will 1x sata -> 1x pcie work?
I mean how much watt can sata cable provide?
Good question. That's something I didn't even consider. From the Wikipedia article for Serial ATA: A third voltage is supplied, 3.3 V, in addition to the traditional 5 V and 12 V. However, few current disk drives use the 3.3 V line. Each voltage is transmitted through three pins grouped together, because the small contacts by themselves cannot supply sufficient current for some devices. (Each pin should be able to carry 1.5 A.) So, a SATA cable should be able to provide 12V * 3 * 1.5A = 54 W. It seems to me, that powering 16 K16s is going to be more complicated and expensive than I first thought. |
|
|
|
The link you provided shows BKKCoins saying that each PCIE cable can only power one K16: A K16 will use around 32W, so a K64 will need about 128W each (with 4 leads). They're designed to take a PCIe 6 pin connector much like a GPU. I would guess that you could run a K64 off each PCIe lead from the PSU with splitters to feed each of the 4 sections. |
|
|
|
|
I've heard that data centers have limitations on the amount of power devices can consume. Are there any such power limitations for your service?
|
|
|
|
|
Congratulations on a an excellent chip. Now, the only relevant question is when will I be able to purchase one?
These chips are completely irrelevant if restricted to 100TH and Metabank (who wont ship outside of Russia). Either sell us the chips or sell us the devices that use these chips, but stop waving them in our faces and telling us we can't have them.
|
|
|
|
|
So, where are you guys up to with the IPO, and how long can we expect to wait before it's up on Bitfunder?
|
|
|
|
|
What will be the thickness of these with the heatsinks attached?
|
|
|
|
I like http://www.asicminercharts.com/3 things I notice: 1. We were at 20 TH/s on 5/9. We hit a peak of 37 TH on 6/13. So, it took us a month to almost double our hash rate.. If that rate can be maintained (I don't know if that is reasonable), then we can expect about 80 TH on 7/13, 160 TH in mid August. You can't assume that they can just double the rate at which they bring hashing power online. Going from 20 Th/s to 40 Th/s in a month just shows that they can bring 20 Th/s online in a month. Were those devices already assembled? The Blades do about 10 Gh/s so that's about 100 Blades per Th/s. In order to go from 80 Th/s to 160 Th/s in a month, about 266 Blades would have to be brought online every day. |
|
|
|
So, let me get this straight. Friedcat has already told you that the price of hardware will be getting slashed, and you don't think that will cause a decrease in dividends from hardware sales?
Which is the bigger value, x*10 or x*20?
Except it's not x and x, it's x and y. When cost goes down, quantity sold goes up. The quantity available for sale is limited, so it is x and x. You are talking nonsense. Unless you sold out and you are not able to produce more units, lowering the price might increase the profit. So it's x and y and you are terribly misguided. No, you are talking nonsense because you haven't followed the conversation. The conversation was about dividends from hardware sales decreasing. So, selling out is completely irrelevant. The amount of hardware AM has for sale is limited. That is a fact. They have a limited number of USB miners and any other hardware sales come out of the mining operation, so they only sell what they no longer want. How many Blades did AM sell? |
|
|
|
They haven't got enough hashing power to maintain 30%. BFL hash about 400 Th/s incoming, AM's got 200 Th/s incoming taking it total to 250 Th/s, Avalon will have 250 Th/s, BitFury has 200 Th/s incoming and KnC has 200 Th/s incoming from the 500 pre-orders. That's about 1300 Th/s between them and AM will only have 250 Th/s of that. That's 19.23%. By the end of the year, AM will account for about 10-15% of the network share.
