Elon Musk says xAI is targeting 50 million 'H100 equivalent' AI GPUs in five years — 230k GPUs, including 30k GB200s already reportedly operational for training Grok

Four banks of xAI's HGX H100 server racks, holding eight servers each.
(Image credit: ServeTheHome)

Leading AI companies have been bragging about the number of GPUs they use or plan to use in the future. Just yesterday, OpenAI announced plans to build infrastructure to power two million GPUs, but now Elon Musk has revealed even more colossal plans: the equivalent of 50 million H100 GPUs to be deployed for AI use over the next five years. But while the number of H100 equivalents looks massive, the actual number of GPUs to be deployed may not be quite as great. Unlike the power they will consume.

50 ExaFLOPS for AI training

"The xAI goal is 50 million in units of H100 equivalent-AI compute (but much better power-efficiency) online within 5 years," Elon Musk wrote in an X post.

One Nvidia H100 GPU can deliver around 1,000 FP16/BF16 TFLOPS for AI training (these are currently the most popular formats for AI training), so 50 million of such AI accelerators will have to deliver 50 FP16/BF16 ExaFLOPS for AI training by 2030. Based on the current performance improvement trends, this is more than achievable over the next five years.

Only 650,000 Feynman Ultra GPUs

Assuming that Nvidia (and others) will continue to scale BF16/FP16 training performance of its GPUs at a pace slightly slower than with the Hopper and Blackwell generations, 50 BF16/FP16 ExaFLOPS will be achievable using 1.3 million GPUs in 2028 or 650,000 in 2029, based on our speculative guesses.

If xAI has enough money to spend on Nvidia hardware, it is even possible that the goal of getting to 50 ExaFLOPS for AI training will be achieved even earlier.

Graph displaying exponential reduction in GPUs required by the arrival of Feynman Ultra

(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

Elon Musk's xAI is already among the fastest companies to deploy the latest AI GPU accelerators to boost its training capability. The company already runs its Colossus 1 supercluster that uses 200,000 H100 and H200 accelerators based on the Hopper architecture, as well as 30,000 GB200 units based on the Blackwell architecture. In addition, the company aims to build its Colossus 2 cluster consisting of 550,000 GB200 and GB300 nodes (each of such nodes has two GPUs, so the cluster will feature over a million GPUs) with the first nodes set to come online in the coming weeks, according to Musk.

Steady performance increases

Nvidia (and other companies) recently switched to a yearly cadence of new AI accelerators release and Nvidia's schedule now resembles Intel's Tick-Tock model from back in the day though in this case we are talking about an architecture -> optimization approach using a single production node (e.g., Blackwell -> Blackwell Ultra, Rubin -> Rubin Ultra) rather than switching to a new process technology for a known architecture.

Such an approach ensures significant performance increases every year, which in turn ensures dramatic longer-term performance gains. For example, Nvidia claims its Blackwell B200 delivers 20,000 times higher inference performance than the 2016 Pascal P100, offering around 20,000 FP4 TFLOPS versus the P100’s 19 FP16 TFLOPS. Though not a direct comparison, the metric is relevant for inference tasks. Blackwell is also 42,500 times more energy efficient than Pascal when measured by joules per generated token.

Swipe to scroll horizontally
Nvidia enterprise GPU roadmap

Year

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

2027

Architecture

Hopper

Hopper

Blackwell

Blackwell Ultra

Rubin

Rubin

GPU

H100

H200

B200

B300 (Ultra)

VR200

VR300 (Ultra)

Process Technology

4N

4N

4NP

4NP

N3P (3NP?)

N3P (3NP?)

Physical Configuration

1 x Reticle Sized GPU

1 x Reticle Sized GPU

2 x Reticle Sized GPUs

2 x Reticle Sized GPUs

2 x Reticle Sized GPUs, 2x I/O chiplets

4 x Reticle Sized GPUs, 2x I/O chiplets

FP4 PFLOPs (per Package)

-

-

10

15

50

100

FP8/INT6 PFLOPs (per Package)

2

2

4.5

10

?

?

INT8 PFLOPS (per Package)

2

2

4.5

0.319

?

?

BF16 PFLOPs (per Package)

0.99

0.99

2.25

5

?

?

