Next-Generation Hardware Management for Hyperscale and Neocloud AI Infrastructure

The Paradigm Shift in Data Center Hardware Management

The exponential acceleration of artificial intelligence, driven by the proliferation of trillion-parameter large language models (LLMs) and complex generative architectures, has catalyzed a fundamental paradigm shift in data center infrastructure. The computational requirements for both training and real-time inferencing have exposed the severe limitations of traditional, CPU-centric hardware management models. Contemporary data center operators are now tasked with the orchestration of graphics processing unit (GPU) clusters that scale to tens of thousands of interconnected nodes. Consequently, rack power densities are experiencing unprecedented growth. Historically, enterprise racks consumed approximately 10 kW; today, architectures like the NVIDIA GB200 NVL72 demand up to 132 kW per rack, with industry roadmaps projecting consumption to reach an astonishing 800 kW per rack for upcoming architectures such as the NVIDIA Rubin by 2027.1

This extreme hardware densification and the resultant thermal output fundamentally alter how computing resources must be provisioned, monitored, orchestrated, and maintained. The hardware management plane can no longer operate as an isolated, out-of-band afterthought relegated to simple power cycling and basic temperature threshold alerts. Instead, it must function as a highly integrated, deterministic control system. This system must be capable of managing intricate thermal dynamics, processing high-frequency liquid cooling telemetry, executing synchronized firmware updates across heterogeneous components, and enforcing strict hardware attestation to maintain zero-trust security boundaries.

Furthermore, the cloud computing market has bifurcated into two distinct operational models. Traditional hyperscalers continue to optimize for versatile, multi-tenant virtualized environments, which introduce inherent virtualization overhead. Conversely, a new class of specialized "neocloud" providers has emerged, optimizing strictly for bare-metal GPU performance and AI-native workloads to maximize Model FLOPS Utilization (MFU).3 This report provides an exhaustive, critical analysis of the evolving hardware management ecosystem. It evaluates the crucial transition from legacy protocols to modern API-driven standards, details the collaborative innovations driven by the Open Compute Project (OCP) and the Distributed Management Task Force (DMTF), compares the efficacy of proprietary versus open-source baseboard management controllers (BMCs), and identifies the critical telemetry, thermal, and orchestration gaps currently challenging modern hyperscale and neocloud environments.

The Evolution of Hardware Management Protocols

The foundation of automated data center operations rests upon the protocols utilized to communicate with the hardware at the lowest levels. The shift from rudimentary command-line interfaces to sophisticated, schema-driven APIs represents a critical evolution necessary to support the scale of modern AI factories.

The Legacy of IPMI and Its Architectural Limitations

For several decades, the Intelligent Platform Management Interface (IPMI) served as the ubiquitous standard for hardware management across the enterprise computing industry. IPMI provided a standardized, message-based interface for Baseboard Management Controllers (BMCs), enabling essential out-of-band management, sensor monitoring, and basic remote control functions independently of the host operating system.6 While subsequent updates to the specification introduced necessary security improvements—such as RAKP+ authentication and computationally stronger ciphers designed to remediate early vulnerabilities—IPMI's underlying architecture remained inherently limited and poorly suited for hyperscale orchestration.6

The rigid, byte-encoded command structure of IPMI, its reliance on UDP-based remote management payload transport, and the fundamental lack of human-readable, self-describing data formats made it increasingly difficult to integrate into modern, software-defined hybrid IT environments.7 In modern deployments, where administrators rely on declarative configuration and continuous integration/continuous deployment (CI/CD) pipelines, the archaic nature of IPMI necessitates the maintenance of complex translation middleware, creating operational friction and slowing the onboarding of new hardware topologies.8

The Transition to Redfish and Modern API Standards

To directly address the architectural shortcomings of IPMI, the Distributed Management Task Force (DMTF) developed Redfish. Redfish is explicitly designed to deliver secure, scalable, and highly interoperable management for converged infrastructure, hybrid IT, and the software-defined data center (SDDC).6 Redfish represents a complete architectural paradigm shift by utilizing a RESTful (Representational State Transfer) API operating over standard HTTP/HTTPS protocols.7 Data payloads are formatted in JavaScript Object Notation (JSON), and the overarching data models are rigidly defined using the Common Schema Definition Language (CSDL) as specified by the Open Data Protocol (OData) v4.7

This modern, web-standard architecture allows hardware telemetry and management directives to integrate seamlessly with contemporary toolchains, automation scripts, and cluster orchestration platforms such as Kubernetes.7 Redfish functions as a hypermedia API, inherently capable of managing complex, nested data types and incorporating built-in microservices for task management, role-based user management, and asynchronous event control via Server-Sent Events (SSE).7

Since the initial publication of Redfish 1.0 in 2015, the standard has rapidly evolved to encompass the entire spectrum of modern data center hardware, expanding far beyond basic server management to include memory, disk drives, converged network endpoints, composable infrastructure features, and advanced telemetry streams.7 The DMTF Redfish Forum, chaired by leaders from Dell Technologies and Hewlett Packard Enterprise, continuously refines the standard.10 Recent iterations, such as Redfish Specification 1.23.1 and the 2025.4 Redfish Schema Bundle, have introduced highly sophisticated additions. These include robust NVMe personality support for drive and storage schemas, advanced port aggregation configurations for network adapters, Compute Express Link (CXL) to Redfish mapping specifications (DSP0288), and native regular expression implementations based on ECMA-262 to facilitate advanced querying.10

DMTF Platform Management Communications Infrastructure (PMCI)

While Redfish serves effectively as the external, northbound interface utilized by cluster orchestrators and automation engines, the internal, "inside-the-box" communication between the BMC, host interfaces, and peripheral managed devices—such as discrete GPUs, Data Processing Units (DPUs), and CXL memory modules—is governed by the DMTF's Platform Management Communications Infrastructure (PMCI) suite of standards.12 The PMCI protocol stack is absolutely critical for ensuring that highly complex, multi-component hardware can communicate efficiently, securely, and reliably across disparate internal buses.

