Nvidia Breaks the $1 Trillion Market Cap Threshold

Nvidia Logo
(Image credit: Nvidia)

Nvidia became the first chipmaker in history to break the $1 trillion market cap barrier, reaching $1.01 trillion as its shares continued to rise amidst the impact of widespread generative AI adoption. Nvidia shares were trading at $412.71 at the time of writing, a 6% gain over the previous day and a whopping 188% increase for the year thus far. As a result, Nvidia becomes one of just six companies with a market cap of over $1 trillion, joining Apple, Microsoft, Saudi Aramaco, Alphabet (Google), and Amazon in the elite club. Nvidia is also only the ninth company to ever break the $1 trillion mark. 

Nvidia's incredible rise over the course of the year came as generative AI and large language models like ChatGPT have exploded into the mainstream, with blue-chip tech companies like Google, Meta, and Microsoft investing heavily in AI infrastructure to bulk up their AI capabilities.

Nvidia has played a pivotal role in developing the AI ecosystem of hardware and, perhaps more importantly, software powering the AI revolution. With an uncontested lead in AI hardware processing horsepower and the strength of its CUDA software programming model, Nvidia doesn't seem to have a clear opponent for its leadership position.

Nvidia further solidified its position this week at Computex 2023, unveiling a broad portfolio of new solutions to address a wide range of segments, from massive supercomputers like its DGX GH200 to a new line of reference MGX system designs that will bring AI to mainstream data centers and enterprises. Nvidia is also leveraging the fruits of its tactical purchase of Mellanox to develop its own AI-centric networking infrastructure that ties its solutions together, giving it yet another advantage over its competitors -- the ability to design tightly-coupled systems at data center scale. 

For now, Nvidia's biggest problem is satisfying the explosive demand for its GPUs that has led to shortages. Still, the company has made large investments in boosting its production capacity. It is even taking more drastic steps, like courting Intel to have it manufacture its GPUs, to assure that supply constraints at its leading foundry partner TSMC don't hinder its growth. 

Paul Alcorn
Managing Editor: News and Emerging Tech

Paul Alcorn is the Managing Editor: News and Emerging Tech for Tom's Hardware US. He also writes news and reviews on CPUs, storage, and enterprise hardware.

  • bit_user
    I hope this prompts AMD to triple-down on their investment in GPU compute, and finally support ROCm across all recent hardware models, including APUs.

    You can't hope to compete with Nvidia on compute, if you don't have a vibrant ecosystem. And part of having a vibrant ecosystem is making it easy for people to develop on your hardware.

    Another thought I have is that Nvidia's Grace represents a real threat to AMD's server CPU revenue, as well. I'll bet quite a lot of servers hosting Nvidia GPUs have been EPYC-based. Grace looks set to change much of that.
    Reply
  • Exploding PSU
    Welcome to the club!
    Reply
  • InvalidError
    A 'barrier' is a limitation that isn't meant to be crossed. Fluffed-up market valuations passing 1T$ is merely a late-stage capitalism milestone.

    bit_user said:
    Another thought I have is that Nvidia's Grace represents a real threat to AMD's server CPU revenue, as well. I'll bet quite a lot of servers hosting Nvidia GPUs have been EPYC-based. Grace looks set to change much of that.
    Nvidia has its Grace Hoppers, AMD has its MI300 and Intel has its Data Center GPU Max. No shortage of large integrated CPU+GPU solutions in the DC space.
    Reply
  • mhmarefat
    Only 1 trillion? Ok then that explains the predatory pricing behavior of its recent GPUs.
    "Only" 1 trillion! Their very foundations are at stake here. They NEED to release a mainstream TRASH card and charge $400 for it because times are really rough. It is a matter of life and death for nvidia.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    InvalidError said:
    Nvidia has its Grace Hoppers, AMD has its MI300 and Intel has its Data Center GPU Max. No shortage of large integrated CPU+GPU solutions in the DC space.
    Grace is new and only beginning to finally ship. We don't know how much of AMD's revenue projections for EPYC were based on the assumption AI buildout would continue on trend, but Grace might invalidate such assumptions.