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL  So funny, thank you. Claims have no bearing on reality. You're not living in reality, are you? Based on reality, AM is the only one with accurate estimates, so really that's more like AM will account for about 80% of the network share. You know, except, they need to hold back. BFL, Avalon, and Bitfury *have all been delayed* The AM numbers come from Friedcat (initial wafer - 50 Th/s, second wafer - 200 TH/s). The Avalon numbers come from 1500 63 GH/s units and 500,000 chip sales as reported by Yifu. The BFL numbers come from this unofficial pre-order list. The BitFury number come from 100TH. The KnC number come from the 500 pre-order units. This is the reality. You can pretend it isn't as much as you want, but it won't change the facts, it'll just lead to you making poor decisions. Your numbers are missing exact dates of delivery, the most pertinent detail. Exact dates of delivery are irrelevant, what's relevant is the fact that AM now have competition and that competition will be bringing online just as much, if not more, hashing power. Because of this, they cannot maintain their current share of the network. Great, so how will you be investing? In AM and AMC. I'm just not fooling myself about AM though. |
|
|
|
They haven't got enough hashing power to maintain 30%. BFL hash about 400 Th/s incoming, AM's got 200 Th/s incoming taking it total to 250 Th/s, Avalon will have 250 Th/s, BitFury has 200 Th/s incoming and KnC has 200 Th/s incoming from the 500 pre-orders. That's about 1300 Th/s between them and AM will only have 250 Th/s of that. That's 19.23%. By the end of the year, AM will account for about 10-15% of the network share.
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL So funny, thank you. Claims have no bearing on reality. You're not living in reality, are you? Based on reality, AM is the only one with accurate estimates, so really that's more like AM will account for about 80% of the network share. You know, except, they need to hold back. BFL, Avalon, and Bitfury *have all been delayed* The AM numbers come from Friedcat (initial wafer - 50 Th/s, second wafer - 200 TH/s). The Avalon numbers come from 1500 63 GH/s units and 500,000 chip sales as reported by Yifu. The BFL numbers come from this unofficial pre-order list. The BitFury number come from 100TH. The KnC number come from the 500 pre-order units. This is the reality. You can pretend it isn't as much as you want, but it won't change the facts, it'll just lead to you making poor decisions. Your numbers are missing exact dates of delivery, the most pertinent detail. Exact dates of delivery are irrelevant, what's relevant is the fact that AM now have competition and that competition will be bringing online just as much, if not more, hashing power. Because of this, they cannot maintain their current share of the network. |
|
|
|
Income from hardware sales will obviously decrease as more valuable hardware from competitors becomes readily available.
LOL, dude, friedcat already announced price cuts on his hardware (blades). He can just keep doing this. Create good shit, *actually ship good shit in a timely manner* and cut the prices when necessary until he creates more good shit. So, let me get this straight. Friedcat has already told you that the price of hardware will be getting slashed, and you don't think that will cause a decrease in dividends from hardware sales? Which is the bigger value, x*10 or x*20? Except it's not x and x, it's x and y. When cost goes down, quantity sold goes up. The quantity available for sale is limited, so it is x and x. |
|
|
|
They haven't got enough hashing power to maintain 30%. BFL hash about 400 Th/s incoming, AM's got 200 Th/s incoming taking it total to 250 Th/s, Avalon will have 250 Th/s, BitFury has 200 Th/s incoming and KnC has 200 Th/s incoming from the 500 pre-orders. That's about 1300 Th/s between them and AM will only have 250 Th/s of that. That's 19.23%. By the end of the year, AM will account for about 10-15% of the network share.
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL So funny, thank you. Claims have no bearing on reality. You're not living in reality, are you? Based on reality, AM is the only one with accurate estimates, so really that's more like AM will account for about 80% of the network share. You know, except, they need to hold back. BFL, Avalon, and Bitfury *have all been delayed* The AM numbers come from Friedcat (initial wafer - 50 Th/s, second wafer - 200 TH/s). The Avalon numbers come from 1500 63 GH/s units and 500,000 chip sales as reported by Yifu. The BFL numbers come from this unofficial pre-order list. The BitFury number come from 100TH. The KnC number come from the 500 pre-order units. This is the reality. You can pretend it isn't as much as you want, but it won't change the facts, it'll just lead to you making poor decisions. |
|
|
|
Income from hardware sales will obviously decrease as more valuable hardware from competitors becomes readily available.
