Huang said that "we" have no trouble beating "the numbers" on a regular basis, without saying whose numbers.
Mostly true True in substance, wrong in a detail.
Factual: Statements about the present or the past, checked against the record: did they hold up?
The second judge would not resolve this claim; the verdict shown is the first judge's.
Said for an organisation they lead or work for; it counts on both records.
What would count as true or false
The proposition is that Huang made this statement, not that NVIDIA actually beats any particular numbers. TRUE: a transcript or recording of Huang's remarks on or around 2025-09-26 shows him saying, substantially as quoted, that 'we' have no trouble beating 'the numbers' on a regular basis. MOSTLY TRUE: he said it with minor wording differences, or on a slightly different date. MOSTLY FALSE: the transcript shows materially different wording that changes the meaning, for example a hedge or a reference to specific named numbers. FALSE: the transcript of that appearance shows he did not say anything like this.
Set before the research began.
Evidence (1)
-
E1 Jensen Huang Fires Back At Wall Street 'Flatlining' Nvidia Forecasts, Says AI Demand Will Crush Long-Term Expectations Benzinga · 29 September 2025
“During the podcast, Huang said, “We're comfortable with that,” adding that his company has “no trouble beating the numbers on a regular basis.””
Reasoning
Benzinga, an independent outlet, reported on 2025-09-29 that during a podcast Huang said "We're comfortable with that" and that his company has "no trouble beating the numbers on a regular basis" (E2). That wording matches the claimed quote. However, E2 is a secondary news report, not a transcript or recording, and it does not give the exact date of the podcast. That falls short of the criteria's standard for a full "true" verdict, so the claim resolves as mostly true.
Cite this claim
Jensen Huang, “Huang said that "we" have no trouble beating "the numbers" on a regular basis, without saying whose numbers.” (said 26 September 2025). Verdict: mostly true. Reliability API, claim c_8ce7e238e168, method 0.1.0+03d23c0e, dataset release v1.1.2. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_8ce7e238e168
This claim is in dataset release v1.1.2, with the same verdict.
Reply to this claim
More factual claims by Jensen Huang
-
Mixed
“the reason why NVIDIA’s growth is accelerating is because people are starting to realize that we’re the safest architecture to invest in.”
-
Mostly true
“Trillions of dollars in investment.”
Current investment in AI is on the order of trillions of dollars.
-
Mostly true
“Today, it’s dollars per million tokens.”
AI intelligence is now monetized and priced in dollars per million tokens.
-
Mixed
“Each one of these at one gigawatt level started at $20, $30 billion dollars.”
-
Mostly true
“Now CoreWeave is worth $50, $60, $70 billion dollars and growing incredibly fast.”
CoreWeave is now worth $50, $60 or $70 billion and is growing very fast.
Verdicts are made automatically; how verdicts are made.