Stargate Project Pivots: OpenAI Abandons Construction for Leasing, Wakes from 1.4 Trillion Compute Empire Dream

marsbitPublicado a 2026-03-17Actualizado a 2026-03-17

Resumen

OpenAI has significantly restructured its ambitious Stargate project, shifting from a plan to build its own data centers to leasing computing power from cloud providers like Microsoft Azure, Oracle, and Amazon AWS. Initially announced in January 2025 with a projected investment of up to $1.4 trillion, the project's budget has been reduced by 57% to around $600 billion through 2030. The change comes after more than a year of delays, with no employees hired and no construction started, largely due to lenders' reluctance to finance the project given OpenAI’s ongoing substantial operating losses. The restructured Stargate is now organized into three teams overseeing commercial partnerships, technical engineering, and physical operations, all managed by former Intel executive Sachin Katti. Despite the shift in strategy, OpenAI still aims to deploy nearly 7 gigawatts of server capacity over three years, with investments totaling over $400 billion. The company is also developing its own AI chips in collaboration with Broadcom to reduce inference costs. Annual spending is projected to reach about $120 billion, matching Microsoft's yearly capital expenditure, even as OpenAI's revenue remains significantly lower and profitability is not expected before 2030.

1.4 trillion dollars. This was the total value of the Stargate computing blueprint presented by OpenAI CEO Sam Altman to investors at the end of 2025. Fourteen months later, that number has been slashed to 600 billion.

According to a March 16th report by The Information, OpenAI has significantly restructured the Stargate computing infrastructure project, abandoning plans to build its own data centers and fully shifting to leasing computing power from cloud service providers like Microsoft Azure, Oracle, and Amazon AWS. Stargate has been split into three functional teams, all managed by former Intel Chief Technology and AI Officer Sachin Katti.

The reason for the pivot is straightforward. Stargate was announced with great fanfare at the White House in January 2025, revealing a joint venture with SoftBank and Oracle to build large data centers, with an initial investment of $100 billion and a total investment of $500 billion over four years. However, more than a year after the project's launch, not a single employee had been hired, and no substantive development of a data center had begun. According to CNBC, lenders were unwilling to provide billions in construction financing to a company still reporting massive operating losses. OpenAI also recently withdrew from negotiations to expand the Oracle Stargate facility in Abilene, Texas.

Over a year, zero employees, zero construction started. The "build-it-ourselves" path for Stargate never truly began.

According to disassembled data from investor materials, the $1.4 trillion total commitment cited by Altman was distributed among seven suppliers. According to venture analyst Tomasz Tunguz's analysis of the investor materials, Broadcom accounted for $350 billion, Oracle $300 billion, Microsoft $250 billion, NVIDIA $100 billion, AMD $90 billion, with AWS and CoreWeave combining for $60 billion.

In February 2026, CNBC reported that this figure was reset to approximately $600 billion (by 2030), a 57% cut. The same report gave a slightly different but directionally consistent figure, with OpenAI expecting to spend $665 billion on cloud servers by 2030.

$600 billion is still a number that needs context. According to internal OpenAI forecasts, the company's revenue target for 2030 is $280 billion, meaning the cumulative spending-to-revenue ratio over five years is about 2:1. And according to internal financial data cited by ainvest, the company's projected loss for 2026 is $14 billion, with a gross margin of only 33% as reported by multiple media outlets (Note: Gross margin reflects the profitability of the product itself, while net loss is the final result after deducting all costs like R&D and management; the two can coexist).

Placing OpenAI's spending target within the panorama of the Big Tech computing arms race makes the proportions clearer.

According to company financial reports and public Guidance, Amazon's planned capital expenditure for 2026 is $200 billion, Alphabet's is $180 billion, Meta's is $125 billion, and Microsoft's is approximately $120 billion. These four companies have seen their expenditures roughly double or triple within two years, totaling over $650 billion, with about three-quarters flowing into AI infrastructure.

OpenAI's $600 billion is a five-year cumulative target, annualized to about $120 billion, which is comparable to Microsoft's single-year capital expenditure. The difference is that Microsoft's annual revenue exceeds $240 billion, while OpenAI's annualized revenue has just reached $25 billion and is not expected to achieve positive cash flow before 2030.

The Stargate restructuring is more than just a change in budget numbers; the organizational adjustments reveal a deeper shift in direction.

The restructured Stargate is divided into three lines. The Epic business partnership group is led by longtime OpenAI employee and former Deloitte manager Peter Hoeschele, managing cloud contracts with Microsoft, Oracle, Amazon, and transactions with chip manufacturers. These deals include a multi-year contract with AMD (using up to 6 gigawatts of chips, costing up to 10% of AMD common stock) and an agreement with chip startup Cerebras Systems.

The technical engineering and design group is co-led by former Meta and Google engineer Chris Malone and former Microsoft engineering lead Adrian Caulfield, responsible for redesigning the AI server clusters used by OpenAI. The physical facilities operations group is led by former Google data center director Nick Saddock, replacing Keith Heyde who left weeks ago.

The semiconductor team led by former Google chip executive Richard Ho falls outside Katti's jurisdiction and reports directly to OpenAI President Greg Brockman. This team is collaborating with Broadcom to develop in-house chips, which OpenAI hopes will eventually reduce the inference costs of running products like ChatGPT.

