Nvidia’s record-breaking revenue hides a risky truth as three mysterious clients dominate billions in data center sales

Nvidia’s financial stability depends heavily on three powerful, unnamed customers
Elon Musk, OpenAI, and Meta are the likely three
Massive GPU installations reshape data centers into unprecedented mega-scale operations

Nvidia’s latest earnings report for 2025 has drawn attention not only for breaking sales records once again, but also for revealing a risk hidden beneath the numbers.

The company reported $46 billion in its Q2 2026 quarterly revenue, with its Data Center division contributing $21.9 billion.

But what really stands out is that “nearly 53%” of this income came from just three customers. The report detailed $9.5 billion from Customer A, $6.6 billion from Customer B, and $5.7 billion from Customer C.

Speculation on the big spenders

While this concentration of sales demonstrates strong relationships with powerful buyers, it also suggests a structural vulnerability in Nvidia’s financial base.

Nvidia has not confirmed the identities of these clients, but industry observers have made informed guesses.

Elon Musk’s xAI is often mentioned, particularly after a record-setting installation of 100,000 Nvidia H200 GPUs in just 19 days, a task CEO Jensen Huang said normally requires four years.

Musk’s stated ambition of running 50 million H100-equivalent GPUs over five years further strengthens the speculation.

Another possible contender is the OpenAI and Oracle partnership, which announced plans for a Stargate data center featuring more than two million AI chips.

Meta has also been expanding aggressively, with “several multi-GW clusters” reportedly the size of Manhattan, adding more weight to the theory.

These projects represent demand levels far beyond typical enterprise needs, closer to what one would expect when equipping a supercharged workstation or deploying an entire fleet of machines designed with the best CPU available.

It may seem reassuring to have such massive contracts locked in, but the concentration risk is difficult to ignore.

If one of these entities were to pivot toward in-house chip design, switch to a competitor like AMD, or encounter operational issues, Nvidia would face a sudden financial hole.

Customer A alone accounts for more than 20% of quarterly sales. The dependence is stark, and investors cannot ignore how fragile such reliance might become.

Nvidia’s dominance in GPUs remains clear, but market history shows that leaders tied too closely to a few clients can face serious disruption.

Geopolitics adds another layer of uncertainty – Nvidia has already absorbed a $5.5 billion hit following restrictions on its H20 chip, compounded when Chinese firms were directed to halt purchases after an initial reopening of sales.

These events highlight how the company’s market position can be influenced by decisions far outside the scope of chip design or supply chain management.

As of today, Nvidia’s GPUs remain unrivaled, but the underlying question persists: can the company maintain its momentum if its mystery trio ever decides to walk away?