LOL, dude, friedcat already announced price cuts on his hardware (blades). He can just keep doing this. Create good shit, *actually ship good shit in a timely manner* and cut the prices when necessary until he creates more good shit. So, let me get this straight. Friedcat has already told you that the price of hardware will be getting slashed, and you don't think that will cause a decrease in dividends from hardware sales? Which is the bigger value, x*10 or x*20? |
|
|
|
Mabsark knows all the numbers before they happen! Incredible!
That's because those numbers are common knowledge. |
|
|
|
I never got an answer. Just some first grade math here:
1) 2.5 BTC per share -> 0.036 weekly dividend = 0.145 btc a month = 17 month breakeven
2) 50 BTC (20 shares) = 3 btc a month
3) 50 BTC buys you a 13 GH asic card = 12 BTC a month (factor in whatever difficulty increase it is still significantly better income, and keep in mind the mining shares dividend are also impacted by the difficulty increase).
So i really dont understand why anyone will buy asic shares? what is the point? the return on those are terrible, on top of absolutely insane counterparty risk dependent on some guy who is running a black box that tells you what dividend he will pay.
Why would you not just have a physical card you own with no dependency on third party and make significantly more btc as income? Yet so many smart people are buying those shares...there must be something i am missing?
waiting to be enlightened...
BFL 5 GH/s = $274 18 Mh/s per USD 1.8 Gh/s per BTC @ 100 USD/BTC 1 AM share costs more than 2.74 BTC at the moment and the exchange rate is at 100 USD/BTC. Assuming that AM was at 2.74 BTC per share, then 1 share would need to provide 5 Gh/s in order to offer the same value as a 5 Gh/s BFL. At 5 Gh/s per share, AM would need a hashrate of 5 Gh/s/share * 400, 000 shares = 2,000 Th/s. People claiming that AM continuously adding hashing power is a reason why share prices are currently undervalued need to take a serious look at the numbers. With a share price of 2.74 BTC, AM needs a hash rate of 2,000 Th/s in order to be competitive with a 5 Gh/s BFL. Their initial wafer order was for 50 Th/s. The current wafer order is for 200 TH/s in two parts. These should be coming online over the next couple of months. That's a maximum of 250 Th/s. With the rate at which BFL is dispatching back orders, they should be shipping from the shelf by the time AM bring that 250 Th/s online. Going by this site's numbers, BFL have about 400 Th/s to bring online. Avalon's 3 batches should be online by then as well, which is another 100 Th/s. Avalon chips should be shipping by then as well, so we'll see a number of new mining systems based on them. That's another 150 Th/s. 100 Th/s should come online in July and August from 100TH and 50 Th/s should come online from Metabank in August and September. In September and October, KnC should also be bringing 200 Th/s online. The next gen chips from Avalon and AM are due in October and Yifu said said that Avalon would be using 55 nm. The BitFury chips used by 100TH and Metabank are also 55 nm and I'd assume AM will also be 55 nm. At this point, most of the hashing power will be coming from BFL products, and Avalon and AM having a similar amount at around 250 Th/s. BitFury and KnC should also have similar amounts at around 200 Th/s. AM needs 2,000 Th/s to be competitive with a 5 Gh/s BFL, to be competitive with a Metabank BitFury 120, we have the following: Metabank BitFury 120 120 Gh/s 2160 USD 55.556 Mh/s per USD 5.556 Gh/s per BTC ASICMINER 6,500 Th/s 400,000 shares 16.25 Gh/s per share 2.93 BTC per share 5.556 Gh/s per BTC It truly boggles my mind how anyone could believe that ASICMINER is undervalued. IMO, ASICMiner's model is to build hashrate until they hit 30% of the network or so, and then sell hardware. As more hardware gets deployed, they can then deploy more hashpower to their farm in order to maintain their total share of the network. To me, it looks like they can continue this for quite a while, even assuming a 10x or greater boost in difficultly over the next 6-12months. Yes, prices for their hardware will have to come down whenever the other guys get around to shipping in volume, but the point is that they should be able to reliably maintain a significant percentage of total network hash from their farm and hardware-sales combined. If other guys are shipping tons of cheap ASIC gear, then ASICMiner just focuses on scaling the farm... It's a nice model, and they've already figured out quite successfully how to operate at scale, so I'm confident in their ability to execute for the foreseeable future. They haven't got enough hashing power to maintain 30%. BFL hash about 400 Th/s incoming, AM's got 200 Th/s incoming taking it total to 250 Th/s, Avalon will have 250 Th/s, BitFury has 200 Th/s incoming and KnC has 200 Th/s incoming from the 500 pre-orders. That's about 1300 Th/s between them and AM will only have 250 Th/s of that. That's 19.23%. By the end of the year, AM will account for about 10-15% of the network share. |
|
|
|
Income from hardware sales will obviously decrease as more valuable hardware from competitors becomes readily available.
