EP 187: Inside the Future of Memory Summit & AMD’s "Boring" Bullishness

0:05Hello, everyone. Welcome to another episode of The Circuit. I am Ben Beharin. Greetings, agents. I'm Jay Goldberg. All right. This week was good. There was a lot of earnings. We are not going to get to them all because there was also a super interesting conference that I was at, Future of Memory Summit, that we think is worth digging into. But we do want to talk about AMD. It was very interesting. There was kind of a mixed reaction, despite the fact that they had some pretty good numbers. I know that there's some timing questions, which we'll talk about. But obviously, you know, and again, coming off Advancing AI Day, where they outlined a pretty bullish forecast, as well as their own belief that they will outgrow the market in accelerators.

0:58seems to be the execution part of this story, I think is kind of what, what I landed on afterwards. But what was your, what was your take kind of high level? I thought this was sort of very typical for what we've seen with AMD over the last few years, which is they have a sort of fundamentally, I don't say boring. They got mad at me when I said it last time, boring, but in a good way, they have a fundamentally very, straightforward story which is we're going to make some products and we're going to execute to our roadmap and we're just going to keep doing that quarter after quarter and that's what they did and what a lot of i think the street has come to expect is like blowout earnings big massive beats and and that wasn't what they they delivered like you said they just had an event uh what two weeks ago where they sort of gave all the good news and this this quarter came in i mean the numbers were good like good good quarter good guidance like in terms of relative expectations they beat across all sort of metrics um but people weren't super excited i think the stock was down the day after and then it's it's up a little bit for the week but it was it's very much in the category of just like oh just an execution quarter and i think there's a there's a class of investors who just want more excitement than that and it wasn't exciting it was good which is like what andy should be known for and so i i didn't i couldn't find you know i couldn't find fault with anything any other commentary some of the criticisms i saw afterwards struck me as a little esoteric um you know data center whatever number people were expecting for data center number somehow wasn't good enough even though it was like i think it doubled year on year so there's a lot of little quibbling around it but good numbers from a very solid you know company that sort of just executing.

2:57That's the story. And I guess that wasn't exciting enough for people. Yeah. I mean, and I think part of it too, again, I don't know, I don't know, again, if this is just the boring part, but like, you know, so much strength in the business and CPU demand, even with ASPs rising, right, as a part of that mix as kind of the new roadmap of CPUs can command some higher pricing. But I don't know, maybe just people aren't as excited about CPUs despite, you know, the, the significant growth of it and their outlook into that very big number into 2027. I mean, I get the accelerator base, but just the strength of CPUs alone, right.

3:38Which I just don't think a lot of people have fully grasped in their, in their models. Like they're, they're pretty bullish on what's going on with CPUs going forward. And I don't know, some, like I said, maybe that's just too boring, but, uh, I just thought it was interesting that it kind of feels like it's either not exciting enough or people just still aren't sure what's going on in the CPU demand. Yeah, I heard that a little bit. I sort of took that in the context of they're making as many chips as TSMC can. They're selling as many chips as TSMC will make for them. Right. I think that's the key thing there, along with everybody else, their capacity constraint.

4:23I haven't run the numbers yet, but I think they lost a little bit of share in the data center to Intel, which we talked about a few weeks ago. Share is going to change this year, but the market is growing so fast that will blur the share. I think share is a less relevant argument right now, just that the whole pie is growing so big. Yeah. So quickly. So, you know, like, yeah, I mean, what was it, three months ago, which seems like an eon ago, everybody's all excited about CPUs. And, yeah, CPUs are still a big deal, but, like, maybe they're not as exciting as they were three months ago, even though their numbers keep going up for everybody.

5:10So I think it's a little bit of sentiment versus where people's interest is right now. Right. I thought it was interesting. You know, they pointed out first half CPU supply was tight because demand was unforecasted while 2027 should be better forecasted was the note I had from the earnings. So it's interesting to me that, I mean, obviously not a lot of people saw CPU coming. and by the time we did, right, they would have secured wafers. But I kind of took that as a positive that they feel they can secure the wafers they need for what they're modeling into 27 with their forecasts, which, again, I still think will be supply constrained.

