ComputeAssay

Delivered Compute Report · 2026-10-26 · previous issue (2026-09-14)

The neoclouds repriced, and delivery became the question

We re-read every one of the registry's 133 offerings on the seller's own page this week. 26 prices changed. 18 were increases; the rest are a format change (Nebius preemptible), probable currency drift (Scaleway) and one newly published price (Google). The cheap tier of H100 capacity got smaller: the median walk-up price for an H100-SXM across the 13 providers on our headline board rose from $3.99 to $4.61 (+15%), while the top end (the hyperscalers) did not move. Six weeks ago the spread ran from cheap neoclouds to expensive clouds. Now the neoclouds are converging upward.

What moved

ProviderOfferingsBeforeNowChange
Verda (DataCrunch)B300 / B200 / H200 / H100 / A100 / L40S on-demand$7.50 / 6.11 / 4.00 / 3.25 / 1.79 / 1.37$10.91 / 8.52 / 6.01 / 4.61 / 2.16 / 1.83+21% to +50%
RunPodSecure Cloud B200 / H200 / H100 SXM / A100 SXM / RTX 4090 (H100 PCIe unchanged)$6.79 / 4.59 / 3.49 / 1.59 / 0.74$7.99 / 5.29 / 3.99 / 1.79 / 0.89+13% to +20%
NebiusHGX B200 / H200 / H100 on-demand$7.15 / 4.50 / 3.85$8.50 / 5.40 / 4.50+17% to +20%
AWSCapacity Blocks p5 / p5e / p5en / p6-b200 (GB200 UltraServer unchanged)$5.19 / 5.97 / 6.87 / 12.36$5.97 / 6.87 / 7.90 / 14.21+15%
Google Clouda3-ultragpu-8g (H200) on-demand — first published price—$10.60new
ScalewayH100-SXM / H100 PCIe / L40S / L4 (USD via aggregator; likely FX, not list changes)$3.61 / 3.34 / 1.68 / 0.87$3.57 / 3.21 / 1.65 / 0.88−4% to +1%

Per GPU-hour. Every one of these rows carries the price text we read on the page, in the re-survey file. RunPod's page is dated 2026-10-15. AWS's Capacity Block page says its next price update is January 2027. Nebius's preemptible tier changed format. It used to be a fixed price; it is now a dynamic spot rate with a floor ("from $0.79–0.99"). We record the floor, flagged variable-floor, and keep it out of every price band.

What is no longer published

What we could not re-read (19 rows)

These keep their 2026-09-10 price and date, so the staleness shows on the row:

A row we could not read is never marked confirmed.

Read across: the board, then and now

H100-SXM walk-up, 13-provider board2026-09-102026-10-26
Cheapest (Hyperstack)$3.20$3.20
Median$3.99$4.61
Most expensive (Azure)$12.29$12.29
Providers at or under $4.0075

The same-chip spread is still 3.8×, but it now comes from a different place. Six weeks ago the cheap end was crowded with neoclouds a long way below the hyperscalers. Now three of them (Verda, Nebius and RunPod's Secure Cloud) have moved toward the middle within a single month. That is what a capacity crunch looks like from the outside. It also matters for the cash-settled GPU futures now coming to market: an index built on posted walk-up rates just absorbed a step-change that came from a handful of repricings, not from any change in what was delivered.

New this issue: will the capacity show up?

The more consequential question is no longer what an hour costs. It is whether committed capacity arrives on schedule. We graded the next unfinished phase of ten announced AI sites on public grid, build, hardware and track-record evidence, published a probability for each, and wrote it to a hash-chained ledger that resolves forecast by forecast.

Site (next phase)TargetGradeP(on time)
IREN Childress, Horizons 2–4 → Microsoft2026-Q4DR-B65%
TeraWulf Lake Mariner, CB-4 → Fluidstack2026-H2DR-B62%
Cipher Barber Lake, first halls → Fluidstack2026-Q4DR-B61%
Microsoft Fairwater, Datacenter 22028DR-B58%
SpaceXAI Colossus II → Anthropic2026-12DR-C48%
Applied Digital Polaris Forge 1, Building 3 → CoreWeave2027DR-C47%
AWS New Carlisle (Rainier) phase 2 → Anthropic2028-Q1DR-C47%
Stargate Abilene, final two buildings → Oracle/OpenAI2026-Q4DR-C43%
Nebius Vineland → Microsoft2026-12DR-D34%
Nscale Monarch, Anthropic building2027-Q4DR-D32%

The pattern: the three lowest-graded sites with near-term targets (Vineland, Colossus II, Abilene) all depend on on-site gas generation that is unpermitted, in litigation, or awaiting a permit, and Texas has halted TCEQ data-center permits pending an ERCOT audit. The sites with the best near-term grades (IREN, Lake Mariner, Cipher) all have grid power already energized on site. Across these ten sites, power is the binding constraint on delivery, not chips and not construction. A contract that does not say whose generation, under which permit, delivers the capacity is not a delivery contract.

The grades use stated priors (DR-1 v0.1), not fitted ones. The point of publishing now is that each forecast resolves on a date and stays in the ledger. A track record cannot be backfilled.

Also shipped

Method and corrections

Data for this issue: registry 2026-10-26 · re-survey with quotes · sites.json · forecast ledger. CC BY 4.0. Not investment advice.