A single datacentre campus reaches 2 GW

Where things stand (14 Oct 2026)

As of 14 October 2026, no qualifying publication dated on or after 16 September 2026 exists. The hard part of this question is getting the threshold verified. Several campuses will probably pass 2 GW of IT load physically during this five-year window. Publications that state single-campus IT load clearly enough to count are rare.

SpaceX "Colossus II" (Memphis, Tennessee and Southaven, Mississippi) is the main near-term path.

• A metric that matches the question. SpaceX's Q2-2026 quarterly filing defines "nameplate compute draw" as the number of GPUs installed times their all-in power draw, explicitly excluding cooling, power-distribution losses, lighting and facility overhead. That is almost exactly the question's definition of IT power.
  • Company-wide figure: 1.4 GW at 30 June 2026 (10-Q).
  • On the 4 August earnings call, management said it expects "over 2 GW" by year-end 2026 and roughly 5–10 GW by end-2027.
• Site-level numbers have appeared before, but only once. The June prospectus (424B4):
  • defines COLOSSUS II as the Tulane Road (Memphis) plus Stateline Road (Southaven) facilities;
  • gives cluster-level megawatts: 110k GB200 = about 210 MW, 110k GB300 = 220 MW, and a further phase of at least 220k GB300 = over 400 MW;
  • but states its total only for both sites combined: "COLOSSUS and COLOSSUS II collectively provide approximately 1.0 gigawatt."
• The September website does not qualify. SpaceX's Mid-South website (published about 25 September; I extracted the text from the page's code) says "Colossus I and II … over two gigawatts of compute." That combines two campuses about 12 km apart, which the question excludes.
• Physical progress. Musk's 25 September post says Colossus 2 has 110k GB200 and 440k GB300, with 220k more GB300 the next week, 220k in November and possibly 220k by late December. An internal memo targets "6 phases by end of year". At the per-GPU power implied by the prospectus (about 1.9–2.0 kW), Colossus II's nameplate figure would be about 1.5–2.0 GW without the December batch and about 2.0–2.4 GW with it.
• Independent estimate. Epoch AI estimates 946 MW of IT power now and 1,531 MW by February 2027 (Epoch, updated 12 October). It cannot resolve the question but gives a check on SpaceX's claims.
• It counts as one campus. OpenStreetMap building outlines put the Macrohard building (5420 Tulane Road) and the Macroharder building (Stateline Road West) about 150 m apart, directly across Stateline Road. That fits "adjoining parcels separated only by roads". Minihard and a planned building at 8425 Tulane Road add more capacity on or near the site.

Other candidates are later or report less clearly.

• Epoch's projections show no other site at 2 GW of IT before about May 2028, when Microsoft's Fairwater Wisconsin is projected to reach 2,263 MW. Amazon's New Carlisle is projected at 1.93 GW and Meta's Hyperion first phase at 1.63 GW.
• Meta has expanded Hyperion to "5 GW in compute capacity" with completion around 2030 (Meta, 13 July 2026).
• Hyperscalers and OpenAI usually quote gigawatt figures without saying whether they mean IT or total facility power. Utility filings report total load, which only counts if paired with a site-specific power usage effectiveness (PUE) figure for the same period.

Base rate and model

• Reference class: campuses that crossed a record IT-load level, and how quickly operators confirmed it. Colossus II probably passed about 1 GW of nameplate IT by June 2026. No single-campus confirmation followed; SpaceX reported only combined or company-wide figures. This suggests the chance of confirmation is well below the chance of physically reaching the level.
• SpaceX path:
  • About 0.7 that Colossus II passes 2 GW nameplate by early 2027, rising to about 0.85 by end-2027.
  • About 0.3 that SpaceX states a Colossus II-only figure of at least 2 GW in its fiscal-2026 annual report (due by 31 March 2027), earnings materials or website by Q1 2027, rising to about 0.55 by end-2027.
  • About 0.65 that a resolver accepts it. The risks are "compute" versus "IT load", "installed" versus "operational", and wording such as "approximately".
  • Together this gives about 0.13 by Q1 2027 and about 0.26 by end-2027.
• Other operators and other SpaceX sites: these add slowly, reaching about 0.30 by 2031. That allows for multi-gigawatt campuses with boastful operators, offset by unclear metrics and the risk of an AI spending downturn.
• Shape of the series: quarterly hazards are about 3% in Q4 2026, a spike of about 12% in Q1 2027 around annual-report season, about 5–7% through 2027, then about 2–3% a quarter afterwards.

