Nvidia’s earnings report can best be described by a Shakespeare line in Henry IV: “Heavy is the head that wears the crown.” When it comes to stocks, being on top is harder than it looks. You are no longer afforded the element of surprise, and particularly important for Nvidia, you must produce new catalysts that can contend with the previous, hard-hitting catalyst that drove the company’s historic growth in previous years.
The catalysts on the horizon are imperfect, whether it’s custom silicon gaining traction as inference scales or the attach rate on CPUs-to-GPUs shifting as agentic AI requires more orchestration. Nvidia is also seeing heightened supply-related commitments, likely due to steep HBM and NAND pricing. The company is also changed its reporting segments, and below, I discuss why that raises concerns.
However, on the positive side, Nvidia is a beast on the bottom line. Apple is firmly in the rear-view mirror when comparing profits and cash flows. Nvidia’s operating income is north of $50 billion compared to Apple’s $36 billion, plus cash flows that are nearly 2X Apple’s at $48.6B versus $28.7B.
To be picky about its growth status, there is a deceleration in QoQ growth as the guide is for 11.5% QoQ growth compared to the previous three quarters, which all reported 19.5% to 22% QoQ growth. If we look a bit further ahead, analyst estimates are calling for flat-ish QoQ growth in the September quarter and then a leveling off to 7% and 6% QoQ growth. All of that will clear up when Rubin ships in volume, although as you’ll see below, the company left an out for themselves on the timing.
I always enjoy covering Nvidia, because although the stock is well-covered, I think the I/O Fund continues to surface key details you don’t typically hear elsewhere. My strong Nvidia streak is slowing somewhat as I turn my focus to other opportunities across the AI trade, yet understanding the juggernaut is non-negotiable for all AI investors.
Below, I take a closer look at what was communicated last night.
The AI Demand Signal is Extraordinary
As you’ll see below, Nvidia’s positioning is becoming more challenged by both custom silicon and CPUs. However, before we go into those details, the 10,000-foot view is fairly clear – which is that AI demand is parabolic. Collette Kress, the CFO, pointed out in the opening remarks that analysts expect hyperscale capex to exceed $1 trillion in 2027 with AI infrastructure reaching $3T to $4T by the end of the decade.
This year, analysts are expecting capex to grow between 90% and 100% with Nvidia exceeding this growth rate with data center growth of 120%. As pointed out on the call, this is because Nvidia serves two major customer groups; the first being well-known hyperscalers and the second being neoclouds and enterprises. Whether it’s Nvidia specifically or the AI infrastructure market more broadly, the point Huang made on the earnings call is that far more than just 7 companies will support this market over the next few years:
“The second category is all of the AI native clouds. They're regional, they're all over the place, they're start-ups all over the world, supporting those companies. They're enterprise, 250,000 enterprise companies around the world, many of them will have to build or want to build AI factories for themselves to operate. Many industrial companies, there's no choice but to put the computer where the context is, where the action is, you can't put that in the cloud. It has to respond reliably, quickly every single time, can't imagine a chip plant, a chip fab being connected to a cloud service provider, doesn't make any sense. And so the second category and the sovereign AI clouds. And so there's a whole category of data centers that semi-custom chips just don't apply because these data centers want to buy systems, they want to operate systems, they don't want to design, they don't want to build it themselves.”
The point being made is two-fold. On one hand, it helps investors to see the diversity of customer base driving the AI market. On the other hand, it’s self-serving as Nvidia is likely preparing the market for a time when hyperscaler capex is more concentrated in custom silicon. We covered this in the free article recently, stating: “Counterpoint Research believes that by 2028, custom silicon will cross the 15-million mark to surpass GPU shipments as the top 10 hyperscalers will have deployed 40 million AI server compute ASIC chips cumulatively during 2024-2028.”
Nvidia Changes Segment Reporting to Breakout Hyperscalers from Neoclouds/Enterprises
If we operate under the assumption that custom silicon will become a fierce contender to GPUs within hyperscaler budgets, then the appropriate defensive move for Nvidia is to breakout the line item that shows they have a diverse set of customers.