5:53But the fact that it sounds like they're able to get those wafers, whether they can get the memory, that's a whole different situation. But the fact that they could at least get the wafers they need for CPU, and they're saying they forecasted that right, I thought that was a positive too because this, again, is an upside pool that I don't think people have really modeled into. And they're saying they're going to be able to get that capacity that they need to grow into their demand forecast. Yeah. All right. I mean, AMD has probably the best access to TSMC allocation of anybody. And they also are the most reliable in their forecasting.

6:33They're not going to forecast numbers that they can't hit. So, I mean, I think that's ultimately the problem is that they're very reliable and very reasonable in their sort of future commentary, as opposed to some others in the industry who are perhaps forecasting things less tied to, you know, specific hard data. hard data. Right. And so the others look more exciting. AMD is like, Hey, we're going to grow a reasonable amount. And other people are saying, Hey, we're going to grow a crazy amount. And AMD is like, yeah, but we have the capacity and we're not going to exaggerate our numbers. So I, I get, I get that.

7:15Um, I think, uh, like, I, I don't know how much people appreciate that like when when lisa starts coming off as like pretty bullish signals that's right for growth like she doesn't do that like she's pretty conservative so it's sort of like they're like oh like you said like forget like that it's probably going to be bigger but the fact that she's this empathetic on this particular growth is like you just have to appreciate that that She does not do those things if there's not – that's a very bullish signal how ambitious she sounded in the growth. So take that for what it is. Man. All right. So there was a brief – I don't know if this was a big issue.

8:10It kind of got debated as to whether it was. But there was some early speculation that their CapEx spend, which is going up to I believe$108 million and it was estimated at$200 something. was part of why the stock had a mixed reaction. Now, I don't know if that's totally true. I mean, I think the reality is if you need to go and secure that level of equipment, testing, et cetera, right, that you're doing, your upspend in CapEx is the signal that you have a lot of demand. So I don't know if you had a take on that. It seemed like that was debatable. Like, was the CapEx raise partially why some people were off or not?

8:51but I don't I wasn't sure yeah I again to me that's like a second order of criticism like yes they're gonna have to spend more both in OPEX and in CAPEX to do this it's not entirely clear where their CAPEX is going and I think they gave reasonable-ish explanations for that I think it's just cost of doing business at this point It's getting very expensive to compete here. You need to do a lot more for your customers. And that's going to imply some capex. I think partly what may have sort of triggered some people is all the financing stuff we've been seeing going around. I know that that has spooked some people, like the degree of financing that's being required, both with Broadcom and especially NVIDIA are putting into this.

9:42and I think there's a little bit of trepidation among investors that AMD is going to have to start doing that as well. I mean, right? So they have to some degree, but not nearly as much as the other two. Right. And so when you hear CapEx going up, people start to get a little spooked. Yeah. I guess. Again, second-order criticism. I'm not sure how important it is. I mean, there was a lot of second-order criticisms that happened here. It was a good quarter. They're guiding to pretty strong growth. I guess the only other thing I heard was people don't disagree with the growth trajectory. I think they just hoped it would be sooner, like into this year versus more of a 26-27 story.

10:21But that's just what it is. That's what they're ramping to. They're ramping to meet the demand of the next two years. And so, again, critique that as well as it will, but it's coming. They're posturing for very good growth is kind of, again, my takeaway. They have good growth and they're building and ramping up for very good growth in the next two years. Yeah, I think it's as simple as that. I mean, ultimately, that seems in line with what they should be doing given the growth they're facing, the opportunity they have in front of them.

11:00Yeah, OK. Well, yes, I agree. I'm glad I surmised it. Anyway, good quarter. We'll go into Q4 where I think we'll start to see Helios start to inflect, which will be good. So good stuff there. All right. On to Future of Memory Summit, which I went to. So I don't know how many folks of our listeners go to that conference, but I have attended this conference at different points of time in the past 15 years or so uh obviously memory coming up I heard it was pretty big last year I didn't go I was out of town um certainly right everybody is is is uh optimistic on memory but I have never for anybody who knows of the Santa Clara Convention Center.

