Good morning, everyone. Thank you all for coming. My name is CJ Muse, Semiconductor Equipment Analyst at Cantor Fitzgerald, and it is truly my pleasure to be hosting Fireside Chat with Marvell. We have Matt Murphy, CEO, and Willem Meintjes, CFO. Welcome, gentlemen.
Yeah, thanks, CJ, for having us. Good to see you.
Very good to see you. We were going to play the Dropkick Murphys on your entrance in, but New York union rules state that you can't have bands from Massachusetts play.
I see. I'm shipping up to Boston tomorrow.
You've only got me.
That's right.
I hope that's okay. It's great to have you here. We have a very, I think, broad audience. The thought was maybe start at a high level and then kind of take it down. I guess, you know, just to start, and to level set the audience, if you could start perhaps with your recent decision to pivot Marvell all in on AI. You know, what was the thought process? How have kind of the logistics investments within the company changed, with that pivot?
Yeah, no, great question. Great to see everybody. Thanks for the opportunity. I think the harder pivot on the all into AI, you know, obviously built over many years. I became CEO in 2016, and very early on, you know, we made the decision back then to pivot to what we called the data infrastructure opportunity, which, in my view at that time, was that ultimately was going to drive the biggest TAM growth in semiconductors on the go-forward.
Even though Marvell was consumer-levered, we sort of knew we needed to make that change. A lot of you guys that were investors, you followed that story and sort of methodically, year by year, organic investment, M&A divestitures, all the different moves we made. That TAM has sort of exploded, obviously.
In particular, the data center side of it has continued to increase at a tremendous rate. As we found ourselves now in the last few years with like 90% plus exposure in the data infrastructure and I think down to like 5% consumer, what's happened is that the composition of that market has skewed big time to data center. I mean, it's like 75% of the TAM now for chips that we do is in that market. That's been driven primarily by the increase in AI. It may sound like, hey, yeah, let's go after AI. It's like this new thing. For what we do, it's the biggest end consumer of the types of things that we're good at.
On top of that, I would say that our pivot at Marvell eight or nine years ago to data infrastructure, the pivot to all in on AI is an extension of that, but it is as consequential. We can talk about what that means for our other businesses, which we actually feel really good about.
In order to really execute and succeed and win in this big market transition and dislocation, which you only see, you know, three or four times in a long career, our view is the best way to succeed and to change our fundamental trajectory is just to completely laser focus and take on constantly a five-plus year type of time horizon on our investments. We are making that big bet. So far, we are really happy with where it is, where it has landed.
Makes sense. Anything worth kind of highlighting in terms of R&D focus, evolution, hiring, engineering? You know, you announced the program with Amazon. You know, would love to hear kind of strategically how things may have evolved.
Yeah, I think from an R&D standpoint, very pleased with, not only how our team's performing, but how we've grown it. Even with all the ins and outs and the market cycles up and down and all the challenges that semi companies face, I think we were looking at this data. You know, we've grown our R&D spending very consistently, actually, every year in and out.
Now, we've done a lot of, I think very, very appropriate, you know, and very sort of forceful capital allocation moves to take people who are working on, say, one set of technologies and move them. We've got that ability now inside of Marvell to do that. It's actually really hard to do in companies. You have business units and you have people with teams and nobody wants to get rid of their team.
Anyway, we have actually established a culture where that's part of the operating system of the company. In the last couple of years, we've really pivoted the R&D resources ahead of the market share growth we saw and the revenue growth into the data center area. I mean, we were running probably 80% of our investments plus in data center the last few years, back when the revenue was 50-60% of our revenue in data center.
Now it's 75%. You start to see those things catch up. On top of that, we've really focused the effort around a dedicated data center business group. That's led by Raghib Hussain, who's been my longtime partner and President of Marvell. He was a co-founder of Cavium.
He and I have worked kind of jointly and hand in hand to really create a vision for Marvell back in 2017 when we were doing the Cavium deal. This is like his sort of dream job for him. This is really what he's great at. We have taken the non-data center end market customers and products and opportunities and moved those under Chris Koopmans, our COO.
Part of that was just to get the focus right, not just the focus on the data center, but actually also having a senior executive on my team that was going to really manage with its own P&L approach and its own profitability profile and investment profile for the multi-market business as well. Just because we decoupled them does not mean one got sort of de-emphasized.