The foundational layer of this internal communication architecture is the Management Component Transport Protocol (MCTP). MCTP acts as the base transport layer, mathematically abstracting the physical interconnects and allowing standardized management traffic to traverse various media seamlessly.12 The DMTF has rigorously defined multiple physical bindings for MCTP to ensure universal applicability. These bindings include MCTP over PCIe Vendor Defined Messages (VDM) (DSP0238), the PCIe Management Interface (PCIe-MI) (DSP0291), the Universal Serial Bus (USB) Transport Binding (DSP0283), and bindings for SMBus, I2C, and the newer, higher-speed I3C protocol.13 This exceptional transport flexibility is vital in modern GPU Universal Baseboards (UBBs), where high-frequency telemetry—such as localized thermal loop data and precision voltage monitoring—must be streamed to the BMC via sideband connections without interrupting or consuming the bandwidth of the primary PCIe or NVLink data pathways.14

Operating directly atop the MCTP transport layer is the Platform Level Data Model (PLDM). PLDM provides the specific, standardized data models and operational commands required for diverse hardware management functions.13 Key PLDM specifications form the operational nervous system of the server:

• PLDM for Platform Monitoring and Control (DSP0248): Enables the precise tracking of hardware health, sensor state, and thermal thresholds.13
• PLDM for Firmware Update (DSP0267): Provides a standardized, vendor-agnostic method for deploying firmware payloads across various discrete components, crucial for maintaining fleet security.13
• PLDM for Redfish Device Enablement (RDE) (DSP0218): A transformative specification that allows complex peripheral devices (like intelligent SmartNICs or OCP Accelerator Modules) to dynamically construct and integrate their own management data directly into the BMC's primary Redfish JSON tree, eliminating the need for the BMC firmware to maintain hardcoded knowledge of every possible peripheral.13
• PLDM for File Transfer (DSP0242) and Multi-part Data Transfers: Addresses the need to move large diagnostic payloads, such as crash dumps, across the internal management bus.13

Security Protocol and Data Model (SPDM)

As zero-trust architectures permeate down to the physical hardware layer, the Security Protocol and Data Model (SPDM) has become an indispensable component of the PMCI stack. SPDM ensures that all communications between internal hardware components are cryptographically encrypted and that devices can mutually authenticate and attest their identity and firmware integrity.12 Recent advancements highlighted by the DMTF include the SPDM 1.4 specification, the SPDM to Storage Binding Specification (DSP0286), and SPDM over TCP Binding (DSP0287).15

This cryptographic attestation is particularly crucial in multi-tenant neocloud environments. Because neoclouds often remove the hypervisor layer entirely to provide bare-metal GPU access, the burden of security, tenant isolation, and hardware sanitization falls directly onto the hardware management plane and the SPDM architecture.5 Furthermore, forward-looking specifications are already integrating post-quantum cryptography into SPDM to ensure that long-lifecycle hardware remains secure against future cryptographic threats.18

Open Compute Project (OCP) Standards and Ecosystem

The Open Compute Project (OCP) has rapidly evolved into the central collaborative nexus for standardizing hyperscale hardware designs, thermal tolerances, and management interfaces. By pooling the intellectual and engineering resources of leading hyperscalers (Meta, Google, Microsoft) alongside primary silicon vendors (NVIDIA, AMD, Intel), infrastructure providers (Dell Technologies, HPE, Supermicro), and specialized component manufacturers, OCP establishes open, baseline interoperability profiles.19 This collaborative ecosystem actively reduces hardware fragmentation, lowers engineering barriers, and dramatically accelerates the deployment of new architectures to market.

Hardware Management Profiles and the OCP GPU Management Interface

A primary deliverable of the OCP Hardware Management subgroup is the rigorous definition of Redfish Interoperability Profiles. These profiles explicitly delineate the mandatory, recommended, and purely optional Redfish resources, schemas, and properties required for specific hardware categories, effectively establishing a unified compliance and testing target for original equipment manufacturers (OEMs).22

The management of discrete AI accelerators has historically been highly fragmented, with each vendor implementing proprietary out-of-band tooling, imposing significant integration and onboarding costs for cloud service providers.23 To resolve this, the OCP Hardware Management group published the OCP GPU & Accelerator Management Interfaces specification.21 Under this standardized framework, a UBB—which hosts multiple GPUs alongside high-speed interconnects and PCIe switches—must present a unified, standards-compliant Redfish interface.14

This interface is typically exposed by an Accelerator Management Controller (AMC) located directly on or immediately adjacent to the UBB.14 While standard configuration, inventory discovery, and baseline environmental monitoring occur via this RESTful Redfish interface, the specification mandates that high-frequency, critical telemetry required for split-second thermal protection must utilize MCTP or PLDM over direct sideband connections.14 The specific JSON schema dictating these requirements, such as the OCP_UBB_BaselineManagement.v1.0.0 profile, mandates exact implementations for assembly tracking, certificates, chassis identifiers, and granular environmental metrics.24

OCP Accelerator Module (OAM) and Universal Baseboard (UBB) Specifications

The OCP Accelerator Module (OAM) specification directly addresses the severe physical, electrical, and thermal complexities inherent in dense GPU deployments. The specification defines form factors supporting up to eight OAMs per system in either fully connected or partially connected network topologies.25 Power delivery standards are meticulously engineered, supporting both traditional 12V inputs for components operating up to 350W Thermal Design Power (TDP) and 48V inputs capable of sustaining 700W TDP—the latter being explicitly designed to support direct liquid cooling requirements.26

By standardizing the interconnect insertion loss budgets (e.g., establishing a maximum -8dB channel loss at 28Gbps) and strictly defining the pin map for Molex Mirror Mezz connectors regarding SerDes links, power delivery, and management channels, the OAM standard ensures that CSPs can seamlessly integrate specialized accelerators from entirely different vendors into a common, interoperable mechanical and electrical chassis.26 The management interfaces defined for these modules standardize crucial operational tasks, including sensor reporting, hardware error monitoring, dynamic power capping, and out-of-band firmware updates.26

Hardware Management Module (HMM) and DC-SCM

To further decouple the fast-paced lifecycle of compute architectures (CPUs/GPUs) from the generally slower lifecycle of management hardware, the OCP developed the Datacenter Secure Control Module (DC-SCM) under the Hardware Management Module (HMM) sub-project.27 The DC-SCM encapsulates the BMC, the hardware Root of Trust (RoT), cryptographic identity elements, and related out-of-band management circuitry onto a standardized, modular, swappable card.28