11:53It is not the nicest convention center. It's kind of outdated. It's also not big, but I have never not been able to park in the parking lot, in the free parking lot that sits to the complex in between past the Hyatt. First day I roll in, no place to park, no place to park at all. And I was firstly like, okay, sign of the times, right? But then I'm like talking to other people executives of friends of ours right and everybody was like dude i've never not been able to park here like i had to park at levi's i had to park across the street like everybody had the same point and it was like the show was buzzing it was crazy the show floor was not big enough every booth was like big and packed between sk and samsung and micron and marvell like just tons of like i've never seen it like maybe there was an fms where this was this much fun i've never seen this and again just make those observations to say the sign of the times of this show yeah well i i will say like this year at gtc i couldn't get to the show like it was there was no parking the big lots were closed it was clear it was gonna take me an hour to find parking and so i just didn't i ended up not walking the show and just met people on the periphery.

13:14Geesh. So, um, oh wait, that was in San Jose. Yeah. Santa Clara is. Dude, no. Yeah. Yeah. Like again, if you know Santa Clara Convention Center, it's, uh, it's not, it's not big. So anyway, FMS needs to move. Apparently they're still going to be there next year, but they, they need to move. It is. Anyway, so sign of the times, everybody in the ecosystem was there from memory to memory controllers. and interconnects, which I think is an important, interesting observation of why networking and interconnect companies wanted to show up. But my takeaway was this was the first time where I kind of saw the ecosystem around CXL in particularly take shape.

14:02And everybody wanted to talk about CXL. There was a bunch of CXL announcements, both from chips to fabric to networking. Everybody in memory wanted to talk about CXL. And I walked away believing that the time is now for CXL that will start to scale. I did a whole report on this at the Diligent Stack this week for anybody, last week for anybody who cares. But you needed kind of the entirety of the ecosystem from the controllers to the sensors to the optical transceivers to the switches. like everything to work so that you could disaggregate memory and now have memory be what we all hoped it would be when cxl would scale the promise of cxl to have near memory compute but disaggregate that memory off the board finally looks like it's at a spot to scale and again everybody at the ecosystem was was there marvell had some excellent demos of this just showing disaggregated memory move at lower bit rate, sorry, higher bit rate, lower picojoules of power, kind of all of the benefits across their stack.

15:11And so, you know, again, I had not seen, I've seen pockets of this. You've seen some proof points, but I think you walk in and you see a very mature ecosystem around the standard for true disaggregated memory. It makes me confident that kind of we're on the path to start to scale this. So let me take a step back because CXL is a little obscure for some people, I know. So I had to look this up. It's CXL stands for Compute Express Link, which is, doesn't tell you much. It is a protocol for interconnecting different pieces of different chips, like chip-to-chip communication, right? And so think of it as, it's like PCIe or USB for, but at a very, very low level, connecting different parts of different chips or different tiles in a package or whatever.

16:09And this is a technology that's been around, this is a standard, I guess, that's been around for a while. I remember very, very clearly in like 2021, 2022, people were getting all excited about it. I was getting a lot of investor questions about it. I think we talked about it on the show really early on. And it was clear that it was like one of these really interesting things, but it was going to take a long time to mature, especially because the applications that people are going to use it for originally were for big, complicated SoCs, essentially. And then AI happened, and everybody lost interest in CXL, because all people cared about was memory bandwidth.

16:47And this seemed unrelated. And I remember at some point, like in 2023, I think semi-analysis, I think it was Dylan wrote a piece about CXL is not dead, but nobody's going to care about it for a long time until it becomes useful for AI in the future. And I think we're now reaching that point where it's like suddenly memory is so... I mean, I think this is the broader theme that's going on now is like memory is so expensive and it's such a bottleneck that people are going to start doing everything they can to get around the memory tax, if you will. And CXL looks to be a pretty interesting way to do that Because it gives you a lot more flexibility in bringing memory close to the compute.

