SemiAnalysis' report on orbital data centers estimated 4x terrestrial costs in 2026, then parity around ~2040.

https://newsletter.semianalysis.com/p/to-boldly-go-the-case-...

Based on very specific assumptions: “…the world in which AI demand is so overwhelming as to exceed the already formidable datacenter capacity additions” — but also this same world is one where GPU chip supply is abundant, there just isn’t enough data centers to put them in.

This does not seem like the likeliest scenario to me.

▲

Gh0stRAT 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Agreed, how could we not have datacenter capacity for the GPUs when Meta has shown that you can go from a bare field to an operational datacenter in about 3 months by using tents instead of buildings?

▲

Ekaros 2 hours ago | parent [-]

How hard would it be to weatherproof a GPU computing rack? Like how much more cost would it add? So theoretically you could even forgo tents. Just have them at field. Technically you could even maybe run them in freeports. Thus saving any tariff costs...

	▲	c0balt 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		You don't even have to weatherproof the rack, putting racks into shipping containers is already done to some extent (and multiple deployments are to my knowledge working fine). It is often also marketed as "module data centers". The main problem here is that it reduces efficiency (cooling a large datacenter is more efficient per Watt of dissipated heat than a shipping container) and increases initial cost (building in a shipping container is not actually as easy as doing it in a normal-ish building). Portability (when offline, you can put a shipping container like this on a truck and cart it around) and availability (no need for a new/refit building, only power is required and could be included in the container with a generator (gas/diesel)) are the main reasons for accepting a higher TCO here.