A procurement lead asking where a Saudi government workload will physically sit in 2027 gets a marginally better answer from Oxagon, though the timeline still falls short of what she needs. Oxagon gives her a named site, a megawatt figure and a year: 100MW, operational in 2028 [2]. That is about two years out from the Leap 2026 stage where it was announced [15], and past the end of most contract terms being signed this quarter.
Tariq Amin, Humain's CEO, set the measuring stick himself, saying that AI ambition only matters when you can turn it into infrastructure, compute and capacity that customers can use [6]. Measured against that standard, the 100MW under construction is about 28 percent of the 360MW first phase [12] and 6.7 percent of the 1.5GW the finished campus is targeting [13]. The first phase in full accounts for 24 percent of that target [14]. Neom itself was launched in 2017 [11], which puts the first 100MW of compute inside it 11 years later [20].
One of the two items DataVolt brought to Riyadh has a crew on site [1]. The other is a memorandum of understanding with Zain KSA covering an unspecified number of data centers with no delivery timeline attached [7], earmarking capacity for Zain's own future requirements plus government entities, businesses, large enterprises, cloud service providers, digital content companies and digital platforms [8]. That customer list takes in roughly everyone in the Kingdom with an IT budget, which is usually what a list looks like before anyone has sized it.
On power, the report says the site will reportedly run on Neom's wind and solar assets [4], and it does not specify storage, firming or grid backup [17]. A cluster billed by the GPU-hour is exposed to the hours the wind is not blowing, and nothing published so far says what covers those hours. That is a tenancy-negotiation question, not a sustainability-brochure detail.
The sorting rule for anyone keeping a Gulf capacity plan honest is two tests per line item: whether a named site has land secured, and whether a megawatt number is attached to a stated year. Oxagon's 100MW answers both, so it can carry a tenant commitment. The 1.5GW target answers only the first, which makes it a forecast rather than supply. An MoU with no site count and no date answers neither, and simply belongs on a watchlist. The useful discipline is refusing to let the three sit in the same column of the same slide.