17:32Yeah. So there's two other parts, too, that I think make this interesting to inflect. I mean, obviously, as we talked about next week, we're early in the rack scale era. And obviously, it benefits a medium or a protocol standard like CXL. As we move to racks, because you're building these compute racks, it's not just like hosts of just CPU racks sitting there. You're starting to build accelerator racks. And within that, you have optionality as a vendor, let's just say, as a hyperscaler at this point. And so you could see how as they start to think about rack scale infrastructure, they start to think about what they want to do in their compute pods that gives them flexibility in TCL.

18:18So there's that part. We're early in the RackScale era, but RackScale becoming the de facto way to deploy accelerators and AI opens up this opportunity for CXL because you're just thinking about how you mix and match and build these things. The second one is that we were obviously waiting for inference. The reality is that memory makes a big deal in inference workloads. So you need a whole lot more memory in an inference cluster in order to handle concurrent users at scale, which could be many thousands of agents or hundreds of thousands of agents at any given time in an inference cluster. And so memory matters for that.

18:52So those are kind of the big ones. My concern coming into this was always like, this is great. This all sounds great. But like, where are you going to get the memory? Like, I don't, I don't like, you're not like memory doesn't grow on trees. you're not just all of a sudden going to be like, dude, I could now make a memory server with an unbelievable amount of memory. With what memory? And so I'm like, okay, that was always sort of my thing going in. But what I came away with at this conference and kind of my biggest nugget, which I wrapped a whole report around for CXL was CXL is the only standard.

19:28And I say this because there are other standards, right? Credo is pushing OmniConnect, which I think is good. Obviously, this goes over PCIe. And so people were like, well, there's trade-offs in speed. Fine. You know, that can get solved. But the reality is in every other solution, you have to go and secure brand new memory. DDR5, right, what you want. CXL is the only solution that supports memory reuse. So reuse of old DIMMs. So in this case, you can use DDR4. You can do any DDR4 you have in your data center as you retire old systems that have a truck ton of DDR4, largely in general purpose CPUs.

20:06Reuse that in your CXL racks, in your pod, either as its own rack, which I think happens later, but within the rack in scale-up. And so when you unpack the TCO advantage that CXL brings, particularly to the hyperscalers, who, again, have an unbelievable amount of DDR4 that they're sitting on, that they can retire as they upgrade their CPUs to Agentec, as we know they're all doing, which also incentivizes them to upgrade those because they can reuse that memory. Like, it's just the TCO benefits for this make so much sense. Now, again, I am isolating that to the benefits of those who have a lot of memory to reuse, which is your three hyperscalers and to some degree Oracle, not others.

20:51But I also think those three slash four alone can fundamentally drive the ecosystem of this across the board because, again, they've actually got the memory in oodles to refresh and use and use for CXL. So to me, if you just said, hey, look, why are you so confident that CXL is the thing? And I'm not saying other solutions do not enter the fray. NVLink obviously has a role to play here. What I'm saying is high memory reuse is the reason I think it makes so much sense for the hyperscalers to reuse this, which is why I think it is the one that gets the most traction first amongst others that I also think will be deployed.

21:33Okay. Yeah. Yeah, I think, I mean, CXL has always been interesting that it's very flexible. It has a lot of different things it can be used for. It was going to take time, and I think now it's real, which is kind of cool. It's like a whole new standard. And I think that's really interesting what you're saying, that the hyperscalers have all that old memory that they can reuse, which is mind-boggling to me. like the idea that we're going to, you know, reuse memory. Like I have this image. I know that's not exactly what it is, but I have this image of like data center, hyperscaler data centers with like trucks up on cinder blocks as they're pulling all the memory out.

22:16Well, okay, but there's two parts to this. So yes, the other reason I think this advantages the hyperscalers is that like I've known this for some time, like they do actually have as a part of their whatever you want to say like just the way they do tco they've already got qualified programs internally to reuse components as needed so like they've got everything they need to take take that that memory do what they need to qualify it and make it ready for new solutions that's that's not easy like that is a hard process but they do this oftentimes with old gpus with old networking equipment they have the ability to reuse that in other systems.

