Enterprise AI vs. Hyperscaler AI: Networking Architectures, Costs, and Strategic Choices

Table of Contents

Frequently Asked Questions - FAQs

Owning Versus Consuming AI

Artificial Intelligence has become the defining battleground for enterprise competitiveness. Yet while much of the public discussion centers on models, algorithms, and applications, the true revolution lies deeper in the stack—in the physical and virtual infrastructure required to run AI workloads at scale. The question confronting enterprises today is stark: should they invest in building and owning their own AI infrastructure, or continue consuming AI as a service from hyperscale providers.

Hyperscalers such as AWS, Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud, and Meta offer vast pools of compute power, designed to serve thousands of customers with on-demand scalability. Their proposition is seductively simple: rent what you need, avoid capital expenditure, and let someone else handle the complexities of massive-scale hardware and networking. Yet enterprises increasingly recognize that for advanced AI workloads, especially those handling sensitive data or mission-critical applications, simply renting infrastructure isn’t always sustainable.

The decision to build or rent AI capacity is more than an economic calculation; it’s an architectural choice that shapes an organization’s agility, cost structure, and competitive advantage for years to come. Underneath this choice lies one of the least understood, but most consequential, aspects of AI: the network fabric.

The Great Divide — AI Infrastructure in Two Worlds

The advent of large-scale AI has split the technology landscape into two distinct ecosystems, each with its own approach to building the physical and logical foundations of AI. On one side stand the hyperscalers—operators of planetary-scale data centers treating infrastructure as both product and differentiator. On the other stand enterprises, who must balance the promise of AI with economic and operational constraints. While both pursue the transformative power of AI, the scale and philosophy of their infrastructure designs could not be more different.

The Hyperscale Blueprint: Engineering at Planetary Scale

Hyperscale providers operate at a scale almost beyond comprehension. Their core business is the delivery of global, multi-tenant services where infrastructure is not merely an operational cost but a primary driver of competitive advantage. This philosophy fuels a relentless “build-not-buy” strategy. Every component, from custom silicon to software-defined networking stacks, is subject to engineering scrutiny and often entirely redesigned to achieve economies of scale and technical superiority.

As of early 2025, hyperscalers command 44% of worldwide data center capacity, a figure projected to surpass 60% by 2030. A single hyperscale data center typically hosts at least 5,000 servers, with the largest deployments scaling into hundreds of thousands. These facilities handle data volumes measured in petabytes and exabytes, and power consumption regularly exceeds 50 megawatts per site, with new campuses aiming for multi-gigawatt footprints.

This financial and engineering translates into extraordinary customization. Companies like Google have created purpose-built silicon, such as Tensor Processing Units (TPUs), tailored for specific AI workloads. Hyperscalers partner with vendors on semi-custom solutions—for example, NVIDIA’s NVLink Fusion program enables seamless integration of proprietary GPUs into hyperscaler rack-scale architectures.
Operationally, hyperscale networks are models of automation. Global fleets of hardware are managed by AI and machine learning systems that deploy, monitor, and heal infrastructure with minimal human intervention. Networks within hyperscale AI factories are built for extraordinary capacity, with 40 Gbps connections once considered baseline but rapidly giving way to 400G and 800G links necessary to support the colossal data movements of large-scale GPU clusters.

The Enterprise Reality: Pragmatism in a Constrained World

Traditional enterprises live in an entirely different world. For them, technology infrastructure is a critical enabler—but rarely the business itself. Enterprises typically operate data centers ranging from hundreds to a few thousand servers, managing data volumes in the terabyte to low petabyte range. Even as on-premises capacity grows with AI adoption, it remains eclipsed by the explosive expansion of hyperscale clouds.

Economic constraints dominate enterprise decisions. Unlike hyperscalers who justify billion-dollar infrastructure as a revenue generator, enterprises must weigh every AI investment against competing business priorities. A single AI server with eight GPUs can cost upwards of $400,000. A full rack of NVIDIA H100s might exceed $2 million, excluding the power and cooling upgrades required to support it. These numbers are formidable for organizations without millions of paying customers to amortize costs.

Moreover, enterprises grapple with a severe talent shortage. Specialized engineers capable of designing, building, and operating advanced AI networks are rare and expensive, often lured by the lucrative salaries and technical challenges offered by hyperscalers. Enterprises must rely heavily on upskilling generalist teams, many of whom lack deep expertise in low-level protocols like RDMA or congestion management.

