STT GDC states 63 MW of IT capacity for its current Noida portfolio. Its three building cards read 17, 22 and 28 MW, which sum to 67. Two of the three are labelled under construction, and a separate narrative describes Noida 1 as scalable to 35 MW. So the headline is neither the sum of its parts nor a statement of operating capacity. This is the only STT portfolio that fails to reconcile — Mumbai’s six cards add to its 133 MW exactly — which makes it the right place to document what the whole operator set looks like.
1At a glance
2Sixty-three against sixty-seven
An aggregate four megawatts off its own components is not a rounding error five years into a portfolio. It is a perimeter that nobody has written down.
| If the headline means | Then | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| All three buildings at full design | 67 MW, and the headline is 4 MW short | a stale headline on a page that was updated for cards |
| Only what is operating | 28 MW or less, if Noida 3 is the only standing building | the headline overstates operating capacity by more than 2× |
| A contracted or allocated figure | 63 MW of sold or reserved capacity across buildings | then the cards and the headline measure different things entirely |
The third reading is the most likely and the least useful. A capacity figure that measures what has been sold cannot be compared with building cards that measure what has been designed, and nobody outside the company can tell which of the three readings applies.
What can be said with confidence: two of the three buildings are labelled under construction. So a headline presented as the current Noida portfolio includes at least 39 MW that does not yet exist, and the 63 MW should not be read as Noida supply today.
3The Noida cards, unrounded
Each card taken on its own, with what is and is not said about it.
| Building | MW | Stage | Other figure in public |
|---|---|---|---|
| Noida 1 | 17 | under construction | scalable to 35 MW in a separate narrative |
| Noida 2 | 22 | under construction | none |
| Noida 3 | 28 | unverified | none |
| Sum | 67 | — | 85 if Noida 1 is read at 35 |
| Headline | 63 | current portfolio | no perimeter stated |
The 35 MW narrative is the dangerous one. Applied, it makes the three cards 85 MW against a 63 MW headline — a 22 MW gap — and it would make Noida 1 the largest building in the portfolio, ahead of Noida 3 at 28.
This registry keeps 17 MW as the card value and records 35 as a scalability claim in the notes. That is the conservative choice, and it is the only defensible one when a company publishes two numbers for one building without saying which supersedes which.
4Eight cities, one that reconciles
Noida is not an isolated error. Checked across the whole Indian estate, STT publishes eight city portfolio headlines and around thirty building cards, and only one city adds up exactly.
| City | Headline | Cards | Difference | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mumbai | 133 | 133 | 0 | exact |
| Noida | 63 | 67 | +4 | unexplained |
| Pune | 40 | 81 | +41 | cards double the headline |
| Bengaluru | 23 | 22.6 | −0.4 | rounding |
| Kolkata | 9 | 9 | 0 | exact |
| Hyderabad | 6 | 4 | −2 | short |
| Chennai | 68 | 61 | −7 | short |
| Delhi | 12 | 11.9 | −0.1 | rounding |
| Total | 354 | 389.5 | +35.5 | cards overshoot by 10% |
Two cities reconcile exactly. Two are within rounding. Four do not reconcile at all, and Pune is the outlier — its five cards add to 81 MW against a 40 MW headline, which is not a perimeter problem but a factor-of-two one.
Across the estate the cards sum to 389.5 MW against 354 MW of headlines — a 10% overshoot. For a company whose published aggregates are cleaner than most in this file, that is a meaningful finding: the building cards are the trustworthy layer, not the headlines.
Where an operator publishes both a city headline and building cards, use the cards. They reconcile to real buildings and can be checked; headlines are perimeters that nobody has defined.
Gridvik publishes the cards and treats the headline as a ceiling. That is why this registry’s Mumbai total for STT is six itemised buildings rather than one 133 MW number.
5What this does to the state total
Uttar Pradesh counts 331.1 MW across 24 records. STT’s 63 MW Noida portfolio contributes none of it.
| Measure | Figure | Reads as |
|---|---|---|
| STT published city portfolios, all India | 354 MW | eight cities |
| STT counted in this registry | 10 MW | Ahmedabad 1 and Jaipur 1 — the only two additive STT records |
| STT Noida headline | 63 MW | counted at zero |
| Uttar Pradesh counted capacity | 331.1 MW | 24 records, none of them STT |
| STT as a share of counted UP | 0% | despite claiming 63 MW in Noida |
| STT share of published India portfolios | — | counted 10 of 354 MW, or 2.8% |
Two point eight per cent of STT’s published Indian footprint appears in this registry’s total. The reason is structural rather than editorial: every STT city portfolio and every building inside one is flagged non-additive, so the rule that prevents double counting excludes the operator almost entirely.
That is a defect in this registry and it is documented on the pages rather than hidden. The fix is a data-model change — count the facility, hold the aggregate as a ceiling — and until it is made, any total quoted from this file understates Indian capacity by the whole of STT, CtrlS Mumbai, CtrlS Kolkata and NTT’s campus portfolios.
6Procurement
7Limits and open questions
- Perimeter undefined. The +4 MW cannot be resolved from public material.
- Two numbers for Noida 1. 17 MW on the card, 35 MW in a narrative, no statement of which governs.
- Construction included in a current figure. 39 of the 67 card megawatts are labelled under construction.
- No racks, floor area or PUE for any Noida building.
- Not linked to the legacy parks proposal. PRJ-022 is a separate, unreconciled record and is not merged here.
- What would close it. A defined perimeter for the headline. One sentence.
8Sources
Sources: STT GDC India Noida city page, STT GDC India facility pages for Noida, STT GDC India corporate site, Data Center Dynamics on the KKR and Singtel acquisition, and Indian market commentary on the Noida and Greater Noida data centre market.