Bitcoin Forum

Hey guys, I feel like sharing this today just because many of us (me included) are very skeptical of "7nm" mining chips

Well, Wait no more I suppose!

https://www.gmo.jp/en/news/article/?id=777
https://www.nasdaq.com/press-release/gmo-internet-group-offers-gmo-miner-the-worlds-first-mining-machine-equipped-with-mining-chips-20180523-00326

Apparently GMO really did invent 7NM mining even before Bitmain!

Guess we will learn more in 2 weeks, but so far, we will have to wait until at least October - 5 months, before anyone will see a unit.  That is a lifetime in the Bitcoin world.

Let's see, the 10nm node miners are *just* becoming viable and yet GMO is saying they will begin delivering 7nm products at the end of Q3? Riiiight... And what Foundry will they be using? None are anywhere near even limited production status @ 7nm. Yes Samsung and GF are doing "tape out' for engineering testing of the layouts but that has little to do with being anywhere close to a viable production status.

We'll see in two weeks my man, who's goin to Japan?

Do you know this from some source at the foundries or do you just repeat somebody's baseless speculation? Edit: Wasn't that QuintLeo who convinced you that Intel isn't offering foundry services? End edit.

It would seem that Bitcoin mining IC is near perfect test product for a new process: it is repetitive, it tolerates bad yield, it is free of actual trade secrets or intellectual property in its circuitry. It would be beneficial for both foundry and designers to cooperate and profitably sell the wafers fabricated during process bring-up.

GMO being Japanese could have an additional benefit of really being able to sign binding non-disclosure agreements, unlike the mainland Chinese.

I would love to hear from somebody who has current experience. Mine is really dated, but even a very small fab-less company had been trusted with internal fabrication process metrics provided that they made actual technological and legal effort to protect the trade secrets of the fab.

I agree on those points and have in the past said the very same thing about mining chips being a perfect process test platform for the very same reasons you gave. That is probably why Samsung has been eager to make chips for miners from eBang, Innosilicon/Halong Mining, etc. - great way to work out the kinks in their 10nm node.

 Yes the Foundries are doing tests/'tape out' at 7nm. In their IPO document Canaan (http://www.hkexnews.hk/APP/SEHK/2018/2018051401/Documents/SEHK201805150005.pdf) p.94 mentioned having actual design layout samples of 7nm chips finished by TSMC last month and made mention about possibly having a mass-produced 7nm miner chip by the end of the year. My feeling is that they are assuming that the few remaining issues with EUV are sufficiently addressed by then to keep mask costs far lower.

I just highly doubt any company that is getting it's major funding via ICO token sales and pre-orders can pull this off or be trusted.

On the Intel Foundry services bit - that was new to me. I get a lot of feeds from Intel (mostly about their FPGA's) plus several electronic design feeds - never saw mention of it.

2 things, first the gmo mining contracts start at 500k, and it is contracts, you're not buying the miners. Theyre like the shipping containers for hut 8.
2nd, there has been some promising work with germanium, we may see 7nm chips sooner than we think. I agree q3 seems a bit optimistic, but maybe q1 or q2 2019.
I hope it's coming, we need more energy efficient mining equipment like yesterday.

To which I say:  It really doesn't matter so long as everyone is playing on a level field.  If someone comes up with a 100TH machine that runs a 1000W (~10X todays performance) at the same price point as todays solutions, the world will simply convert to that technology and difficulty will rise 10X.  Power consumption would remain the same.  All of todays tech would simply become land-fill.

The only benefit would be to the first adopters (who will likely pay a capital premium), and that disappears once everyone is using the tech.

The the primary two constraints are Power availability and resulting Heat generation, I highly suspect packaging would be developed that mimics todays machines - drawing around 1400 watts and simply providing 10X the hashrate.    Personnally, I would be swapping those in one-for-one for my existing gear - no energy savings at all in terms of actual usage.

thats pretty much all of us. Mining has always been a time game

Well, I don't know about the vagaries of Intel's marketing. I'm somewhat more interested in how the rumor mills work on this forum or in somewhat broader cryptocurrency news/rumor mills. Nowadays whatever QuintLeo says, I'm immediately thinking that opposite is true. And you have started to repeat a lot of his proclamations.

Thanks for clarification.

So I guess this means they've scrapped the PCIe cards that were going to do 8 TH/s @ 300W? Didn't seem legit.

Somes specs on the site

https://gmominer.z.com/en/


They saying 24 ths

Here's (https://twitter.com/ynakamura56/status/1003908868114509824) also a tweet detailing a few things about the GMO miner I found on r/Bitcoin a couple minutes ago. 24TH/1950W so about 80W/TH, but the miner costs $1999 and ships by the end of October, though sales start in June. I'd still personally take the S9i at its reduced price for a much lower $/TH cost sacrificing just a bit of efficiency, but nice to see that GMO has something working out the board that beats Bitmain for now.

And that is why Bitmain lowered the price and gave out all those coupons.