TF32 PFLOPs (per Package)

0.495

0.495

1.12

2.5

?

?

FP32 PFLOPs (per Package)

67

67

1.12

0.083

?

?

FP64/FP64 Tensor TFLOPs (per Package)

34/67

34/67

40

1.39

?

?

Memory

80 GB HBM3

141 GB HBM3E

192 GB HBM3E

288 GB HBM3E

288 GB HBM4

1 TB HBM4E

Memory Bandwidth

3.35 TB/s

4.8 TB/s

8 TB/s

4 TB/s

13 TB/s

32 TB/s

GPU TDP

700 W

700 W

1200 W

1400 W

1800 W

3600 W

CPU

72-core Grace

72-core Grace

72-core Grace

72-core Grace

88-core Vera

88-core Vera

Indeed, Nvidia and others are not slowing down with performance advancements. The Blackwell Ultra architecture (B300-series) offers a 50% higher FP4 performance (15 FPLOPS) compared to the original Blackwell GPUs (10 FPLOPS) for AI inference, as well as two times higher performance for BF16 and TF32 formats for AI training, yet at the cost of lower INT8, FP32, and FP64 performance. For reference, BF16 and FP16 are typical formats used for AI training (though FP8 seems to be evaluated as well), so it is reasonable to expect Nvidia to boost performance in these formats with its next-generation Rubin, Rubin Ultra, Feynman, and Feynman Ultra GPUs.

Exponential increase in Nvidia GPUs FP16 and BF16 performance on a graph.

(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

Depending on how we count, Nvidia increased FP16/BF16 performance by 3.2 times with H100 (compared to A100), then by 2.4 times with B200 (compared to H100), and then by 2.2 times with B300 (compared to B200). Actual training performance of course depends not only on pure math performance of new GPUs, but also on memory bandwidth, model size, parallelism (software optimizations and interconnect performance), and usage of FP32 for accumulations. Yet, it is safe to say that Nvidia can double the training performance (with FP16/BF16 formats) of its GPUs with each new generation.

Assuming that Nvidia can achieve the aforementioned performance increases with its four subsequent generations of AI accelerators based on the Rubin and Feynman architectures, it is easy to count that around 650,000 Feynman Ultra GPUs will be needed to get to around 50 BF16/FP16 ExaFLOPS sometime in 2029.

Gargantuan power consumption

But while Elon Musk's xAI and probably other AI leaders will probably get their 50 BF16/FP16 ExaFLOPS for AI training over the next four or five years, the big question is how much power will such a supercluster consume? And, how many nuclear power plants will be needed to feed one?

One H100 AI accelerator consumes 700W, so 50 million of these processors will consume 35 gigawatts (GW), which is equal to the typical power generated by 35 nuclear power plants, making it unrealistic to power such a massive data center today. Even a cluster of Rubin Ultra will require around 9.37 GW, which is comparable to the power consumption of French Guiana. Assuming that the Feynman architecture doubles performance per watt for BF16/FP16 compared to the Rubin architecture (keep in mind that we are speculating), a 50 ExaFLOPS cluster will still need 4.685 GW, which is well beyond 1.4 GW – 1.96 GW required for xAI's Colossus 2 data center with around a million AI accelerators.

Swipe to scroll horizontally

GPU Model

TFLOPS (Dense)

Power per GPU (W)

GPUs Needed

Total Power (GW)

H100

1,000

700

50,000,000

35

B200

2,400

1,200

20,833,333

25.00

B300

4,800

1,400

10,416,666

14.58

Rubin

9,600

1,800

5,208,333

9.37

Rubin Ultra

19,200

3,600

2,604,166

9.37

Feynman

38,400

?

1,302,083

4.685 (?)

Can Elon Musk's xAI get 4.685 GW of power to feed a 50 ExaFLOPS data center in 2028 – 2030? That is something that clearly remains to be seen.

Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News to get our up-to-date news, analysis, and reviews in your feeds. Make sure to click the Follow button.

Anton Shilov
Contributing Writer

Anton Shilov is a contributing writer at Tom’s Hardware. Over the past couple of decades, he has covered everything from CPUs and GPUs to supercomputers and from modern process technologies and latest fab tools to high-tech industry trends.