Pictured above: NVIDIA is transitioning to a new reporting framework that better reflects its current and future growth drivers. NVIDIA will have two market platforms — Data Center and Edge Computing. Within Data Center, NVIDIA will report two sub-markets, Hyperscale and ACIE, which incorporates AI Clouds, Industrial and Enterprise.
The strong revenue trajectory in ACIE is communicating that Nvidia has other avenues for growth should we see a reduction of GPU-related capex spending. As stated above, Nvidia believes there is about 250,000 companies as the potential SAM for that segment, with the following granularity offered: “The second segment is AI natives, enterprise on-prems, industrial on-prems and that — and sovereign AI. That segment is growing incredibly fast because everybody needs AI, and we're going to see AI being adopted by every industry, every country, every company. And so everybody wants to build it in a different way. And the fact that we provide the entire solution, it makes it much easier, makes it possible at all for people to be able to build these things. And then, of course, the robotic edge today.”
Overall, investors should be prepared for an expanding AI market to meet decreasing market share for Nvidia during the inference phase. Which brings me to my next two points.
Nvidia’s Market Share in Question for the Inference Market
Over the years, I’ve grown to have a keen ear for the commentary on earnings calls, and I do believe there was a mis-step last night with one Q&A exchange.
An analyst asked Huang: “How do you see Vera Rubin in your extreme co-engineering impacting your share of the inference market as we look into late '26, '27?”
In my opinion, management did not directly address the question. Instead, it redirected toward Nvidia’s growth in inference deployments, while mixing up an important distinction between growth versus market share.
Of course, Nvidia is growing inference revenue and inference capacity. In the excerpt below, companies like Anthropic, Azure, AWS and CoreWeave are cited as evidence of this growing “share.” That wasn’t the question though. The question the whole market is wondering is whether Nvidia is gaining market share relative to the inference market.
As you know, the market’s biggest concern is whether custom silicon will take a larger share of inference as workloads become more repetitive and cost-sensitive. The answer did not resolve that concern, and to me, it appeared the word “share” was being redirected to descriptions around “growth.”
For example, Anthropic is deploying gigawatt-level inference workloads with custom silicon providers like Amazon/Trainium and Google/TPUs, therefore, to cite that Anthropic was “largely 0 until recently” does not translate to gaining share on Anthropic workloads as it actually means Nvidia is under-indexed or lagging on this very large inference customer. That’s one of a few inconsistencies in this critical Q&A exchange, with the main one being interchanging the words “share” with “growth”
“Jen-Hsun Huang, Co-Founder, CEO & Director:
Well, we are growing share in inference, and we're growing share in inference very, very quickly. And the reason for that is this year, the number of frontier model companies grew. And so there's Cursor and Perplexity and there's some new model companies, TML and Reflection, and the list goes on. And so the number of frontier model companies has grown, and we added Anthropic to our partnership this year. They're expanding incredibly fast. We've partnered with them to secure computing capacity across Azure, AWS, CoreWeave. I forget who else we've already announced, but there's a whole list of others that we are bringing online for them. And so the amount of capacity that we're going to bring online for Anthropic this year and next year is going to be quite significant, very significant.
And so we're growing and our coverage of Anthropic has been largely 0 until just recently. And so we're gaining share tremendously fast in inference. Vera Rubin is going to be even more successful than Grace Blackwell at this point. Every single, I can't think of one. Every single frontier model company will jump on Vera Rubin from the get-go, and that wasn't true before on Blackwell. And so Vera Rubin is off to a tremendous start and it will surely be more successful than even Grace Blackwell.
So I think the end of your answer, C.J., is that we're gaining share in inference. Let me go back again to the question that Ben was asking. Remember, so far, everything that I've just explained in the inference question is really focused on hyperscale. Remember, there's a whole second category of AI data centers that we serve almost uniquely. Now this segment is very fragmented, requires a fairly integrated — a really well-integrated platform solution and a very large go-to-market. And that segment, all of the inference, 100% of that — the vast majority of that is NVIDIA.”