Enterprises also face the complex reality of brownfield environments. Unlike hyperscalers who design new “AI factories” from scratch, enterprises must integrate AI workloads into a tangled web of legacy systems, security architectures, and established operational processes. Compliance mandates, such as HIPAA in healthcare or PCI DSS in finance, add further layers of complexity. Many enterprises hesitate to move their most sensitive AI workloads to the public cloud, driven by concerns over data sovereignty, intellectual property protection, and the risk of lock-in.

Why AI Exacerbates the Gap

Artificial intelligence uniquely stresses data center networks in ways traditional workloads never did. Conventional client-server applications generate primarily north-south traffic, where data flows between users and servers. In stark contrast, AI training is a massively parallel operation that creates colossal east-west traffic. Thousands of GPUs exchange enormous datasets in tightly synchronized operations, forming a dense mesh of communication that drives infrastructure to its limits.

In this paradigm, the network becomes a critical part of the compute fabric. The performance of a multi-million-dollar GPU cluster is often bottlenecked not by processors but by the network’s ability to deliver data to every GPU without delay. Even brief slowdowns can trigger “tail latency,” where one straggling data flow stalls an entire training job, leaving thousands of costly GPUs idle.

This reality elevates network architecture to a strategic concern, transforming the fundamental differences between hyperscale and enterprise environments into existential challenges for any organization trying to compete in AI.

The question enterprises must answer is not simply, “What hardware do hyperscalers use?” Rather, it’s “Which elements of hyperscale technology can realistically be adopted and operated within the constraints of enterprise budgets, staffing, and risk tolerance?”

Why Enterprises Invest in Their Own AI

For many enterprises, AI Infrastructure as a Service (AI IaaS) seems the obvious answer. It offers instant access to cutting-edge hardware, eliminates capital expenditure, and transfers operational complexity to the cloud provider. Yet a growing segment of enterprises is moving in the opposite direction, investing in building AI infrastructure on-premises. Several reasons—both economic and strategic—drive this shift.

Data Sovereignty and Security

AI workloads often touch an organization’s most sensitive data: proprietary algorithms, intellectual property, and customer information. In highly regulated industries such as healthcare, finance, defense, or manufacturing, compliance mandates impose strict controls over where and how data can be stored and processed. For these organizations, retaining full custody of data is not optional—it’s a legal and business imperative.

While hyperscalers offer compliance guarantees, enterprises remain wary. The cloud’s multi-tenant architecture can expose them to risks they cannot fully mitigate, whether through regulatory audits, potential subpoenas, or concerns about the protection of trade secrets.

Cost Predictability and Economics of Scale

While AI IaaS provides flexibility, costs can quickly spiral out of control, particularly for enterprises running steady, large-scale AI workloads. Public cloud pricing models charge not only for compute hours but also for data storage and, critically, for moving data out of the cloud—a cost known as data egress. These expenses add up fast when training large models or processing high volumes of data.

In contrast, owning infrastructure allows enterprises to transform unpredictable operational costs into predictable capital expenses. High-performance hardware can be depreciated over several years, improving ROI and enabling better financial planning. For enterprises with continuous, high-volume AI needs, the cost of building infrastructure may be significantly lower than perpetually renting from a hyperscaler.

Performance and Customization

Hyperscalers build infrastructures to serve many customers simultaneously. That necessitates design choices prioritizing generality over specific performance optimizations. Enterprises with unique workloads or specialized performance requirements often find that the public cloud cannot deliver the deterministic, low-latency behavior they need.

Owning infrastructure gives enterprises the freedom to:

Tune network fabrics for specific workloads.

Deploy hardware configurations optimized for proprietary models.

Experiment with emerging technologies without waiting for hyperscaler adoption cycles.

This control can become a strategic advantage for organizations looking to differentiate their AI capabilities.

Avoiding Vendor Lock-In

Reliance on a single cloud provider creates strategic risk. Enterprises increasingly recognize that shifting workloads between clouds,or from cloud to on-premises, can be costly and complex. Proprietary APIs, unique management tools, and opaque pricing structures make “multi-cloud” strategies difficult to execute in practice.

Owning infrastructure creates leverage. Even enterprises that continue using AI IaaS for certain workloads gain negotiating power and strategic flexibility by maintaining the ability to run AI workloads on-premises if circumstances demand it.

Security and Emerging AI Threats

AI introduces unique security challenges. Generative models can leak sensitive data, while novel attacks,  like model poisoning or prompt injection, target AI-specific vulnerabilities. Enterprises worry about managing these risks in multi-tenant environments where infrastructure is shared across thousands of customers.

