By funding and backstopping CoreWeave, which exclusively uses its GPUs, NVIDIA establishes its hardware as the default for the AI cloud. This gives NVIDIA leverage over major customers like Microsoft and Amazon, who are developing their own chips. It makes switching to proprietary silicon more difficult, creating a competitive moat based on market structure, not just technology.

New AI models are designed to perform well on available, dominant hardware like NVIDIA's GPUs. This creates a self-reinforcing cycle where the incumbent hardware dictates which model architectures succeed, making it difficult for superior but incompatible chip designs to gain traction.

While known for its GPUs, NVIDIA's true competitive moat is CUDA, a free software platform that made its hardware accessible for diverse applications like research and AI. This created a powerful network effect and stickiness that competitors struggled to replicate, making NVIDIA more of a software company than observers realize.

The long-held belief that a complex codebase provides a durable competitive advantage is becoming obsolete due to AI. As software becomes easier to replicate, defensibility shifts away from the technology itself and back toward classic business moats like network effects, brand reputation, and deep industry integration.

Google successfully trained its top model, Gemini 3 Pro, on its own TPUs, proving a viable alternative to NVIDIA's chips. However, because Google doesn't sell these TPUs, NVIDIA retains its monopoly pricing power over every other company in the market.

Google training its top model, Gemini 3 Pro, on its own TPUs demonstrates a viable alternative to NVIDIA's chips. However, because Google does not sell its TPUs, NVIDIA remains the only seller for every other company, effectively maintaining monopoly pricing power over the rest of the market.

Even if Google's TPU doesn't win significant market share, its existence as a viable alternative gives large customers like OpenAI critical leverage. The mere threat of switching to TPUs forces NVIDIA to offer more favorable terms, such as discounts or strategic equity investments, effectively capping its pricing power.

In a power-constrained world, total cost of ownership is dominated by the revenue a data center can generate per watt. A superior NVIDIA system producing multiples more revenue makes the hardware cost irrelevant. A competitor's chip would be rejected even if free due to the high opportunity cost.

This theory suggests Google's refusal to sell TPUs is a strategic move to maintain a high market price for AI inference. By allowing NVIDIA's expensive GPUs to set the benchmark, Google can profit from its own lower-cost TPU-based inference services on GCP.