Tech
Nvidia is a victim of the compute marketplace it created
Long the leading light of the industry, Nvidia has had a bad couple of months. Bloomberg has the ugly details, but the upshot is that the company’s stock price has fallen 15% since its peak in May, even as projected revenue continues to grow. Compared with expected earnings, the company is now cheaper than the S&P average; investors are paying less per dollar of Nvidia’s projected profit than they do for the typical large American company.
Money is still flooding into AI infrastructure stocks, but it’s mostly going into memory companies. Over the same period, Micron — one of the world’s largest makers of DRAM, the standard type of memory chip found in computers and servers — has nearly tripled in value, establishing memory as the new bottleneck for data centers and the hot new AI trade. The basic reason is simple: The GPU shortage that looked so alarming last year has eased off a bit. At the same time, data centers need all the memory money can buy.
For anyone who appreciates Nvidia’s technological accomplishments, this can feel a bit deflating. There’s a lot of genuinely impressive technology behind Nvidia’s rise, both in developing CUDA, its widely adopted programming platform that made Nvidia GPUs the default engine for AI research, and in pushing the pace of GPU development to a speed few thought possible. Nvidia’s success is the kind of thing you can write whole books about, and the GPUs themselves are among the most complex devices ever produced, right at the bleeding edge of human capability.
For memory companies like Micron, the story is much simpler. They build high-bandwidth memory chips — specialized components designed to move data in and out of processors as fast as possible — which have been getting incrementally better for 20 years. Without the chips or the companies changing too much, the service they provide suddenly became very valuable — and since demand is growing faster than anyone can scale up supply, they have been able to increase prices tenfold over the past year.
This, via Datatrack, is what the spot price for DRAM — the price buyers pay for chips on the open market, as opposed to long-term contract rates — looks like since 2023:
You might think there was some amazing technical breakthrough in the summer of 2025, but no, the industry as a whole just vastly underestimated how much memory it would need for the data center buildout.
In comparison, this (via the compute market Ornn) is how the spot price for an hour of time on an Nvidia H100 GPU has changed over the last year:
Just like Nvidia’s stock price, there’s a peak in May (around $3.20 an hour) and then a steady drop-off. For better or worse, Nvidia’s value as a company is tied to the price of compute and that price is falling. Micron and its cohort are tied to the price of DRAM, and that price keeps rising.
When I talked to Ornn co-founder and CTO Wayne Nelms about the forces driving that disparity, he framed it as a simple issue of supply and demand. Google, Amazon, Microsoft, and even OpenAI have launched their own custom processors to lessen their dependence on Nvidia; even if those chips aren’t as good as the latest model from Nvidia, they’re good enough to drive down the price of compute.
“More GPU and accelerator players are entering the market. Everyone wants to make their own silicon, but no one is making their own DRAM,” Nelms told me. “Until there’s a major technological breakthrough on HBM [high-bandwidth memory], a shift in supply and demand, or someone new [enters the market in memory], I think things will more or less persist as we see today.”
It’s a frustrating state of affairs for Nvidia, and largely a product of its own success. Having proven how valuable compute can be, the company finds itself at the center of a market everyone wants to be in — while simpler technologies and less interesting companies get rich on the sidelines.
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.
Tech
After Apple, India’s smartphone manufacturing boom enters new phase with Vivo JV
India on Thursday approved a manufacturing joint venture between China’s Vivo and local manufacturer Dixon Technologies, a move that could mark the next phase of the country’s smartphone manufacturing boom after Apple helped turn India into a global smartphone production hub.
The approval allows Vivo to proceed with a long-delayed manufacturing partnership first announced in December 2024, after New Delhi cleared the investment under investment rules introduced in 2020 that require extra government scrutiny of investment from countries sharing a land border with India — a category that includes China. The joint venture will acquire certain manufacturing assets from Vivo, manufacture part of the company’s smartphone orders in India, and can also produce electronic products for other brands, according to a stock exchange filing by Noida-based Dixon.
The 51/49 venture — majority-owned by Dixon, with Vivo holding the remaining stake — reflects a broader shift in how Chinese smartphone brands are expanding manufacturing in India through local partnerships. For an industry watching how governments referee the relationship between Chinese capital and domestic manufacturing, the structure, analysts believe, could become a template for similar arrangements across the industry, helping broaden India’s smartphone manufacturing story beyond Apple.
Over the past few years, India has emerged as a major global smartphone manufacturing hub as Apple and its suppliers expanded iPhone production in the country while diversifying supply chains beyond China. Government incentives have also helped attract global electronics manufacturers, boosting the country’s role in global smartphone production.
Apple spent years building its manufacturing footprint in India and today accounts for 57% of the country’s smartphone exports by volume, according to Counterpoint Research’s data shared with TechCrunch. Chinese brands, on the other hand, dominate India’s smartphone market sales with 72% of the market, but contribute less than 10% of exports, a gap that shows how much upside is still on the table if they start exporting from India the way Apple does.
Apple’s India manufacturing expansion has largely been driven by suppliers such as Foxconn and Tata. Chinese smartphone brands, meanwhile, are increasingly exploring partnerships with Indian companies after New Delhi tightened investment rules for neighboring countries following the 2020 border clashes with China. Several of those companies, including Oppo, Vivo, and Xiaomi, have also faced tax and regulatory investigations in India in recent years, which helps explain why ceding majority control to an Indian partner is now looking like the more sustainable path forward.
