• Pasta Dental@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Which means they’re in a bubble because Nvidia’s total assets (85B$) value is less than half of Intel’s (205B$). I refuse to believe that the “potential for growth” of Nvidia is worth anywhere close to 120B$ in actual value even in the next 5 years. I see only two things here: either Intel is undervalued, or Nvidia is overvalued. I think it’s both. When that bubble bursts it’s going to hit very hard for a lot of people because it’s the same thing as the other big tech companies (apple google meta etc) are all valued based on predictions and magic when the companies that have an actual intrinsic value are worth less

    • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Intel is lagging behind AMD and NVidia with no sign of catching up. Meanwhile NVIDIA has a monopoly on AI.

      It’s no wonder NVIDIA is worth far more now.

      • Pasta Dental@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Intel have shown signs of catching up by putting out a better iGPU than AMD’s latest and greatest for laptop chips in certain games and most compute tasks. They’ve also put out one of the best laptop chips last month, they consume next to nothing while still having decent performance but go on I guess

        • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          49 minutes ago

          Aren’t the best handhelds using AMD iGPU’s? The MSI Claw didn’t exactly leave a great mark. The new Radeon 890m looks pretty killer for its power efficiency.

          • Pasta Dental@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 minutes ago

            The cpus I’m talking about have released about a month ago, but until very recently AMD were the only good options for handhelds

  • narc0tic_bird@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Crazy how quickly NVIDIA went up. I wonder if they’ll crash down just as fast should the AI hype either die off or shift to other manufacturers (Intel, AMD etc.) or in-house solutions (ex. Apple Intelligence).

    • Zorsith
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      5 hours ago

      I just want to get a graphics card for less than the rest of a rig combined… shits ridiculous, and AMD doesn’t seem to be even trying to compete anymore

      • Dudewitbow@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        3 hours ago

        they do compete, its just users weigh DLSS and Raytracing far more than they should, and devalue VRam in long term situations

        for example a 7900 GRE cost about the same as a 4070, but more people will buy the 4070 regardless

        • Zorsith
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 hours ago

          I definitely do like raytracing, sadly. I’m more interested in graphics and immersion in a setting/story in a game than competitiveness or ultra-high FPS. Water reflections and mirrors just look absolutely gorgeous to me.

          I’m definitely strongly considering AMD regardless for my next build, as I’d like to switch to Linux fully at some point.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        3 hours ago

        Eh, I got an AMD GPU somewhat recently and it meets all my expectations. I’m not too interested in RTX or compute, and they have a really good value on raster performance.

    • daddy32@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      44 minutes ago

      Apple is not there yet, its models were trained on Google hardware. Though I am surprised it wasn’t Nvidia hardware.

  • toothbrush
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    94
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Yes, go on, let NVIDIA buy intel. Let them buy AMD too. What could go wrong. I love monopolies! /s

    • Gerudo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      6 hours ago

      The thing that bothers me when people say “oh its unrealized gains, it’s not real money” is that they use those unrealized gains as collateral for loans of real money. They effectively ARE that rich.

      • asdfasdfasdf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        Banks don’t take this into consideration when assessing collateral?

        Lol, who downvotes a question?

        • Gerudo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 hours ago

          There are completely different rules when you are that rich. Look at Trump, he bankrupted how many businesses and banks STILL lined up to loan him money. At the very top, your trading favors and power.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Take what into account? They basically look at current valuations and offer loans up to some fraction of that amount.

          And that’s generally the way the ultra-rich operate, they don’t actually sell anything, they just borrow against their assets. They punt the can down the road until they die, at which point those unrealized gains get stepped up in basis for those who inherit it. If you have enough stock assets, you can service the debt with the capital gains you’re forced to realize (i.e. dividends).

          So the bank sees someone with $100B in assets asking for a $10M loan or whatever, and they’re completely happy to offer that, because even if the stock gets cut in half, he can still pay the debt.

        • superkret@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          3 hours ago

          With money they loan from a bank, using whatever they bought with the previous loan as collateral.
          It’s credit all the way down.

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 hours ago

            And that ends when they die, at which point the stocks get stepped up in basis so the taxes are almost completely avoided. Or they structure their debts in such a way that certain entities can be bankrupted without impacting the actual assets.

            Things get wild when you’re in the 0.1% and above.

    • NIB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      8 hours ago

      You dont need to sell your stocks to access that wealth. You can use that as collateral to take loans or exchange stocks.

    • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      7 hours ago

      He can turn a significant chunk of this value into actual dollars, even without selling the stock. This line of reasoning that execs’ worth is not what it seems to be because it’s based on share value is constantly used to discount their wealth and argue against acting on wealth inequality.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Exactly. At the very least, he could go get a margin loan at relatively low cost (like 5%) compared to the tax burden of cashing out (20% or more). And that’s just using publicly available numbers, a billionaire can get a lot cheaper loans than that.