Those of you who are waiting for 10pc chip orders should have received your tracking numbers in email.
I have not received a tracking number. I just sent a request for investigation through the contact form on http://megabigpower.com |
|
|
|
Updated best result by bitfury's 55nm chip (1290 Mh/J at chip level!) This is roughly 65x more efficient than BFL's 40nm (Stratix II) FPGA-based Mini-Rig (20 Mh/J)! Some people said a year ago that such then theoretical improvements would be plain absurd - well bitfury proves them wrong... |
|
|
|
The number of dies is irrelevant, that's just a cost cutting measure to save having to make another type of wafer. What's relevant is the 12 year old PAC611 package could handle a TDP higher than the total KNCminer system is expected to draw, so it's not venturing into the unknown like you are trying to make out with your armchair FUD effort.
Wrong, the PAC611 package cannot handle 260W. (This theoretical number is merely published because Hondo has 2 dies that could in theory draw 130W each.) In practice, Intel had to throttle the dies so that Hondo never draws more than 170W total: The challenge was to design a dual Madison (Itanium 2) processor module that would use no more then a single madison/power pod reference design provided by Intel (ie, 170W).
The mx2 module is designed to run each processor so that it consumes about 65 percent of the max power that it could theoretically draw.
|
|
|
|
GPUs have power constraints, look at server grade processors if you want to what's possible. eg. The Intel Itanium (Hondo) CPU is 260watts TDP, a Sun SPARC T4 240watts, and KNCminer are quoting 250watts for the complete Mercury system not just the CPU.
Exactly, you need to be Intel or Oracle (or AMD or Nvidia) to be able to design such a high TDP chip, especially in such a short timeframe. By the way Hondo has 2 dies, not 1; not even Intel could manage 260 watt on a single die... There is a reason neither Intel nor Oracle continued to sell such high TDP chips. They have to bin the top 5% of their CPUs from the foundry, to find the ones that are stable despite the heat, and it's just too expensive and complex to design systems able to power and cool such chips. And in Mercury, at least 80% of the power will be consumed by the chip alone. 20% will be lost to AC/DC and DC/DC power conversion steps, and maybe 1% in ancillary support components. |
|
|
|
They have *your* money, not mine  |
|
|
|
Next to an ac?
There is no house A/C that blows air at 25F. Do you realize how cold 25F is? It turns water into ice! |
|
|
|
I think
223 isnt Centigrade are Fahrenheit .
223F are 106C.
Nope. It is centigrade. Note the temperature of the input air: 25C, which is average room temperature. Who on earth would run a consumer device simulation with ambient temps of 25F/-4C ?! If it was fahrenheit, KnCMiner would be telling us their device requires below zero ambient temperature  |
|
|
|
*note disclaimer, I own no hardware (other than temporary stock), have no preorders and no affiliation* Something is wrong here with this simulation. Its a side view of the board at the bottom, with package and chip slightly above, with a 4 heatpipe heatsink. The left, blue side is showing an ambient intake of 25C, exhausting at ~50C. Now, look at the chip area; its deep oranges at best. Their own simulation is telling us the chip's heatspreader [not even the chip itself] is somewhere between 125-150C. I don't know a consumer grade chip that gets even close to these temps, nor materials creating using conventional techniques that would withstand 24/7 at these temperates. Its hard to tell without a larger image but it looks like an auto scaled legend, so its reporting a spot temperature somewhere on the chip of 223C. I am not aware of the limitations of the exact simulations they ran, but if mine came back and showed that I would be weeing myself. tldr: Either that simulation is made up, fake, wrong, set up horrifically - or the chips are running @150C+.  Exactly. Even companies like AMD or Nvidia, with the best thermal engineers and ASIC designers on the planet, barely manage to approach 200-250W consumed by the GPU ASIC chip only (even then, a good 50W+ is consumed by the rest of the card, so the GPU ASIC itself is closer to 200W, not 250W). KnCMiner is so ridiculously underestimating the complexity of their technical choices... There is absolutely no way they will ship a ~250W 100Gh/s chip (their claims) in October 2013. Mark my words. It is mind-boggling to see the number of people who accept KnCMiner's claims of feasibility without blinking an eye. KnCMiner will either spectacularly fail to deliver anything. Or they will have to underclock their chips and increase the number of chips per device to match their performance numbers per device (like BFL did with the Single SC). |
|
|
|
BUT, the unit was rejected by german customs officers because of the missing CE-mark and a missing german manual (based on EU law: EC No. 765/2008)  gr0bi42, did the german customs officers explicitely told you this was because of the missing CE-mark and missing manual? Or are you just guessing[1]? [1] "Guessing" based on that other person who similarly got his Single (not Avalon) rejected by german customs due to a suspected falsified CE mark and missing manual. |
|
|
|
Congrats Bitfury! (We will definitely be a customer  ) FYI there is an error on the front page: it says "starting at 0.1 BTC", when chips actually start at 0.29 BTC each (reel of 3000 pcs for October delivery). |
|
|
|
|
Xiangfu: I did not expect the pb to be fixed in batch #2 so I did not even check if my ctl unit was an updated pcb. And you are right, mine is rev 1.52 (even more recent :-)) so I will re-add the fuse ...
|
|
|
|
I just received one more Avalon from batch #2, wave #2 (order #35XX), after receiving tracking information 2 days ago. I am in southern california. WATCH OUT people! Fuse F1 was present on my control unit, even though this is a "black" Avalon unit shipped after May 31 that is not supposed to have it. I removed the fuse before powering up the machine. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Avalon#V1.5 |
|
|
|
Well, my order (made & paid on 18th of February) was shipped more than a couple of weeks ago and arrived in my country two weeks ago. Unfortunately, even though I opted for EMS transport, they sent it via DHL. As a result the order is stuck in customs ever since it arrived. They won't release it to a private person, since they claim it's too large and the value declared is too high, so I need an invoice for a firm or some juridical entity. Sent a ticket to support, received no answer so far, it's been more than two days. My problem is that if I don't solve the customs issue soon, I think the package will be sent back. I sent a PM to Yifu too, hopefully he sees it soon  . Wow. What country do you live in? These horror stories really opened my eyes as to how messed up and unreliable international shipping carriers and customs can be, for individuals as opposed to businesses. |
|
|
|
65nm asic, smaller than BFL's current chip is coming.
This is not smaller. BFL is 65nm. "Oops, boss, we failed to do proper market research, we did not know BFL was using 65nm" |
|
|
|
I am more worried that they will kill the price of BTC.
Why are you worried? Their very existence depends on BTC having value. If they kill BTC they would kill themselves! Your worry makes no sense. |
|
|
|
We are absolutely interested in doing assembly for those who have Avalon chips. But we work with minimum quantities of 10 thousand chips per customer. If you are interested, email me at m.bevand at gmail.com
Hey I emailed about a week ago and still no response. Would like to see what you can offer as I'm still considering the avalon clone as an option over the klondike. I know, sorry. I just replied to a ton of those requests 1h ago. Check your mail. |
|
|
|
|
I should be receiving my Single SCs in the next few weeks, and will be measuring myself, if no one does it by then.
|
|
|
|
It seems BFL Single SCs do 250 Mhash/Joule at 12V (estimation only, since no one bothered measuring power consumption at 12V). Anyway this seems far from the 350 Mh/J value set by the 80 BTC bet. So, I sent my cryptographic escrow code to Micon. In summary, I won 100 BTC (150+ Mh/J bet), then lost 40 BTC (350+ Mh/J bet). Total = won 60 BTC from Micon. Thanks for betting, Micon. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
