arXiv2026
The NVIDIA Blackwell Ultra (B300) GPU cuts FP64 vector throughput $\sim 30\times$ while multiplying FP8 tensor throughput. After the recovery of FP64 GEMM via Ozaki Scheme II on FP8 tensor cores and the Tensor-Memory Equilibrium model of the companions ("FP8 is All You Need, Part 1" and "Ozaki 2.5") we ask whether the fifth canonical HPC primitive, the full-FP64 $1024^3$ 3-D FFT, can be carried by the same substrate, and answer with a design and its limit. It is a Bailey six-step transform with no FP64 arithmetic: FP8-tensor DFT GEMMs with fused twiddles, residue-domain Karatsuba combines and exact CRT reconstruction whose bulk is a small GEMM on the FP16 tensor path and whose remainder is a Kulisch fixed-point accumulation with a two-sided modulo-$M$ lift, so the only rounding is the final conversion; constants are machine-generated and verified bit-exactly. The central finding: the binding resource is not floating point but a per-output integer epilogue with floor $(c_{\rm epi}/8),B_{\rm mem}$, $c_{\rm epi} \approx 203$-$281$ instructions per output: on B300 it holds the transform at 63-87 ms against a 12.9 ms roof ($4.9$-$6.7\times$ short); at most $1.3$-$1.9\times$ faster than the collapsed native path, possibly no faster at realised issue rates; no software route reaches the roof; on the NVIDIA Rubin GPU emulation loses $8$-$11\times$. An FP32 variant meets the same wall: the cause is per-scalar reconstruction, not FP64. Each floor term names its remedy: the NVIDIA B200 GPU's INT8 tensor core restored with a position-weighted cross-column accumulation primitive, a load-path deconstruction datapath shared with the companions, two ISA idioms and modular reduction at the MMA output give 16.0-23.5 ms with minor hardware and 12.9-15.0 ms with one moderate ask. All figures are projected floors, not measurements, with sensitivities and the FP8 layout condition given.