CPU-to-GPU Attach Rate is Increasing; What that Means for GPUs
We covered the rising importance of CPUs in a recent analysis on Arm, stating: “In agentic workflows, the GPU still handles inference, but between each inference call, the CPU is doing the orchestration – which are best described as handling tool calls, API requests and memory tasks. AI agents are surfacing this new constraint, which is how to prevent latency and underutilized GPUs following the exponential growth of orchestration needs.
For investors, what matters is that CPUs account for 50% to 90% of total latency in workflows, which means the CPU-to-GPU ratio in AI clusters will need to increase. Earlier this year, both AMD and Intel saw analyst upgrades based on the outstripped supply of CPUs leading to higher average sales prices of roughly 10% to 15%. Reuters also reported that Intel’s unfulfilled orders are reaching longer than six months while AMD delivery times are believed to be eight to 10 weeks.”
According to TrendForce and commentary from Arm, it’s expected the CPU-to-GPU attach rate increases from 1:8 to a ratio of 1:2 or even 1:1.
This helps explain why Nvidia spent a decent amount of time last night focusing on its Vera CPU designs: “Vera CPU opens a brand-new $200 billion TAM for NVIDIA, a market we have never addressed before, and every major hyperscale and system maker is partnering with us to get it deployed. We have visibility to nearly $20 billion in total CPU revenue this year, setting us up to become the world's leading CPU supplier.”
However, this inevitably raises the question as to what this means for GPUs (i.e., will more AI compute spend be diverted from largely being GPUs to now include higher CPU content). One analyst went so far as to state it could cannibalize GPUs, of which Nvidia’s management team pushed back on. The answer was long-winded so I am keeping only the excerpts that pertain to the concern.
For more information on the topic, you can read our AMD post-earnings analysis here and Arm post-earnings analysis here.
Vivek Arya
BofA Securities, Research Division
Jensen, there's a lot of excitement around CPU for agentic applications and just a lot of noise around the number of CPUs actually exceeding the number of GPUs. And I was just hoping that you could kind of give your perspective that, first of all, is this an incremental workload? Is this kind of cannibalizing what the GPU would have done otherwise? And then secondly, the $20 billion number that you gave, is that for stand-alone Vera CPUs? Or is that kind of already included in that Vera, as part of Vera Rubin? So just if you could educate us on the role of CPU versus GPU, is it cannibalistic? Is it incremental? And then the $20 billion number, how to kind of put that in context with what you sell, right, which is usually the CPU as part of the GPU?
Jen-Hsun Huang
Co-Founder, CEO & Director
The $20 billion is for stand-alone CPU. And remember, we have Vera, is used in 3 ways. As a stand-alone — 4 ways — let me just start with the one that you already know. The first way is Vera Rubin. And we'll sell millions of Rubins, and every 2 of them is connected to a Vera. And of course, we price those 2 and they're properly priced. And so that's #1 use case.
The second use case is Vera stand-alone CPU. The third is Vera with CX-9 and the software stack for storage. And then Vera in a — with CX-9 with a software stack for security and compute isolation and confidential computing. Okay, so each one of those use cases is built on Vera. And my sense is that we'll be supply constrained throughout the entire life of Vera Rubin. There are 4 different use cases of it. And — but anyhow, the answer to your question is — of the $20 billion is a stand-alone [,,,] And so — but the large length, every one of those agents are going to spin off subagents. And every time they spin these off, you're going to need to do inference. That's where the thinking happens. All of the thinking happens on GPUs, all of the orchestration essentially runs on CPUs. And the subagents when they're spun off, they — when they're thinking they use GPUs.
[…] So we're going to need a lot more CPUs, and Vera was designed to be an agentic CPU. The CPUs of the past were designed to have many cores so that it could be easily rentable. People rented cores. Well, agents don't rent cores. They just want the work to be done fast. The economics of the past was dollars per core. That's the economics of cloud computing of the past. The economics of the AI of the future is tokens per dollar or dollars per token. And so what we need to do in the future is to generate tokens, process tokens as fast as possible, and that's what Vera does incredibly well […]
Supply-Related Commitments Surge to $119B; Good or Bad?