This profound modularity allows hyperscalers to completely upgrade processor and memory architectures on the primary motherboard while seamlessly retaining their established, thoroughly verified management stack. Conversely, it permits the integration of next-generation management silicon—capable of handling greater Redfish JSON processing loads or executing advanced SPDM post-quantum cryptography—without forcing the replacement of the multi-thousand-dollar primary compute node. The HMM specification, including the RunBMC specification, defines the explicit pin-out and signal interface requirements between the management module and the underlying compute platform, ensuring broad interoperability across the vast vendor ecosystem.27

Strategic Insights from OCP Global Summits (2024-2025)

Analysis of the presentations, workshops, and strategic initiatives launched during the 2024 and 2025 OCP Global Summits underscores a clear, industry-wide pivot toward deeply integrated, rack-scale AI systems heavily dependent on advanced cooling technologies. The summits showcased the transition from traditional 400VDC architectures to 1 MW AI racks reliant on Direct Liquid Cooling (DLC) and advanced Coolant Distribution Units (CDUs).29

Key industry leaders emphasized the absolute necessity of "fungible" data centers—physical infrastructure capable of dynamically adapting to rapid, unpredictable innovations in AI hardware design without requiring total facility teardowns.32 Notable technical sessions at these summits prioritized the integration of advanced technologies:

• AI Rack-Level Design Evolution: Presentations by NVIDIA, AMD, and Meta focused on maximizing FLOPs per rack while balancing power, cooling, and modularity, demonstrating a philosophy shift from standalone "GPU boxes" to holistic, rack-level infrastructure.31
• Next-Gen Power & Cooling: Companies like Vertiv and Delta Electronics unveiled advanced liquid cooling technologies and AI-driven coolant flow control capable of supporting racks scaling from 200 kW to beyond 1 MW.31
• Scale-out Ethernet: Broadcom and Arista Networks presented on polymorphic Ethernet architectures to mitigate interconnect bottlenecks and extend RDMA over Converged Ethernet (RoCE) across vast fabrics.33
• Security and Attestation: Sessions detailed orchestrating confidential compute using OCP Secure Boot, CXL IDE, and the latest DMTF SPDM specs, alongside explorations into post-quantum cryptography.18

The formation of the "Open Data Center for AI" Strategic Initiative highlights the community's response to the challenges of deploying trillion-parameter models, focusing collaboratively on power distribution, mechanical tolerances, and comprehensive management telemetry.32

Baseboard Management Controllers: Proprietary vs. Open Source

The automated orchestration of modern data centers relies unconditionally on the capabilities of the Baseboard Management Controller. Historically, this domain was dominated by highly proprietary, closed-source solutions from major OEMs. However, the landscape is undergoing a massive shift as hyperscalers demand absolute visibility, infinite customizability, and freedom from prohibitive vendor lock-in, fueling the rapid adoption of OpenBMC.

The Rise of OpenBMC in Hyperscale and Neocloud Environments

OpenBMC is a collaborative, open-source Linux distribution specifically engineered for BMCs, utilizing the Yocto Project framework. Backed extensively by organizations including Meta, Google, Microsoft, and Intel, OpenBMC provides a robust framework that standardizes the underlying firmware stack across entirely disparate hardware platforms.22

For hyperscalers and neocloud providers, OpenBMC offers several critical, non-negotiable advantages. First, it entirely eliminates the "black box" nature of proprietary firmware, allowing infrastructure engineering teams to fully audit the source code for severe security vulnerabilities, memory leaks, or operational inefficiencies.35 Second, the software architecture—utilizing D-Bus for inter-process communication—allows for the rapid, internal development and integration of customized Redfish endpoints and proprietary telemetry pipelines. This aligns precisely with the operator's bespoke orchestration tools, effectively bypassing the often-lengthy and expensive feature request cycles characteristic of traditional OEMs.36

The widespread adoption of OpenBMC is now penetrating the broader enterprise hardware market. Recognizing this shift, traditional OEMs are adapting. Dell Technologies, for instance, introduced the Open Server Manager (OSM) built explicitly on OpenBMC for select PowerEdge cloud-scale servers.35 This offering allows Cloud Service Providers (CSPs) to order hardware directly from the factory running OSM, providing a unified, open management stack across heterogeneous environments, while ingeniously retaining the fallback option to convert the silicon back to the proprietary iDRAC stack if necessary.35 Similarly, NVIDIA's BlueField BMC implementations utilize the bmcweb component from the OpenBMC community, ensuring strict compliance with the DSP0266 Redfish specification while facilitating continuous upstream synchronization.36

Comparative Analysis of Proprietary Management Solutions

Despite the overwhelming momentum of OpenBMC in the hyperscale space, proprietary management solutions from major tier-one vendors maintain a formidable presence in enterprise, colocation, and hybrid environments. These solutions offer highly polished, out-of-the-box functionality, deep AI-driven predictive analytics, and mature global support ecosystems that many organizations require.

The following table (Table 1) provides a comprehensive comparative overview of the leading proprietary solutions against the capabilities of OpenBMC.

The deliberate choice of management platform significantly dictates both the total cost of ownership (TCO) and overall operational efficiency. In rigorous, large-scale evaluations of AI infrastructure—such as Tesla's deployment of 10,000 servers housing 40,000 NVIDIA A100 GPUs—Supermicro was selected over Dell and HPE largely due to its superior thermal management design, lightweight Redfish adherence, and unencumbered customizability.42 This systematic selection resulted in a proven 32% reduction in power consumption and enabled 15% higher sustained clock speeds during continuous training workloads.42 Conversely, for traditional enterprise data centers prioritizing strict regulatory compliance, automated zero-trust security lockdowns, and immediate out-of-the-box sustainability reporting, Dell's iDRAC and HPE's iLO offer formidable, highly comprehensive, albeit significantly more expensive, management suites.37

Neoclouds and the Bare Metal Provisioning Paradigm

The AI boom has fundamentally altered cloud consumption models, giving rise to specialized providers known as neoclouds.

