitions. Once the pieces do come together, however, Nvidia's strategy becomes clear: the company is taking on a much larger role than ever before and is well-positioned to achieve its ambitious objectives.

At the end of the day, Nvidia knows that being an infrastructure and ecosystem provider means that they can benefit both directly and indirectly as the overall tide of AI computing rises, even as their direct competition is bound to increase. It's a clever strategy and one that could lead to even greater growth for the future.

Bob O'Donnell is the founder and chief analyst of TECHnalysis Research, LLC a technology consulting firm that provides strategic consulting and market research services to the technology industry and professional financial community. You can follow him on Twitter

Permalink to story:

 
Yes, but Nvidia is demanding too much from its clients—who also happen to be its biggest competition. It seems like Nvidia is taking its current success for granted.

Isn’t much of this success due to OpenAI? That app skyrocketed in popularity, and everyone wanted a piece of the action. That’s what triggered the AI gold rush, which, in turn, made Nvidia so successful.

But why did everyone rush into AI? Meta, Google, Apple… If they decide Nvidia's pricing is too high, this massive success could fade quickly. After all, GPUs have been around for decades—Nvidia isn’t the only player in the game. So why does it act like it’s discovered the holy grail and assume it can generate $500 billion in revenue?

Does Nvidia really know that all these companies will continue pouring billions into AI? Has AI even proven itself profitable enough to guarantee ROI?

Take Samsung, for example. It introduced AI-powered features in its latest smartphones—a compelling product, no doubt—but AI alone won’t make Samsung the market leader. So why is Nvidia betting everything on it?
 
Last edited:
At what point will nVidia no longer sell Gaming GPU's? I'm sure the idea is to make gaming an A.I. GPU must have, however, does that mean the average consumer can afford to purchase entry level A.I. based GPUs in the near future?

A good tech article would be how much a gaming system with top level mainstream GPU and specs has costed over the past 20 years (maybe each 5 years) compared to building/buying the same top level mainstream GPU specs system today along with some projections for next few years as best as we know it.
 
Yes, but Nvidia is demanding too much from its clients—who also happen to be its biggest competition. It seems like Nvidia is taking its current success for granted.

Isn’t much of this success due to OpenAI? That app skyrocketed in popularity, and everyone wanted a piece of the action. That’s what triggered the AI gold rush, which, in turn, made Nvidia so successful.

But why did everyone rush into AI? Meta, Google, Apple… If they decide Nvidia's pricing is too high, this massive success could fade quickly. After all, GPUs have been around for decades—Nvidia isn’t the only player in the game. So why does it act like it’s discovered the holy grail and assume it can generate $500 billion in revenue?

Does Nvidia really know that all these companies will continue pouring billions into AI? Has AI even proven itself profitable enough to guarantee ROI?

Take Samsung, for example. It introduced AI-powered features in its latest smartphones—a compelling product, no doubt—but AI alone won’t make Samsung the market leader. So why is Nvidia betting everything on it?
This is a problem created by venture capitalism. The potential for a massive economic disruption from AI is huge and everyone is will spend billions to be the best. "the only people who made money during a gold rush were the people selling picks and pans to the miners." nVidia is selling the tools people need to participate in the gold rush.

However, we have a massive debt problem in the US, currently. Most companies don't buy this hardware, they finance it through the banks. The massive loans that these megacorperations are using to build their AI farms are starting to go south because of current market conditions. The economy is running out of money and I think after the cancelations for nVidia's massive blackwell AI servers, they are trying to diversify and show off AI in different ways. You'll still need the massive server farms to train AI models, but they're "marketing" new uses for AI in the hopes that people will buy up more of their servers.

So the end game for these companies is to forget about the ROI right now and spend as much money to be the first company with a truly disruptive AI product. Once someone is first to market, the others will quickly go bankrupt and the winner can buy up their assets and IP at auction for a very steep discount.

And AI has gotten considerably better over the last year, but I still think we're 5 years away from AI actually being able to replace jobs. And, oh boy, if there isn't some type of economic solution to the billions of jobs that a true, quality AI will replace then we'll have people rebelling in the streets. It's always been my opinion that the true risk of AI isn't from the AI killing us, it's being the catalyst for us to kill each other in a civil war like event caused by economic depression the likes of which has never been seen.
 
At what point will nVidia no longer sell Gaming GPU's? I'm sure the idea is to make gaming an A.I. GPU must have, however, does that mean the average consumer can afford to purchase entry level A.I. based GPUs in the near future?

