Sify is the oldest data centre operator in this registry and it publishes more capacity figures for itself than any company in the file. Its portfolio page says 86+ MW of available capacity, scalable to 263+ MW. Its executive director told investors in July 2026 that Sify has 188 MW of designed capacity and 134 MW of operational, revenue-generating capacity, with 150 MW under construction. A September 2026 interview cites campus land and power permits that can scale to 800 MW. That is a 9.3 times range between the smallest and largest, all current, all published by the company or its own executives. None of the five is dishonest. Only one describes money coming in, and it is 134 MW.
1At a glance
2Five figures, fourteen months
| Source and date | Measure | MW | Scope |
|---|---|---|---|
| Portfolio page, Oct 2026 | Available | 86+ | Capacity available to be sold |
| Portfolio page, Oct 2026 | Scalable | 263+ | Design ceiling of the operating estate |
| Earnings call, Jul 2026 | Operational | 134 | Revenue-generating, per the executive director |
| Earnings call, Jul 2026 | Designed | 188 | Built and designed capacity |
| Interview, Sep 2026 | Permitted | 800 | Campuses with secured land and power permits |
| Integrated report 2024-25 | Built / ready / development | 162 / 262 / 26 | An earlier and different split |
| Older pages, stale | Headline | 100 / 350 | No longer current |
The single most important observation is that the operational figure is larger than the available figure — 134 MW against 86 MW. That is not an error. “Available” means unsold capacity; “operational and revenue-generating” means capacity that exists and is leased.
So Sify is disclosing, indirectly, that roughly 48 MW of its 134 MW operational estate is already sold — a 36% contracted share. Almost no Indian operator publishes that, and it came out in an earnings call rather than a marketing page.
A portfolio that is 36% pre-sold is a fundamentally different asset from one that is 0% pre-sold. It carries contracted revenue, it finances more cheaply, and it tells you the market is absorbing capacity rather than merely being offered it.
“86 MW available” reads as a company with too much empty space. “134 MW operational, 36% of it sold” reads as a company with a working business. Both sentences are about the same estate, published a few months apart, and one of them is much closer to the truth.
This is the argument for the product in a single company: the numbers that matter are the ones nobody puts on the marketing page.
3The one number that is revenue
Of every figure on this page, 134 MW is the only one that describes a business. It was stated by an executive to investors under disclosure obligations, and it is the anchor the registry uses to read the rest.
| Step | MW | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Operational and revenue-generating | 134 | Earnings call, July 2026 |
| Headline available | 86 | Portfolio page, unsold capacity |
| Implied contracted share | 36% | Derived: 48 of 134 |
| Designed capacity | 188 | 54 MW more than operational |
| Under construction | 150 | Of which about 100 MW due in FY27 |
| Permitted scalability | 800 | Land and power secured, nothing built |
| Registry counted from Sify facility records | 46.0 | Noida 01 and 02, Airoli and others |
The relationship between the operator’s 134 MW operational and revenue-generating, its 188 MW built, and the 155.09 MW this registry counts from eleven facility records is the most useful number on this page. Counted capacity now sits 21.09 MW above the operational claim and 32.9 MW below the built claim — between the two, which is exactly where a building-level count should land. The 134 MW figure is a revenue subset; 188 MW is design. A reader holding only one of those three numbers would misjudge Sify by between 16% and 54%.
The reason is structural: Sify has 16 data centres and this registry only reaches its largest cards. The remaining records in the Sify family — PRJ-217 through PRJ-230 — are being built out one at a time, and most will be in the tens of megawatts.
So the honest statement of coverage is this: Sify is the most under-recorded operator in the file, and the missing capacity is not small.
4Facility cards against the headline
| Facility | Record | Card figure | Other Sify figure |
|---|---|---|---|
| Noida 01 | PRJ-217 | 10.96 MW | 10.8 MW on the Europe site |
| Noida 02 | PRJ-218 | 30+ MW | 25.92 live, 78 planned, 130 to 133 full build, 180 scalable |
| Airoli | PRJ-219 | 4.05 MW | 5.4 MW on the Mumbai page |
| Portfolio total from cards | — | About 155.09 MW | Against 134 MW operational |
| Disclaimer qualifier | — | “As of June 30, 2025” | The cards are dated, the headline is not |
There is a defensible explanation and it is printed on the pages: several cards say “IT power capacity as on June 30, 2025”. The portfolio headline is undated. So a reader comparing them is comparing a fourteen-month-old estate with a current claim.
