Big Tech needs to generate $600 billion in annual revenue to justify AI hardware expenditure

Skye Jacobs

Posts: 55   +2
Staff
The big picture: The tech industry is riding a new high amid a frenzy fueled by AI. Big Tech companies have been plowing huge sums to build out the necessary infrastructure to meet what they perceive demand will be for these products in the coming years. One analyst warns however that the industry needs to stop and consider whether the actual revenue generated by AI will be enough to support these investments.

Analyst at Sequoia Capital, David Cahn, noted last September that there was a very significant gap between the revenue expectations implied by the AI infrastructure build-out and the actual revenue growth in the AI ecosystem. He estimated that the annual AI revenue required to pay for their investments was $200 billion.

Fast forward almost a year – a period during which Nvidia has become the most valuable company in the world – and that number has climbed to $600 billion, annually.

This is how Cahn came to his conclusion. He started with the premise that for every $1 spent on a GPU, roughly $1 needs to be spent on energy costs to run the GPU in a data center. In Q4 2023, Nvidia's data center run-rate revenue forecast was $50 billion. He took that run-rate revenue forecast and multiplied it by 2x to reflect the total cost of AI data centers.

He determined that the implied data center AI spend was $100 billion. Then he multiplied that number by 2x again to reflect a 50% gross margin for the end-user of the GPU.

The final calculation is $200 billion in lifetime revenue needed to be generated by these GPUs to pay back the upfront capital investment. And this does not include any margin for the cloud vendors, Cahn said – for them to earn a positive return, the total revenue requirement would be even higher.

By Q4 2024, Nvidia's data center run-rate revenue forecast is predicted to be $150 billion, making its implied data center AI spend $300 billion and the AI revenue required for payback $600 billion.

That is a big hole to fill especially when it is not clear whether the capital expenditure build out is linked to true end-customer demand or is being built in anticipation of future end-customer demand.

Furthermore Cahn is projecting that AI revenue required for payback will eventually reach $100 billion, pointing to Nvidia's recently announced B100 chip, which will have 2.5x better performance for only 25% more cost. "I expect this will lead to a final surge in demand for Nvidia chips," says Cahn. "The B100 represents a dramatic cost vs. performance improvement over the H100, and there will likely be yet another supply shortage as everyone tries to get their hands on B100s later this year."

Ultimately Cahn thinks the expenditures will be worth it in the end. GPU capex is like building railroads, he said, meaning eventually the trains will come, along with the destinations.

Certainly executives from major tech companies have been expressing confidence in AI's potential to drive revenue growth with Big Tech's reported revenue growth rates in Q1 much higher than anticipated just over two quarters ago. Microsoft, for example, reported a 7-point increase in AI contributions to Azure's growth of 31%. That said, this analyst urges the industry to consider who wins and who loses as these investments continue to be made.

"There are always winners during periods of excess infrastructure building," he said. "Founders and company builders will continue to build in AI – and they will be more likely to succeed, because they will benefit both from lower costs and from learnings accrued during this period of experimentation."

Meanwhile, if his forecast actually materializes, it will be primarily the investors that are harmed, he said.

Permalink to story:

 
I'm sorry, but population of developed World is shrinking. Their disposable income, adjusted for inflation, also.
They will have to find a way to sell ChatGPT services and artificial cats to Afghani and Sudanese farmers somehow.
LOL.
AI, very much like Bitchain before it, was a promising technology that was turned into bubble by greedy Wall Street speculators (and Jensen Huang).
 
They need to finance this themselves and not put it on the users, except for those that WANT to pay for it .....
 
Until the rest of the world realize that Ai it's just another turd, Nvidia will cash out. This will leave their customers with the hardware and the money spent. Or worse in debt to some bank. Just how much Ai the world needs?

Ai, Ai, Ai caramba!
 
That would equate to getting about $2,000 per person per year in the U.S., or about $75 per person per year in the world. Nah, I don't see that happening.

The "new" $20/month subscription for gen AI services that created much interest in Wall Street will fizzle out as software and hardware catch up to make distributed (local) gen AI readily available (it already is for gamers, anyways, albeit it is quite limited compared to subscription offerings at the moment). There are plenty of non-local but still free offerings, also, and more are being created all the time. People already have subscription fatigue, it would surprise me to see that revenue model grow or even stay steady.