Why is this obvious? What you are saying is that the market leader in hardware sales is less likely to be competitive in future sales than newcomers? Because compared to BFL they offer extremely poor value (Mh/s per BTC). Why pay 1.99 BTC for 336 Mh/s, when you can buy 5 Gh/s for 3 BTC? Why buy 10 Gh/s for 50 BTC when you can get 50 Gh/s for 25 BTC? Whatever happens, you're looking at reduced prices due to competition, leading to a decrease in income from hardware sales. The fact that their is competition will mean that the competition will capture network share from AM, making it harder for them to capture 30% of the network even if they wanted to. AM have purchased 50 TH/s already and have 200 TH/s incoming over the next few months. That's 250 Th/s maximum. Avalon also have about 250 Th/s from chips and the 3 batches, whereas BFL have almost 400 Th/s incoming according to that unofficial pre-order list. With the competition set to match or beat AM's hashing power, they're not going to be selling as much hardware or their network share will slip further behind. The hardware they do sell will have to be sold for competitive prices. Both of those factors will reduce the dividends from selling hardware. |
|
|
|
I never got an answer. Just some first grade math here:
1) 2.5 BTC per share -> 0.036 weekly dividend = 0.145 btc a month = 17 month breakeven
2) 50 BTC (20 shares) = 3 btc a month
3) 50 BTC buys you a 13 GH asic card = 12 BTC a month (factor in whatever difficulty increase it is still significantly better income, and keep in mind the mining shares dividend are also impacted by the difficulty increase).
So i really dont understand why anyone will buy asic shares? what is the point? the return on those are terrible, on top of absolutely insane counterparty risk dependent on some guy who is running a black box that tells you what dividend he will pay.
Why would you not just have a physical card you own with no dependency on third party and make significantly more btc as income? Yet so many smart people are buying those shares...there must be something i am missing?
waiting to be enlightened...
BFL 5 GH/s = $274 18 Mh/s per USD 1.8 Gh/s per BTC @ 100 USD/BTC 1 AM share costs more than 2.74 BTC at the moment and the exchange rate is at 100 USD/BTC. Assuming that AM was at 2.74 BTC per share, then 1 share would need to provide 5 Gh/s in order to offer the same value as a 5 Gh/s BFL. At 5 Gh/s per share, AM would need a hashrate of 5 Gh/s/share * 400, 000 shares = 2,000 Th/s. People claiming that AM continuously adding hashing power is a reason why share prices are currently undervalued need to take a serious look at the numbers. With a share price of 2.74 BTC, AM needs a hash rate of 2,000 Th/s in order to be competitive with a 5 Gh/s BFL. Their initial wafer order was for 50 Th/s. The current wafer order is for 200 TH/s in two parts. These should be coming online over the next couple of months. That's a maximum of 250 Th/s. With the rate at which BFL is dispatching back orders, they should be shipping from the shelf by the time AM bring that 250 Th/s online. Going by this site's numbers, BFL have about 400 Th/s to bring online. Avalon's 3 batches should be online by then as well, which is another 100 Th/s. Avalon chips should be shipping by then as well, so we'll see a number of new mining systems based on them. That's another 150 Th/s. 100 Th/s should come online in July and August from 100TH and 50 Th/s should come online from Metabank in August and September. In September and October, KnC should also be bringing 200 Th/s online. The next gen chips from Avalon and AM are due in October and Yifu said said that Avalon would be using 55 nm. The BitFury chips used by 100TH and Metabank are also 55 nm and I'd assume AM will also be 55 nm. At this point, most of the hashing power will be coming from BFL products, and Avalon and AM having a similar amount at around 250 Th/s. BitFury and KnC should also have similar amounts