Nvidia becomes the first company worth $5 trillion, powered by the AI frenzy

NBC ^ | 10/28/25 | Steve Kopack

[DallasBiff]

The artificial intelligence giant Nvidia on Wednesday notched yet another historic milestone, becoming the first company to be worth $5 trillion.

The value of Nvidia alone is now worth more than the GDP of every country on earth, except for the United States and China, according to World Bank data.

[DallasBiff]

5 trillion? It's NBC, don't know.

[adorno]

The value of Nvidia alone is now worth more than the GDP of every country on earth, except for the United States and China, according to World Bank data.

Invalid way to compare businesses against countries.

The value of Nvidia will be static, with 'minor' fluctuations every day/week/month/year.

Meanwhile, the GDP of countries is a recurring number each year, with the previous year's GDP having been mostly spent. Nvidia's value is not spent yearly.

But, numbers-wise, it's an impressive number. But the value of the company will eventually settle, just lime the value of Microsoft and Google and Apple and other major companies have settled. The settled value of Nvidia will likely come down, a lot, after the AI hype also settles.

[MeanWestTexan]

I agree.

If you used GDP like EBITDA, you’d apply a multiple of somewhere between 3 and 5 to give a purchase value.

Then you’d add land value and assets.

So, for example, to buy Luxemborg, with a GDP of 100.6B, at a conservative 3X multiple, that’s 301.8B

Total private wealth is 314B

Real estate is valued somewhere around $1,000B

Total 1.6T total.

So, you could trade Luxemburg for a 1/3 stake of Nvidia.

[TheDon]

How long until the bubble bursts? Or will it?

[packrat35]

My NVDIA stock is still doing well.

[bigbob]

You presume AI to be creating “hype”. People thought the same about the notion of a phone that could be carried in one hand or that newfangled “information superhighway” nonsense.

Nvidia is the most valuable company because it has a leadership position in the latest disruptive technology. It’s impossible to predict the fate of individual companies in the AI space, but we are at the beginning of a new “S-curve” which will create massive growth opportunities for all who are in it it. There’s no reason to think Nvidia will suffer the fate of, say Nokia or Compuserve, but history shows that today’s leaders are themselves targets for the next disruption. No one knows yet what it is - maybe quantum computing?

[politicket]

My portfolio says: “Thank you very much”.

[dfwgator]

Until somebody comes up with a processor that is more tailor-made for processing LLM models. GPUs may be the best technology for it, for now, but things can change.

[adorno]

You presume AI to be creating “hype”.

I'm not presuming anything. AI is not creating the hype; people in it, and who want to profit from it, are the ones creating the hype. The bigger the hype, the more profits.

People thought the same about the notion of a phone that could be carried in one hand or that newfangled “information superhighway” nonsense.

I was one of the biggest cheerleaders for easily transported and easy to use mobile technology. After computers because easily used and mobile, I knew that all other tech could use the same advancements.

I was in the computer/tech field before the advent of mobile technology, and I was always hopeful that every person in the world would have access to the same tech that I had in m y hands, except that what I had was not transportable or mobile.

I put AI in the same category as EVs, which are useful, but not game-changers. EVs have met a wall s far as advancements are concerned, and AI is at the same level now.

Heck, I use AI every day, but it's not what its cropped up to be. It's mostly just computerized question and answer tech, but much faster and with more available data, and more HYPE.

It's mostly the same tech of old with new and faster tech, and with better and smarter programming.

" Like I said, the tech will settle, and the hype will start to dwindle. But, go ahead and invest and possibly get rich, while it's still possible.

[Bobbyvotes]

I use my own God given brain, no need for a fast search engine.

[ProtectOurFreedom]

This is why in Silicon Valley we are seeing 30 year old couples with two toddlers paying $4 million cash for 75 year old ranch houses, bulldozing them, and spending $5 million on a new building.

We've seen this many times in our 47 years here. It's amazing how many companies have launched and grown here.

• 1951: Hewlett-Packard
• 1953: Lockheed Martin
• 1956: Shockley Semiconductor (foundational, led to Fairchild)
• 1957: Fairchild Semiconductor
• 1957: Syntex (pharma pioneer)
• 1959: Varian Associates
• 1967: Applied Materials
• 1968: Intel
• 1969: AMD
• 1976: Genentech
• 1976: Oracle
• 1977: Apple
• 1979: 3Com
• 1980: Seagate Technology
• 1981: Adobe Systems
• 1982: Sun Microsystems
• 1983: Cypress Semiconductor
• 1984: Cisco Systems
• 1985: Linear Technology
• 1987: Synopsys
• 1991: Finisar
• 1991: Salesforce
• 1993: NVIDIA
• 1993: Yahoo!
• 1994: Netscape
• 1995: AltaVista
• 1995: eBay
• 1996: Juniper Networks
• 1997: Netflix
• 1998: Google
• 1999: BioMarin Pharmaceutical (Novato biotech)
• 1999: VMware
• 2000: PayPal
• 2001: LinkedIn
• 2003: Palantir Technologies
• 2003: Tesla
• 2004: Facebook (now Meta)
• 2005: YouTube
• 2006: Twitter (now X)
• 2008: Airbnb
• 2009: Uber
• 2010: Instagram
• 2011: Dropbox
• 2012: SpaceX (Hawthorne HQ, major Silicon Valley engineering)
• 2012: Palo Alto Networks
• 2012: Coursera (big data analytics - acquired HortonWorks)
• 2015: Zoom Video Communications
• 2016: Snowflake

[bigbob]

Fair enough but we disagree. I see AI as disruptive, not incremental technology, similar to how streaming is not just a better VCR.

[adorno]

I see AI as disruptive

It's a 'game changer' for those who see it as disruptive.

But, it's just a quicker, smarter, more inclusive way, of doing things we were doing before. It's just making what Google and Bing used to do, with a better intuitive interface.

The the current EVs reincarnation was supposed to be disruptive too, but then, it turned out to be just a different way of powering the same thing we had been using before.

The 'hype' that got a huge amount of attention for AI, was that we were about to get technology that would get as smart or smarter than humans. That was a huge load of BS. Take away the hype, and it's just a quicker, slightly smarter way of getting information which we were capable of doing before.