Most of the gen AI revenue will have to come from business to business transactions. Businesses have the most use for it, anyways, in terms of automating all kinds of activities. It seems to me that there's a redistribution of wealth going on in the business world as a result of this, spurred by an initial infusion of new subscription cash, but I expect that infusion to decline.
 
Need to sell more customer data. It is fully achievable with a brain implant that reads everything a wearer thinks.
Now the hard part. How to convince people to have these amazing readers installed?
 
I'm sorry, but population of developed World is shrinking. Their disposable income, adjusted for inflation, also.
They will have to find a way to sell ChatGPT services and artificial cats to Afghani and Sudanese farmers somehow.
I think this is the last thought people from their circle have. If or when this thought crosses their mind, it would already be too late.
 
I don't think anyone really knows how to these calculations, as really is so complex, synergistic, cannibalistic etc- and lots of unquantifiable benefits at moment.

Talking about sales is kind of a misnomer, when probably most emphasises at moment is on reducing expenses

As for people saying AI is BS, would you have said that about super computers for last 50 years and their super modelling?

Look at mobile phones, Microsoft lost trillions in potential revenue.

These companies Apple , Meta , Alphabet , MS etc are money machines, they have to invest somewhere, their shareholders demand it.

No one knows how this is going to play out, but the naysayers on AI are just so wrong
Better drugs, better personalised medicine, better modelling to see if good intentions to a problem , doesn't have unexpected consequences

What's the cost of staying out of the race?

Ignoring Business to Business and businesses reducing cost of production.
Look at say what people spent on Call of Duty.

People want the power of AI to be accessible to them , even though the CloseAI group wants a monopoly ( OpenAI ) - so they can model their gardens , see how it will look in the 4 seasons and the future years .

To craft an optimise education program for their kids that is efficient and productive
Input: using Mickey Rodent and Donald Duck, have them explain quantum gravity in a way my 3 year old will understand.

Short term ROI may not be the aim here over strategic long term positioning
 
As the AI war carries on, don't worry the CIA will make sure the U.S. has all the AI funding it needs. Reminds me of the Cold War Operation Gladio and it's unholy alliance with the Mafia and Nazis. But today it's probably with the drug cartels.
 
No one knows how this is going to play out, but the naysayers on AI are just so wrong
Better drugs, better personalised medicine, better modelling to see if good intentions to a problem , doesn't have unexpected consequences
it is true that nobody knows how this will pan out. But honestly, I am not optimistic about it. Better drugs you said? The reality is that big pharma won't share confidential drug research openly for AI to train on, and because you don't know what sorts of unthinkable stuff they add to your med. So how is the AI going to train, and if I put it differently, would you be the first in the line to be tested on this drug?

And again, better modelling to see if good intentions to a problem, doesn't have unexpected consequences. You can model all the possible outcome that you want, but you still can only choose one which really isn't what the AI is going to be 100% correct. It is ultimately still a "guesstimate". Training based on yours or everybody's experience can yield too many results for it be meaningful. If anything, it may end up being too much information.
 
it is true that nobody knows how this will pan out. But honestly, I am not optimistic about it. Better drugs you said? The reality is that big pharma won't share confidential drug research openly for AI to train on, and because you don't know what sorts of unthinkable stuff they add to your med. So how is the AI going to train, and if I put it differently, would you be the first in the line to be tested on this drug?

And again, better modelling to see if good intentions to a problem, doesn't have unexpected consequences. You can model all the possible outcome that you want, but you still can only choose one which really isn't what the AI is going to be 100% correct. It is ultimately still a "guesstimate". Training based on yours or everybody's experience can yield too many results for it be meaningful. If anything, it may end up being too much information.

I agree , who knows, but these monster corps want to be in on the action.
As for drugs , protein folding, Google's deep mind has already done quite a bit.
Same as guesstimating all the compounds that could be made etc.
synthesists are very skilled and experienced in finding the best process ( less steps/cost/time/energy etc ). The problem also when that skill lost to AI
Took top dispatchers years to handle a taxi fleet to get best efficiency less wait for customer, and more time paying customers for drivers . Now probably just an algorithm

The black box syndrome - give it some inputs, take outputs , no idea what it did- Is going to become a problem, but people are working of AI that can interrogate the black box
 
I believe the current AI costs are investments that may or may not pan out. The current costs are huge, but if technology and models keep advancing, then, maybe in a few years the overall cost of deploying AI for some tasks will be economically feasible and the investments will be recouped over the coming years. Even if it works, some companies will not survive. Is this any different than the crypto craze? At least AI promises to solve some problems, increase productivity whereas crypto promised and delivered what?
 