They’re trying to snuff the little GMO before it gets a grip in this industry. An S9i actually costs around ~350$ to produce enmass. With the coupons we’re pretty much getting them on par with production. Why is Bitmain being so generous? They’re not, anyone buying Bitmain now thinking is a good deal is another lost customer to GMO.   Classic monopoly tactics

Not necessarily. Some people just might not want to (or be able to) operate a single 2KW miner.

In the long run wouldn't the B2 miner be more profitable? Let's say after the difficulty spikes because of the new miners. Thinking 2-3 years ahead.

yeah maybe if it does not break.

the 2 mistakes they are doing :

1) not shipping now
2) not offering a 1000 watt miner along with a 2000 watt miner


they would have been better off build  some  1000 watt 13th miners  along with some 2000 watt 26 th miners

and simply selling them once they are available.

This moron preorder falls right into the hands of bitmain.
r
Economically 2 s9i in hand for   1265 is so much better

They got no choice as far as I can tell. It seems that GMO is not willing to risk alot in this cryptomining venture of theirs. They are asking for preorders because they are not willing to foot the bill for production. However it seems to me that they have spent quite significantly on launching the product already. I will have some of their miners for sure. But I am definitely not going to be the guy who gets shot through the door. Besides, I think the very first batch has already been sold out.

this style of selling only feeds into bitmain

btw I am not being anti bitmain this is simple economics.

bitmain just cranks out cheap s9is sells the shit out of them.

and here is the kicker bitmain does not even have to design its next chip just buy  each new miner from Halong ,Innosilicon, Avalon or GMO


and reverse engineer it then sell it at a  lower price.

EVEN better bribe a guy on the inside and put the chip out faster then the real builder like they did to the sia asic builders.

That said I grabbed 2 cheap s9i's to test my solar idea out.
I may be able to sell a solar package for an s9i at a good price.

certainly a 2 board s9i on the cheap

Does the actual unit have 2 network ports like the renderings and are they using the extra port to make them daisy-chainable?

I would agree, because BM price is 4 times less now, for S9i  -  and  taking $100 coupon in account, which I have a few, I would better order S9s for delivery in a few weeks.

---

By the way, this miners would need a 2,200 Watt PSU - which can cost much more than Bitmain's atandart APW3++.

Does anybody know how much a good PSU of 2200 Watts costs?

---

JUST RELEASED !!!  

https://i.imgur.com/BTw8h5N.jpg (https://i.imgur.com/BTw8h5N.jpg)

GMO has just made a public presentation of their 7NM miner!


https://www.ccn.com/gmo-unveils-japans-first-ever-bitcoin-mining-rig/

Interesting:
the B2’s 7nm chips were produced in Taiwan, most likely by TSMC, which also supplies China-based mining giant Bitmain with most of its chips.   ??? ???
They are planning to supplant Bitmain, using the same manufacturer as Bitmain uses  ;D ;D ;D

look for an expansion board to connect on some good server PSU, with lot of 6pin connectors
You will need at least 10 6-pin connectors to connect all the boards, like on the antminer
and server PSUs are the best choice, cause they are build to run 24/7

the price is around 0,15$ per W, a 2,200 W PSU will cost around 330$

Yea, not alot of people think about the extra cost of the PSU

They have stated on twitter already  "$1999 PSU included" which can be seen here:  https://twitter.com/gmominer/status/1004317442267439107

Looking at the cost of operation 10% or more savings on electric is huge. Power rates do change, and that 10% could be the difference between an RoI/Profit with a longer outlook as difficulty rises. I personally do not have facilities paying $.03-$.04/kwh, in the summer time I pay a whopping $.0857/kwh. The extra efficiency looks pretty enticing to small fries like myself looking at a 2 year road map. I assume there are others out there feeling the exact same way.

We can simply use calculator to compare profitability, and can see that ROI for B2 is 100 days more than with S9i :

https://i.imgur.com/TPv57sg.png (https://i.imgur.com/TPv57sg.png) https://i.imgur.com/hgnS80d.png (https://i.imgur.com/hgnS80d.png) https://i.imgur.com/tuDFfu1.png (https://i.imgur.com/tuDFfu1.png)

That is, while efficiency of B2 is 15% more than of S9i,  but high price makes it 30% less attractive for ROI.

I agree on the surface that the GMO B2 does not look as appealing, but if you run the same calculations accounting for difficulty adjustment over 2 years, the B2 is the only one that can give a RoI in 1.5yrs and remain profitable after that. Assuming a $50 internet connection monthly, a 10% rise in BTC price monthly (Only way the calculator would show either profitable) with a power cost at $0.09/kwh. It is not as straight forward as 10% price increase a month though. These new GMO miners "Should" ship in October, which I interpret as it being delivered some time around December. So with 5 Months of missing s9 profit ($410?) it would not matter longer term.

It would make sense to have hardware that will remain profitable for a longer time than hardware that in the near future will not be profitable for smaller miners like myself. Assuming it does not have 4 months of delays it makes sense over other options.

-I could easily be wrong and missing something that a more experienced miner may see.

And assuming it doesn't fall apart or catch on fire a long time before it pays itself off.

10% monthly increase on BTC sure would be nice, instead of the 20% overnight dumps we've been getting lately.

