|
Title: Since BFL isn't able to deliver, why doesn't AMD do a SHA256 ASIC line? Post by: bitcoinnix on March 19, 2013, 03:03:42 PM It seems like ATI could design, fab, and deliver easily and in a short timeframe, given their existing infrastructure.
Title: Re: Since BFL isn't able to deliver, why doesn't AMD do a SHA256 ASIC line? Post by: tycho on March 19, 2013, 03:53:14 PM It seems like ATI could design, fab, and deliver easily and in a short timeframe, given their existing infrastructure. Because the market is tiny compared to the markets that they're already targeting. Title: Re: Since BFL isn't able to deliver, why doesn't AMD do a SHA256 ASIC line? Post by: bitcoinnix on March 19, 2013, 04:37:22 PM It seems like ATI could design, fab, and deliver easily and in a short timeframe, given their existing infrastructure. Because the market is tiny compared to the markets that they're already targeting. Title: Re: Since BFL isn't able to deliver, why doesn't AMD do a SHA256 ASIC line? Post by: Foxpup on March 20, 2013, 01:37:51 AM It seems like ATI could design, fab, and deliver easily and in a short timeframe, given their existing infrastructure. Because the market is tiny compared to the markets that they're already targeting. Title: Re: Since BFL isn't able to deliver, why doesn't AMD do a SHA256 ASIC line? Post by: bitcoinnix on March 20, 2013, 11:51:34 AM It seems like ATI could design, fab, and deliver easily and in a short timeframe, given their existing infrastructure. Because the market is tiny compared to the markets that they're already targeting. I more meant that the Linux high-performance desktop market is microscopic compared to the rest of their line, so I'd bet bitcoin ASICs (or really even just really nicely done SHA-256 & sCrypt FPGAs) would be worth it to them. |