This update is mainly to address the uncertainty that have been surrounding the ASIC scene recently due to the lackluster performance by our competitors. We will be walking you through our process of getting the ASIC fabricated. Unlike our competitors we are a in-house team and everyone is always on the same page.

Another update will address the actual status of our chips as we have obtained word from TSMC whom will offer us weekly updates on their website. All in all, see our arguments below regarding our competitors and wait for weekly updates directly from TSMC.

---

Anyhow, any of our numbers, estimates, and shipping date have not changed, just in case somebody got the wrong idea about this update.

---

First things first. the following Gallery is our contract with TSMC with pricing and other sensitive information removed. http://imgur.com/a/DnUNm


Some background information on ASIC production process, before tape out, 3 day before uploading GDS, we fill out a MT form with TSMC detailing the ASIC specific information so they may understand what we are doing. The gallery is here http://imgur.com/a/YOLez


to put simply, to create the physical ASIC goes something like this.

sign contract -> submit GDS for review -> mask making -> wafer making -> ship to packaging company -> packaging -> shipping.
Only then can the chips be in your hands or placed on PCB for finalization.

This whole process will take 30-50 days depending on the processor node technology used, mainly due to the increasing in layer number as you go down in processor size. for example, we have 29 layers, and since TSMC is one of the big companies in fabrication, each layer take 1.2 ( normal lot ) day per layer. in addition, accordingly to friedcat, their fab is producing 4 layers every week [odd, but I guess it is possible if fab is small].

This also means while you wait for the wafer(chips) fabrication you can not do anything else, it is usually around this time you make sure you have everything else ready.

a few things to note is,

1. while this wafer making process is going, you can't cancel it, or make adjustments, and if you wish to change anything, you will have to re-run this whole work flow all over again ( the large amount of the NRE upwards of 6 digits in USD is paid when you make the MASK). so anytime, BFL mention they are waiting for chips to come e.g. next week, but if they are still making adjustments, then this is physically impossible. In addition, fabrication company don't do chip packaging, if they are expecting the chips to arrive next week that means the production is already finished and they are probably in the chip packaging company (it is usually this time you find out if your chips work or not. which can also take some time since you'll have to test each of the chips for defects.)

2. the whole chip fabrication is very mathematically predictable based on the number of layers your ASIC has and the speed which the fabrication company can produce a layer. There is no such thing as a fabrication company giving a "fuzzy" date when it comes to when the chips will come from the assembly line. The only number that can vary is the shipping time from the fabrication company to the packaging company, but even that is no more than a few days of difference, depending on the shipping method.

3.a if bASIC made an MPW to start (which is the correct way to save money, but not time). the cost to get large amount of chips during this time is astronomical, however the average size is about 50. It is unheard of for somebody to only produce 2 chips to built a prototype and now no longer have any chips left over to build another prototype.

3.b. Even after testing MWP and everything is fine, it'll take the same amount of time to produce a new MASK ( cost and everything ) then make wafers, which will take another 30 - 50 days, which I suppose is consistent with bASIC's new mid-Jan shipping date, ( but this is optimistic estimate, the regular workflow is about 2 month)

3.c. what we think that happened is bASIC has licensed a SHA256 core, the IP company has already produced demo ASICs that utilizes this core, and did some math on how many core you can placed in the chip to obtain the 14GH/s estimated hashrate, while regular SHA256 and Bitcoin's blockchain hashing algorithm is not very different but it is not something you can compare via simulation without making an actual chip, and if they made an actual chip, even if it doesn't perform up to specifications you can still demonstrate it and be world first.

the conclusion is as follows.

1. If BFL really have chips coming, then they are not making any so-to-speak "clock buffer adjustments", either that or they don't have any chips coming and have not tape-out at all, it is also entirely possible that they have not make the MASK yet either. I guess we will find out on the week of the 11th, in this month hopefully.

2. we believe bASIC has no prototype, or have any chips. Also we at Avalon have also explored the possibility of licensing an IP core, but after some in-house comparison, none of the core on the market is superior to our own, thus we eliminated that option.

Questions, Comments are welcome.