Neocloud Architecture vs. Traditional Hyperscale Infrastructure

Neoclouds—including prominent providers such as CoreWeave, Lambda Labs, VESSL AI, Nebius, and Crusoe Cloud—have emerged as specialized, AI-first infrastructure providers engineered explicitly to resolve the severe compute scarcity and specific performance bottlenecks inherent in traditional cloud infrastructures.3 Traditional hyperscalers (e.g., AWS, Azure, GCP) optimize their data centers for broad, general-purpose versatility. To achieve this, they rely heavily on deeply embedded hypervisors (virtualization layers) to enforce strict isolation between diverse tenants and manage a vast array of varying workloads.

However, in the context of high-performance AI training, this virtualization layer introduces unacceptable latency, obscures underlying physical hardware topologies from the workload scheduler, and prevents advanced, direct-memory interconnect optimizations such as GPUDirect RDMA. Neoclouds circumvent this overhead entirely by specializing in GPU infrastructure as a Service (GPUaaS) and Bare Metal as a Service (BMaaS).3 These providers are fiercely competitive, offering provisioning that is often instant or completed within days, with compute costs significantly lower than hyperscalers. For instance, VESSL Cloud offers on-demand A100 SXM 80GB instances starting at just $1.55 per hour, representing roughly a 66% cost reduction compared to traditional cloud counterparts.44

By operating container orchestration frameworks like Kubernetes directly on bare metal servers, neoclouds completely bypass hypervisor constraints. This direct-to-metal approach unlocks maximum FLOP utilization, guarantees highly predictable, low-latency networking, and provides unimpeded access to high-speed NVMe storage pipelines.5 CoreWeave, operating at massive scale, reports achieving greater than 50% Model FLOPS Utilization on Hopper GPUs utilizing this architecture—a figure approximately 20% higher than standard public hyperscaler baselines.45

Furthermore, the integration of advanced Data Processing Units (DPUs), such as the NVIDIA BlueField-3, has become the foundational enabler for secure multi-tenancy within these bare-metal environments.46 DPUs function effectively as an isolated "mini-server" integrated directly into the network interface card.46 They physically offload complex software-defined networking, NVMe-oF storage protocol management, and strict security enforcement from the host CPU.46 This revolutionary architecture allows the neocloud provider to grant the tenant total, unencumbered control over the host CPU and GPUs to maximize performance, while simultaneously maintaining strict, hardware-enforced isolation and security at the network boundary managed by the DPU.45

The reliance on strict bare-metal architecture is also heavily driven by the emergence of Decentralized Physical Infrastructure Networks (DePIN), such as io.net, Render Network, and Akash Network. These distributed compute protocols operate permissionless marketplaces and absolutely require strict cryptographic attestation to prove that specific, physical hardware (e.g., a genuine NVIDIA H100) exists and is actively performing the assigned computational work.47 Virtualization layers inherently break this chain of trust by abstracting and obscuring true hardware identities, rendering virtualized infrastructure useless for these networks. Therefore, bare-metal provisioning is an absolute necessity for nodes seeking to participate in and earn rewards from these decentralized compute economies.47

Bare Metal Provisioning Workflows and Automation Tooling

Provisioning bare-metal servers at hyperscale without the convenience of a hypervisor requires robust, API-driven automation engines capable of manipulating physical hardware with the speed, predictability, and reliability traditionally associated with spinning up virtual machines. The industry has largely converged on a declarative, GitOps-aligned approach, utilizing sophisticated open-source projects like Tinkerbell and Metal3 (which leverages OpenStack Ironic).

The Tinkerbell Ecosystem

Tinkerbell, officially maintained under the Cloud Native Computing Foundation (CNCF), is a highly modular, Kubernetes-native bare-metal provisioning engine that applies declarative configuration to physical infrastructure.48 The Tinkerbell stack comprises several interacting microservices designed specifically to handle the highly volatile early stages of hardware boot and operating system installation:

1. Tink (Server/Worker/Controller): The core workflow engine of the platform. It processes declarative configuration templates (workflows) into actionable, granular tasks that are executed by the Tink Worker agent running directly on the target physical hardware.48
2. Smee: A highly specialized DHCP and iPXE server. Smee manages the critical initial network boot sequence, reliably assigning temporary IP addresses and directing the bare-metal hardware via Preboot Execution Environment (PXE) to download the appropriate installation media.48
3. HookOS: An in-memory, highly minimal Linux operating system installation environment (OSIE). Upon successfully network-booting via Smee, HookOS loads entirely into RAM, registers its presence with the Tink Server, and executes the heavy provisioning workflow (e.g., securely wiping disks, configuring RAID partitions, flashing permanent OS images) before initiating a reboot into the final, provisioned state.48
4. Rufio and PBnJ: These optional microservices are responsible for interacting directly with Baseboard Management Controllers (BMCs) via standard protocols like Redfish or IPMI to autonomously orchestrate power cycles, configure boot device orders, and continuously monitor hardware state.48

Tinkerbell's deep integration with the Kubernetes Cluster API (CAPI) allows infrastructure operators to conceptually treat massive fleets of bare-metal clusters as ephemeral resources, seamlessly scaling physical nodes up or down in response to Kubernetes autoscaling triggers.48 Furthermore, the recent introduction of composable workflows utilizing the CNCF Artifact Hub and Go binaries has drastically reduced memory footprints and significantly accelerated hardware provisioning times.50

Metal3 and OpenStack Ironic

Metal3 provides an alternative, deeply Kubernetes-integrated approach to bare-metal provisioning, utilizing OpenStack's highly mature and battle-tested Ironic project as its underlying execution engine.51 In a standard Metal3 workflow, the Bare Metal Operator (BMO) running in Kubernetes translates desired hardware states—defined in Kubernetes Custom Resource Definitions (CRDs) known as BareMetalHosts—into concrete Ironic API calls.

Ironic subsequently orchestrates the complex sequence of IPMI or Redfish commands required to boot the specific node into the Ironic Python Agent (IPA). The IPA executes on the bare metal, applying cloud-init configurations, flashing the operating system image, and preparing the node for the final Kubernetes component installation.52 Metal3 excels particularly in robust state machine handling; for instance, if a node enters a transient failure state during the delicate provisioning process, the BMO autonomously detects the failure, initiates a comprehensive cleaning cycle to sanitize the hardware, and gracefully restarts the provisioning sequence, drastically minimizing the need for manual human intervention.51

Use Cases: Orchestration, Monitoring, and Firmware Management

Managing raw compute power is only effective if the software layer can securely multi-tenant, accurately monitor, and safely update the underlying hardware.