  • Bikki
    Thanks for the anslysis, very well done.
    Sam with the power infra and Musk with compute infra may meet at each other’s ends in 2029.
    Reply
  • joeer77
    If you don't own Nvidia stock, you are missing the boat!
    Reply
  • vanadiel007
    100 million, 200, 700 mllion!

    And we still will have no intelligence in AI. In my opinion they are a glorified data search engine.
    The only accomplishment I can see them make is dethrone Google as a search engine.
    Reply
  • Gururu
    Dollars to donuts in that timeframe we will have tech (hardware/software if not completely hardware) running at least tenfold more efficient as "H100 equivalents".
    Reply
  • bigdragon
    No wonder my electricity, water, and gaming costs keep increasing. All these hardware improvements should help Grok hallucinate in a fraction of the amount of time it takes now! I'm so excited to have it unreliably perform all the same tasks Siri can do with 1,000,000x the environmental impact!
    Reply
  • jp7189
    16 bit performance hasn't changed in quite a while. The only things changing are the <mostly marketing> tricks used to report the numbers. Apples to apples it shakes out like this (source techpowerup):

    H100 sxm= 267.6 TFLOPS
    H200 sxm= 267.6
    B200 sxm= 248.3*

    *These are single die numbers, B200 has 2x dies per package, so while the package is a good bit faster, the underlying point is the same; Nvidia doesn't have any fundamentally ground breaking new performance now or anywhere in sight.
    Reply
  • JRStern
    Gururu said:
    Dollars to donuts in that timeframe we will have tech (hardware/software if not completely hardware) running at least tenfold more efficient as "H100 equivalents".
    We (or they) can already build today's chatbots about 1000x faster than five years ago.
    By next year they'll add another 10x at least when all the B200/B300s are up and running.
    There are several different hardware and software improvements kicking around now that claim another 10x or better, each.
    Basically by Christmas the world will have all the GPUs they'll need for the next ten years.

    By 2035 high school kids will build their own chatbots with components from hobby lobby and their own smartphones.
    Reply
  • JRStern
    jp7189 said:
    16 bit performance hasn't changed in quite a while. The only things changing are the <mostly marketing> tricks used to report the numbers. Apples to apples it shakes out like this (source techpowerup):

    H100 sxm= 267.6 TFLOPS
    H200 sxm= 267.6
    B200 sxm= 248.3*

    *These are single die numbers, B200 has 2x dies per package, so while the package is a good bit faster, the underlying point is the same; Nvidia doesn't have any fundamentally ground breaking new performance now or anywhere in sight.
    The addition of more HBM helps overall throughput.
    So does faster networking.
    So do FP8 and FP4.
    There are several other improvements kicking around. FP16 may not change but there is much else that can improve, a lot.
    Reply
  • JRStern
    I mean, Musk talks a lot, and no doubt retains the option of changing his mind.
    Altman's megalomaniac dreams and fears - are apparently fully present in Musk as well.
    HOWEVER the idea that AI means Scale means AI, has pretty much already failed.
    Musk can spend every penny he can lay hands on buying GPUs and get himself in the history books as the craziest dude in history.
    He may already be up for that with Starship and his Mars project, which is already on the edge of flaming out. There's no purpose in it, Mars is a poor destination, but it will cost at least 3x what Musk has imagined to complete it. Is it worth that?
    I salute Musk's madness for trying, with so little analysis. Full employment for thousands of engineers and craftsman. Better than just building giant yachts and stuff.
    Musk's SpaceX is a great success, though they had to hose him down a few times so they could put in the discipline to make it work.
    Musk's Tesla gave us the modern EV ten years before it would otherwise have arrived. Whether that is a good thing or not, I can't say.
    Musk bought Twitter and cleaned it up like Hercules and the Augean stables, a story for all time, even if he blew an extra $20b on it simply because he ran his mouth - that's a story for all time, too.
    And he got Trump elected or we'd now have President Kamala, you can rate that as you like.
    Crazy old world, ain't it.
    But the whole world doesn't need 50 million H100s now or ever.
    Better he build a ten gigawatt Magic 8 Ball.
    Reply
  • dalek1234
    3600 Watts per GPU in 5 years? Does performance-per-watt no longer matter?
    Reply