Why hardware binds
The binding constraint is hardware. Its gap metric is 68.3 % ◌ derived; the runner-up is timeline at 50 % ◌ derived, a margin of 18.3 % ◌ derived.
Regime R1 ◌ derived: supply and demand are in structural balance; the facility can serve demand at target utilisation across the planning horizon.
Hardware binds at 68.3 % ◌ derived. The GPU allocation queue stands at 16 months ◌ derived. Fragmentation loss is 7.2 % ◌ derived and the efficiency erosion rate is 123.9 % ◌ derived; capacity exists on order books before it exists in racks.
Sweat the current fleetRefresh each cycleRefresh blocked
Counterfactual, sweat versus refresh: at 80 kW ◌ derived design density no next chip generation is supportable — the nearest higher generation enters at 120 kW ◌ derived per rack. The refresh path holds the current generation and matches the sweat path over the analysis horizon; the facility supports 1 ◌ derived generation classes over 5 years ◌ derived.
Whether that is acceptable is a judgment this model does not make.