Which is exactly the failure mode this registry exists to catch — not lying, but mixing dates across a company’s own disclosures. A dated 25.92 MW and an undated “263+ MW scalable” appearing on pages one click apart will produce a wrong answer for anyone who sums them.
The registry dates every figure it records and never sums across scopes. That discipline is the product.
5India’s first liquid-cooling certification
Sify has the strongest AI-readiness paper trail in the Indian market, and it is worth recording separately from the capacity confusion.
| Campus | Certification | Significance |
|---|---|---|
| Rabale, Mumbai | NVIDIA DGX-Ready, liquid cooling | First in India, awarded 2024 |
| Chennai 02, Siruseri | NVIDIA DGX-Ready, liquid cooling | Certified 2025 |
| Noida 02 | NVIDIA DGX-Ready, liquid cooling | Certified 2025 |
| Density supported | Up to 130 to 200 kW per rack | Against 3 kW for an enterprise cabinet |
| Commercial model | Pay-per-use GPU colocation | Not a rack lease |
| Contracted green energy | 300+ MW | Required by hyperscale procurement |
130 to 200 kW per rack is the number that matters. It is roughly 43 to 67 times the 3 kW density in a legacy enterprise hall, and it means a single cabinet draws as much power as half of Iron Mountain’s PUN-1 building — which runs 532 racks at 3 kW.
That is the scale of the change the AI buildout is forcing on Indian data centres, and Sify has had the certification since 2024, before AirTrunk, CapitaLand or Iron Mountain published any liquid-cooling claim in this file.
The commercial model is the other half. Pay-per-use GPU colocation competes with the GPU cloud operators, not with other data centre landlords — a different business with different margins, and one this registry records but does not value.
6The IPO and what it will force into the open
- Sify Infinit Spaces integrated report states 26 MW in development, 162 MW built and 262 MW ready.
- IPO prospectus filed. Timing under evaluation; no listing date announced.
- Earnings call: 134 MW operational and revenue-generating, 188 MW designed, 150 MW under construction, about 100 MW due in FY27.
- Executive interview: campuses with secured land and power permits that can scale to 800 MW; a stated ambition to hold over 15% of a 10 to 20 GW Indian market.
- Portfolio page still shows 86+ MW available, scalable to 263+ MW, and several facility cards still dated 30 June 2025.
The sequence is the story. Sify has been moving from private company to public issuer for over a year, and each step has forced a more precise number into the public domain: 262 MW ready in the integrated report, 134 MW operational on the earnings call, 800 MW permitted in an interview.
Those are not contradictory, they are progressively clearer. And they tell you what to expect from every other Indian operator: the closer a company gets to a capital markets event, the more honest the capacity disclosure becomes.
For this registry that is a strategic point. The most accurate Indian capacity data does not come from marketing pages. It comes from earnings calls, prospectuses, credit rating notes and fund filings — and the operators closest to a listing publish the best numbers.
Six operators in this registry have had a capital markets event in the last two years: NTT, CapitaLand, Iron Mountain, Colt DCS–RMZ, Yotta and Sify. Every one of them disclosed a number in a filing that does not appear on their own website.
That is the sourcing edge for a paid product. It is also why monthly refresh matters — a prospectus, a ratings note or a fund filing can move a state total by ten per cent, as L&T’s 32 MW did on PRJ-203.
The 134 MW here is worth more than the 263 MW headline, and it took an earnings call to get it.
7Procurement
8Limits and open questions
- Five current portfolio figures — 86, 134, 188, 263 and 800 MW — measuring five different things. None is counted here.
- The 36% contracted share is derived by subtracting 86 MW available from 134 MW operational. It is not a disclosed figure.
- Facility cards are dated 30 June 2025 while the portfolio headline is undated, so they cannot be compared directly.
- The 88 MW coverage gap between this registry’s Sify records and the 134 MW operational figure is the largest in the file.
- 800 MW is permitted scalability on secured land and power — no construction, no capacity.
- Zero megawatts counted at portfolio level; the facility records count individually.
- What would close it. A prospectus-grade capacity table with per-facility megawatts and dates.
9Sources
Sources: the Sify data centre portfolio pages; Sify Infinit Spaces site and 2024-25 integrated report; Sify Noida, Noida 02 and Mumbai data centre pages; RCR Tech on the July 2026 earnings call; Entrepreneur India interview of September 2026; Data Center Locations on NVIDIA DGX-Ready certification; and market operator tables.