Workload Orchestration and Multi-Tenancy

Despite the vast hardware investments made by enterprises, survey data indicates that nearly 90% of teams cite cost or sharing issues as the top blockers to GPU utilization, with GPUs frequently sitting idle due to inadequate sharing mechanisms.53 The solution lies in advanced multi-tenancy models layered over bare metal.

Platforms like vCluster address this by providing isolated, virtual Kubernetes control planes on shared underlying hardware.53 This allows multiple teams to access the same physical GPU cluster safely, eliminating over-provisioned silo clusters and dynamically right-sizing environments.53 Neoclouds leverage this by offering fully managed Kubernetes services (e.g., CoreWeave Kubernetes Service - CKS), which integrate seamlessly with workload orchestration tools like Slurm, KubeFlow, and KServe.45 Technologies like SUNK (Slurm on Kubernetes) bridge traditional High-Performance Computing (HPC) paradigms with cloud-native elasticity, deploying Slurm as containerized resources to achieve topology-aware scheduling optimized for InfiniBand fabrics.45 Furthermore, proprietary accelerators like CoreWeave's Tensorizer enable "zero-copy" model loading, streaming multi-gigabyte AI models chunk-by-chunk to achieve loading speeds up to 5x faster than standard methodologies.45

Telemetry, Monitoring, and Observability

Continuous health checking is paramount. Given the extreme cost of GPU instances, identifying idle waste or failing hardware in real-time is an operational necessity.54 Because neoclouds operate on bare metal, they extract high-resolution metrics directly from the hardware, tracking granular telemetry that hypervisors typically obscure.5

NVIDIA provides specialized tools like the Data Center GPU Manager (DCGM), which includes Prometheus exporters for logging intricate statistics of data center GPUs.55 However, the integration of hardware-level BMC metrics (Redfish/IPMI) with application-level metrics (DCGM/Kubernetes) remains a complex engineering challenge, requiring robust data pipelines to correlate thermal spikes or PCIe errors with specific tenant workloads to trigger autonomous job recovery.8

Firmware Updates and the OCP Recovery Specification

Maintaining firmware consistency across a fleet of thousands of bare-metal GPU servers is a highly sensitive operation. An improperly executed out-of-band GPU firmware update can corrupt devices or trigger massive Redfish "event storms" that instantly overwhelm the management network.57 To combat this, hyperscalers deploy staggered, cluster-aware rolling updates.41

Using standards defined by the OCP Firmware Update Specification (DSP0267), orchestration tools securely push firmware payloads to the BMC or AMC, rigorously verifying cryptographic signatures via SPDM prior to execution.22 If a firmware update fails or a component is compromised, systems rely on the OCP Recovery specification. This protocol provides a structured mechanism for a recovery agent (RA), working in coordination with a Platform Active Root of Trust (PA-RoT), to recover a device's firmware and security-critical parameters back to a known-good security state without requiring manual hardware replacement.58

Critical Gaps and Bottlenecks in Hyperscale GPU Management

While modern protocols like Redfish and provisioning engines like Tinkerbell offer a highly capable framework for management, the physical and operational realities of running massive, liquid-cooled GPU clusters present profound challenges. Scaling from hundreds to deployments exceeding 100,000 interconnected accelerators stretches current hardware management standards to their absolute breaking point.

Telemetry Bottlenecks at Hyperscale

The industry-wide transition from IPMI to Redfish, while conceptually and architecturally superior, introduces significant computational and network performance penalties at scale. Redfish's RESTful API inherently relies on HTTP/HTTPS transport and complex JSON parsing, which consumes substantially more BMC compute resources and network overhead than IPMI's highly efficient, lightweight binary UDP packets.57

In a true hyperscale environment comprising 100,000 discrete GPUs, continuously polling individual nodes for telemetry via Redfish GET requests can induce severe network latency and API throughput bottlenecks.57 Furthermore, during widespread, synchronous hardware events—such as a facility-level power fluctuation, a cooling pump failure causing cascading thermal throttling, or a synchronized firmware push—thousands of BMCs may simultaneously attempt to transmit Event Service Server-Sent Events (SSE). This massive influx of asynchronous data can quickly overwhelm central telemetry aggregation pipelines, resulting in dropped metrics and obscured visibility precisely during critical incidents.57

To mitigate these scaling limitations, infrastructure operators are aggressively pushing for DMTF and OCP standards that dictate structured, efficient access to crash and runtime bulk telemetry.18 Modern architectures are transitioning away from RESTful polling toward publish-subscribe (pub/sub) telemetry streaming, utilizing highly efficient technologies like gRPC or Apache Kafka directly from the BMC.8 However, the inherent schema complexity of Redfish and the frustrating inconsistency of vendor-specific OEM extensions often necessitate the deployment of heavy, intermediate middleware layers to parse and normalize the data before it can be effectively ingested into standard monitoring systems like Prometheus.8

Thermal Dynamics and the Complexity of Liquid Cooling

Arguably the most acute and physically dangerous pain point in modern AI infrastructure management is thermal regulation. High-performance accelerators like the NVIDIA H100 and B200 possess exceptionally narrow thermal operating envelopes. They aggressively throttle core clock speeds when die temperatures approach 80-83°C to prevent immediate, permanent silicon degradation.60 A mere 1°C increase in ambient operating temperature above standard ASHRAE guidelines can drastically reduce a GPU's operational lifespan by 10%.60 Under sustained, multi-GPU training workloads, chips operating in traditional high-density, air-cooled configurations suffer unacceptably high thermal failure rates.61 When a cooling failure occurs, devastating thermal cascade effects are triggered; as one unit fails, adjacent GPU temperatures rapidly spike 5-10°C due to the sudden redistribution of airflow, forcing aggressive, automated workload migrations to prevent physical hardware damage.62

Consequently, the industry has universally and necessarily adopted Direct Liquid Cooling (DLC) for next-generation compute platforms. The Blackwell GB200 NVL72, for instance, consumes an immense 132 kW per rack, making air cooling physically impossible.1 Research conclusively indicates that DLC cuts power usage by 12%, reduces peak chip temperatures by 20°C, and measurably increases FLOP efficiency.64 However, the implementation of DLC completely redefines the scope and requirements of hardware monitoring.