In fact, we think we can recover and grow that multi-market business back up. That is another big change we made. Again, those are hard to do when you go from the, you know, product technology organization to end market focus. It usually creates a lot of noise and a lot of pain and everybody's upset. This was actually a very smooth transition inside of the company. We are very well positioned now. Dedicated data center engineering group, business group, all in focus, no distraction. I think that is going to serve us really well.
Yeah. And CJ, just maybe one additional, a little bit more tactical comment on the R&D, but we're really pleased on the leverage we're driving. You know, if you look at the progress we've made over the last year, and then this guide into Q1, where, you know, typically we'll see sort of a mid-single step up into Q1. You know, this time around, when you look at that guide, we guided up only $10 million.
It's really a reflection of the overall model and the NRE that we're able to recognize as contra OpEx and really encouraged on the trajectory and focus on driving continued leverage right through next year as well.
Perfect. You know, maybe sticking with the high-level thought, perhaps you could give us kind of state of the union.
What do you, what are you most excited about and what are the challenges do you see for the AI semiconductor market in 2025, 2026?
Yeah, I think the thing I'm excited about is also the challenge. It's all wrapped into one, which is that, and, you know, I've been in the industry for 31 years, okay? I've had the chance, especially in my prior company, to get exposed to kind of all these end markets and all these different end product cycles, like, you know, laptops and internet and cloud and all, you know, I've seen all these just like you would.
You've been doing this on the other side of the house. What happens when you hit one of those inflections is I've just seen this a few times. You end up having to go just flat out every day on your engineering execution, your innovation that's needed.
You always feel like you're behind. That's the challenge. The reason is, and with AI, it's very pressing, is this technology needs to be fundamentally lower power. It needs to fundamentally have more and more compute density. It needs to have a better TCO. It's like there's all this massive economic productivity unlock in the globe that can come from this.
Today, if you just, and then, look, it started to hit a major inflection just with the combination and really led by my good friend Jensen, you know, at NVIDIA with the fundamental leveraging Moore's law plus system engineering approach plus software plus everything. Finally, it's created an opportunity for AI to really take off, but we're still at the beginning stages.
It's an exciting time to be in semiconductors because where we sit now at Marvell, and I think there's only a couple of companies that are really at the bleeding, bleeding edge. The whole industry has now been driven, being driven by HPC. That's a big shift. I mean, this was a mobile PC-driven world on technology for the last 30 years. In the last two or three years, and even TSMC has said it, right? I think their shift to their business is more HPC than mobile now.
That's where they've oriented their roadmap. The challenge and opportunity is there's a lot to do. We're at the early stages. I mean, we're going to need six, you know, multiple successive generations of these technologies, I think, to really get it to where it needs to be.
The challenge is it's really hard stuff. That's a good thing for us because I think there's scarce few companies that have the ability to design these large-scale hundred billion transistor chips, get them done first pass silicon, which we've been able to do. All of our five nanometer products, actually, for data center have been first-pass successes.
That's been a great track record approach. Also, the broad suite of intellectual property you need, the packaging technology, the thermals, the system modeling, and then the ability to actually have the manufacturing and supply chain partnerships very deep and multi-year, multi-generation. You have to have scale to do that, and you also have to have the right capable team.
Those are all reasons we feel good, but yet every day I tell you, we feel like we're just, we're just, it's just an all-out, all-out assault to keep up with what the market's requiring. I think that's a great place to be. Once it slows down and you go to five-year cycles or seven-year cycles and nobody needs a refresh and the next nanometer is, you know, it's a different world. We are the farthest thing from that at the moment.
Yeah, no, I agree. You know, I think McKinsey said a trillion dollars semi-revenues by 2030, and we're modeling $800 billion this year led by AI.
Right. Yeah. I mean.
You know, we're almost there.
Yeah, the trillion always looked like, oh, how are we going to get there? Actually, especially when the down cycle is when those reports were coming out. It definitely looks feasible, but it's 100%. The only thing that gets it there is AI. It's not coming back because of consumer tech and smart watches and phones and things like that. That's not going to get us there, right? What's going to get us there is the data infrastructure market led by AI as the primary use case and driver.
That's a good segue to custom silicon. Perhaps you could kind of speak to how you think about your competitive positioning there, and, you know, you talked on the most recent conference call, in terms of ramping, you know, at full volume for one large customer, another soon. Could you perhaps start there?