With coupons I ordered 2x s9i's for 1265 to my door

I will be mining 28th in about 14 days

If I buy the B2 for 1999 plus shipping I will be at 2200  and have to wait until Say oct 20 to mine 4 month head start.  and my power deal is 0 for power split the coins.

So there is no way for this gear to be better then the s9i in my case.

You guys are not accounting for Mining decentralization by buying anything other than Bitmain........Can't we put value on that?

well, ASIC = ASIC - there is no decentralization here, all the same story
real decentralization you have on ASIC proof coins, even the best decentralization You can find in the CPU only coins, they are rare, but the best decentralized

I would say that it is still decentralized but not decentralized as much. Currently, there are miners that are turned off because difficulty is too high. If it keeps going higher, eventually only the cheapest miners will own all the hashrate. If it gets to the point 10 big miners control everything, maybe we should sell some btc because the risk of a 51% attack gets bigger.

Having mined through the Monero Botnet AND the ETH botnet of 2016, I'd disagree with you. But I guess everyone's gotta have that illusion somehow.

No, what I'm talking about is Manufacturer decentralization.

GMO WILL be the first major manufacturer from another country that is not China.

They may not be the last if rumours are to be believed.

Agree with you, speaking on manufacture decentralization

Does it matter if new entrants come in? U would buy this product over an S9? The numbers dont make sense to do so. Only people bad at math would buy this or a halong TI.

this product  is designed in a stupid manner.

a 1950 watt miner  in the same shape and size as the s9 or t1 is pretty much an exercise in stupidity.

Owning the s9
Owning the avalon 841
Owning the t1

They all are close to 1300-1500 watts

trying to cool 1950 watts  in about the same space and size is going to be harder.

also if you have 30 amp pdus  3x 1950 = 5850 watts which will over load the pdu

but if it does 0.08 watts it is good for a guy with limited power.

Ie a smaller miner  maybe a guy with a 30 amp pdu   as he can have 2 of them and 1 s9

1950
1950
1350
5250  watts is a good load for a 30 amp pdu

gives him 24 + 24 + 14 = 62th

while 4x s9i = 4 x 14th = 56th
using 4x 1350 = 5400 watts

I know of a few guys that prepaid  data centers  for 10kwatts a month for 12
 months.

5 of these = 9750 watts and do 5 x 24 = 120th

7  s9i =  9450 watts and do 7 x 14 = 98th

I am not sure that  22th  over the space of a year will earn  the difference  you paid extra.

I also think these use 13  pcie jacks.  so 1950/12 = 162.50 watts a hashboard jack

the s9i is 1350/9  150 per jack

see photo

https://i.imgur.com/yXito2G.jpg (https://i.imgur.com/yXito2G.jpg)

My guess is  this is not going to be so good

They were better off  making it do 14.00 th  and 1100 watts

Probably because it's still speculation that they have more than just a prototype. They could have run it at the presentation to show it was legit. On top of that, their photos show a hash board that has a completely different layout and less than half the chips that they show in renderings here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TcVtEXbjik

I wanted to talk about that a little bit. They have 4 PCI connectors per board because of the power-draw. I do not think these will work at any place +/- 40° from the equator. At least not without serious cooling problems. From what my friend told me about the presentation, they can be daisy-chained like the avalons so you won't need alot of splitters.

Also, 1990W is apparently the figure AT THE WALL with their PSU. I think that has already been clarified. 2k is already including the PSU. Unfortunately for everyone, MOQ is 100 units. Also..........apparently they had alot of help from TSMC, which in proxy means lol, they ripped off bitmain alot.

GMO is using TSMC as well also don't forget GMO coming in has a lot more money than all these other players. Even bitmain so it's not like they are coming to the game short handed.

Okay so let us say that GMO is bigger $$$

they still went in the wrong direction here.

Most miners even 1000 unit miners have space to spare
They are short with cheap power
They are short with cooling issues.

I can run 3x my current amount of miners and still have space left over
I have lots of space.
Packing all the power into a small box is dumb and asks for trouble.

Forcing a use of a 2200 watt psu and pulling 1990 watts against it is meh.

Running a 12th doing 995 watts is so easy to manage.

Well Since I can't get these until October it is not a worry for me.

I've been saying exactly that for three years, since S7 rolled out, but it looks like that kind of high-dense chipsinked package is becoming everyone's de-facto standard (except Avalon, thankfully).

There's no good reason not to build KW/sub-KW miners. Site density stopped being an issue back when people started using shelves instead of racks.

1.4KW is already difficult in that case size, without adding half again to it. Especially since all evidence points to smaller nodes having more issues with heat density in the dies, so the chips probably can't be allowed to run continuously at 120C die temperatures without a high risk of roasting before the machine's expected end of viability.

add on the lack of speed control.

they will run balls to the wall.

Avalon has various settings one is about 990 watts

Halong t1 with -ck firmware low setting is about 1300 watts

I've also been saying that full control of core clock and voltage are necessary features but nobody does that anymore. Probably for idiot-proofing. It is handy some have at least partial options.

yeah  over clocking morons  caused lots of returns.