Nvidia’s total supply-related commitments surged once again in Q1, as Nvidia continues to secure supply and capacity to meet demand, yet there may also be a hidden signal that this is driven by materially higher memory component costs that could weigh on margins.
Total supply commitments reached $119 billion, up nearly $90 billion YoY and $24 billion QoQ. As stated last quarter, we believe this serves as a key sign that the current accelerated QoQ data center growth will persist as Blackwell and Rubin ramp, as Nvidia is putting the pieces together across the supply chain to meet its $1 trillion in forecasted cumulative revenue through 2027.

As seen above, this is the largest two-quarter step-up in supply commitments Nvidia has seen at nearly $70 billion, and as it stands, this also is more than 2X its reported cash and equivalents, the first time exceeding this level since Hopper’s breakout quarter. Supply commitments are also substantially higher heading into Rubin’s ramp than prior generations – early FY24 ramped into the teens, before stepping up to the ~$30 billion level for Blackwell.
Nvidia expects $95 billion of these commitments to be paid in the remainder of FY27, and the sheer increase over the past two quarters could imply that there may be some margin headwinds with the Rubin ramp if the bulk of these commitments stems from memory costs.
Considering that Blackwell Ultra and Rubin contain 60% more HBM content versus Blackwell and with memory prices up ~6X since September, it’s entirely possible that securing HBM and auxiliary memory account for the bulk of this increase. For example, Morgan Stanley estimates that Nvidia’s bill of materials on memory for Rubin has reached $2 million per rack, up 435% from the GB300’s $374,000. Putting this a different way, memory could account for 25% of the total BOM for Rubin, versus <10% for the GB300; when translating this to a $500 billion SKU, this is quite a substantial uplift in memory costs that Nvidia must offset via higher prices to avoid operating margin contraction.
It’s clear that supply-related commitments are surging above and beyond what is normal for previous GPU generations – which could indicate either a very strong pipeline or incoming margin pressure from higher memory costs/commitments.
Rubin Remains the Next Major Catalyst, But Timing Risk Remains
There were mixed signals provided on Rubin’s timing. The headline statements seemed to confirm shipments would begin in Q3 (if so … no biggie), but then statements during the Q&A section seemed to point toward the stronger ramp not occurring until Q4-Q1.
Overall, the commentary left it open on when Rubin will make an impact, with my takeaway being somewhere between Q4 and Q1. Keep in mind that Q4 is end of January for Nvidia, so it could be about 8 months out before there is any material Rubin revenue and about 11 months before a bigger impact.
“Joshua Buchalter
TD Cowen, Research Division
And congrats on the great results. Colette, I believe, in your prepared remarks, you mentioned GB300 is sort of the fastest ramp in the company's history. How should we think about Vera Rubin against this benchmark? It's obviously a new architecture at the silicon level, but in similar rack. Does that mean we should expect a similar slope to the Vera Rubin ramp as the GB300? Or should it be a bit more gradual given the new silicon?
Colette Kress
Executive VP & CFO
Yes. Well, we've indicated for a while that we will be launching Vera Rubin in the second half. We will start in Q3. That will be our initial pieces together. And then once we get to Q4, we're probably going to start to see our ramping continue. It's hard to say at this point what will be a faster ramp. But again, we have demand already planned, we've got POs. We've got almost all of our major customers ready to go, and these are very complex systems that we need to put together. So I think it's just about the timing that it's going to take for us to get that into market. Nothing else other than getting from production of all of the different systems that we have ready for order.
So a little early to say. But yes, we're going to start in Q3 and continue to ramp into Q4. And Q1 of next year certainly is going to be very big as well.”
Financials
Revenue Accelerates 12 Points in Q1, Guided to Persist in Q2
Nvidia reported $81.62 billion in revenue in Q1, beating its own guidance for $78 billion and marking a fresh record for sequential dollar growth at nearly $13.5 billion (versus $11.1 billion last quarter).