Sure. Yeah. We feel very good about our competitiveness. In fact, the contrast of where we are today from where we were when we won those initial five nanometer designs, you know, back in 2021, 2022, 2023, call it, now the last couple of years, comparing, I'm comparing, I mean, literally we won a lot of those initial designs off of a five nanometer test chip and great PowerPoint presentations from our ASIC team, right? Which we had acquired from GlobalFoundries, which was an asset called Avera, which had been inside of IBM for a long time.
It was a very successful chip design team, had never designed on TSMC before. It always used IBM GlobalFoundries processes. At Marvell, by the way, when we got into this ASIC business, our prior most advanced node was 12 nanometer.
We had no products on seven nanometer. We made the decision to skip it. The reason I bring all this up is we went from that and actually capturing those designs, getting the trust of our customers to go take that risk and do it. We executed really well, as I pointed out, in terms of the success rate. I'm super proud of our team. We were like, it's like a 180 from where we were then to now. I mean, we are on, you know, we have the silicon. We have the proof points. We actually have invested ahead of the curve now in very unique IP. We're at the bleeding edge on the TSMC shuttles, the packaging partnerships.
It's just like we are, we are ready to execute and we're pushing the limits on the next gen of everything and even two generations out where before we were kind of wondering how are we going to, how are we going to catch up. We absolutely caught up. This sort of full, you know, Marvell Technology platform approach from process, package, IP, manufacturing is, I think, is what's setting us apart. I think to your point, there's very few companies that can actually do what we do.
We do think that over the long term, despite the fact that there are different business models and different approaches these customers are going to take to get their silicon ambitions fulfilled, we still believe the large portion of the TAM in the future that ends up shipping is going to come from full service, fully equipped, custom silicon companies like Marvell. There will be other exceptions.
It is not a binary thing, but I think the bulk of what ends up getting produced gets produced by people like us because in the end, you can try to do it yourself and you can try to augment it and you can try to license things and bootstrap it together. Maybe, maybe you can, in theory, save some money. In the end, are you going to get your chip delivered? Is it going to yield?
Can it work first pass? Can you, can you underwrite the success of that and de-risk the program? That has proven to be a very valuable thing that we can bring to the table. We can show we can get these to production. As I said earlier, time is of the essence because if you're late and you have to spin the thing two or three times, you might as well throw it away, right? It becomes irrelevant as long as the market leader keeps pushing the state of the art.
A few months ago, you talked about an expansion of your strategic relationship with AWS, multi-generational, five-year agreement, both custom silicon and connectivity. Can you speak to, I guess, how has your relationship, if at all, deepened, you know, since that announcement, how we should think about that structure and what it means to kind of your, you know, multi-generational, multi-year kind of commitment to one another?
Yeah, the announcement was a big deal. It was a huge deal for us and for them. I think industry-wide, it was quite unique, right, to see something like this. It was born out of, though, really years of working very closely together on two directions. The first is, you know, we've become a very strategic supplier to them, of custom silicon, of networking products, connectivity products.
I think that is sort of very much strengthened over the last few years to where that partnership's very deep. At the same time, we were one of the early semiconductor companies to enable our EDA in the cloud and our design engineering network portions of it to be done in the cloud. We chose early on, we chose and we went all in with AWS for that.
That was a risk in an investment, just like they took a risk in an investment in us. Working together, we've made that a very efficient tool and platform for Marvell. Part of this strategic agreement we have is that we're going to expand our usage of their cloud services and our design network, which I think really puts us on the forefront of major design companies leveraging that capability. For them, that's a big deal because they have a very strong teaching customer that's in there every day, helping to improve their performance. That helps them overall in terms of their business they're trying to drive. That is very strategic.
For us, and then on top of that, we entered into this agreement where they, there's a warrant structure where they're incentivized if certain revenue milestones are achieved that they get an opportunity to participate in the upside of Marvell. The scale of that is significant and it covers both custom silicon products as well as it covers networking and connectivity products. Very all-encompassing partnership. I think it's just a, I think it's a symbol of the deepness of the relationship, but certainly codifying it in this way only makes it stronger. We're really pleased and they've been a great partner to us.
Perfect. If I could ask maybe a more narrow question, you know, I think from an investor perspective, the breadth, and scale of growth, of revenues for this business, disappointed, near term. I guess, is that a reflection of perhaps pull-in of business earlier, perhaps conservatism, perhaps second half weighted? How should investors kind of think about that?
Yeah. Let me give it from two angles. I think the first is, and, you know, as a public company CEO, you've got to kind of manage these two dynamics, right? One is your internal plan, your internal view, how's the team doing, how are we tracking, and your commitments, by the way, like what have we said, what are we doing? Then there's the external world always, right?