Owning the physical and logical infrastructure allows enterprises to integrate security controls deeply into their AI stack, providing a level of assurance difficult to replicate in a public cloud.

The Anatomy of AI Networking Challenges

The divergence between hyperscale and enterprise approaches is most visible in how each tackles the formidable challenges of networking for AI workloads. While both care about speed, reliability, and cost, the nature and scale of their problems are fundamentally different.

The Hyperscaler’s Burden: Taming Planetary Scale

For hyperscalers, the primary challenge is engineering networks that can scale to staggering dimensions. Connecting tens or hundreds of thousands of GPUs requires network fabrics with enormous “radix”, the number of interconnected endpoints, and the capacity to deliver petabits per second of bisectional bandwidth. The goal is to ensure any GPU can communicate with any other without bottlenecks.

Such scale introduces secondary challenges:

Power and cooling: High-speed optical transceivers, especially for 400G and 800G links, consume significant power. In networks comprising hundreds of thousands of ports, power demands can reach megawatts. Hyperscalers invest heavily in innovations like advanced liquid cooling and Linear Pluggable Optics (LPO) to reduce power consumption.

Economic sensitivity to latency: Hyperscale training clusters measure productivity in Job Completion Time (JCT). A small improvement in network latency can save millions of dollars in GPU cycles. Perfect load balancing is essential to avoid “straggler flows” that delay entire training jobs.

Reliability at scale: With hundreds of thousands of components—cables, optics, switch ports—failures are inevitable. Networks must detect and reroute around failures within milliseconds, often relying on hardware-level acceleration rather than slower software protocols.

The Enterprise Gauntlet: Complexity on Many Fronts

Enterprises, in contrast, wrestle with different demons. Their primary constraint is the capital required to enter the AI game. As noted earlier, high-performance AI hardware carries a massive upfront price tag, compounded by the cost of the networking fabric needed to interconnect GPUs for training workloads.

Even if budgets are secured, enterprises face a steep operational learning curve. Designing and maintaining a lossless AI network requires deep understanding of protocols such as RoCEv2, Priority Flow Control (PFC), Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN), and congestion management algorithms like DCQCN. These topics are a world apart from traditional enterprise networking, which has historically focused on best-effort Ethernet.

Furthermore, enterprises rarely deploy AI in isolation. New network fabrics must integrate with legacy systems, comply with security frameworks, and operate alongside existing tools. Traffic patterns unique to AI—such as intense many-to-one incast flows—can overwhelm older switch buffers, triggering performance collapses in parts of the network never designed for such stress.
Security and compliance compound the challenge. Enterprises dealing with regulated data must navigate a minefield of compliance requirements while keeping pace with rapidly evolving AI-specific threats. The risk of “Shadow AI,” where business units deploy unauthorized AI tools, further complicates the picture.

Performance Parity? Deconstructing the Benchmarks

For years, the prevailing wisdom held that InfiniBand was the only serious choice for AI networks demanding sub-microsecond latency and guaranteed lossless performance. Yet recent data from hyperscale deployments and controlled benchmarks suggests this performance gap has virtually disappeared. The debate has shifted from raw speed to a deeper consideration of total cost of ownership, operational complexity, and strategic flexibility.

Perhaps the most compelling real-world evidence comes from Meta. In 2024, Meta disclosed that it had built two enormous GPU clusters, each housing 24,576 GPUs to train its next-generation Llama 3 models. One cluster ran on an NVIDIA Quantum2 InfiniBand fabric; the other used an Arista Ethernet fabric based on RoCE. Meta’s engineers reported that, through careful co-design, they achieved performance parity between the two fabrics. There were no network bottlenecks in the Ethernet-based cluster, proving that a well-architected Ethernet network can match InfiniBand even at the uppermost limits of scale.

These real-world outcomes are reinforced by formal benchmarking. Testing found the performance delta between a minimally optimized Ethernet fabric and InfiniBand to be statistically insignificant, less than 0.03%. In one MLPerf benchmark for BERT-Large training, the Ethernet cluster completed the workload slightly faster (3:01:06 vs. 3:02:31). For Llama2-70B inference, InfiniBand edged out Ethernet by mere fractions of a second (52.003 seconds vs. 52.362 seconds). Additional tests of NVIDIA’s Collective Communications Library (NCCL), which measures raw inter-GPU bandwidth, showed similar equivalence under many conditions.

