ARM
Arm Holdings plc
stock NASDAQ ADR

More competitors are entering the market. AMD is catching up. ARM Chips and TPUs are added to the mix. We will have a different market in 24 months.

TPU vs GPU looking like X86 vs ARM....all BD shenanigans

It's crazy to me how CUDA is such a moat when there's so much money on the line for companies like AMD, Intel or now Google to make tools that can translate CUDA into something else.
If Linux can run Windows games (with no cooperation from developers) and now even translate x86 games to run on an ARM CPU it's surprising that translating CUDA, with cooperation from whover is writing software for CUDA and wants to move it to cheaper hardware, is such a mountain to climb.

Not sure why you tossed RAG in there.
Those companies are spending tens to hundreds of billions buying AI "accelerators", a market nvidia basically had to itself with the bestest, most capable ASICs. Only now it doesn't.
And just to be clear, a "GPU" is some general purpose functionality coupled with some specific functionality. Precisely like every other option. An Ironwood tray is 4 TPUs (with 768GB of HBM3e) along with an Axion ARM processor. If the market decided that it really wanted stream vector functionality to process billions of FP64 values, this would be added on the ASICs alongside the MXU, VPU and SparseCore. Positively no one is buying hardware based on some flexibility that they don't use currently.

Okay, let's see if Stacy Rasgon, who I'm sure reads this sub in tears every time, understands it.
If TPUs are an advantage because they're cheap, it's a huge advantage to offer low-cost inference by increasing Google Cloud's moat (to which it then also attaches other services, etc.)... especially since the bottleneck is apparently TPU production... since even Google doesn't have enough for itself
(By the way, in the first iteration this summer, that was exactly the case! Google was about to offer inference services to Meta).
But what's the point of selling 10B of TPU to Meta, which in addition to earning hardware equivalent to NVIDIA for inference, also uses it to study how it works, how various system-level problems are solved, to accelerate the development of its MTIAs?
It's much worse for Google this way... and a good thing for Meta.
In fact, the market rewarded Meta more than Google yesterday... but no... Stacy doesn't see it that way... It's worse for AMD! Lol
Leaving aside the whole issue about how it depends on the workload and the ASICs being developed by hyperscalers are for latency-sensitive workloads right now... and so even by accelerating MTIA, it probably wouldn't have hurt AMD or NVIDIA, but only potential future leasing for Google where it could have a long-term advantage.
Let's think about Google's revenue! Even by selling off hardware (thereby crippling its advantage in its cloud if its hardware was excellent in terms of OPEX) and if it managed to eat up 10% of NVIDIA's market, it would arrive at what... +3% profit? This is to lose a competitive advantage at such an important time (no CSP sells its own custom ARM CPUs to other CSPs... there must be a reason... among others... everyone wants their own and they customize for themselves).
One thing is clear (which Stacy missed): CUDA is under attack from multiple fronts. If the market diversifies, it's easier for AMD to reach 20% while remaining competitive. Where are the narratives that Jensen kept everyone tied to him thanks to the supply chain and the fear of losing shipping preference? (Another invented Jensen moat that's falling? But the narrative forgets these walls he created to protect Jensen from AMD... and which the next day seem to no longer exist... but AMD is always the loser, right Stacy?)
The market, as usual, has overreacted, pumped up by various gossip, in terms of agreements between companies, things are moving much more slowly, all this had already happened before the FADs, and I repeat 80% CAGR, and in my opinion 20% is possible for AMD, which now has a SP around 200... lol

Amazon, MU, AVGO, TSM, ARM, VRT

Firstly, it is months not years. Secondly as has already been pointed out to you there are not huge amounts of engineers at this level of the tech stack. Third, you think the XLA developers can’t debug an XLA error? I can’t even.
How long does it take a decent researcher to learn Jax? Well I hope for fucks sake they already know NumPy or they don’t belong in the field. XLA is not an unreliable dumpster fire and most engineers are not spending their time on weird custom ops that hit some undiscovered bug.
Yes, every company is quite comfortable with “relying” on external engineering departments. They do so constantly and everywhere. My god, I’m relying on Apples engineering department to write this message, who are relying on ARM, who are relying on…
> If you wish to make an ~~apple pie~~ ML tech stack from scratch, you must first invent the universe
Carl Sagan

Ah, right. I did forget about that. But my comment is in response to "only innovative chip design in the last 10 years" which is just false. Apple arm chips are just a tweaked and optimized version of ARM designs that apple likely had no extra input over as compared to any other company who uses their products.

Please take a minute to read the founding of ARM and who was involved in their creating and development

GROOT WILL GIVE WHEN HE WANTS. HAVE GAVE HIS ARM AND HAND SO CHRIS WOULD HAVE A “HAND”LE.