Sooo   no more voltage  controls.

To me I rather run all gear   at 60 to 80 percent of tops speeds and volts.

But no can do.

Yes can do, but you'll void the warranty on the S9s, You can do that on the 841s already but so far I found it unnecessary since -2 turns good yield with good power draw already.


I think GMO maybe releasing a smaller miner for home users late this year or early next year thats got lower power draw and lower speed from the looks of it. Apparently this machine is for "Large server farms". Also if you haven't noticed, the reason the price is so high is because they are mining themselves and they're not going to sell it at lower premiums

GMO designed the machine in Japan, which is known for high quality. This means their rigs may outperform the china competitors in terms of quality.

Designed in Japan, produced in Taiwan

https://i.imgur.com/BqVudsM.png (https://i.imgur.com/BqVudsM.png)

I would not be surprised if they offer 1 year warranty. This can be a big advantage.

So what, they're using air with a higher specific heat? Epoxy with zero thermal resistance? 300CFM fans that don't spin at 10KRPM and draw 100W to do it? Have they discovered a heatsink profile with no solidity and perfect heat transfer, and made sure to place every single one to avoid vortices?

Quality or not, the physics of air cooling is a big limitation. Look at all the issues we already have with heat unreliability on 16nm and 10nm and think how much worse it's going to be on 7nm, which has basically never been tested before this point.

Well  1950 watts or 1990 watts either way   it will be roasting hot.

Even if they offer a semi speed control  like -ck did with the T1 (nice work on his part)
Or voltage offset like the Avalon 841

I can state it is a moron move to run 1950-1990 watts on that size and shape.

The density is not that important.
Cooling and efficiency are important.

They have began with a good chip (maybe)  and put it in a moron shape.

How about same size box doing 12th at 972 watts?  with  low medium fast speed settings.

The gear they built  with not like air cooling it will want ac and a colder room  which makes the power savings lost.

All these smart guys  and they sell this in a stupid box.

I tell you what  does this gear come on Nov 3 since it shipped on Oct 31?

And if it does come on Nov 3   How much do you want to bet  that bitmain beats them to market with the s-11   with  17 th doing 1377 watts.  same efficiency and cost of 1400?

How will GMO look then.

They really fucked up doing a pre order  with Oct delivery.

I mean you can't really reverse engineer a 7nm chip. Also they didn't bribe anyone to make it faster than the sia they just did it a really inefficient way which allowed them to come to market faster even though the efficiency was shit compared to the others but they didn't care because they flooded the market.

---

I mean the biggest issue I see with a lot of mines is they are all going for high density well at least the services and business I use. So okay yeah you need more cooling to cool it down but if you have the hot and cold isles built for this kind of air movement your right as rain. Also for the 2kw these draws you figure on a 60amp pdu @ 240 you can run 7 of these off a 60amp pdu well maybe wil the rule of 80 your looking at 6 but that is almost using a full load. Granted the bigger miners with big power rails none of this really matter to them as pdu's are not an issue. When I had the majority of miners in my basement my issue was space. I had 40 miners and I did not have a way to put them all into the hot box. The hot box had proper cfm to vent it out but venting in 40 4inch ducts is just a mess when if I can do just 10 ducts I am right as rain. But I see your complaint but those of us and those who have to deal with high density due to limited room these could be great.

But many mid-size farm, like mine, have pre-wired expecting 20 amp 220V to be split between 2 devices, not one. 

Frankly, one does have to wonder where folks get their 'increase in efficiency' as node size get smaller figures from. Please explain your reasoning. Is it that you expext x amount of size reduction to equal the same x amount of power savings?

Bzzzt. The Real World doesn't work that way.

Lets see, Inno's A1 28nm chip back in late 2013: promoted to run 1.25x faster and 15% lower power than the Real World proved but - when put into a good design the chips still were/are rock-solid. ref the various Dragon miners from 2014 that are still around. I still have my uber-rare 1THs A1 miner from AMT, one of maybe 5-6 ever delivered by AMT before it went under as one of the casualties of the ill-fated, horrifically bad Bitmine.ch A1 hash board designs.

Same year, 2014, had several failed 28nm designs, BFL Monarch, the Minion chip, and others. Most failed because of the extreme power-density of the designs and insufficient cooling systems.

Then BM nailed the 28nm node with their s7 chip. Time passes and the 16nm s9 chips arrived ruling as most efficient (reference needed: last S7 chips vs first S9 chips. Did the size drop match eff increase? No, but how far off?) but even as early as the s4 BM began pushing power density. Their S5+ began their current shoe box packaging now copied by everyone, warts and all.. Everyone but Canaan with their Avalons that is. Only they seem to have taken the time and thought out proper internal design of the hash boards and heat sinks....

Back to node size/efficiency: The 10nm eBang eBit and Halong/Inno Dragonmint T1 miners began shipping early this year. The eBang 10nm efficiency is worse than their earlier 16nm miners plus it seems the their miners are dying on the vine. The Halong 10nm efficiency cannot really be compared due to the (minor) effective hash rate increase from it using asicboost. That said, despite -ck doing extensive performance tweaking (paid by MyRig and NOT Halong btw) people are reporting the T1 efficiency at advertised speed is less than a s9. Only when dropped to top s9 speeds of around 14THs and less does it match/slightly beat the s9.