The conclusion is clear: for the vast majority of AI workloads, a properly designed and tuned Ethernet fabric can deliver performance virtually indistinguishable from InfiniBand. The conversation is no longer about speed alone but about the broader economics, ecosystem openness, and operational sustainability.

The Future is Ethernet, But Not as You Know It: The Ultra Ethernet Consortium (UEC)

Despite Ethernet’s advances, it remains, at heart, a “best-effort” technology retrofitted for lossless operations through complex layering of protocols and meticulous tuning. Recognizing these limitations, a broad coalition of technology leaders has formed the Ultra Ethernet Consortium (UEC) to reinvent Ethernet as a native, high-performance fabric purpose-built for AI and HPC.

Founded by Arista, Broadcom, Intel, Meta, and Microsoft, the UEC’s mission is ambitious: to match or exceed InfiniBand’s performance while retaining Ethernet’s open standards and multi-vendor ecosystem. The first major output of this effort arrived in mid-2025 with the UEC 1.0 specification, introducing the Ultra Ethernet Transport (UET) protocol.

UET is designed from scratch for the realities of AI workloads. Among its innovations:

Packet spraying disperses large data flows across multiple paths, preventing bottlenecks and ensuring optimal bandwidth utilization.

In-network processing allows network devices to perform collective operations like reductions directly, offloading work from GPUs and speeding up distributed training.

Link-level retransmission (LLR) shifts error recovery from higher protocol layers down to the physical link, reducing recovery times dramatically and mitigating the tail latency that devastates AI performance.

Hardware vendors are rapidly preparing for this transition. Arista, for example, markets its entire Etherlink portfolio as “UEC-ready,” meaning these platforms can be upgraded via software to support UET as soon as the standard finalizes. Even NVIDIA, once a staunch InfiniBand champion, has begun marketing its own Spectrum-X Ethernet solutions, validating Ethernet’s place as a credible—and often preferable—AI fabric.

The focus of competition has shifted decisively. The industry is no longer asking “Ethernet or InfiniBand?” but rather, “Whose Ethernet fabric offers the best blend of openness, performance, and operational simplicity?”

What Scales Down and What Doesn’t

The question for enterprises is not whether to pursue AI, but how to build a sustainable architecture. Hyperscalers offer compelling models, but only parts of those architectures translate successfully into enterprise environments. Some elements are entirely scalable, while others remain exclusive to the hyperscale domain due to economics, talent requirements, or physical limitations.

Scalable Architectures: Designs That Translate

Among the most powerful and accessible lessons from hyperscale design is the leaf-spine network topology. Also known as a Clos network, this two-tier architecture ensures predictable low-latency paths and scalable, non-blocking bandwidth. Every leaf switch connects to every spine, ensuring that any two endpoints are separated by a single hop through a spine switch.

This topology perfectly suits AI’s east-west traffic patterns and has become the de facto standard for data centers of every size. It scales smoothly from vast hyperscale fabrics to multi-rack enterprise deployments, enabling enterprises to build networks that can accommodate future AI growth without wholesale redesigns.

Even more advanced designs have emerged to “scale down” hyperscale concepts. Arista’s Distributed Etherlink Switch (DES) architecture, for example, presents multiple physical switches as a single logical device. It eliminates the need for complex inter-tier routing protocols, providing single-hop forwarding across the fabric. This abstraction simplifies operations, reduces latency, and delivers a hyperscale-inspired architecture in a form enterprises can realistically deploy and manage.

Core technologies like RoCEv2, PFC, ECN, and DCQCN also translate well to enterprise scale. Whether connecting 100 GPUs or 100,000, these protocols rely on the same fundamental principles. The challenge lies not in technology itself but in the operational expertise required to deploy, tune, and maintain it.

Non-Scalable Realities: What Enterprises Can’t (and Shouldn’t) Replicate

Yet not every element of hyperscale architecture can, or should,  be adopted by enterprises.

Custom silicon and hardware design sits firmly beyond enterprise reach. Hyperscalers spend billions developing bespoke ASICs, DPUs, and network devices to achieve performance gains and cost efficiencies. Enterprises lack the scale to justify such investments and must rely instead on commercially available hardware from vendors like Arista, Broadcom, and NVIDIA.

Similarly, bespoke network operating systems like Microsoft’s SONiC or Meta’s FBOSS reflect enormous internal engineering investments. Enterprises rarely have the capacity or appetite to maintain proprietary network software, instead depending on vendor-provided systems such as Arista’s EOS. These commercial systems offer stable, feature-rich platforms, optimized for diverse deployments and supported by vendor expertise.

