I'll ask my uncle (he works for Nintendo) and get back to you on that one
My personal take, with no sources: 100T sounds excessively high given they need to be able to actually serve these things on commercially available hardware. I would guess they are in the same order of magnitude as the Chinese frontier models. It's possible their edge is in RL training methods, training-time compute, and access to data (e.g. from customers' CC/Codex sessions), not in model size.
This is so hard to sort the true from the false nowadays.
If LLM becomes that good at coding, I'll have to run an open weight one locally.