Strongest counter-arguments

• Lower: SpaceX has so far combined Colossus I and II in every total it publishes. A strict resolver may reject a "nameplate" figure as not operational. Even 1 GW single-campus IT has never been cleanly confirmed.
• Higher: SpaceX is an SEC filer with a metric that matches IT load almost word for word, and a strong incentive to claim "the first 2 GW cluster". The Memphis–Southaven site keeps adding buildings, and by 2029–31 several campuses of 3–10 GW should exist.

I shaded the combined estimate down slightly because both paths depend on the same resolver strictness.

Question. By the last day of each quarter, has a single AI datacentre campus reached at least 2 GW of operational IT load, verified by the operator or a utility filing?

Definitions.

• AI datacentre campus: one geographically contiguous site, or adjoining parcels separated only by roads, railways, waterways, or utility rights-of-way, operated as one datacentre development and housing deployed hardware used to train or run AI models. Multiple buildings, tenants, and construction phases within that campus may count together. Separate campuses do not become one campus through a shared name, owner, power supplier, or network connection. Any operator and any country qualify; the covered-developer list does not restrict this question.
• Operational IT load: the electrical load capacity of installed, commissioned IT equipment available for production use, including accelerators, CPUs, memory, storage, and networking. It is not a requirement that the equipment continuously draw its full rated power. Empty powered halls and electrical capacity reserved for equipment not yet installed do not count. The entire operational IT load of a qualifying AI campus counts, not only accelerator power.
• 2 GW: at least 2,000 MW of IT power, excluding cooling, lighting, power-conversion losses, and other non-IT facility overhead. Grid-supplied and on-site-generated power may both support the load, but cannot be double-counted. Generator ratings, substation ratings, and utility service capacity are not themselves IT load.
• Verification: a qualifying source must identify the campus and state both the qualifying IT load and its operational status as achieved facts. An explicitly reported value of 2 GW qualifies; a range qualifies only if its lower bound is at least 2 GW. Descriptions such as “nearly 2 GW” or “up to 2 GW” do not establish the threshold. Separate building figures may be summed only where the sources establish that they were operational concurrently within the same campus.

Resolves YES if a qualifying operator statement or utility filing establishes that the campus has at least 2,000 MW of operational IT load. An explicit report of actual IT electricity demand at or above 2,000 MW during production operation also qualifies. A total-facility power figure may be converted to IT power only if the qualifying sources provide an explicit campus-specific power usage effectiveness (PUE) value on the same operating basis and for the same period; IT power equals total facility power divided by PUE. Generic or assumed PUE values do not count.

The Resolution window and Observation period conventions apply. The operational status or measurement must concern a date or period ending after the opening date, not merely repeat a pre-opening achievement.

Exclusions (resolve NO).

• Announced, proposed, contracted, permitted, under-construction, or ultimate build-out capacity, unless the qualifying amount is separately verified as already operational.
• Grid connections, power-purchase agreements, generation capacity, or total-facility power figures without sufficient evidence of qualifying IT load.
• Adding together separate campuses, including facilities marketed as one AI supercomputer or metropolitan cluster.
• Temporary electrical load-bank tests or commissioning tests without production-ready installed IT equipment.
• Estimates based only on satellite imagery, cooling equipment, chip counts, construction progress, or industry reporting. In particular, Epoch AI estimates alone cannot resolve the question.
• If no qualifying verification has been published by a horizon, that horizon resolves NO.

Resolving source. Public confirmation under A2, narrowed to (1) the campus operator's own-domain publication or operator-authored public document, including a technical report, press release, or regulatory filing; or (2) a publicly accessible filing by the serving utility or campus operator in an electricity regulator's or grid operator's official docket, establishing the campus's achieved operating load. A filing that only requests future service is insufficient. Executive interviews and personal social-media posts do not count. Epoch AI's AI Data Centers hub and its linked documentation may locate primary evidence, but are not independent resolving sources for this question. Resolve on the qualifying source's publication date under A3, not the commissioning date; where multiple documents are necessary, use the publication date of the last required document.