Amidst fears of an AI bubble, AMD CEO Lisa Su's core strategy is aggressive investment. She argues that for a generational opportunity like AI, the danger of being too cautious and falling behind far outweighs the financial risk of overinvesting in the short term.
Related Insights
Contrary to the popular belief that failing to adopt AI is the biggest risk, some companies may be harming their value by developing AI practices too quickly. The market and client needs may not be ready for advanced AI integration, leading to a misallocation of resources and slower-than-expected returns.
The current AI boom isn't just another tech bubble; it's a "bubble with bigger variance." The potential for massive upswings is matched by the risk of equally significant downswings. Investors and founders must have an unusually high tolerance for risk and volatility to succeed.
The world's most profitable companies view AI as the most critical technology of the next decade. This strategic belief fuels their willingness to sustain massive investments and stick with them, even when the ultimate return on that spending is highly uncertain. This conviction provides a durable floor for the AI capital expenditure cycle.
Major tech companies view the AI race as a life-or-death struggle. This 'existential crisis' mindset explains their willingness to spend astronomical sums on infrastructure, prioritizing survival over short-term profitability. Their spending is a defensive moat-building exercise, not just a rational pursuit of new revenue.
The current AI investment surge is a dangerous "resource grab" phase, not a typical bubble. Companies are desperately securing scarce resources—power, chips, and top scientists—driven by existential fear of being left behind. This isn't a normal CapEx cycle; the spending is almost guaranteed until a dead-end is proven.
Unlike the dot-com or shale booms fueled by less stable companies, the current AI investment cycle is driven by corporations with exceptionally strong balance sheets. This financial resilience mitigates the risk of a credit crisis, even with massive capital expenditure and uncertain returns, allowing the cycle to run longer.
Current AI spending appears bubble-like, but it's not propping up unprofitable operations. Inference is already profitable. The immense cash burn is a deliberate, forward-looking investment in developing future, more powerful models, not a sign of a failing business model. This re-frames the financial risk.
Critics like Michael Burry argue current AI investment far outpaces 'true end demand.' However, the bull case, supported by NVIDIA's earnings, is that this isn't a speculative bubble but the foundational stage of the largest infrastructure buildout in decades, with capital expenditures already contractually locked in.
Specialized chips (ASICs) like Google's TPU lack the flexibility needed in the early stages of AI development. AMD's CEO asserts that general-purpose GPUs will remain the majority of the market because developers need the freedom to experiment with new models and algorithms, a capability that cannot be hard-coded into purpose-built silicon.
Companies are spending unsustainable amounts on AI compute, not because the ROI is clear, but as a form of Pascal's Wager. The potential reward of leading in AGI is seen as infinite, while the cost of not participating is catastrophic, justifying massive, otherwise irrational expenditures.