Finally, physical infrastructure poses inherent limitations. Hyperscalers can build multi-gigawatt campuses with dedicated power substations and proprietary fiber networks. Enterprises, however, must work within the power, cooling, and spatial constraints of existing data centers. These limitations frequently become the bottleneck determining the scale of enterprise AI deployments.

The Operational Chasm: The People Problem

Perhaps the greatest gulf between hyperscale and enterprise operations lies in human capital. Hyperscalers employ large teams of Site Reliability Engineers (SREs), network developers, and performance analysts focused solely on optimizing infrastructure. These specialized teams can fine-tune networks at a level of detail that would be unsustainable for most enterprises.

Enterprises, by contrast, often rely on small teams managing the entire corporate network, including WAN, campus, security, and emerging AI environments. For these teams, operational simplicity is not merely a preference—it’s an existential necessity. Any technology requiring constant manual intervention, complex troubleshooting, or deep protocol-level debugging risks failure in an enterprise setting.

The enterprise path to hyperscale-class infrastructure lies not in replicating hyperscalers’ human resources but in leveraging software intelligence to replace manual work. Solutions that abstract away complexity, automate tuning, and deliver clear insights are the critical bridge enabling enterprises to deploy advanced AI networks without requiring hyperscale-sized engineering teams.

Intelligent Visibility — The Bridge to Hyperscale-Class AI Networking

As enterprises move to adopt AI, they face a stark reality: building and operating high-performance AI infrastructure is no longer just an exercise in buying faster hardware. It’s an engineering discipline that demands specialized network architectures, seamless integration with legacy systems, and advanced operational practices that hyperscalers have spent years refining. Unlike the cloud giants, most enterprises lack the dedicated teams, deep protocol expertise, and battle-tested playbooks required to design, deploy, and sustain lossless AI fabrics at scale.

This is where Intelligent Visibility (IVI) steps in, not merely as a provider of observability software, but as a partner in designing, building, and co-managing AI network infrastructures tailored for enterprise realities. IVI bridges the gap between hyperscale-class capabilities and enterprise constraints, delivering both the technical foundations and the operational muscle enterprises need to succeed with AI.

Solving the Hidden Complexities of AI Networking

AI workloads are uniquely punishing for network infrastructure. Unlike traditional applications, which create predictable “north-south” traffic between users and data centers, large-scale AI models generate colossal “east-west” traffic within the data center itself. Thousands of GPUs must exchange massive data sets with precise timing, and any disruption — from microbursts to incast congestion — can leave entire clusters idle, erasing millions of dollars of potential value.

Building a network to handle these demands requires more than hardware. It calls for a deep understanding of protocols like RDMA over Converged Ethernet (RoCEv2), congestion control mechanisms such as PFC and ECN, and advanced routing architectures like Clos fabrics or distributed switch designs. These are not areas where most enterprise IT teams have experience, nor do they have the bandwidth to learn while running day-to-day operations.

IVI offers enterprises a way forward by delivering expert-led network architecture and design services. Our team helps enterprises assess their specific workloads, power and cooling constraints, and business priorities to engineer a network that can handle AI’s unique requirements without overbuilding or overspending.

Integration Without Disruption

Even when the technical design is clear, the practical challenges of deploying AI infrastructure inside an enterprise are formidable. Enterprises rarely operate on a clean slate. New AI clusters must coexist with existing systems, security policies, compliance mandates, and operational workflows.

IVI specializes in integrating modern AI network fabrics into these complex “brownfield” environments. We help enterprises navigate legacy constraints, ensuring that new high-speed fabrics interoperate safely with existing networks and security architectures. Whether designing hybrid cloud interconnects, securing data flows for compliance with standards like HIPAA or PCI DSS, or optimizing for power and cooling limits, IVI brings a practical, enterprise-focused lens to the hyperscale playbook.

Co-Managed Services: Extending the Team

The most daunting gap between hyperscalers and enterprises isn’t just technical — it’s operational. Hyperscalers employ armies of engineers focused exclusively on network performance and reliability. Enterprises, by contrast, often have lean IT teams stretched across everything from WAN to Wi-Fi to data center operations. Any technology that requires constant protocol tuning, troubleshooting, or manual intervention is simply not sustainable in an enterprise context.

IVI’s co-managed services transform this reality. We become an extension of the enterprise’s team, actively participating in operating and optimizing the AI fabric. Our services go far beyond installation. We monitor live telemetry, apply advanced analytics to detect subtle network problems, and proactively adjust configurations to maintain optimal performance. For enterprises, this provides hyperscale-class operational expertise without needing hyperscale-class headcount.