22:54Maybe again, that they wouldn't have it in a tier one system like they can do with DDR4. But the reality is they've got everything they need to reclaim and reuse their old memory. So, so fine. Now, now again, right, I get DDR4 is not going to be as fast as DDR5. And sure, there's trade-offs in speed. And yes, it's not as low power. Again, none of that matters when the answer here is you don't need to go buy a bunch of more memory. You have it. You have the memory you need to now go deploy cxl at scale which again helps you keep your cogs down helps you keep your capex down helps you build new inference infrastructure that you can monetize with lower costs like it just makes so much sense it's i think it's just as simple as you can't you can't get enough memory that exactly 100 100 right so you take you take whatever hit you can because the option is the alternative is nothing it's fascinating yeah no agreed you know and again i'm not saying that i fully built this model and kind of projected it in memory reuse economics but i'm not saying all of the memory can use there is some that's soldered to boards but a good chunk of it is available to just unscrew or on you and and re-qualify so anyway again that's not an immediate thing but but but That's why, again, I said, when you look at it in that light, that they can reuse this old memory that's largely been sitting alongside their CPUs for general purpose CPU workloads.

24:27We already knew they all want to upgrade their CPUs. We see them upgrading CPUs. Our point about AMD seeing absurd growth in data center CPUs is only incentivizes them more to do it. So my other point is that you should actually be super bullish hyperscaler CPUs with this line of thinking because they're incentivized to decommission those older CPUs, recommission new ones because they can reuse that memory and they get the benefit of bringing more agent-to-class CPUs into their data center. So it's like wins all around for the hyperscalers to do this and do this via CXL. And again, there's a handful of winners.

25:12And I do for all of the like back and forth through the years we've gone on Marvell. I think they are very well positioned for CXL. In fact, I think they're the best positioned of anybody because they have the entire stack across the flexibility of everything you need to do this onboard of disaggregated memory. within rack and scale up disaggregated memory and scale out in O2 rack or memory pods. They've got the whole solution versus others who have only a few. So anyway, I think I'm energized in that it is interesting. I see a ton of opportunity here. But again, going back to the beginning, the ecosystem seems mature.

25:58it feels like we're at a spot where the validity of cxl is now and we're going to start to see these things deploy at scale so you know pick pick your pick your winners here who do you think's best positioned because i do think this market's going to start to ramp

26:18cool cxl yeah so the other yeah sorry no go ahead go ahead good finish this because then i'm gonna Yeah. I mean, I was like when these, these old topics come, come back because it was so hyped up for so long and it was clearly like beyond what was reasonable. And now people have forgotten about it and it's going to be actually useful. I like that dynamic. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So the other one was, I obviously had, had good meetings with everyone in memory and it doesn't appear that memory costs are going down anytime soon, despite the kind of fear out there. I do think you could argue that we are either at or near peak memory pricing, which to me is not a big deal, but it feels like if you just survey the landscape of Twitter, people are freaking out about this.

27:10Like, oh, it's not peaking. I'm using this term that you haven't heard me use yet that you probably will love called margin maxing. and I was like, I think the days of margin maxing are over again for a good reason, because it does sound like when I asked like what's going on with the conversations with your customers, their point was like, they want flexible pricing. We understand that they need to have predictable pricing going forward, which is why there's price floors and price ceilings. We're, we're not trying to make their lives difficult. We're not trying to, you know, to some degree price gouge them.

27:44This word didn't come up, but, but you see what I mean? which is why they're all doing longer term deals. And one of my takeaways, because I said, like, look, you guys have done LTAs before. Micron calls them SEAs and Sandus calls them NBMs. You've done longer term contract deals before. And sure, the critique of that has been, oh, an LTA is great, but really they can just cancel them at will. Fine. I understand that critique. So the durability or strength of an LTA is certainly where I think people have concern today. But what they pointed out was, yes, we have done these longer-term deals with customers before, but it's usually been with one or two customers.