I'm sorry, but population of developed World is shrinking. Their disposable income, adjusted for inflation, also.
They will have to find a way to sell ChatGPT services and artificial cats to Afghani and Sudanese farmers somehow.
LOL.
AI, very much like Bitchain before it, was a promising technology that was turned into bubble by greedy Wall Street speculators (and Jensen Huang).
What does the population from the developing world have to do with making money from AI? I doubt companies are spending money they don't have on products they don't know how to make money from. I don't think Jensen Huang has anything to do with the Chinese company BitChain.
 
I think people miss a crucial component in that. The most expensive aspect of AI is quality datasets. You can scrape as much as you want ...but you won't find copyright free, quality content online.
 
Translation: The Tech Industry needs to generate $600 Billion annually through AI to line NVidia's pockets.

IMO - Taint gonna happen especially when AI is just regurgitating the giant pile of crap it eats on a daily basis.
The "new" $20/month subscription for gen AI services that created much interest in Wall Street will fizzle out as software and hardware catch up to make distributed (local) gen AI readily available (it already is for gamers, anyways, albeit it is quite limited compared to subscription offerings at the moment). There are plenty of non-local but still free offerings, also, and more are being created all the time. People already have subscription fatigue, it would surprise me to see that revenue model grow or even stay steady.
Absolutely. I'd say that you can bet that if the sheep don't bleat their way to AI, those subscription rates will rise well beyond what people are willing to pay for AI.

Maybe this is good, however, maybe the computing infrastructure that is being built will actually be used for something useful. I'm hopeful, but highly skeptical that it will especially because of the energy it takes to power it. IMO, its more wasteful than cryptocoin mining.
 
I don't think anyone really knows how to these calculations,
I don't know about that. There are BOINC projects that do drug prediction that have been going for a long time. For example - https://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/

It would not surprise me if AI, in the course of trying to find anything new, revisits predictions that have already been made and at least somewhat tested, in an effort to find compounds that are statistically relevant, but have not been considered relevant enough, so far, by humans to explore further. That is something that is much less complicated to do, IMO.
 
I don't know about that. There are BOINC projects that do drug prediction that have been going for a long time. For example - https://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/

It would not surprise me if AI, in the course of trying to find anything new, revisits predictions that have already been made and at least somewhat tested, in an effort to find compounds that are statistically relevant, but have not been considered relevant enough, so far, by humans to explore further. That is something that is much less complicated to do, IMO.

Yeah will be interesting AI revisiting stuff . If my wording was unclear, I meant how to value the return on future AI, They gave some figure 600 Billion a year. I trust that as much as I trust a report by Deloittes by a CEO to justify a decision. Maybe the fugure is revelant in 5 to 10 years when everything settles. But so many imponderables, and all the mega corps want a dog in the race or two /

It's foolish to think humans have a monopoly on AI . Everytime a machine can do something, that something is then deemed to not be intelligence by many people.
We do have emotions and focus though. The curiosity is give AI a body with sensations, needs, and imperative to stay alive. Given that the brain has an overwhelming desire to process data , remove all sensations , people will go into a wide awake dream state, so brain can keep on braining
 
I'm sorry, but population of developed World is shrinking. Their disposable income, adjusted for inflation, also.
They will have to find a way to sell ChatGPT services and artificial cats to Afghani and Sudanese farmers somehow.
LOL.
AI, very much like Bitchain before it, was a promising technology that was turned into bubble by greedy Wall Street speculators (and Jensen Huang).
IDK, it really never was that promising -- more like over promising and under delivering!
 
This is funny, I just asked Copilot to rewrite my post and instead it gave me this lecture. Big brother is watching and listening too. LOL

It's understandable to feel skeptical about the significant investments in AI. However, the spending isn't just about chatbots or image generation. AI is being integrated into various sectors to enhance efficiency, improve decision-making, and drive innovation. For instance, the U.S. federal government has significantly increased its AI-related spending, particularly in defense, to leverage AI for strategic advantages.
 
Back