Utah’s 40,000 acre datacenter proves it’s not absolutely at the upper end.

https://www.theverge.com/ai-artificial-intelligence/933687/u...

Most hyperscalers now prefer to build larger sites as “campuses” which may consist of many buildings each consuming 40-100MW, and then yes each building needs most of what you mentioned, so it adds up.

A few sites are now also contemplating BTM or ‘behind the meter’ power generation which takes additional space.

Then some sites like Microsoft’s Fairwater design are optimized for a very large number of Accelerator cabinets — think GPU, TPU, etc. Those cabinets are each consuming 140kW today and with a path to 700-1000kW cabinets soon, so that’s one super dense building instead of a campus of less dense buildings filled with Compute.

> Utah’s 40,000 acre datacenter proves it’s not absolutely at the upper end

So far it seems to be more of a concept of a plan. I wouldn’t be surprised if they build smaller scale data centers first, then cancel the 40000 acres expansion. That sorts of feel like a marketing tactic. If not and they are serious, are we close to peak bubble?

The density of modern racks makes me wonder why they would want so much space. There's just no way to power all of that.

Storage? Even that is now ultra-compact.

40,000 acres, aka 77 × Monaco's!

TIL.