This price quote is a proof to people who don't believe that ASICs are cheap to manufacture, after NRE costs are recovered. A 12-inch wafer costs $4k for Avalon. They will likely make about a thousand chips per wafer assuming a 50 mm² die. Which means each chip technically costs about $4. There is going to be ten chips or so per Avalon device, so $40 of ASIC chips in a device that is sold $1300. That's a profit margin of $1260! (I am simplying here, there are other minor costs: chip packaging, other components, PCB, etc, maybe $100-$200 maximum). Of course this insane profit margin is only valid once NRE costs ($200k+) are recovered. But some/all ASIC vendors will eventually recover them... so expect ASIC prices to eventually drop massively.

and bASIC chips have been done for a while (https://www.btcfpga.com/forum/index.php?topic=203.msg1445#msg1445)



I have orders from all 3...I just want someone to ship, so that I can stop checking the forums every fucking day!

Exactly.

http://www.technologyreview.com/news/508061/custom-chips-could-be-the-shovels-in-a-bitcoin-gold-rush/

According to this article they will start shipping in "early 2013".

Oh indeed, some bad news is coming, but who I wonder.

yeah, some bad news.  

It has now been more than a month. Who is the test lab? What was the result?

Called it.

 

Joyous moments for some here, again, BFL ain't shipping a thing till somewhere in January, as it seems now.

As Debbie from BFL wrote in her last Mail:
We had originally hoped to be shipping by now, but unfortunately, we are still waiting for some parts to come in. We are working to start shipping orders before the end of the year.

You could anticipate your order shipping sometime in February or March. If they are ready sooner, we will ship them sooner.
We appreciate your patience as we are working to bring you the latest in mining technology.

Happy X-mas 😢

No, that is not true. It was forum member MeSarah that started the FCC questions in the bctfpga thread. Much after everyone here jumping on him, the "BFL rep" asked, when the smoke was cleared a bit, "well Tom, how about that FCC regulation?"
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=79637.msg1308803#msg1308803

Maybe they were bragging, like they were about their October release dates? Or just submitted their designs (the computer ones) to check if everything will be ok? Just totally speculating here.

I suspect almost no one else on this board does, either, and I only brought up the "Mobos don't require it" point because too many people seem to be so confident in their "BFL required FCC/UL certification!" claims.

These ASIC devices would be unintentional radiators and with all probability would easily pass certification on a technical level.

The bigger concern to me is that a competitor, troublemaker or some FUDge-packing FUDster might complain about a lack of certification and get my ASIC shipment delayed or confiscated.

Why would vendors discount ASIC hardware until they have to? IOW why cut prices until competition and/or slow sales require it? ...and if slow sales require it, isn't the difficulty already too high to expect a rapid ROI? ...and doesn't a longer ROI come furnished with it's own risks? Pre-orders are risky, but if you're even mostly right about choosing a vendor then your ROI should be very short.

Assuming that no company goes bankrupt, you're right. But I think the risk of bankruptcy / scam is high. What if the company you have chosen will produce ASIC few months later than the other? If you buy from a company that already has an existing ASIC (assuming that other companies have long delay), you'll be one of the first ASIC miners without risk Even if you good predict the company which will be first, you have no guarantee that this company will increase the difficulty before the rig gets to you. For those who like to risk I recommend satoshidice.com. This is better than ASIC preorder because you yourself can choose the level of risk Personally I do not like gambling;) This is why I did not buy preorder from any of the companies. I'm going to buy ASIC from a company that will be the first (if this will still worthwhile).

Now I'm waiting for a wave of criticism

The BFL equipment I mine with, and the BFL devices I have ordered, do not need FCC certification.  If you were planning to quote from Title 47 USC Telegraphs, Telephones, and Radiotelegraphs, I can tell you it has not been enacted as Positive Law.  A non-positive law title is "an editorial compilation of Federal statutes."  It's not Congress' exact words, it may vary, and therefore does not apply outside of the federal districts overlaid on the states.  Except, of course, by contract; by agreement.
http://uscode.house.gov/about/info.shtml
http://uscode.house.gov/codification/legislation.shtml

What do you care for an FCC certificate, your Avalon won't have one? Gonna refuse it now?