Equity markets, competitive rumors, landscape, et cetera. Sometimes those things diverge, okay? From our standpoint, set aside the whisper, the expectation, we're extremely pleased with the performance of the company. You know, we had a huge beat and raise from Q3 to Q4. There was a big step up in the revenue. As we ramped some of these key programs, that was great. We performed well against that ramp. We executed.
We guided ahead of consensus for Q1. It wasn't as high as people wanted, but as far as what we said we were going to do, we're actually way ahead. I mean, let me just take you back a year real quick, just to look, we were sitting here. Consensus for Marvell for fiscal 2025 at that time was $5.3 billion. We ended at $5.8 billion.
So we upsided $500 million in like nine months, mostly driven by AI. That was pretty cool. At the same time for fiscal 2026, the year we're in, consensus a year ago was like $6.7 billion. And now consensus has us at $8.2 billion. So that's $500 million. Again, this is actuals plus sort of street forecasts.
In basically a year, we got $500 million last year more than we were projected to have on top of what was already looking like pretty strong growth. When we look also year over year from fiscal 2025 to 2026, there are very few companies I think that, if we can deliver this type of growth per the street forecast, it would be astonishing, especially at our scale.
When you step back too and you look at just the net add per year, we are adding incremental data center revenue year over year. I think last year we added like $1.8 billion or $1.9 billion. This year street said $1.8 billion or $1.9 billion. In 2026 we said we are going to grow too in terms of that. Again, we feel really good about how we are doing.
Now, we can talk more about the external environment, but as far as where we're tracking, I mean, we guided the best quarter in the history of the company. We got the best EPS. We've GAAP profitable. We're buying back shares. SBC is under control. Like we got great TAM outlook. From our standpoint, actually nothing's changed. It's only gotten better over the last year since the AI day.
I would say even since the December quarter results that we announced in December, if you just look at sort of with the administration change and all the kind of news about the overall AI market, big capital projects being announced, sovereign data centers, rumors of huge spend by the hyperscalers in the future, it looks really positive. All those data points look more incremental over the long term.
If I did not know what was going on in the stock market, I would be, we would be having a glass of champagne and saying, "Good job, Matt. You know, you took this company. It was kind of a mess and you sort of turned it around and you bought these assets and you integrated them and you, you figured out how to get into this AI market and you got the thing up to like $8 billion in revenue this year and cool." You know, that is contrasted with the reality, which I understand and I appreciate and I understand the frustration by investors with certain externalities that are happening.
I am trying to be as helpful as I can, but you guys also would understand these partnerships I have built with these customers. They are so deep.
They're so trust oriented and they're underwritten with NDAs and contracts and the whole nine yards. At the end of the day, it's a trust business. I have gotten the honor to know the CEOs of these big companies and they're trusting me. They're trusting me, not just with like executing to meet what they need, but with their fundamental, like we know their roadmap.
We know all the ins and outs of some of these things. I'm not going to, I can't talk about, I would never do that. I think every investor here would understand, but me and my team will try to be as helpful as we can. We framed the long-term opportunity, but some of these short-term things, it's just hard to comment. We're no stranger to rumors at Marvell.
I mean, every once in a while there's, you know, OFC 2023. You guys remember that one? Linear Optics was going to wipe out our DSP. I wasn't going to bring that up. Stock plummeted. What's that?
I wasn't going to bring that up.
I remember. I mean, it's been a long time. We're just going to, you know, again, we're a very heads down, execution oriented, focus company. Drive the stability, drive the long-term growth, take care of the team.
Makes sense.
Yeah.
Maybe a higher level question on custom silicon. I think in the last 12 months, the market has decidedly, you know, made the call that, you know, if there is a second source or, you know, primary source, you know, vis-à-vis NVIDIA, it's custom silicon. I guess within that construct, you know, there, there's two large players, you and Broadcom, with the IP, the advanced packaging, the SerDes, whereas there's others, you know, I would highlight kind of in Taiwan and mainland China, design houses with, you know, less kind of IP.
Curious, as you look at the landscape, as you look at the push to three nanometer and below, how does the differentiation increase, and how, and I do not want to call it market share, but how kind of the prioritization of just two players, you know, occur, you know, over the next one, two, three years?
Mm-hmm. Yeah. I think a couple of things on the market dynamic. This view that there was going to be one big merchant guy, NVIDIA, and then custom silicon, and then probably not a lot of room left. That was me and Raghib's high level thesis in 2018, okay?