The name "Stargate" remains, but what it refers to has completely changed. In January 2025, it was a joint venture with SoftBank and Oracle to build data centers. In March 2026, it is OpenAI's broad strategy for bringing gigawatt-scale server capacity online. It has gone from "I want to build my own power plant" to "I want to sign the best leases." The total planned capacity for all sites remains nearly 7 gigawatts, with a three-year investment total still exceeding $400 billion. OpenAI is shifting its computing direction towards NVIDIA's Vera Rubin platform, aiming to achieve the first gigawatt-scale capacity online in the second half of 2026.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Misjudged A-Shares: Resilience, Expectations, and Confidence

China's A-share market recently faced selling pressure, especially in tech sectors, initially triggered by a global tech sell-off that began in South Korea. However, the article argues this is a case of "mistaken injury" and highlights the market's underlying resilience. This resilience stems from three main pillars: **1) Tech Sector Fundamentals:** Unlike Korea's market dominated by a few memory chip stocks, China's tech sector is diversified across computing, communications, electronics, and semiconductors, supported by dual narratives of global AI supply chains and domestic substitution. Core areas like optical modules and fiber optics continue to show strong earnings growth. **2) "National Team" Support:** State-backed institutions and large corporations have made significant market purchases and announced buybacks, providing liquidity and signaling confidence. This is seen as a stabilizing policy signal, often associated with market bottoms. **3) Broader Market Pillars:** Other major sectors are showing endogenous recovery momentum. Consumer stocks benefit from stabilizing CPI and signs of sector recovery (e.g., liquor price hikes). Cyclical sectors like aluminum have high earnings, potential price increases due to tight supply, and low valuations. The financial sector offers stable dividends and low valuations. The conclusion is that the sell-off was driven by external contagion, not a collapse in fundamentals. With strong policy support and recovering momentum across key sectors, the A-share market possesses the toughness to regain stability.

marsbitHace 25 min(s)

Misjudged A-Shares: Resilience, Expectations, and Confidence

marsbitHace 25 min(s)

The Clarity Act's Journey Through Congress: The Thorny Path of Bipartisan Compromise in the U.S.

The U.S. Congress is struggling to advance the crypto market structure bill known as the Clarity Act, with bipartisan compromise proving difficult. Key hurdles include unresolved disputes over "yield" products and, more critically, the inclusion of strong ethics provisions for elected officials—a non-negotiable demand for many Democrats. While a compromise on yield was reached in May, securing only limited Democratic support in committee, the separate Senate Agriculture Committee version later passed with no Democratic votes due to the ethics impasse. As Republicans push for a full Senate vote in July, demands for ethics rules have expanded, and other contentious issues like developer protections and concerns from law enforcement and large banks further complicate negotiations. Despite consensus on the need for legislation, the path forward is unclear. Recent discussions between senators and White House officials aim to find acceptable ethics language. Some lawmakers question whether a compromise text can garner enough bipartisan support, with one Democrat stating the current proposal lacks the strong ethics provisions required for their vote. Potential short-term goals for the crypto community include symbolic Senate action before the August recess, a longer-term aim for passage by 2026, or establishing a detailed framework that addresses ethics and other compromises. The process remains arduous, relying on the traditional, vote-by-vote effort to build bipartisan support.

marsbitHace 44 min(s)

The Clarity Act's Journey Through Congress: The Thorny Path of Bipartisan Compromise in the U.S.

marsbitHace 44 min(s)

Are Kalshi and Polymarket Founders at Odds? This Business Rivalry Is More Brutal Than You Think

"The Rivalry Between Kalshi and Polymarket Founders Turns Bitter and Litigious" The intense feud between Tarek Mansour, CEO of Kalshi, and Shayne Coplan, founder of Polymarket, has escalated far beyond typical business competition into personal animosity and regulatory battles. Both lead billion-dollar prediction market platforms, but their approaches differ sharply. Kalshi positions itself as the compliant operator, securing U.S. regulatory approval before launching. In contrast, Polymarket initially operated offshore, allowing U.S. users to access its platform via VPN, which drew regulatory scrutiny. The conflict reached a peak in November 2024 when FBI agents raided Coplan's New York apartment. While Coplan publicly blamed political motives, his team privately suspected Kalshi was involved. According to sources, Kalshi's lawyers had previously reported Polymarket's operations to federal prosecutors, highlighting its accessibility to U.S. users despite a ban. This incident fueled mutual accusations and underhanded tactics, including social media smear campaigns and attempts to sabotage each other's major business deals. Their rivalry also played out in Washington, influencing regulatory debates. Kalshi actively lobbied against Polymarket's practices, framing them as illegal and unethical. Polymarket, after facing a CFTC fine and investigation, later acquired a licensed U.S. firm to launch a domestic app, regaining a foothold. Despite the hostility, both companies have seen massive growth, with combined trading volumes soaring. However, increased regulatory scrutiny, particularly around insider trading on Polymarket's platform, continues to pose challenges. The founders' deep-seated mutual disdain ensures their battle for market dominance remains as much a personal vendetta as a commercial one.

marsbitHace 53 min(s)

Are Kalshi and Polymarket Founders at Odds? This Business Rivalry Is More Brutal Than You Think

marsbitHace 53 min(s)

Trading

Spot
活动图片