Revenue growth accelerated 12 points from 73.2% YoY in Q4 to 85.2% YoY in Q1, while QoQ growth was steady at 19.8% QoQ, an impressive growth rate considering the sheer scale of Nvidia’s revenue.

For Q2, Nvidia guided for revenue to be $91 billion, +/- 2%, implying YoY growth accelerating further to 94.7% while QoQ growth would moderate to 11.9%. However, dollar growth would remain rather strong sequentially at $9.4 billion guided. This was notably $4 billion ahead of consensus for $86.95 billion.
For FY27, current consensus estimates sat at $373 billion (up 72.7% YoY) heading into earnings, $43 billion higher than the $330 billion estimate from late February due to Nvidia’s comments about $1 trillion in cumulative revenue for Blackwell and Rubin through 2027. However, considering Q1’s beat and Q2’s raise over estimates, it’s likely that FY27 revenue estimates will have to move a minimum of $10 billion higher.
Networking Remains Robust at 35% QoQ to Nearly $60B Annualized
As expected, Data Center momentum remained robust, with revenue up 92% YoY and 21% QoQ to $75.25 billion. This marked a 17 point acceleration from 75% YoY growth in Q4 while QoQ again remained steady with Q4’s 22% growth off a larger base. Nvidia said that growth was driven by the GB300 ramp as well as demand across its Networking portfolio, including InfiniBand, Spectrum-X Ethernet and NVLink.

Compute revenue was $60.4 billion, accelerating 19 point to 77% YoY with QoQ growth of 18%, roughly maintaining the 19% QoQ growth from Q4. On a dollar basis, growth was $9.1 billion, increasing from Q4’s ~$8.3 billion. Nvidia added that it recorded no China-based Hopper revenue in the quarter.
Networking growth remained robust, up 199% YoY and 35% QoQ to a record $14.8 billion, or nearly $60 billion annualized, compared to $20 billion annualized last Q1. While YoY growth did technically decelerate 36 points from 235% YoY in Q4, the more impressive feat was the slight QoQ acceleration from 34% in Q4 to 35% QoQ this quarter.
New Reporting Structure for Key Segments
It should be noted that Nvidia shook up its segment reporting this quarter, re-categorizing Data Center to two sub-markets: Hyperscale and AI Cloud, Industrial and Enterprise (ACIE), to emphasize what customer cohorts are driving growth. While Nvidia did provide Compute and Networking revenue this quarter, it’s unlikely that we will get another breakdown here moving forward.
Nvidia’s other segments – Gaming, Automotive, Pro Viz, and OEM and Other – were reclassified into Edge Computing.
For a quick snapshot of the new segment structure:
Hyperscale revenue accounted for roughly 50% of Data Center at $37.87 billion, up 115% YoY and 12% QoQ. Revenue from Hyperscale was $17.6 billion a year ago (45% of DC) and $33.8 billion in Q4 (54% of DC).
AI Cloud, Industrial and Enterprise (ACIE) revenue was the remaining half of Data Center at $37.38 billion, up 74% YoY and 31% QoQ. ACIE revenue was $21.5 billion a year ago and $28.5 billion in Q4.
Edge Computing revenue was $6.37 billion, up 29% YoY and 10% QoQ, driven by strong demand for Blackwell workstations, offset by slower consumer PC demand.
Margins Remaining Steady
While Nvidia continues to grow its topline at increasingly large rates on a dollar basis, margins are remaining steady. There were also tiny signs of operating leverage at this scale, with gross margins in line with guidance and slight outperformance on operating margins.
GAAP gross margin was 74.9% and adjusted gross margin was 75%, both in line with guidance. Both were up >14 points YoY due to the H20 impacts last Q1, and marginally lower QoQ. For Q2, Nvidia guided for both to be flat QoQ at 74.9% and 75% respectively, representing roughly 2.5 and 2.3 points of expansion YoY.
GAAP operating margin was 65.6%, coming in above guidance for 65%; this marked a >16 point YoY expansion again from the H20-related impacts, and a slight increase from 65% in Q4. Adjusted operating margin was 65.9% and saw a similar dynamic, up >13 points YoY and expanding from 65.3% in Q4.