Standard Redfish and PLDM profiles must now meticulously track a vastly broader array of environmental metrics. Monitoring simple air temperature is no longer sufficient; BMCs and AMCs must continuously ingest, process, and analyze the coolant supply temperature (strictly mandated at approximately 25°C for the GB200), volumetric flow rates across complex piping manifolds, highly variable system pressure, and mechanical pump telemetry.60 Most critically, the hardware management plane must now integrate seamlessly with external Building Management Systems (BMS) to support rapid, autonomous fluid leakage detection. A catastrophic coolant leak within a 132 kW rack requires microsecond-level automated interventions to instantly sever electrical power and redirect high-pressure coolant flow—capabilities that bridge the gap between IT management and facility engineering, and which are only now being formalized in emerging OCP specifications.56

Interconnect Reliability and Network Fabric Challenges

Modern AI training workloads operate on massive, distributed deep neural networks utilizing advanced tensor parallelism and complex mixture-of-experts (MoE) architectures. These workloads demand perfectly synchronized, lossless, and highly predictable communication between thousands of GPUs.65 In these advanced topologies, the network essentially is the computer; connectivity bottlenecks at the interconnect layer are just as detrimental to overall system performance as severe compute starvation.67

Within the physical rack, high-speed scale-up fabrics like NVIDIA NVLink provide ultra-high bandwidth (up to 130 TB/s within the GB200 NVL72 domain) and exceptionally low latency.2 However, scaling network fabrics between racks and across the data center introduces profound management complexity. Operators must architect and manage networks choosing between InfiniBand—which offers inherent lossless, ultra-low-latency performance utilizing native Remote Direct Memory Access (RDMA) and hardware-level adaptive routing—and RDMA over Converged Ethernet (RoCE).69 Utilizing RoCE requires the meticulous, highly complex tuning of Priority Flow Control (PFC) and Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) on Ethernet switches to adequately simulate InfiniBand-class network behavior.69

Existing hardware management systems acutely struggle to provide cohesive, end-to-end observability across these disparate, high-speed fabrics. A slightly degraded PCIe link, a microscopic instability in an NVLink connection, or minute microburst packet drops on a RoCE spine switch can silently stall an entire 10,000-GPU distributed training job.61 High-speed physical interconnects are remarkably susceptible to signal integrity degradation induced by chronic thermal stress.61 Identifying whether a sudden drop in Model FLOPS Utilization (MFU) is caused by poor application code inefficiency, a storage I/O drag bottleneck, or a failing physical optical transceiver requires advanced, cross-stack telemetry correlation that the vast majority of existing BMCs and disparate fabric managers currently fail to unify.67

Component Reliability and the Mitigation of GPU Waste

The immense, unprecedented scale of modern AI clusters inevitably leads to highly frequent physical component failures. Comprehensive statistical analysis of large-scale, production training clusters reveals significant hardware attrition rates. The primary failure modes consistently involve the thermal degradation of thermal interface materials (accounting for 41% of failures) and critical memory subsystem errors (accounting for 28%).61 Notably, these failure rates exhibit a strong positional dependence within the physical data center; GPUs located in the upper third of server racks fail 2.3 times more frequently than those in the lower third, a direct result of heat naturally rising and causing airflow stratification.61

Table 2 details the primary classifications of GPU waste and efficiency challenges observed in hyperscale clusters, highlighting the necessity for advanced management solutions.70

Given that a single idle high-end GPU represents tens of thousands of dollars in wasted operational expenditure annually, infrastructure operators are heavily prioritizing the deployment of AI-driven predictive maintenance and autonomous job recovery algorithms.53 By continuously ingesting and analyzing Redfish telemetry—specifically tracking minute increases in PCIe correctable error rates, memory ECC correction frequencies, and sub-degree thermal fluctuations over time—operators can predict impending hardware failures with remarkable accuracy.60 This predictive capability enables the orchestrated, graceful draining of workloads from a degrading node before a catastrophic hardware failure crashes a massive, distributed training run, thus preserving invaluable compute cycles and significantly reducing expensive GPU waste.61

Strategic Synthesis and Future Outlook

The landscape of hardware management, provisioning, and orchestration is undergoing a rigorous, accelerated maturation process, driven entirely by the uncompromising physical constraints and harsh financial realities of the global AI revolution. As power densities shatter historical limits and infrastructure costs soar, the efficiency of the management plane directly dictates the economic viability of the data center.

The fragmentation of proprietary management interfaces is no longer sustainable at hyperscale. The universal adoption of DMTF Redfish, securely underpinned by the PMCI stack (MCTP, PLDM, and SPDM), alongside strict mechanical and electrical standardization via OCP initiatives (OAM, UBB, DC-SCM), ensures a fungible, vendor-agnostic operational foundation. OpenBMC will undoubtedly dominate the hyperscale and neocloud sectors due to its unparalleled extensibility, relegating proprietary BMCs to traditional enterprise deployments where highly polished, out-of-the-box software suites justify their premium licensing costs.

Furthermore, the exponential rise of neoclouds completely validates bare-metal provisioning as the superior architecture for maximizing AI performance. Sophisticated tools like Tinkerbell and Metal3 have successfully transformed static physical servers into highly ephemeral, cloud-native resources. Moving forward, the traditional boundaries separating hardware, high-speed network fabrics, and security perimeters will continue to blur. Advanced DPUs will entirely absorb the isolation responsibilities previously held by hypervisors, governed by strict, hardware-enforced cryptographic attestation protocols that enable trustless decentralized compute networks.

Ultimately, successfully deploying and operating next-generation, liquid-cooled AI infrastructure requires an architecture that views hardware management not merely as a static monitoring tool, but as a highly dynamic, deeply integrated control system. Organizations that successfully synthesize rapid bare-metal automation, advanced fluid-dynamics telemetry, and secure, open-standard protocols will possess the operational resilience necessary to scale into the zettascale era, maximizing GPU utilization while safely mitigating the profound physical risks inherent in extreme-density computing.