Local partnerships such as the Dixon-Vivo venture offer Chinese brands a more stable operating model, while aligning with India’s push for greater local participation in electronics manufacturing, said Tarun Pathak, research director at Counterpoint Research.
“The approval of this joint venture creates a win-win for both players,” Pathak told TechCrunch. He added that the majority-Indian-owned structure provides Vivo with greater policy alignment while giving Dixon the scale to deepen local value addition and pursue exports.
Vivo has manufactured and exported smartphones from India for years, but the approved venture marks a shift toward a majority-Indian-owned manufacturing structure as the market leader deepens its footprint in the world’s second-largest smartphone market. The Chinese smartphone vendor retained the top spot in India’s smartphone market with a 23% shipment share in Q1, per Counterpoint.
For Dixon, India’s largest electronics manufacturing services company, the venture could add annualized manufacturing volumes of about 20 million to 22 million smartphones, based on Vivo’s current sales, according to comments by Managing Director Atul Lall during the company’s May earnings call. That’s a meaningful volume bump for a public company whose growth increasingly hinges on winning exactly these kinds of manufacturing contracts.
Dixon already manufactures smartphones for Xiaomi, suggesting the Vivo venture builds on an expanding role as a manufacturing partner for both global and Chinese smartphone brands in India, and reinforces its position as one of the more reliable bets in India’s electronics build-out.
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.
Tech
Florida ransomware negotiator convicted for helping ransomware gang extort US companies
Florida man Angelo Martino has been sentenced to more than five years in prison for conspiring with hackers to deploy ransomware during his job as a ransomware negotiator for a U.S. cybersecurity company.
The U.S. Department of Justice confirmed the sentence on Thursday, noting that the government seized more than $10 million worth of cryptocurrency and assets. Martino allegedly bought these assets, which include a food truck and a luxury fishing boat, with money stolen in the hacks.
Martino is the third person to be jailed for the scheme, following the earlier incarceration of cybersecurity professionals Kevin Martin and Ryan Goldberg. The trio, prosecutors say, worked together to deploy the BlackCat ransomware against companies in the United States throughout 2023. In one successful attack, the cyber professionals moonlighting as criminals extorted a company for about $1.2 million, which they then split three ways after laundering the funds.
The investigation highlights a rare case of security professionals working for malicious hackers while on the job. Governments have long advised victims of hacking and extortion not to pay any ransom and prevent cybercriminals from profiting, although some companies do so anyway in attempts to prevent their customers’ private data from being leaked.
Extortion attacks have helped create an entire insurance sub-sector in the U.S. for responding to ransomware and extortion attacks. Some companies in this space employ negotiators to try to bring down the cost of ransoms.
BlackCat (also known as ALPHV) is a ransomware-as-a-service operation that allows independent hackers, known as affiliates, to rent access to the gang’s file-encrypting malware in exchange for a cut of the profits from cyberattacks.
The group’s ransomware was famously used to steal highly sensitive medical and billing data of more than 192 million people in America during a hack at U.S. health technology giant Change Healthcare in February 2024, though the affiliate hackers responsible for the 2024 data breach were never identified.
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.
Tech
EU threatens Meta with fines over addictive features on Facebook and Instagram
The EU announced on Friday that Meta must overhaul Facebook’s and Instagram’s addictive design features or face a fine. The tech giant is in breach of the Digital Services Act by focusing on features like infinite scroll, autoplay, push notifications, and highly personalized recommendation algorithms, the European Commission said.
The Commission says these features fuel the user’s urge to keep scrolling and shift the brain into “autopilot mode,” which contributes to unhealthy habits and compulsive use. It found that Meta failed to adequately assess the risks posed by the addictive design of its platforms to users’ physical and mental well-being, including minors and vulnerable adults.
The Commission also accused Meta of ignoring evidence about the amount of time minors spend on Instagram and Facebook at night and how features such as Reels and Stories could encourage excessive or compulsive use of the platforms.
“Evidence also shows that Meta’s current mitigation measures failed to effectively tackle the risks stemming from its addictive design,” the Commission wrote. “For example, Instagram’s and Facebook’s time management tools, including those activated by default for teens, can be easily dismissed and do not lead to a meaningful reduction and control of the usage of the service.”
It’s calling on Meta to disable key addictive features, such as autoplay and infinite scroll by default, and to introduce effective screen-time breaks, as well as modify its recommendation algorithm to make it less focused on user engagement.
The findings are not final, and Meta will now have the opportunity to review the evidence against it and submit a formal response. If the Commission’s findings are confirmed, Meta faces a fine of up to 6% of its total global annual turnover.
Meta did not immediately respond to TechCrunch’s request for comment.
Friday’s announcement marks the second time this year that the EU Commission has found Meta contravening its laws. In April, the Commission found that Meta was failing to prevent children under 13 from using Facebook and Instagram.
Meta has also been facing scrutiny in the U.S. for failing to protect young users on its platforms. Most recently, Meta said in a court filing on Monday that four U.S. states are seeking $1.4 trillion in penalties over claims that the tech giant designed Facebook and Instagram to addict young users and that it misled the public about the platforms’ safety.
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.
The Very Adult Space Sci-Fi Killed By Hollywood And Buried By Its Own Name
MLB roundup: Jays' Dylan Cease loses no-hit bid in 9th vs. Giants