A good tech article would be how much a gaming system with top level mainstream GPU and specs has costed over the past 20 years (maybe each 5 years) compared to building/buying the same top level mainstream GPU specs system today along with some projections for next few years as best as we know it.
localized AI is going to become a big thing in the next few years. It's far too expensive for companies to do it in the cloud like it's currently being done, so I see nVidia trying to sell consumers on hardware to run LLMs locally. The megacorps have already slowed down their purchases of new nVidia hardware to train their models on. Was it DeepSeek that showed the world that you don't need tons of data and computer hardware to make a good model?

We're going to start seeing some of these AI companies go under, restructure or get bought up. They were just a tool to steal money from venture capitalists and private equity funds for awhile, but we if want to make real progress on real AI, we need people tweeking how the data is processed. We can't just throw more data and hardware at the problem anymore. We need to treat AI as a specialized field and get real leadership to make progress. I can't want to see what all the tech-stock bros move onto next once the reality of progessing AI sets in. Maybe they'll move back to crypto or something.
 
The megacorps have already slowed down their purchases of new nVidia hardware to train their models on. Was it DeepSeek that showed the world that you don't need tons of data and computer hardware to make a good model?
Can we stop perpetuating this myth already? If anything, DeepSeek spurred more investment in Nvidia buildouts.
 
Can we stop perpetuating this myth already? If anything, DeepSeek spurred more investment in Nvidia buildouts.
DeepSeek showed the world that we didn't need better AI hardware or more Data, it showed them that we need better programmers. If anything, DeepSeek helped nVidia sales by showing that you don't need hyperscaler level AI farms to make a good AI model and lowering the cost of entry.

Most AI "programs" are just exotic money laundering schemes and fractions goto the actual hardware. What's a few hundred million for hardware when you have several executives paying themselves billions of dollars a year? You end up having AI startups that take in tens of millions in startup money, the owner pays himself several million to hire some guy in India for a few grand to develop an AI model for and then he sells his company to private equity firm or venture capitalist. Or, heck, get picked up my M$, google or any of the other big ones.

That's literally the business model and it's been going on for a few years now. The only way you can ignore it is if you're willfully ignorant in the practice.
 
I read gaming GPU revenue is only 25% of their business now when it was 75% a decade ago. Still a good chunk but hardly the priority now…..
 
I guess game devs should finally get the idea that THE new top line GPU for games now is Ryzen 8700G...

P.S. I would surely be glad if devs dig that and do a miracle with their products, and make them run on iGPU with the same perfomance and graphics. Would be nuts to be able to throw out of a window all these megatowers and 600W gpu's, and get a nice, little nuk box for gaming.
 
DeepSeek showed the world that we didn't need better AI hardware or more Data, it showed them that we need better programmers. If anything, DeepSeek helped nVidia sales by showing that you don't need hyperscaler level AI farms to make a good AI model and lowering the cost of entry.

Most AI "programs" are just exotic money laundering schemes and fractions goto the actual hardware. What's a few hundred million for hardware when you have several executives paying themselves billions of dollars a year? You end up having AI startups that take in tens of millions in startup money, the owner pays himself several million to hire some guy in India for a few grand to develop an AI model for and then he sells his company to private equity firm or venture capitalist. Or, heck, get picked up my M$, google or any of the other big ones.

That's literally the business model and it's been going on for a few years now. The only way you can ignore it is if you're willfully ignorant in the practice.

Deepseek was and still is a scam.
 
It's a strong position to be in.

Nvidia's processors serve as the backbone for the vast ecosystem they offer beyond just raw computing power.

It's no longer just about the GPU—it's about the seamless integration between the CPU, GPU, networking, and software.

Now, they’ve also developed proprietary technology for connecting server racks, further strengthening their dominance. Nvidia has a knack for linking each piece of the chain together, creating an ecosystem where their solution becomes the only viable choice.

While competitors have CPUs and GPUs, they lack Nvidia’s ability to integrate these components into a cohesive system that outperforms the competition.

It’s fascinating how this all came together simply because they were first to market when the AI boom took off.

Others may have server racks, but without a fully integrated hardware stack, they just don't have the same edge.

Will be interesting to see if this lack of choices in the industry will actually affect the adoption of AI.
 
I guess game devs should finally get the idea that THE new top line GPU for games now is Ryzen 8700G...

P.S. I would surely be glad if devs dig that and do a miracle with their products, and make them run on iGPU with the same perfomance and graphics. Would be nuts to be able to throw out of a window all these megatowers and 600W gpu's, and get a nice, little nuk box for gaming.