Works cited

1. AI hardware installation & maintenance: from GPU racks to memory and storage, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.cudocompute.com/blog/ai-hardware-installation-maintenance
2. GB200 NVL72 | NVIDIA, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/data-center/gb200-nvl72/
3. What Is a Neocloud? - Interconnections - The Equinix Blog, accessed April 12, 2026, https://blog.equinix.com/blog/2025/10/14/what-is-a-neocloud/
4. The evolution of neoclouds and their next moves - McKinsey, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/tech-and-ai/our-insights/the-evolution-of-neoclouds-and-their-next-moves
5. Bare Metal Servers for Enhanced Performance - CoreWeave, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.coreweave.com/products/bare-metal
6. Intelligent Platform Management Interface - Wikipedia, accessed April 12, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_Platform_Management_Interface
7. What Is Redfish? – IT Explained | PRTG - Paessler, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.paessler.com/it-explained/redfish
8. Monitoring IPMI and Redfish with Prometheus: alerts and dashboards - GSE, accessed April 12, 2026, https://gse.kz/en/blog/ipmi-redfish-monitoring-prometheus-alerts-dashboards
9. Redfish API Support for Modern Infrastructure - Uvation, accessed April 12, 2026, https://uvation.com/articles/expanding-capabilities-redfish-api-support-for-modern-infrastructure
10. REDFISH | DMTF, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.dmtf.org/standards/redfish
11. Redfish Release History, accessed April 12, 2026, http://redfish.dmtf.org/schemas/Redfish_Release_History.pdf
12. Platform Management Communications Infrastructure (PMCI): Technology Overview - DMTF, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.dmtf.org/sites/default/files/PMCI_Technology_Overview_2_22_22.pdf
13. PMCI | DMTF, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.dmtf.org/standards/pmci
14. OCPGPU& ACCELERATOR MANAGEMENT INTERFACES - Version 1.0 - Open Compute Project, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.opencompute.org/documents/ocp-gpu-accelerator-management-interfaces-v1-pdf
15. All DMTF Standard Publications, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.dmtf.org/standards/published_documents
16. Be Sure to Stop By and See Us at All of the Fall Events Don't Miss DMTF's Manageability Workshop at the 2025 OCP Global, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.dmtf.org/sites/default/files/DMTF_Newsletter_October_2025.pdf
17. How CoreWeave Builds Security Into the Architecture That Powers Modern AI, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.coreweave.com/blog/how-coreweave-builds-security-into-the-architecture-that-powers-modern-ai
18. DMTF Presentations from the OCP Global Summit Now Available, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.dmtf.org/content/dmtf-presentations-ocp-global-summit-now-available
19. GPU Profiles for Hyperscale Use Cases - DMTF, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.dmtf.org/sites/default/files/GPU_Profile_Use_Cases_1.pdf
20. Solution Providers Directory - Open Compute Project, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.opencompute.org/membership/sp/open-compute-project-solution-providers
21. Contributions - Open Compute Project, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.opencompute.org/contributions?contributions%5BrefinementList%5D%5Bis_ai%5D%5B0%5D=Yes
22. Hardware Management/SpecsAndDesigns - OpenCompute, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.opencompute.org/wiki/Hardware_Management/SpecsAndDesigns
23. OCP GPU & Accelerator Management Interfaces v.9 (Final) - Open Compute Project, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.opencompute.org/documents/ocp-gpu-accelerator-management-interfaces-v0-9-pdf
24. HWMgmt-OCP-Profiles/gpu/OCP_UBB_BaselineManagement.v1.0.0.json at master - GitHub, accessed April 12, 2026, https://github.com/opencomputeproject/HWMgmt-OCP-Profiles/blob/master/gpu/OCP_UBB_BaselineManagement.v1.0.0.json
25. OCPSummit19 - EW: Server - OCP Accelerator Module (OAM) System An Open Accelerator Infrastructure - YouTube, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIHLNDqdVjY
26. OCP Accelerator Module (OAM) - Rackcdn.com, accessed April 12, 2026, https://146a55aca6f00848c565-a7635525d40ac1c70300198708936b4e.ssl.cf1.rackcdn.com/images/fbb4a175925d7b085634f772f89584006f81f01f.pdf
27. Hardware Management/Hardware Management Module - OpenCompute, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.opencompute.org/wiki/Hardware_Management/Hardware_Management_Module
28. An Evaluation of the Open Compute Modular Hardware Specification, accessed April 12, 2026, https://infohub.delltechnologies.com/fr-fr/p/an-evaluation-of-the-open-compute-modular-hardware-specification/
29. 2024 OCP Global Summit - Open Compute Project, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.opencompute.org/events/past-events/2024-ocp-global-summit
30. Open Systems for AI - Open Compute Project, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.opencompute.org/projects/open-systems-for-ai
31. 2025 OCP Summit—AI Infrastructure Buildout Consisted of Three Pillars: AI Servers Rack, Power & Cooling, and Networking - The Futurum Group, accessed April 12, 2026, https://futurumgroup.com/insights/2025-ocp-summit-ai-infrastructure-ai-servers-rack-power-cooling-and-networking/
32. Realizing the Open Data Center Ecosystem Vision - Open Compute Project, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.opencompute.org/blog/realizing-the-open-data-center-ecosystem-vision
33. 2025 OCP Global Summit - Open Compute Project, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.opencompute.org/events/past-events/2025-ocp-global-summit
34. 2025 OCP Global Summit, By the Numbers! - Open Compute Project, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.opencompute.org/blog/2025-ocp-global-summit-by-the-numbers
35. Enabling Open Embedded Systems Management on PowerEdge Servers - Dell, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.dell.com/en-us/blog/enabling-open-embedded-systems-management-on-poweredge-servers/
36. Platform Management Interface - NVIDIA Docs, accessed April 12, 2026, https://docs.nvidia.com/networking/display/bluefieldbmcv2510ltsu2/Platform-Management-Interface