Now GMO is pre-selling their 7nm miner with delivery starting Oct (or later). Pre-selling- as did Halong - with advertised specs that said pre-sale Investomers are expecting to achieve with no 'oh by the way the pool must support AB' surprises like Halong pulled or other such crap. Even more power density cooking a node size that even more than the 10nm node is meant for far cooler running, low power (mobile) chips.... Leakage from electrons quantum tunneling between the conductors will be even higher. Hmm, wonder how this will turn out.... ;)

S3 478GH, 28nm silicon, 366W = 1.306GH/W at the chip = 0.766 W/GH
S4 2000GH, 28nm silicon, 1450W =  1.279GH/W "at the wall" (maybe) ~= 0.725 W/Gh
S5 1155GH, 28nm silicon, 590W = 1.958GH/W = 0.511 W/GH (just goes to show what can be down within a chip 'size')
S7 4500GH, 16nm silicon, 1293W = 3.480GH/W at the chip = 0.287 W/GH - a 1.78X factor in power consumption improvement for a 1.75X decrease in die size - pretty linear.
S9 13500GH, 16nm silicon, 1323W = 10.20GH/W at the chip = 0.098 W/GH - a 2.93X improvement in power consumption via better chip design vs. the S7.

So I'm guessing a shinkage of die size can be estimated to make linear improvement in power consumption, perhaps.

Here is hoping this doesn't get deleted for being "off topic" in a speculation forum...

BM1385 in the S7 is a 28nm chip, and has a bottom-clock efficiency around 0.18J/GH with decent hashrates still around 0.22J/GH; the 700MHz operating point setpoint of 45-chip S7 was past the knee of the efficiency curve and we also lost ~10% of power, board-level, to the 45A single-phase main regulator plus around 50W machine-level just for fans. Chip-level, the BM1385 was not much worse than some others' early 14/16nm designs.

Amen to that

Never wrote that taserz wrote it.

and  a hard wire 2 outlet circuit at 20 amps  would be asked to do 20x 240 = 4800  x 80 percent that is 3840  watts

or worse  20 x 220 = 4400 x 80 percent that is  3520 watts

since this says it is 1950 or 1990    you are doing 3900 watts to  3980 watts

I have gone past 80 percent derate   and in a hotter setup  it has issues.

I would  not want 100 of these  doing  398,000 watts   which could be  3980/4400 =  as high as 90.45 %    vs 80%    Yeah in canada or iceland not that hot

but plenty of hot mining spots are around

if you have robust volts (240)  you are at 3980/4800 =  82.92%  which may be okay

My area is 239 to 243 volts which is helpful.

And if you're on 208V and derate to 80%, a 20A circuit gets you 1 machine (and 48% utilization); 30A circuit gets you 2 (and 64% utilization).
Though a 60A PDU and 80% derate would run exactly 5 without a lot of overhead.

208's pretty common for industrial-scale electric, even in datacenters.

And the point still stands that the power density and cooling requirements mean these'll only run where your intake temperatures are regulated to probably 60F and lower. In my farm, that means I could run one for at most five months out of the year. If someone bought one and sent it here for hosting I'd have to turn it down. Got enough trouble keeping S9s cool May through August.

The biggest reason I kept the t1s was -ck s speed control.

Low 14.4 th
Medium 15.5 th
Fast 16.5 Th.

That low setting solves my cooling issues in the summer .

The company GMO now has a hotbox doing 1950-1990 watts taking money for preorders .

First will it do all pools I don’t know
Second can I run it at 80% to avoid overheating I don’t know.
Yeah I get it that industrial spots may have really good cooling. But a lot of farms do not cool that way.

I was watching the english version of the presentation and these apparently have some kind of GPS tracking enabled that they say is for locating during theft. They claimed they are already testing/mining with a B1 miner, which is not for sale to the public. B2 is still only in tape-out and they have no chips yet. Warranty is only 180 days.

I doubt they are using GPS as interference from the miners would pretty much keep it from acquiring satellites. More likely it is just simple IP address lookup being used.

Question is: Are the miners constantly phoning home or does it only happen during boot? Where are the miners reporting to - a GMO site? If the tracking 'is for theft prevention' that implies that the miners can also be remotely shutdown ala' the Bitmain Antbleed kerfuffle. Can't wait for the rampant speculation to start on this one... Anyone need pitchforks and torches?

The last thing I want is ANY device be it a miner, TV, computer, whatever, to be phoning home. Hell, I even keep GPS/location reporting turned off on my phone.

there is a "spec" for it on their site, what states: Daisy Chain   MAX 32 units.. .whatever this means, I am curious if anyone has some actual info on this! :)

I figured I would chime in from my perspective running a large scale datacenter.