Why don't you call me?
No, we did. We bought Avera in 2019. We announced it in like May. You know, it was born out of all these meetings we were having with these hyperscalers. We had an inference chip, by the way, from Cavium, the M1K. I do not know if you guys remember this. Syed may have talked about it. Maybe he did not, but we had an inference chip. We had a great team. It was awesome.
It was the best performance of any seven nanometer chip in the history of mankind. There were no customers for it. None. Everyone wanted their own. Our, so we shut it down. We redirected those resources in, at the end of 2018, early 2019, we acquired Avera and we set it on that journey. I think that thesis clearly has proven to be the correct one.
I'm glad we didn't try to do an M1K and an M2K and an M3K and we'd be still telling you some story with no revenue. Instead, we've got revenue in this area. I think that, so I think that's going to continue. Then within that, as you point out, there's sort of the full service model, right? Which is the end-to-end suppliers that can do everything. As I said earlier, I think that's still going to dominate in the future, the large chunk of the revenue that ships through. Clearly with the amount of spending going on, there's going to be room for experimentation.
There's going to be room for companies to try to do it a different way, which is more like do it yourself, but augment with some design resources, license a lot of IP, use a whole bunch of partners and try to pull it together. So far, that approach historically has been kind of a mixed bag. What's really shipping today primarily has been the full service model if you just look at the % of the revenue. I think you'll see that.
I think there's a valid reason for companies to try to do that. To answer your question, it's only going to get harder. I mean, we're already out looking at A16 and A14 at TSMC, the next two nodes beyond two. We're looking at what that complexity is going to bring.
We're looking at things like backside power. We're looking at things like CPO and scale-up networks and how to integrate all this stuff and two generations out on package technology and the cost structure that's going to be required to go drive all this. I'm just looking at all this in my engineering reviews and thinking to myself, how is somebody going to do all this themselves? Maybe somebody can and they can try to cobble it together. That may work sometimes. I'm not saying it's going to be 0% of the market. I've never said that this is binary. That will exist. It has existed.
I just still believe based on how complex it's going to keep getting, the large customers I think are going to rely on the full service companies to really underwrite the success and just like, don't take any risk and get the best engineering team, best technology, and someone that's going to get in there and be able to fix it, yield it, ship it, and you don't have to worry. That's worth a lot, especially in a world where manufacturing cycle times now are astonishingly long on these new EUV-based technologies.
I mean, it's 20 something weeks in the fab. You do an all-layer change and you spin the chip and, oh, it didn't work. Sorry, but we went cheap on the PD and we didn't have close timing. We didn't have to have all the advanced verification techniques like that a Marvell would have.
It did not work. Then you spin it and, okay, I'll see you in a year. It is really risky. These are the dynamics that we see.
Makes sense. Maybe pivoting to networking and connectivity. You know, Inphi, obviously tremendous acquisition. I think you've grown your optics revenue by more than 150% versus calendar 2022. You know, really pivoted to, you know, high-value data center interconnect and switching solutions with OFC just around the corner. You know, what are you most excited about in terms of the near-term trends?
Yeah. I think there's a lot of good stuff happening, and OFC is always a blast. Always a, always a, you know, something fun to look forward to. I think we have, we'll, you'll, if you guys are there, come see our booth. I mean, we're going to have a great lineup in terms of speakers, in terms of demos. Yeah, I don't want to steal the team's thunder, but, you know, I think the suite of technologies that we have, really the full end-to-end in connectivity, is very unique.
You know, the combination of having silicon photonics in-house, broadband analog circuits, advanced DSPs, new use cases, things like AECs, retimers. There's a lot of companies, there's companies that have one of these or two of these or some of these.
We've got the broadest range and all at the sort of bleeding, bleeding edge and we can stitch them all together. We also, I mean, not only that, we take all those technologies and we formed this group in the reorg we did called our Cloud Platform Group where now we've implemented very sophisticated system modeling capabilities. So we actually can help our customers decide what's the right blend of IO that they need. What's the best trade-off in terms of how they want to architect their interconnect? We can do that because we can provide everything from SiPh to Linear Optics to full, full DSPs in the most advanced node to electrical solutions instead of optical and everything in between. It's very compelling because at some point the stuff's so complicated and it's such a mix now.
It's totally heterogeneous. Going like supplier by supplier may be an approach, but there's also a value in pulling the pieces together. That is how we think about our business there. We could not be more thrilled with the Inphi team. They have done an outstanding job. It has been a great integration. We just completely came together. We staffed the heck out of it. Took a lot of talented Marvell folks, put them in there.