    One place where MI300 falls short is that it's not CUDA-native. Unlike x86, you can't just deploy MI300 or Falcon Shores and run your CUDA workload on them. In theory, AMD and Intel can just support PyTorch, Tensorflow, etc. and you won't have to think about what's underneath, but I doubt most sophisticated AI customers would agree with that. They probably have custom layers written in native CUDA code.

    Perhaps an even bigger reason is that Nvidia just keeps a tight grip on the performance crown. Every generation, they manage to defy being leapfrogged. Furthermore, they know how to scale like nobody else - aside from securing their performance superiority, it's also a major factor in selling massive numbers of devices.

    Basically, the situation we're in is that everyone wants Nvidia. I tried to find some market research, but didn't find an easy answer to the AI marketshare Nvidia currently holds. I'm sure it's massive, though.

    BTW, it sounds like AMD got the wakeup call. From earlier this month:
    https://www.nextplatform.com/2023/05/03/amd-says-ai-is-the-number-one-priority-right-now/
    Reply
  • gg83
    bit_user said:
    I hope this prompts AMD to triple-down on their investment in GPU compute, and finally support ROCm across all recent hardware models, including APUs.

    You can't hope to compete with Nvidia on compute, if you don't have a vibrant ecosystem. And part of having a vibrant ecosystem is making it easy for people to develop on your hardware.

    Another thought I have is that Nvidia's Grace represents a real threat to AMD's server CPU revenue, as well. I'll bet quite a lot of servers hosting Nvidia GPUs have been EPYC-based. Grace looks set to change much of that.
    I was thinking that GPUs would be replaced by a more AI processor in the near future. Do you think GPUs will be the processor of choice going forward? Can Nvidea stay on top? Or is their stock insanely overrated?
    Reply
  • Elusive Ruse
    Jesnen will be even more under pressure to deliver on growth and profits which means bad news for gamers since our needs are now truly an afterthought.
    Reply
  • InvalidError
    Elusive Ruse said:
    Jesnen will be even more under pressure to deliver on growth and profits which means bad news for gamers since our needs are now truly an afterthought.
    That depends on how sustainable the AI gold rush will be. My gut feeling is demand will level out within two years, so I expect about two years before AMD, Nvidia and Intel go "Oh crap! We need something else more sustainable to dump all of our excess wafers on. Maybe we shouldn't have golden-showered gamers two years ago."
    Reply
  • bit_user
    gg83 said:
    I was thinking that GPUs would be replaced by a more AI processor in the near future. Do you think GPUs will be the processor of choice going forward?
    I would love to see a perf/$ and perf/W comparison between their GH200 and Cerebras CS-2. Related:
    https://www.nextplatform.com/2023/03/29/cerebras-smashes-ai-wide-open-countering-hypocrites/
    gg83 said:
    Can Nvidea stay on top?
    Hard to say, but they have as many resources and as much expertise as anyone in the field. They won't be easy to unseat.

    A couple years ago, I'd have thought Intel could do it, but I haven't heard a lot about Habana and the failures & shortcomings of Xe are known all too well. AMD is forever playing catch-up. Other AI startups don't seem to have gotten that much traction, but I'm not positioned very well to know.

    gg83 said:
    Or is their stock insanely overrated?
    Well, they have their eggs in several growing baskets:
    Gaming & graphics
    Deep learning: training & inference (AI)
    HPC
    Metaverse
    Self-driving
    Robotics
    Datacenter networking
    That's a rather broad portfolio. That paves many paths to continued revenue growth. However, I can't tell you whether they'd be a good investment. My hunch is that they're rather over-valued, based on their near-term growth prospects, but nobody should take my investment advice.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    InvalidError said:
    That depends on how sustainable the AI gold rush will be. My gut feeling is demand will level out within two years,
    It will definitely be a fad, just like the Internet was. Trust me boys: we're going back to sneakernet any day now!: D
    Reply