The Role of Intelligent Visibility and AIOps

Observability and AIOps remain essential pillars of our approach, but in service of a broader mission: making AI networks reliable, performant, and manageable for enterprises. Traditional network monitoring tools cannot capture the microsecond-level events that cripple AI workloads. IVI’s intelligent visibility platforms unify telemetry from switches, NICs, servers, and AI job schedulers into a single source of truth. Machine learning models analyze this data to detect, diagnose, and often automatically resolve problems before they disrupt AI jobs.

For example, conventional load balancing techniques like ECMP hashing often fail in AI networks, leading to hotspots and underused bandwidth. IVI’s advanced traffic engineering techniques, including Cluster Load Balancing, ensure even distribution of AI traffic flows, maximizing link utilization and minimizing costly “tail latency.” Our platforms not only identify performance bottlenecks but recommend, or even execute, precise changes to maintain performance, translating directly into higher GPU utilization and lower costs.

Enabling Economic Viability

Ultimately, the economic case for investing in enterprise AI infrastructure comes down to performance and ROI. AI infrastructure is extraordinarily expensive, with even modest deployments running into millions of dollars. If the network underperforms, GPU resources sit idle, and project ROI evaporates.

By partnering with IVI, enterprises gain both the design excellence to build right-sized, future-proof networks and the operational expertise to ensure that infrastructure consistently delivers on its promise. We help enterprises avoid costly missteps, shorten time-to-value for AI initiatives, and maximize the return on every dollar invested in high-performance compute.

IVI democratizes hyperscale-class AI networking for enterprises that need to compete, but cannot afford to staff or operate like a hyperscaler. Our mission is simple: empower enterprises to build and run AI infrastructure that delivers real business value, without compromise.

Strategic Recommendations and Future Outlook

Navigating AI networking is not merely a technical challenge—it is a strategic decision with implications for competitive differentiation, cost structures, and organizational capabilities for the next decade.

For the Enterprise CTO: A Framework for AI Networking Strategy

Enterprise technology leaders must treat AI infrastructure not as commodity hardware but as a strategic pillar. Three guiding decisions should inform this strategy:

Greenfield vs. Brownfield
Building new, purpose-built AI data centers allows for optimized power, cooling, and modern design but comes with high upfront costs and long lead times. Retrofitting existing data centers is quicker but constrained by physical limitations that can stifle future AI ambitions.

Open Ecosystem vs. Integrated Stack
Choosing between a multi-vendor Ethernet ecosystem and a vertically integrated stack like NVIDIA’s InfiniBand or Spectrum-X shapes everything from TCO to operational flexibility. Open ecosystems offer freedom and lower costs but demand investment in visibility and automation. Integrated stacks promise simplicity at a premium price and higher risk of lock-in.

Visibility as a First Principle
Regardless of architecture, enterprises must treat observability as foundational. Intelligent visibility platforms should be budgeted from the outset. Their ability to preserve performance and minimize GPU idle time pays for itself many times over.

For the Network Architect: Actionable Guidance

Architects and engineers translating strategy into design should:

Embrace lossless Ethernet with confidence, knowing that modern implementations can match InfiniBand’s performance for most AI workloads.

Favor simplified topologies such as two-tier leaf-spine designs, while exploring innovations like Arista’s DES for larger deployments.

Prioritize automation and observability. Template-driven frameworks and streaming telemetry are critical for managing operational complexity.

Partner with a provider experienced in complex networking. The stakes are too high for guesswork.

Market Outlook (2025–2030)

The coming years will cement Ethernet’s dominance as the default AI network fabric. InfiniBand will remain a powerful niche technology for ultra-specialized HPC environments, but the momentum belongs to Ethernet.

The Ultra Ethernet Consortium will define the next generation of open, high-performance fabrics. As hardware capabilities converge around shared standards, the true battleground will shift to software. The vendors who win will be those offering the most intelligent, automated, and insightful visibility platforms.

For enterprises, the future is bright. AI no longer demands hyperscale budgets or hyperscale teams. With the right strategy, even organizations constrained by brownfield realities and limited staff can build networks capable of supporting world-class AI workloads.

Ultimately, the network is no longer merely a conduit for data—it is a critical partner in intelligence itself. Enterprises that recognize this will position themselves to thrive in an AI-driven economy. Those who view networking as just another collection of cables and boxes may find their AI ambitions stalling before they ever truly begin.