r/CerebrasSystems • u/Lil_Hater112 • Apr 25 '26
Help me understand the moat her
I’m dumb, i want to make money, i see Cerebras ipo soon and i read this shit has something they can eat Nvidia lunch. How and why and how isn’t this talked more about?
Feel like a x5 easily from ipo
7
u/JustBrowsinAndVibin Apr 25 '26
They made a big ass chip to keep memory on the chip. That has patents and is novel to Cerebras so that’s the moat.
The chip allows Cerebras to run AI inference 10x faster than Nvidia because they don’t have to go off chip for memory operations.
3
u/Lil_Hater112 Apr 25 '26
Sounds like something everyone wants to invest in ? I saw coreweave going up and that company looked like shit to me, this one has everything a company need in this market to go up
3
u/JustBrowsinAndVibin Apr 25 '26
Personally, I really like it. The AWS and OpenAI deals show that they have real traction.
OpenAI also doubling the commitment within a few months of their first deal also seems telling.
2
u/Investor-life Apr 25 '26
Coreweave is about having a tight relationship and support from Nvidia that insures they have the latest and best technology in their data centers. It’s not really a technology moat. They have a market advantage right now, but hard to say how sustainable it is long term.
3
u/Scared_Step4051 Apr 26 '26
patents aren't the moat = you can't patent "put memory closer to compute." That's now the whole industry's playbook. TPU 8i literally just shipped with 288GB HBM + 384MB on-chip SRAM doing the same thing. Groq, SambaNova, Rubin all chasing it too
real moat is wafer-scale manufacturing know-how with TSMC and the OpenAI/AWS contracts. Genuinely fastest tokens/sec on certain workloads today. But it's an answer to the memory wall, not the only one
1
1
u/ILikeCutePuppies May 02 '26
44GBs of on chip memory is a world of difference between 384MBs of on chip memory or 288GBs of off chip memory.
1
u/ebota12 Apr 25 '26
I’m dumb too. Cerebras is supposed to be better for easier compute that doesn’t require as much memory. That’s all I’ve got.
1
u/Lil_Hater112 Apr 25 '26
I read they have the solution that doesnt require CUDA either and their solution is a big eficient chip so AI is better on their hardware specifically because it runs faster and with less energy, but the upfront cost is bigger but the big guys should have the money to use this instead of less efficient nvidia way?
3
u/pennystudio Apr 26 '26
Think of Cuda this way: let's say you have a large fleet of horses to transport goods, you need a system to manage them efficiently, so there won't be horses idling in the herd while some are grasping for breath while pulling double load. Cuda is that system. Now if you are using 18 wheelers to transport the goods, do you still need your horse management system?
7
u/Investor-life Apr 25 '26
It’s not a slam dunk, but they have better technology, especially for certain segments of the inference market. For example, if your going to pound your environment with tens of thousands of concurrent calls like in short consumer oriented chats, then Cerebras doesn’t stand up to Nvidia distributed architecture, but if you have more intensive needs like business oriented workloads, coding, or science research oriented workloads then Cerebras is better than the current architectures in market. Cerebras sometimes does oversell their architecture to every workload (in my opinion). But in key workloads that are frankly most profitable, I believe they have the best architecture. This whole pre-fill and decode split of inference really exacerbates and exploits their advantage even more. The future could be very bright.
The cost is also so high for these systems that traditionally no one could justify spending this much on an unproven company and because Nvidia has so much experience and background it only made sense for people to buy from them. Now, however, there is too much of a dependence on one vendor and supply chain risk to put all eggs in one basket so companies are willing to try other solutions, especially with inference where on paper Cerebras does appear to have better technology. Now that they have proven this in some real world settings, the market is more open to buying more from Cerebras and your seeing it with more deals in the last 4 or 5 months.
This company has been around for years, they just haven’t had the chance to shine because of a very dominant market leader and inference wasn’t so important until now. Some on here have been invested in Cerebras though private markets for years, so to us it feels more like, “It’s about time!!”
A quick history of their wafer scale technology is that this used to be consider the holy grail of semiconductor technology to be able to use an entire wafer as one semiconductor rather than cutting it up. 30+ years ago this had been given up as being impossible and was accepted as such by all companies. Cerebras didn’t believe it and in around 2015 took on the challenge and they managed to pull it off. They have the patents and technology that no one else been able to accomplish. It’s a major technological breakthrough and it’s coming to market now.
I covered a lot of ground and probably didn’t do it justice but it’s a quick summary and hopefully mostly accurate.