EU GPU

Build vs Buy: EU GPU Compliance
For small regulated teams, the real cost is time

Your model is ready. Your data is sensitive. You need GPUs in the EU with a paper trail your DPO will accept. The instinct is to build it — spin up a Hetzner box, wire CUDA, write the DPA. It is doable. The question is whether it is the best use of the one resource a small team can never buy back: time.

The real cost of DIY compliant GPU infra

The GPU rental is the cheap part. The expensive part is everything around it: hardened container isolation, encryption at rest and in transit, access control, a defensible security posture under Article 32, a written DPA, a sub-processor disclosure, a breach process, and the audit trail to prove all of it. For a team without a dedicated infrastructure engineer, that is realistically 3 to 6 months of elapsed time — during which the model sits idle and the deployment waits.

A decision framework

Use two axes: do you have infrastructure engineers, and how sensitive is the data?

• No infra engineer + sensitive data → buy. The paperwork and posture are the hard part, not the GPU.
• Infra team + sensitive data → build if GPU compliance is core to your product; otherwise buy and spend the team on your product.
• Strict HDS-hosting requirement → neither generic option fits; use an HDS-certified host (e.g. Scaleway).
• Occasional or bursty workloads → buy. Standing infra idles between runs.

When to build anyway

Buying is not always right. Build if GPU compliance is your product, if you already run infrastructure engineers who would own it well, or if a regulatory requirement (like HDS hosting for certain health data) rules out a managed option that lacks it. GhostNexus, for instance, does not hold HDS certification and will tell you so before you commit — some cases genuinely need something else.

General information, not legal advice.