The whole thing is imaginary: "In this paper, we propose Chiplet Cloud, a chiplet-based ASIC AI-supercomputer architecture that optimizes total cost of ownership (TCO) per generated token for serving large generative language models to reduce the overall cost to deploy and run these applica- tions in the real world."

So they are comparing actual implementations with a theoretical implementation. Never mind that they got the A100 figures wrong, they are still in the 'wouldn't it be nice if we had 'x'' stage. This looks like a paper whose sole purpose is to raise funds for a research project that will probably ultimately go nowhere and they needed a reason that looks good on paper to increase their chances of getting funded. A100 can already be had for $0.87/hour so even their theoretical advantage is under significant pressure and assuming they got everything else right by the time the project has run the market will have overtaken them. This is what usually happens to CPUs that are application specific.