BTC $82,757.89 +0.99%
ETH $2,447.69 +1.96%
BNB $739.35 +1.48%
XRP $1.33 +2.21%
SOL $106.55 +1.84%
TRX $0.3309 +0.02%
DOGE $0.0816 +2.89%
ADA $0.2231 +2.71%
BCH $281.22 +1.20%
LINK $12.28 +3.02%
HYPE $81.40 +3.64%
AAVE $154.44 +4.21%
SUI $1.02 +4.02%
XLM $0.1814 +2.70%
ZEC $1,243.48 +9.19%
AAPL $339.15 -1.19%
AMZN $263.43 +0.16%
GOOGL $341.15 -1.15%
MSFT $531.73 -0.30%
META $694.27 -1.77%
NVDA $221.18 +1.59%
TSLA $378.24 +2.73%
SNDK $1,397.82 +1.49%
INTC $94.98 +2.75%
SPCX $154.77 +3.75%
MU $916.74 +1.06%
AMD $546.20 +1.19%
BTC $82,757.89 +0.99%
ETH $2,447.69 +1.96%
BNB $739.35 +1.48%
XRP $1.33 +2.21%
SOL $106.55 +1.84%
TRX $0.3309 +0.02%
DOGE $0.0816 +2.89%
ADA $0.2231 +2.71%
BCH $281.22 +1.20%
LINK $12.28 +3.02%
HYPE $81.40 +3.64%
AAVE $154.44 +4.21%
SUI $1.02 +4.02%
XLM $0.1814 +2.70%
ZEC $1,243.48 +9.19%
AAPL $339.15 -1.19%
AMZN $263.43 +0.16%
GOOGL $341.15 -1.15%
MSFT $531.73 -0.30%
META $694.27 -1.77%
NVDA $221.18 +1.59%
TSLA $378.24 +2.73%
SNDK $1,397.82 +1.49%
INTC $94.98 +2.75%
SPCX $154.77 +3.75%
MU $916.74 +1.06%
AMD $546.20 +1.19%

putin

All
Article
Flash

first_img Kerman Kohli: The bottleneck of computing power financing lies in credit

Cryptocurrency researcher Kerman Kohli published "Compute Financing" on Substack on October 19, 2026, discussing financing for computing power construction. He believes one of the main bottlenecks is capital, especially credit: early expenditures mainly come from balance sheet cash, followed by a shift to equity financing. The article cites Alphabet's $85 billion financing and Meta's fundraising through shareholder dilution, with the next step being the credit market.Kohli summarizes the current beliefs of creditors into three points, which he believes are incompatible: AI may be a bubble; the biggest risk is counterparty risk in purchase contracts; the underlying GPUs are not valuable and depreciate like ordinary hardware. He argues that demand is closer to infinite, stating that the demand for agentic AI is growing by about 2.5 to 5 times each year, with supply potentially doubling by the end of 2030. Memory is expected to sell out by 2027, with computing power commitments reaching trillions of dollars, and he mentions Jane Street's multi-billion dollar commitments, as well as the needs of pharmaceutical companies, research, military, and cybersecurity.Regarding efficiency, he states that when the cost of intelligence drops by 90%, the increase in usage is even greater, with a baseline exceeding 10 times, and he cites Jevons' Paradox.On the topic of purchasing, Kohli believes that computing power is more substitutable than real estate; when demand is strong, if someone withdraws their commitment, others will take over. He mentions that many creditors require 2 to 3 year contracts and down payments of 20% to 30%, sometimes as high as 50%, and locking in long-term discount contracts effectively shorts computing power for lenders. The article also states that computing power rental prices have risen by about 50% in the past 6 months and about 100% in the past year, with B300 supplies being tight. Regarding collateral, he notes that the A100 from 2020 is still operational and rented out until 2029, leading him to believe it has at least about 9 years of use value; the current price of B200 is about 50% higher than when it was released about two years ago, and a 6-year-old A100 is still worth about 25% of its value. He concludes that computing power will surpass real estate to become the largest asset class, and the scale of credit-supported computing power is currently just beginning.

Vitalik compared the mining costs of BTC and the inference costs of AI: the former has electricity costs accounting for nearly half, while the latter relies more on capital expenditures for computing power

Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin shared that the cost of Bitcoin mining is roughly half derived from capital expenditures on computing power equipment and the other half from electricity consumption; in contrast, the cost of AI inference is almost entirely dominated by capital expenditures on computing power. This difference reflects the distinct cost structures of the two computing businesses. Bitcoin miners need to continuously pay for electricity and determine their profit margins based on mining machine efficiency, coin prices, and network difficulty changes; AI inference, on the other hand, relies more on investments in expensive hardware like GPUs, as well as equipment utilization and computing efficiency.The industrial boundaries of both are also changing. As the demand for AI computing power grows, some Bitcoin mining companies are beginning to shift their existing electricity resources and data center facilities towards AI and high-performance computing businesses, hoping to transition from pure mining to computing infrastructure services. Some mining companies are leveraging previously allocated electricity capacity for mining to enter the AI data center market. However, transformation does not mean that cost pressures disappear: mining operations are more directly exposed to fluctuations in electricity prices and Bitcoin prices, while AI computing businesses must bear risks related to GPU procurement, depreciation, and underutilization. Both types of businesses compete for electricity and computing resources, but ultimately, profitability depends on how these resources are converted into revenue.

first_img Analyst Jukan: Storage and computing power will fluctuate in the same direction, local AI may meet the demand

Analyst Jukan published a discussion on the storage industry's cycle, believing that computing power and storage will tighten or loosen in sync, and that there will not be a situation where computing power is continuously in short supply while storage alone turns to surplus. He also stated that the logic of shorting storage while going long on hard drives does not hold, as hard drives are tied to the storage cycle; if this cycle declines, hard drives will struggle to remain secure on their own.Jukan noted that the market lacks a clear judgment on trends after 2027. Historically, prices often peak one to two quarters before supply increases, followed by an expansion in shipments and a contraction in profit pools. He believes that this cycle is different from those of personal computers, smartphones, and general-purpose servers, as the products used are not standardized, and the triggering factors are also different. Some investors who still view storage through the lens of past experiences of profits during upswings and losses during downswings dominate pricing, leading to a low valuation of storage. He stated that a sharp collapse similar to previous ones is unlikely to reoccur, but a gradual decline is possible; even if Samsung and SK Hynix's profit margins are halved from current levels, the price-to-earnings ratio may still be in the teens, about half of the valuation of hard drive companies.He also believes that when storage prices decline, other demands will absorb supply at various price levels, with local AI-driven personal AI demand expected to emerge. If the storage prices pushed up by hyperscale cloud providers cannot be controlled, local AI will struggle to spread. Referring to the transition from mainframes to personal computers and from cloud to smartphones, he anticipates that this AI cycle will shift from cutting-edge laboratories to local open-source AI, with the latter absorbing storage demand. He simultaneously stated that storage prices will not remain high for over ten years; prices will eventually decline, but new consumer demands driven by local AI and open-source initiatives may provide bottom support.
app_icon
ChainCatcher Building the Web3 world with innovations.