The powerdraw and the anticipated heat problems are both deal killers. I would have to build a whole new power infrastructure to run these things and id end up with like 2 machines per shelf. Its a waste of space to try and shoehorn these into an existing setup. Obviously the things wont run in pretty much any crypto datacenter with the heat they will be pushing out. I dont know of any datacenter not in the arctic that can run cold enough in the summer to keep these things online. This is all not to mention how new, unproven, and quite probably unreliable the first generation of these miners/chips will be. I *might* order one as a test, but im leaning towards not bothering unless there are changes to the packaging and power requirements.

Also, Bitmain has delayed their next new miner and im betting they will release it just in time to take the wind out of GMOs sales. Better to go with the devil you know rather than the devil you dont. Bitmain will ship an as advertised unit and they will most likely ship it on time. As much hate as they receive they do get the job done.

No. At the moment, we will have to wait until at least October - 5 months, before anyone will see a unit.

Where is the October verbiage? GMO's site says July batch but their taking "applications" for orders.

Broker just shared this even though it is a generic reply our first 100 batch order is in.

It was in all of their press releases, presentation, and also still currently on their pricing page, although that now says shipping November 2018. FAQ still says end of October for June orders.

Sad we missed that, broker got the invoice a moment ago. We'll have to contact buyers and soak transaction fees for those who don't want to wait or position funds for another buy.

Thank you.

Did you pay using the email they provided to you after you completed the purchase application? or was it done on their website?

I just do the marketing for mfb but from what I understand is they send BTC/BCH addresses and wire information. You pay to your preference, no need to contact them directly unless you need to. B2 is sold out though, B3 is available for Nov.

go to B2 press release where some features are explained more completely.

Only requires plugging one of them into the internet, and the rest hook up to eachother

Just like the Avalons....saves on running multiple ethernet wire all over the place, although the Avalon's start to get some weird errors after five are connected.   Still five is better than one.

my post on avalons hooking up to the rasp pi controller was deleted.

There was a point to it.  So I will re phrase

max avalons on a controller = 20

I have found 12 on a controller work far better then 20.

so 60%  of max = really good results.

100% of max = more errors.

No one knows  what the max will be for this new gear.

I caution buyers that what is said to be the max  by the builder  may work  or you may need to do 60% of the max daisy-chain the builder of this gear says you can do.

So if you are getting a lot of these keep in mind you may not be able to the full amount the builder say that you can do.

Since this is speculation I will speculate that  50 to 65%  of the number said to be the max by the builder  will work better with less errors then 100% of the max the builder says you can do.

Does anyone here have anything to add about the double fans?

Will that actually be more efficient than 1 bigger fan?

I'm quite curious since they don't mention that part in any of their FAQ

Just that they are not stacked fans. Each is a single fan like the Delta GFB1212VHW (https://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/delta-electronics/GFB1212VHW/603-1093-ND/1014424) that uses a 76.2mm deep housing to accommodate deeper fan blades.

edit: added DigiKey link to the Delta fan

I wondered about that.

I also wondered - why make a machine for which that's necessary?

Ok, so my original thought was correct about the b3 fans?

Aren't these rated at higher wattage than 2k? You'll at least have voltage "control" in the UI to bring it down to b2 spec. Still "vaporware" till we're closer to release date. Way to early GMO, you've already changed your design in a few months. Maybe soon they'll figure out a third model that has the speed with efficiencies we want to see by Oct.

@sidehack: I imagine your question is rhetorical but for the sake of discourse.  ..

Retooling can be costly so I imagine design is centered to manufacturing, look at Obilisk for example. It will be hard to break the narrow tube design, packing heat sinks in a jar like they're cotton balls. Maybe someone will be bold and change the game for the industry.

You mean like literally everyone was doing before the S7 became popular? And like Canaan still does?

The narrow tube design with heat sinks packed in like cotton balls is a lazy way to put way too much power in a tiny box. A tiny box nobody's asking for. A tiny box that substantially reduces system reliability (not just by baking the crap out of your silicon, but by relying heavily on overtaxed mechanical components like high-speed fans and assumptions about ambient conditions - these would die rapidly without chilled, dust-free air), in a time when breakeven returns will take a year longer than the warranty period.

It doesn't really take boldness. Just takes common sense, a little bit of extra R&D and prioritizing providing durable quality hardware to the customer over making immediate large profits.

Profits are a huge motivator, that's why it would be a bold move to break the norm and why other people conform to meet the expectation. In a sense at this point to deliver anything else to market would be "rebellious" even as we agree completely, that it would only make sense to do so to deliver a quality product.

They are  not taking advantage  of other designers.

use avalon 841 heatssinks
use halong t1 style firmware for speed control

82 watts  per th

   fast speed       15 th  1230 watts
  medium speed  13 th  1066 watts
  slow speed       12 th    984  watts

easy peasy

Only advantage is in the way of using manufacturing already in place. If you mimic you can turn units quickly since you don't have to retool a factory especially if you own your own facility (turn time is even more accelerated).

Canaan is a great example of design intuitiveness. Still though the concept is the same, just more thought into delivering a better product (my personal opinion) with subtle but effective changes. As a buyer you're rewarded with it. If you're following my post on heat here lately I am less nervous about my avalons then my antminers. Would love a T1 but with prices probably looking at other units.