The pre-market numbers are awful (6.5% drop back to 200). Pff this will be rough due to the TPU rumors with Meta.
I could definitely see why Google is pitching their chips to others. My team is building some more easy chip (bunch of simple ARM cores and other interfaces), but even that already has close to 100M NRE, for much bigger and advanced chips NRE is easily 1B or above these days. That's even a lot for a hyperscaler, you really need volume to spread that NRE across the chips (at 1M units that's $1000/chip for just NRE) and on top of that you need volume to get manufacturing costs down. Besides for Meta this is a great negotiation tool.
I do think it is a bit of an overreaction on AMD/Nvidia, their chips will sell out no matter what even to Google/Meta. The market is growing a lot and TSMC is the bottleneck. I'm sure AMD/Nvidia bought a lot more fab capacity than like a Google.
I don't want to know what happens to my AMD stock today. Thought we were on the road to 220 and a tad higher. Now back to the doghouse. I did luckily sell some 230 and 240 covered calls for next week and the week after, so those I will probably close out now. Too bad I forgot to buy some 210 puts for this week... I only realized after the fact that they were only $2.5.

Wobei ich nicht verstehe, warum Meta die Kohle wieder an einen anderen Konkurrenten weiterreicht. Warum nicht direkt bei Broadcomm mittels ARM eigene Chips designen? Kapital und Manpower hat META dazu.

What makes a "AI chip" a legitimate AI chip? Per the description, it sounds like an ARM based SoC, not unlike all cars with infotainment systems and most Android devices.

Of course not but the AI “pump” seems to work like this:
-general, all AI stocks go up.
-software, MSFT/GOOG/AMZN pump while the hardware companies lag.
-company specific, sympathetic pumps too but all the rest lag.
-GPU specific, non GPU companies pump.
And so on. When GOOG pumps we tend to see AVGO/ARM/MU pump and NVDA/INTC/AMD lag.

TOS is running Java for ARM (Silicon). No, it is not native, but it does function.
I have not heard that they intend to create a "native" Mac app for Silicon. I wish, but I doubt it will happen.

If you're just involved in simple puts that are just going to expire worthlessly, sure, but Burry bought CDSes, which are entirely different instrument. His ability to pay the premiums because the MBSes weren't cratering immediately when the ARM inflation's kicked in, means that he had runway to be wrong on timing because he knew it was going to blow up one way or the other.

Morning everyone!
Economic report(s) scheduled for the day is(are) | at^[i](https://fidelityfiplus.econoday.com/byweek): Chicago Fed National Activity Index | 8:30am, Dallas Fed Manufacturing Survey | 10:30. Media platforms are discussing: Evolving Federal Reserve policy, ARM Loan utilization, Real-Estate data hack, Tim Cook’s replacement, AI Debt wave swamps credit markets, Holiday market schedule, State of the Trade deals (or lack of them). The topics of discussion also included entertainment industry performance, various opinion analysis of the economy, anecdotal evidence of challenging financial situations, and plenty of other sentiment driven indicators; Nothing remarkable or particularly new, moods and opinions reflecting as much volatility as the stock market itself. Premarket futures were up slightly to modestly in early trading as of 7am, VIX futures were down somewhat.
MVIS ended the last trading session at 0.94, on slightly lower volume traded compared to the daily average over the past month. The share price continued to show relatively elevated range, given the share price being more or locked below $1 for now. It is possible that some knew that Anubhav was expected to leave MicroVision and thus expected negative market reaction, though it seemed somewhat expected given what often happens when a new CEO steps in. The rate of change occurring here with regards to the company’s direction and trajectory could be just a taste of what is yet to come, as it appears that DeVos is moving quickly to drive the company’s product roadmap directly into what is desired by the automotive industry. For years the company took in advice from consultants, the contacts at automakers, and followed competitors moves, with minor variations in the end product claims; None of which turned into large volume contracts. Separating a company from the pack is essential, and starts with the products and culture of the company.
## Daily Data
***
|H: 0.96 — L: 0.88 — C: 0.94 ^[i](https://chartexchange.com/symbol/nasdaq-mvis/historical/) |[Calendar](https://fidelityfiplus.econoday.com/byweek.asp)|
|:- |:-|
|**Pivots ↗︎ : 0.97, 1.01, 1.05** ^([i](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/pivotpoint.asp)) |**Pivots ↘︎ : 0.89, 0.85, 0.81**|
|Total Options Vol: 3,578 ^([i](https://researchtools.fidelity.com/ftgw/mloptions/goto/underlyingStatistics?cusip=&symbol=MVIS&Search=Search)) |Avg 90d Options: 3,877|
|Calls: 2,774 ~ 69% at Market ⊟ |Puts: 804 ~ 83% at Market ⊟|
|Open Exchanges: 2,910k ~ 49% ^[i](https://chartexchange.com/symbol/nasdaq-mvis/exchange-volume/) |Off Exchanges: 3,009k ~ 51% ^[i](https://chartexchange.com/symbol/nasdaq-mvis/exchange-volume/)|
|IBKR: 400k Rate: 3.70%^[i](https://chartexchange.com/symbol/nasdaq-mvis/borrow-fee/) |Fidelity: —k Rate: 0.00%
|**R Vol: 95% of Avg Vol: 6,211k** ^([i](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/averagedailytradingvolume.asp)) |**Short Vol: 2,481k of 3,557k ~ 70%** ^[i](https://chartexchange.com/symbol/nasdaq-mvis/short-volume/?tblshortvolix=0)|

^(Follow links for sources. Bold text represents key points or larger data, Italics are slightly unusual or lower than normal.)