28:28And one of those two customers or all of those customers that do those have a lot of scale. So Apple, for example, might do a longer-term deal but at a very, very low price. their point was the two things that signal the duration of this demand is how many customers are signing long-term agreements and how many of them are signing them at a drastically higher price and margin profile than years past. So it's sort of like those two things together, I think, again, signal the duration and the durability, as well as the revenue quality for these names, Micron, SanDisk, Hynyx, Samsung, etc. Just simply because

29:16this volume of customers would not do this if their supply chain people were not telling them, we don't see any ease to this, not even into 28 and 29. The number of those signing 4-5 year deals as average. Your supply chain professionals would be out of their job if they're like, nah, this is going to ease up in a couple of years. You're your host. So anyway, that was my takeaway on where are we going with memory demand? Are we at peak? The days of margin maxing are over, but focus on revenue quality and duration, which seems to be sustainable, is kind of my meta point. So we had one data point this week in Sandisk reported earnings and monster numbers.

30:02and I thought the the a couple things one is the street kind of shrugs it off just like huge numbers huge beat and the stock is barely up this week um one of the things I took away from their earnings was gross margins were held steady 80 80 sort of low 80s which in you know memory terms is incredible gross margins of 85 percent are you know it's just an incredible thing for the memory industry to see um and what you make of those though is it's kind of i think there's a there's lots of there's a few takes i took on that one is disappointment that it wasn't 90 where you see all this demand why are your gross margins even higher I saw another take which I thought was a little more reasoned which was this is a sign that that the the memory companies are going to be merciful um and that they're sort of being disciplined in this and that if they really took prices as high as they theoretically could that would create such bad will long term yeah um that it would accelerate all the other things we were just talking about before about ways that people are looking to get around the memory tax and gross margins holding steady are a sign of reasonable discipline and i i think a lot of debate i've heard about memory pricing right now is how much higher can it go and we you know we keep talking about it's all sold out until forever are prices going to go up from here are they going to go up 50 60 percent are they going to double or triple there's some people out there saying it's memory prices could still triple um after they've i've lost track of how much memory prices have gone up it's it doubled and it doubled and it doubled again so uh and people are saying it can double or more from here i i don't right and i i don't know i don't i mean all of those seem possible to me.

32:11And I think the other alternative is that pricing goes up a little bit, but I think the better debate of, you know, is it 60 % or is it tripling? A better debate is how long can we sustain margins here and pricing here? And I think that's the real question that people are looking at. And I certainly don't know the answer. The argument you raised, which is that there are some very serious long-term agreements in place across the numbers of customers and a very, very different nature substance to those contracts would lead some credence to think that we are in for a prolonged period of high memory prices and good structural, I won't say structural, good margins for the industry.

33:00And if you want to get really bullish, then you say, oh, this is structural and it's going to stay this way for a long time. right and i think that's the range of arguments there yeah i i you know yeah i but but again like okay so i think you would be very hard pressed to agree it's not structural i agree with you that like i mean again i i don't think i could totally be wrong but i don't see prices drastically increasing. I think, again, the goal is to hold, hold steady, hold those margins. Now, when a new node comes on, right, when a node shrink comes and you get more capacity, maybe that leading edge, your ASP goes up.

33:47But for the mature products we're in right now, I think the reality is like, let's just hope that they hold. Now, I think that will happen. I don't know if the market has fully, again, appreciated that. In fact, Morgan Stanley had this note, you know, Sean Kim, who was kind of like everybody blamed for the initial like memory demise. And now he's like, no, this is, we're returning now to a late stage. This is going to increase in Q4. But his point was, if company, if people would accurately value LTAs the way we think they should, then that would drastically help the rating of these memory companies.