Back to the b2/3 concept, if you're facilities cooling is on point it doesn't matter. Stuff the jar, suck the power (if it's cheap), mine blocks. These things aren't made for me and mining at home.

Then any miner wants a solid combination of hash and efficiencies. My point is that GMO is taking this model to the extreme. I hope companies pick up on this and look to adjust in a better direction like we're all saying in different ways. Better efficiencies, cooling design, and voltage control.

I don't need a miner that looks like Arnold would have over his shoulder ready to fire from a helicopter.

In-place mfg such as what?

PCB assembly houses do not care about the shape of boards, they can make and stuff any shape/size you want.
As for the housing, Bitmain uses an extruded tube and ja an extrusion die cost $$$ to make however there are many extruded tube/case profiles that could be used 'off-the-shelf'. Canaan and GMO are using machined frames and simple bent covers which of course means that they could use any style case they want to.

I appreciate the insight but the argument isn't they can't, but why they don't. Ease, profits, turn to market. Or is there more I'm missing?

Doesn't seem like it's helping the time to market if they're not gonna be shipping units for three months anyway. Making a case is a heck of a lot faster than making enough 7nm ASICs to put in it, and getting them installed on the boards.

Canaan's machines are better thought out in pretty much every way. If I'm remembering right, Canaan was started by the engineers left in the rubble of Avalon ripping off most of its customers and skedaddling with all the money. Putting more engineers in charge of a product instead of bean-counters is probably a good way to go if you want something to actually work well.

Yeah at least how I look at this gear.

Anyone with an understanding of mining won’t want this gear.

Two fans pull 62 watts.

Must force feed it cold air.

So if margins stay tight I am going to lose quite a bit of money feeding cool air to it.

If a fan has an issue gear may over heat.

So basically this miner is for an ac hosting place with crazy cheap power. And is short on space.

I simple don’t see why you buy this using 82 watts per th and needing ac

Over the Avalon the s9 or the t1/t2. All of which can survive a 90f room with fan cooling.

Well this should make the GMO Investomers feel a little more comfortable, from the July issue of Photonics Spectra: Extreme UV Keeps Pace with Moore’s Law (https://www.photonics.com/a63492/p5/vo149/i1021/Extreme_UV_Keeps_Pace_with_Moores_Law). Good article describing it even if it is written with more of a simplified-for-marketing vs whitepaper style.

EUV power is getting higher and more stable & mirrors are lasting longer so come Q4 7nm is finally looking to become economical for commercial production of chips vs the current Engineering samples/pre-production status.

24 TH for 2 KW?

Not very impressive if they're actually using 7nm parts.

Innosilicon has done better than THAT on new nodes....

right now  gmo claims 82 watts per th

innosilicon claims  72 watts per th on a down clocked t2 turbo

and pangolin claims 65 watts per th on its new m10

so

24th doing 2000 watts  for gmo ships in OCT

33th doing 2145 watts for pangolin  ships in Sept

no real verification in field tests by real miners as of today.

but GMO is in trouble if  both innosilicon and pangolin deliver on their claims.

And Bitmain's pending announcement will most likely fall into competing for market on newest specs/efficiencies.

I would think it would , but I never saw them  trail in every single  type of miner they  were selling.

Already back to this gear it now looks like a terrible investment.

As both innosilcion and pangolin claim to work better.

and both innosilicon t2 turbo  releases sooner then OCT1

as does pangolin M10.

Yea, GMO is doing it wrong. Their pretty much selling asics that plan to will host them selves. No developed for most mining facilities and date is way to far to even call them a market competitor. Then they will probably keep changing their design every few months as efficiencies or hash rates increase. Hopefully the prior.

I'm just checking the threads to see if anyone ordered this miner and knows if the end of October ship date is still on the table?

I'd like to see if they are meeting the first commitment before people start shelling out for their next announcement.

All batches are sold out, no shipping info for any B2's for our buyers yet.

So no B2 has shipped yet. There website claims to have hit the number for production to start on the B3, so orders have been halted, but you can send an email if still interested.

Then I read in another thread they are offering refunds for the b2 and cannot ship them.

I've requested more info, and directed them here

so for todays news GMO stated that they can't ship miners and they already issued some refunds to clients
even though the company is legit I was sure that something would happen, it doesn't matter who you are the pre-order stuff is always fishy
it reminded me butterflylabs

means they fubar'd their chips.  Why issue refunds if you're simply late on delivering product?

Probably more like they saw the latest competitions products and decided they couldn't compete

exactly

Bitmain is on the market for almost 6 years now and GMO thought they can compete with them? Bitmain just took over the chip factories and I'm pretty sure they planned it before GMO's official statement about 7nm chips and plus today's market

Timing is everything, then there is price to market. GMO was doomed when they announced in what March-June ish? Way to long for a release. Even 60 days is too long now. Manufacturers will need to step up and deliver hardware that is the very best they can offer otherwise they'll get constantly trumped by the next release and so on, and so on.

