Lets all give up mining BTC then!  This forum is going to be very boring.  

Sure, I gave up the 10% transfer fee.  But I also had a 25%-off coupon from my October order that I used.  So I still saved around $700 off of the list price.

Btw, I don't feel bad about giving away my place in line for an April order.  By the time that order finally arrives, ROI was never going to happen.

Am I the first in this thread to actually admit that I pre-ordered a Monarch?  Well, I did.  And no, I'm not proud of myself.  Lol.

I was sitting on an April order for a Single and a Jalapeno w/2GH upgrade.  When (if?) that order arrives, it would have been virtually worthless because of no ROI.  I had a 25%-off coupon from an earlier October order for a Little Single (still waiting on that one).  So the upgrade cost me about 8.5 BTC.  Strangely I now have a credit on the invoice for $297.50.  Not sure where that came from.

Why did I do such a stupid thing?  In for a penny, in for a pound!  And it's exciting to think I potentially went from a 57GH order to 600GH for very little extra money.

I'm just a BTC hobbyist with more money than sense but I figure that the reward is worth the risk.  I also have pre-orders with Bitfury and KNC.  I missed the Avalon boat and am still kicking myself for that.  So I now have my fingers in as many pies as I can safely afford.

The worst case scenario... I just threw away 5 grand.
Best case scenario... I'm at the front-of-the-line for the Next Gen ASICs.  And it's fun to dream.  

Whats the hand print on the carpet ..was somebody getting it  from the rear...lolz

We *fully* understand miner skepticism towards ASIC companies.  It is rational and justified.

Re: why sales instead of equity, HashFast is not the first technology company Simon &I have founded in Silicon Valley (see www.Devicescape.com).  
There are critical differences between companies that start out by selling pieces of themselves and companies that start out by making products their customers want.  
It defines who your #1 priority is, for one.

Roughly 90% of HashFast is owned by us and the people who work here - and the other 10% is by our families and friends.  
Further, everyone here including ourselves is subject to a 4-year vesting schedule.  
Which means that what comes of this to any of us is dependent on creating long term value.

Re: why BTC - we support BTC and are using it for as much of our business as possible.
We are aware that this is costing us sales. That's OK.

Re: 'how are you different', we feel it's best to let  the miners who have visited our offices in person speak to that.


Eduardo deCastro
Founder and CEO, HashFast

I'm still waiting on a single and little single from a FUCKING YEAR AGO.  And someone is suggesting that people should double down on BFL?  Other than a sock puppet, who would be that stupid?  

This could be a good thing or a bad thing depending on whether BFL is actually insolvent right now or not.

They could have run out of money and are trying to fund old pre-orders with new pre-order money. If that's the case I see prison cells in BFL mangers' futures since it's a blatantly ponzi-esque tactic that will collapse in on itself eventually.

However think about the people who ordered after the price of BFL units doubled. They will likely never see a return on investment on their order anyway so switching to the new product queue and being at the head of that line actually makes a ton of sense for them. This only holds true as long as BFL has enough money to stay afloat without dipping into future pre-order money to fund old pre-orders' production though.

With their history though I would certainly never pay for a pre-order in Bitcoin. For a product in hand that other people have recieved from a seller with no problem Bitcoin works great, but for a pre-order the lack of protection for buyers is very worrying.

HAHAHAHAHAH.  WHAT!? The calculations for transistor gate energy are pretty complicated, and they certainly aren't linear with respect to surface area. and I think at 28nm you have more leakage which leads to more waste energy as well.

I think this shows you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

TDP of 5970 is 294W and 5870 is 224W.   The card is reported to be 350W which is significantly higher not lower.

Also this pretends away the challenges of the form factor and ignores it was AMD with three decades of experience delivering their 12th generation graphics card family.

AMD (ATI) first graphics card looked like this and consumed 10W.  Even AMD isn't immune to the challenges of working in a compact unforgiving form factor, the 7990 (375W TDP) was delayed by six months due to power/thermal issues that they found challenging to resolve.


While 350W is possible in that form factor one would have to be willing to bet that unlike every other time the simulations aren't lower than reality AND that the company doesn't run into any cooling or power problems due to the high energy density.   350W is 0.6 w/GH.  BFL current chips are 3.1 w/GH correct?  A die shrink generally cuts power consumption by 40% (you stated upthread or in another thread that it can be up to 60% but that would be rather optimistic don't you think?). 28nm is two die shrinks from current chip.  So 3.1 w/GH * 0.6 * 0.6 = 1.1 w/GH.  If the chips were identical with only a die shrink we would be looking at 1.1w/GH (660W for this card).  Now you did indicate you optimized the chip but that is a rather significant optimization wouldn't you say.  Nearly an 86% (1.1/0.6) improvement in performance per watt outside the die shrink.  Intel is happy for a 5% to 10% improvement in performance per watt (outside of die shrinks).

Given the aggressive improvement in performance per watt necessary, combined with the lack of any headroom (if it misses by even 20% then it can't be cooled in that form factor at that speed), it would need to be a nearly flawless design and execution from start to finish.   It certainly "can" be done but given BFL past promises on power and cooling well one would be betting that "this one will be different".  

 Assuming this is the same engineer that estimated the prior power requirements for their presently shipping product, I'm not sure how anyone can believe anything being reported prior to having a physical working product.

 Again, I am using well-documented history as an indicator.

Regarding power consumption, Radeon 5970 and 5870 both consume more power than our card does, the very reason we took this design approach.


Regards,
Nasser

This is hilarious... I actually have some BFL hardware and even I think this means they are finished..  They are obviously trying to move payments to a medium that cant be refunded (bitcoin or wire xfer).  They are using a design which alot of us *know* cannot dissipate that much heat, and they are moving at a snail's pace with current orders.

Guys... Ive never said this before, but i believe they are on the virge of folding and taking anyone who preorders money with them..

I think BFL jsut wrote their own (coded) obituary. Breathtaking, and simultaneously, hilarious, and not least, very upsetting for their unsatisfied pre-orderers.


I hear some nervous shuffling from pre-orderers for other over-promised ASIC companies, I'm sure of it....

Not the place to ask.  Inaba will probably accuse me of stealing customers or something.  If you delete and post in another thread I will delete and response there.