at around 200 Th/s. AM needs 2,000 Th/s to be competitive with a 5 Gh/s BFL, to be competitive with a Metabank BitFury 120, we have the following: Metabank BitFury 120 120 Gh/s 2160 USD 55.556 Mh/s per USD 5.556 Gh/s per BTC ASICMINER 6,500 Th/s 400,000 shares 16.25 Gh/s per share 2.93 BTC per share 5.556 Gh/s per BTC It truly boggles my mind how anyone could believe that ASICMINER is undervalued. You forgot to account for the fact that ASICMINER sells hardware as well. I'm not sure how much hashing power ASICMINER had on the market when they went live, but I'd be interested to know. If anyone has this information, please post it up. Income from hardware sales will obviously decrease as more valuable hardware from competitors becomes readily available. |
|
|
|
I never got an answer. Just some first grade math here:
1) 2.5 BTC per share -> 0.036 weekly dividend = 0.145 btc a month = 17 month breakeven
2) 50 BTC (20 shares) = 3 btc a month
3) 50 BTC buys you a 13 GH asic card = 12 BTC a month (factor in whatever difficulty increase it is still significantly better income, and keep in mind the mining shares dividend are also impacted by the difficulty increase).
So i really dont understand why anyone will buy asic shares? what is the point? the return on those are terrible, on top of absolutely insane counterparty risk dependent on some guy who is running a black box that tells you what dividend he will pay.
Why would you not just have a physical card you own with no dependency on third party and make significantly more btc as income? Yet so many smart people are buying those shares...there must be something i am missing?
waiting to be enlightened...
BFL 5 GH/s = $274 18 Mh/s per USD 1.8 Gh/s per BTC @ 100 USD/BTC 1 AM share costs more than 2.74 BTC at the moment and the exchange rate is at 100 USD/BTC. Assuming that AM was at 2.74 BTC per share, then 1 share would need to provide 5 Gh/s in order to offer the same value as a 5 Gh/s BFL. At 5 Gh/s per share, AM would need a hashrate of 5 Gh/s/share * 400, 000 shares = 2,000 Th/s. People claiming that AM continuously adding hashing power is a reason why share prices are currently undervalued need to take a serious look at the numbers. With a share price of 2.74 BTC, AM needs a hash rate of 2,000 Th/s in order to be competitive with a 5 Gh/s BFL. Their initial wafer order was for 50 Th/s. The current wafer order is for 200 TH/s in two parts. These should be coming online over the next couple of months. That's a maximum of 250 Th/s. With the rate at which BFL is dispatching back orders, they should be shipping from the shelf by the time AM bring that 250 Th/s online. Going by this site's numbers, BFL have about 400 Th/s to bring online. Avalon's 3 batches should be online by then as well, which is another 100 Th/s. Avalon chips should be shipping by then as well, so we'll see a number of new mining systems based on them. That's another 150 Th/s. 100 Th/s should come online in July and August from 100TH and 50 Th/s should come online from Metabank in August and September. In September and October, KnC should also be bringing 200 Th/s online. The next gen chips from Avalon and AM are due in October and Yifu said said that Avalon would be using 55 nm. The BitFury chips used by 100TH and Metabank are also 55 nm and I'd assume AM will also be 55 nm. At this point, most of the hashing power will be coming from BFL products, and Avalon and AM having a similar amount at around 250 Th/s. BitFury and KnC should also have similar amounts at around 200 Th/s. AM needs 2,000 Th/s to be competitive with a 5 Gh/s BFL, to be competitive with a Metabank BitFury 120, we have the following: Metabank BitFury 120 120 Gh/s 2160 USD 55.556 Mh/s per USD 5.556 Gh/s per BTC ASICMINER 6,500 Th/s 400,000 shares 16.25 Gh/s per share 2.93 BTC per share 5.556 Gh/s per BTC It truly boggles my mind how anyone could believe that ASICMINER is undervalued. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