One giant connectivity engineering organization. You do not even know who is who anymore. It is way outperformed the deal model, obviously. Thank God because that was really expensive when we bought it.
Not getting in front of OFC, but perhaps getting ahead of GTC, where I think co-packaged optics is going to be a critical area of focus. Perhaps you could give us kind of how Marvell sees the adoption curve there, where I think you're of the view that that's a handful of years out as opposed to near-term.
Yeah. I think, I think historically co-packaged optics definitely was, was historically more of a science project. I think there's, there's been, I mean, I was going to OFC even when I was at Maxim in like 2012, 2013, and there was, this was the Holy Grail, you know, and there was like small SiPh companies running around and this is sort of going to disrupt things or not. It's definitely continued to shift because it's, it's a lot of complexity.
The issue there was always technologies maybe not ready manufacturability-wise and also the impact when you try to implement that like in a scale-out network and in the aggregation switching area. It just, there's too much risk because if one of these fails and there's a lot of issues about what's the actual reliability of these, you're not just taking out one switch box.
You're creating a blast radius where you're taking out a whole bunch of switches. The sort of network uptime goes down and is it really worth the trade-off versus if you want to really go hyperscale mode and scale up a massive data center and do it fast, pluggables is the way to go. We think that that's going to continue. In the scale-up where now inside the rack and from inside the accelerator clusters, the need for high-speed connectivity is only getting more because that's going to be a limiter on the throughput. We think that this copper passive approach is probably going to run out of steam soon.
That's where I think a new market opens up, which is new SAM for us with something like co-packaged optics, or some version of that, or even Linear Optics as an example. We're fine with either and all of those because we are the full provider. We want to provide the most optimized solution. In the scale-up, that would be fundamentally incremental SAM for us. It's an opportunity, and we'll see what happens at GTC.
Perfect. Maybe, you know, last question, thinking about the synergies between connectivity and custom silicon where, you know, scale-up, scale-out obviously becoming more and more critical and, you know, thinking of the way Jensen does, viewing the data center as kind of one large GPU or one large XPU, in, in your parlance. I guess, can you speak to, as you think about, you know, your investments and your conversations with your customers, how critical and/or competitive advantage is it to have kind of both businesses in-house?
Yeah. I think it's fundamental. I mean, I, you know, you paraphrasing Jensen is the right way to think about it. It's a high-speed networking problem. Obviously, the compute is very sophisticated and it's at the bleeding edge and they and our customers that are doing their own custom chips have done a great job on that.
It sort of doesn't do you any good if you haven't optimized all the IO. Literally down to things like, I mean, we're optimizing HBM interfaces at this point. You'd think, what's the big deal? Can't you just make it go faster or something? Or why can't there be an industry standard? Again, we can apply a lot of our novel design approaches and use our IP to fundamentally create more room actually on the accelerator for compute.
We can shrink the beachfront area that's required and shrink the HBM physical size on the accelerators to the point where the customer can actually have more compute as an example. At the same time, we can enable denser HBM on the periphery of the chip. I'm just giving you that as one example of if you didn't have that innovation, there's a throughput issue there and it's a limiter there.
I think starting from literally die-to-die interfaces all the way building up to, you know, I mean, you can go memory to accelerator, you can go accelerator to accelerator, you can go cluster to cluster. You can just think of this thing and, and with Marvell, we're trying to build it literally on every hop, right?
We want to participate all the way to all the data spitting out of the data center over the DCI network and going back and forth. We want to, we want to own that. We want to be the, the key provider there. That is the capability that we have built up. It really becomes a differentiator for us because we are not just offering to our customers, hey, we can do an ASIC job for you.
What do you want? We can actually provide a full solution relative to the connectivity surrounding it. Then we could start to talk about, hey, let's partner up as you are doing your accelerator design on what kind of scale-up solution you might need to go couple with that.
We view, like, for example, silicon photonics, we pitch it as part of our ASIC platform. It is not a random separate science project. It is highly integrated into our value prop. Those are things that are long-term actually competitive advantage for us because very few digital companies are going to have a SiPh team inside of them that is world-class, that is actually shipping volume, which we do have today.
Perfect. I think with that, we've run out of time. Thank you both.
Okay. Yeah. Thanks very much.
We appreciate it.
Appreciate it. Nice to see everybody. Thank you.