Looking ahead to Q2, guidance implies operating margins to remain flat QoQ at 65.6% and 65.9% respectively. On a YoY basis, this would represent a 4.8 point expansion for GAAP operating margin and a smaller 1.4 point expansion for adjusted operating margin.

GAAP net margin was 71.5%, as Nvidia benefitted from nearly $16 billion in gains related to its equity investments, more than offsetting its $11.6 billion in income tax payments this quarter. Adjusted net margin was 55.8%, up more than 10 points YoY but down 1.4 points QoQ.
EPS
Nvidia’s GAAP EPS benefitted from the equity investment gains, though growth for adjusted EPS was also robust at 140% YoY.
GAAP EPS was $2.39, up 214% YoY due to the equity gains, which contributed roughly $0.64 to the bottom line. Adjusted EPS was $1.87, up 140% YoY (versus Q1’s new adjusted figure of $0.78, per Q4’s change in reporting to include SBC).
For Q2, GAAP EPS is projected to be $1.91, up 76.9% YoY, while adjusted EPS is projected to be $1.96, up 86.6% YoY.
Cash Flows and Balance Sheet
Cash flows were another strong point in Q1 as operating cash flow margin returned to above 60%.
Q1 operating cash flow margin was $50.3 billion for a 61.7% margin, down from a 62.2% margin a year ago but a rebound from 53.1% in Q4. Nvidia says OCF was driven by higher revenue and lower cash taxes, projecting higher taxes in Q2 which is likely to weigh on OCF.
Q1 free cash flow was $48.6 billion for a 59.5% margin, up slightly from 59.3% a year ago and 51.2% in Q4.
Cash, equivalents and marketable debt securities were $50.3 billion (excluding marketable equity securities which were previously included in Q4). Debt remained steady at $8.47 billion.
Inventories were $25.8 billion, up $4.4 billion or 20.6% QoQ, while accounts receivable increased more than $2 billion QoQ to $40.7 billion.
Conclusion:
Nvidia delivered a near perfect quarter, as revenue accelerated, networking grew 35% QoQ, with elite-level margins and cash flow that are significantly better than even the trademark value-stock Apple.
With that said, the catalysts are not as clean as prior years during Hopper and Blackwell. The inference market is becoming more competitive, CPU-to-GPU attach rates could divert compute spend, and Nvidia’s supply-related commitments are surging – which could indicate either a very strong pipeline or incoming margin pressure from higher memory costs/commitments. Lastly, the segment change is likely a defensive move ahead of hyperscaler allocating more AI budget to custom silicon.
Although I am far from bearish on Nvidia, the I/O Fund is a top tier team in AI research. We can do better than hold the most well-known name in the AI trade. As we close up our earnings season soon following Broadcom, we turn our attention to new ideas for a dedicated seven weeks. Keep an eye on your inbox as we revisit the biggest winners from this quarter and surface new stocks you likely haven’t heard of.
Damien Robbins, Equity Analyst at I/O Fund contributed to this analysis.
Please note: The I/O Fund conducts research and draws conclusions for the company’s portfolio. We then share that information with our readers and offer real-time trade notifications. This is not a guarantee of a stock’s performance and it is not financial advice. Please consult your personal financial advisor before buying any stock in the companies mentioned in this analysis. Beth Kindig and the I/O Fund own shares in NVDA at the time of writing and may own stocks pictured in the charts.
Recommended Reading:
- Applied Optoelectronics Q1: Management Guides to 141% YoY Growth; Execution Comes Next
- Arm FQ4: AGI CPU Demand Hits $2B, Revenue Outlook Stays at $1B
- Lumentum FQ3: Firing on All Cylinders Despite Stiff Supply Constraints Across EMLs, Pump Lasers
- Astera Labs: Important QoQ Acceleration, Product Road Map is Loaded


