37. Dell Management tools vs HPE - Principled Technologies, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.principledtechnologies.com/Dell/Management-tools-vs-HPE-0624.pdf
38. Gain Flexibility, Performance and Scale with Dell PowerEdge Servers., accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.delltechnologies.com/asset/en-us/products/servers/briefs-summaries/dell-poweredge-scale-product-brochure.pdf
39. xClarity vs iLO vs iDRAC : r/sysadmin - Reddit, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/u1lbz5/xclarity_vs_ilo_vs_idrac/
40. How to Compare Enterprise Servers | Dell vs HPE vs Lenovo - SpecLens, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.speclens.ai/guides/compare-servers
41. Lenovo XClarity Administrator Product Guide, accessed April 12, 2026, https://lenovopress.lenovo.com/tips1200-lenovo-xclarity-administrator
42. Dell PowerEdge vs HPE ProLiant vs Supermicro: GPU Server Platform Guide - Introl, accessed April 12, 2026, https://introl.com/blog/dell-hpe-supermicro-gpu-server-comparison-guide
43. Profiling Seven Leading Neocloud Companies - ABI Research, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.abiresearch.com/blog/leading-neocloud-companies
44. What Is a Neocloud? The Fastest Way to Get GPU Access | VESSL AI Blog, accessed April 12, 2026, https://vessl.ai/en/blog/what-is-a-neocloud
45. CoreWeave: From Crypto to $23B AI Infrastructure | Introl Blog, accessed April 12, 2026, https://introl.com/blog/coreweave-openai-microsoft-gpu-provider
46. The Future of AI Clusters for Enterprise in 2025 - CoreWeave, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.coreweave.com/blog/building-ai-clusters-for-enterprises-2025
47. Why DePIN Compute Networks Require Bare Metal Infrastructure To Function Correctly, accessed April 12, 2026, https://openmetal.io/resources/blog/why-depin-compute-networks-require-bare-metal-infrastructure-to-function-correctly/
48. Tinkerbell, accessed April 12, 2026, https://tinkerbell.org/
49. Provisioning Clusters on Baremetal : r/kubernetes - Reddit, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.reddit.com/r/kubernetes/comments/1okejd9/provisioning_clusters_on_baremetal/
50. Open-Source Bare Metal Provisioning Platform, Tinkerbell, Spreads Its Wings in the CNCF Sandbox - Application Development Trends, accessed April 12, 2026, https://adtmag.com/articles/2021/04/22/tinkerbell-platform-spreads-its-wings.aspx
51. Ironic in Metal3 - Metal³ user-guide, accessed April 12, 2026, https://book.metal3.io/ironic/introduction.html
52. Scaling Kubernetes with Metal3: Simulating 1000 Clusters with Fake Ironic Agents | Metal³, accessed April 12, 2026, https://metal3.io/blog/2024/10/24/Scaling-Kubernetes-with-Metal3-on-Fake-Node.html
53. AI Infrastructure Bottleneck: Multi-Tenancy, Not GPU Scarcity - Kubernetes & vCluster, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.vcluster.com/blog/ai-infrastructure-gpu-utilization-kubernetes-multitenancy
54. Achieve Full-Stack AI Observability: 4 Strategies for Modern Infrastructure Management, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.coreweave.com/blog/achieve-full-stack-ai-observability-4-strategies-for-modern-infrastructure-management
55. Monitoring your HPC/GPU Cluster Performance and Thermals | by John Boero | Medium, accessed April 12, 2026, https://boeroboy.medium.com/monitoring-your-hpc-gpu-cluster-performance-and-thermal-failures-ccef3561e3aa
56. NVIDIA DGX GB Rack Scale Systems User Guide, accessed April 12, 2026, https://docs.nvidia.com/dgx/dgxgb200-user-guide/dgxgb200-user-guide.pdf
57. Enabling Data Center Management with DMTF Redfish, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.dmtf.org/sites/default/files/OCP_Summit_2025-Data_Center_Enablement_with_Redfish.pdf
58. OCP Recovery Document - Open Compute Project, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.opencompute.org/documents/ocp-recovery-document-1p1-final-pdf
59. Redfish vs IPMI: Why Data Centers Are Embracing Redfish? - Simcentric, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.simcentric.com/america-dedicated-server/redfish-vs-ipmi-why-data-centers-are-embracing-redfish/
60. Environmental Monitoring for GPU Clusters: Temperature, Humidity, and Airflow Optimization - Introl, accessed April 12, 2026, https://introl.com/blog/environmental-monitoring-gpu-clusters-temperature-humidity-airflow
61. Sarcouncil Journal of Engineering and Computer Sciences GPU Reliability in AI Clusters: A Study of Failure Modes and Effects, accessed April 12, 2026, https://sarcouncil.com/download-article/SJECS-97-2025-298-306.pdf
62. Incident Response for GPU Clusters: Playbooks for Common Failure Scenarios - Introl, accessed April 12, 2026, https://introl.com/blog/incident-response-gpu-clusters-playbooks-failure-scenarios
63. Why You Need Liquid Cooling for AI Performance at Scale - CoreWeave, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.coreweave.com/blog/why-you-need-liquid-cooling-for-ai-performance-at-scale
64. Understanding the Impact of Data Center Liquid Cooling on Energy and Performance of Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence Workloads - ASME Digital Collection, accessed April 12, 2026, https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/electronicpackaging/article/147/2/021003/1208659/Understanding-the-Impact-of-Data-Center-Liquid
65. How to Overcome AI Cluster Deployment Challenges - DriveNets, accessed April 12, 2026, https://drivenets.com/blog/how-to-overcome-ai-cluster-deployment-challenges/
66. The next big shifts in AI workloads and hyperscaler strategies - McKinsey, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/technology-media-and-telecommunications/our-insights/the-next-big-shifts-in-ai-workloads-and-hyperscaler-strategies
67. Breaking the Bottlenecks: Scaling AI Without Stalling | CoreWeave Blog, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.coreweave.com/blog/breaking-the-bottlenecks-scaling-ai-without-stalling
68. Addressing Connectivity Bottlenecks at Rack-Scale - Astera Labs, accessed April 12, 2026, https://www.asteralabs.com/addressing-connectivity-bottlenecks-at-rack-scale/
69. Superclusters for frontier AI - Lambda, accessed April 12, 2026, https://lambda.ai/superclusters
70. Making GPU Clusters More Efficient with NVIDIA Data Center Monitoring Tools, accessed April 12, 2026, https://developer.nvidia.com/blog/making-gpu-clusters-more-efficient-with-nvidia-data-center-monitoring/