34:21And he's made the same point that I have been making for a long time, which is LTA signal quality of revenue and durability and stop focusing on margins. So again, if margins can hold, that's great. I think what people just need to wrap their reins around is that this is not going to crash in 28 or 29, highly unlikely. But you still need to have, I guess, your assumptions of what percentage of share they can get in each capacity pool from HBM to, uh, you know, NAND and DRAM and, and obviously storage. So, um, I, this debate's not going away. Like I, I, I know what you're saying. I hear this all the time.

35:04It seems like the market just can't get their brain around this and that's fine. And maybe they won't, I don't know. Um, but the reality is I walked away from this show, those conversations with the memory guys, not really concerned about the structural nature of this. Okay. Yeah. I don't, I don't have a take here. I don't, I don't know where things are going to go. I know that I'm not a memory analyst and these things, there are, there are a small number of people who really, really know how to trade this and have deep, deep connections in Korea and Japan and Taiwan and Idaho and can really track this.

35:48And so I think it's very tricky to trade these, and I certainly am not going to offer trading advice. I just think from a company perspective, that's the range of the argument, is this is cyclical and it's going to end in a year when prices, at some point when demand equilibrates, who liberates or the other, the other argument is no, no, no, there's something different here. We're going to have a prolonged period of heightened margins. And if you want to get really crazy, you can say this is going to last indefinitely. We've restructured the industry, which. Okay. I'm not, like I said, I'm not gonna have an opinion.

36:25Those, those are the range of that's the range of the debate. Yeah. Yes. Um, okay. Before, before we close, there was one other earnings I wanted to kind of briefly discuss, which we don't have to get in detail too, but we've talked about this company before. Is it SpaceX? It is not SpaceX. It is not SpaceX. I have yet to like put my mental energy toward SpaceX. I feel like if they keep wanting to talk about their ambitions to sell compute and be a hyperscaler and Elon's going to come out and say the things he did this week about we're dedicated a hundred percent to Nvidia. I may have to pay more attention to them, but I'm avoiding this as much as I possibly can.

37:12But Sidetime reported this week, who we also like to talk about. And honestly, like the story just keeps getting better for them. And I just want to phrase it this way and everybody should do their due diligence. I have a wonderful report I'm working on on Sidetime that eventually will come out, but they will benefit from the rack scale era. Like you just look for companies who's just sheer content goes up in rack scale and as rack scale demands more compute and in this case timing and low frequency timing so things that speed up that process and synchronization they are going to be a big benefit in fact one of the things they said that that was interesting was they're seeing an uptick in demand even for their synchronization products not just their timing products which shows you that they're benefiting from scale up and scale out so north south and east west as a part of their mems-based solution for both timing and synchronization at low frequency so just to throw this out i still this company is super interesting they do we've talked about this before a very underappreciated part of the of the rack but but their asp profile is good as you move to um lower frequency uh timing and synchronization synchronization devices But my point is that you look for these companies who just – content goes up as rack scale goes up, and they are one of those beneficiaries.

38:42Yeah, side time is deeply fascinating just in terms of what they do. It's like a fun technology. It is like one of those frontiers of replacing old analog parts with something digital and sleek and new. That's kind of cool. MEMS. MEMS are hot. Uh, but yeah, the data center content for side time is astounding. Like I I've lost track of how many hundreds of side time parts can start to show up in some of these racks. Now there's just such a huge demand for it. And it's going to continue to go up as networking challenges become more. Um, if you look at some of the other things that are coming on, on, on stream, even like it just pick any field, like even memory, optical, all this stuff is, is going to need more timing, more complex timing, and something programmable and reliable the way that side time is a big deal.

39:40Yep. Nope, agree. Like I said, the more I talk to them, the more I'm like, this is just such an interesting technology. I know it's not maybe as sexy as people like, but just very – anyway, lots of beneficiaries in the rack scale and the inference era. They among many. and uh anyway that's uh it's nebs how is it not sexy i mean it requires wafers and tsmc loves this because it's a different packet of wafers that is driving interesting demand so agreed but anyway it's check it out all right all right everybody that's our show for this week uh we appreciate your time and listenership and we will talk to you next week thank you everybody tell your friends click like subscribe get your agents to listen and summarize us whatever it takes whatever it takes bye