That really shouldn't have mattered. That's the golden ticket for pre-order companies, the time between when you pay and they deliver. It's a get out of jail free card, all you have to do is deliver the equipment, even if it's sub par for what is being sold along side it when the time to ship comes due.

There is no economical benefit to not shipping out the miners and refunding customers if the gear was successful. Considering the pre-order was supposedly sold out, they would have been way ahead by delivering this product to market, then moving forward.

this is why preorders are death.

so they sold out   say 1000 machines for 3000. or 3 million.

how does anyone know if :

they mined them for 4 months.
they only cost 1 million to make them
they earned 1 million profit which means they are all roi'd

and they refund the 3 million back,

their cost = 0
they have 1000 miners paid off.
they have a load leveler deal with a major japanese power company
they switch gear on and off to level the load  and split the coins with the power company

If that is true I could prove it if  Japan gave me full authority to investigate it. But that is less likely then my 2 sidekick new pacs hitting back to back blocks. ;D

This made my day. :)

So  you're telling me there's a chance. ~ Lloyd Christmas

It would be nice to see the inner mechanisms of these companies or at least a brief overview. Honestly I can't think of any other industry that has this sort of set up, granted there aren't any I can think of where you could potentially use the investor money to build a product then use it to ROI.

I just wonder who would possibly pre order their B3 considering the debacle this turned into... Oh wait didn't they start taking that preorder money to build the B3's before issuing the refunds.

Honestly it's starting to look more like a damn Ponzi the more I think about it.

It looks like we won't be seeing any more of the GMO B2 and B3.

According to CoinDesk (https://www.coindesk.com/gmo-quits-selling-mining-machines-after-crypto-market-downturn), GMO announced (https://ir.gmo.jp/en/pdf/irlibrary/gmo_disclose_info20181225_e.pdf) on Tuesday, December 25, 2018 that they will "no longer develop, manufacture, and sell mining machines." GMO's cryptocurrency mining division apparently recorded losses of $3.2 million in Q2 2018 and $5.6 million in Q3 2018.

too bad...

we need as much as possible, not as few manufacturers as possible, to maintain decentralization on a high level

Heh heh, gee, color me not surprised.....
At best these folks were highly over-optimistic hucksters from day-1 shilling 7nm tech long long before it was anywhere close to being usable other than as engineering test samples. As a result all performance specs they came up with were pure speculation with zero basis in reality. At worst they were scammers who from the very beginning knew exactly how this would turn out.

Q2 - pretty sure this was when they announced, they were going to come out of nowhere and produce the most efficient hardware out there.

Q3- let's assume they were sourcing materials because they sure weren't doing much of anything else.

Q4- let's sell the gear that people would have bought as it was still competitive.

Nah let's abandon the 2 hardware projects we've been planning before trying to recoup any of those losses.

Makes no sense really. Maybe they f'd up hard in the design and build, seems like to stupidest con, as I dont think they took any money upfront from miners either.

Lack of capital imo, monies were refunded. Hard to have a lengthy pre order when consumers know competitors will be coming out with gear and will certainly match or beat spec with earlier release dates.

I still dont understand why people have this misguided idea that more manufacturers equals decentralization.....

Its like nobody knows what decentralization actually is....

Give us a run down of what you're thinking then.

It's clearly not in the original spirit of Bitcoin mining however it still has to be the least worst option with things as they are, and things as they are are extremely unlikely to change.

More manufacturers means potential different markets, different attitudes to mining with customer equipment and it drives more innovation and cost saving for possible customers.

Pre orders = high risk

Pre orders lose way more then they win.


Exceptions

Batch 1 s9 six week wait.

First batch of Avalon 1

Knc first asic in 2013

These all did well enough.

Two were new builders with new gear.

Funny how the GMO thread has turned philosophical in a sense.

More manufacturers allow for decentralization. Essentially you have to look at it like a free market; more competition, more innovation and progression towards a better product in this case.

Zero competition, or a single manufacturer; leads to poor and selfish, "un"-innovative business practices. Shadow mining/extended "burn in testing" is one example. Essentially manufacturers kill the market they desire by mining. Lower the difficulty, the more profits, the more attractive their product.

It's a balance you rarely see or have seen in this area as these are just two extremes of the spectrum to provide relevance.

KNC (who wasn't first) built everything using bitcoin community money and basically ripped everyone off.

Avalon: this was not their first mining hardware.
They made the original Icarus FPGA miners.

As for on topic - GMO went the way I expected when I posted about them a year ago :P

I think he means KNC's first ASIC offering, not that KNC had the first ASIC. If I remember right, ASICMiner had the first ASIC and Avalon had the first publicly sold ASIC.

The point was, those hardwares were among the few built on pre-order money but without completely screwing over the customers.

KNC did screw the whole bitcoin community over :P

Not the ones who were already too broke to buy in!

Also yeah, GMO bailing out is not a surprise at all.

Yeah their first asic offering people made good money on.

As it was ordered when coins where cheap.
Delivered before coins shot up to 1200.

Once coins did that then knc became thieves.

I was referring to Avalon batch 1 asics as people made good money with them.

Avalon went bad after that then became good again.

If you grabbed those preorders  you did okay.