It's not impossible to make very good games that run on iGPUs like the 780M. RDR2 is a beautiful, dynamic game that runs well on modest hardware.


 
It's a strong position to be in.

Nvidia's processors serve as the backbone for the vast ecosystem they offer beyond just raw computing power.

It's no longer just about the GPU—it's about the seamless integration between the CPU, GPU, networking, and software.

Now, they’ve also developed proprietary technology for connecting server racks, further strengthening their dominance. Nvidia has a knack for linking each piece of the chain together, creating an ecosystem where their solution becomes the only viable choice.

While competitors have CPUs and GPUs, they lack Nvidia’s ability to integrate these components into a cohesive system that outperforms the competition.

It’s fascinating how this all came together simply because they were first to market when the AI boom took off.

Others may have server racks, but without a fully integrated hardware stack, they just don't have the same edge.

Will be interesting to see if this lack of choices in the industry will actually affect the adoption of AI.
We must remember that it's rarely about who has "best" products. Somehow Intel still dominates CPU market despite Intel has had absolutely nothing competitive on servers since 2019, nothing competitive on desktops since 2020. Only thing they are even remotely competitive is laptops but that's just because AMD has not been interested about them.

Even if Nvidia has "best" solution etc, it hardly matters. It's more about Nvidia having mind share, not that it actually have best products.

Also good to remember that Sony, Microsoft and Apple no longer will have any large scale co-operation with Nvidia. Ever.
 
It's not impossible to make very good games that run on iGPUs like the 780M. RDR2 is a beautiful, dynamic game that runs well on modest hardware.
My laptop serves as a gaming laptop when I'm away from hope for extended periods of time. Has Intel Iris XE graphics which is the iGPU version of Arc Alchemist on a 12th gen mobile i7. It's similar in performance to the 760M which means I get perfectly acceptable performance at 1080P high so long as the games are 5+ years old. ESO and EvE still play fine at 1080P, skyrim and F4 have no issues. It barely runs CP2077 at 720 low, talking 20FPS, but that's another issue.

Anyway, there are plenty of fantastic games in my library that run at max settings 1080p and it's perfect slice of home if I'm out of town for extended periods of time.

Developers really should be targeting iGPUs more, esspecially with the rise of handhelds. There are some iGPUs out there that GTX1080 levels of performance and that was considered the first "4k gaming card" but, that was only 4k60.
 
So Nvidia went from ‘we make your games look pretty’ to ‘we are the nervous system of the AI-powered future economy.’ This is like watching your high school band geek turn into a rockstar CEO.
 
Greed at its finest. Chase the BIG buck. As AI softens, (which it will do) nVidia can always make GPUs for the pc. Again.

Remember, boysngirls, nVidia doesn't owe you anything, Money has no Morals, and Greed is Good.
 
Yes, but Nvidia is demanding too much from its clients—who also happen to be its biggest competition. It seems like Nvidia is taking its current success for granted.

Isn’t much of this success due to OpenAI? That app skyrocketed in popularity, and everyone wanted a piece of the action. That’s what triggered the AI gold rush, which, in turn, made Nvidia so successful.

But why did everyone rush into AI? Meta, Google, Apple… If they decide Nvidia's pricing is too high, this massive success could fade quickly. After all, GPUs have been around for decades—Nvidia isn’t the only player in the game. So why does it act like it’s discovered the holy grail and assume it can generate $500 billion in revenue?

Does Nvidia really know that all these companies will continue pouring billions into AI? Has AI even proven itself profitable enough to guarantee ROI?

Take Samsung, for example. It introduced AI-powered features in its latest smartphones—a compelling product, no doubt—but AI alone won’t make Samsung the market leader. So why is Nvidia betting everything on it?

Well said.
 
A good tech article would be how much a gaming system with top level mainstream GPU and specs has costed over the past 20 years (maybe each 5 years) compared to building/buying the same top level mainstream GPU specs system today along with some projections for next few years as best as we know it.

As someone else pointed out one route is to have more AI capable hardware locally so that games can use more AI generated/supported content.

Another route, which I consider most likely, is that they will try to move customers to a subscription based model, a.k.a. Geforce NOW. This way they can use the silicon for many customers/gamers and make more money out of it. It also pushes gamers and content providers (game publishers) into more dependency from Nvidia. And at the same they also cut the middle man (board makers) and his profit, or what is left of that.

It will of course all depend on having sufficiently low latency network connections. (Yet local frame generation can help to keep frame rate - not performance - up.)
 
Back