Guys seriously, think a bit...
To forge these ASICs, are about 2M$ . Let's assume they did it. With a jalapeno a breakeven comes in 10 days. They would be nuts to give away such an equipment even the information about such an equipment.
If you believe that BFL's efficient ASICs are a big lie, you should bet "disagree" on http://betsofbitco.in/item?id=665You will win a nice amount of money, as the odds are at 1:18 right now  |
|
|
|
It was originally quoted (and subsequently removed) that the Avalon would mine at 60GH/s @ 600W. Who knows what the final power draw will be, but it's a far cry from BFL's 40GH/s @ 80W.
Either way, I don't care. GHs/$ is all I care about, and someone finally gave BFL a run for their money!
Yes, who gives a shit about the 600W. With that kind of power it is really meaningless for those of us with cheap power. You gave the answer yourself: those who do NOT have cheap power are the ones who care. |
|
|
|
|
Exciting. But any chance this could be made more efficient? Your target of 100 Mhash/Joule is poor compared to plans announced by the competition (bASIC, BFL).
|
|
|
|
Finally, good to see theres others on this forum with their eyes open. The long con, raise your reputation with one wave, then when wave #2 comes around; time to break out with all the btc & fgpa trade-ins leaving the customers with dick. The people that are backing BFL are acting exactly the same way people would act when somebody would call pirate out for the douchebag scammer he is before things went south, the channel itself was a total homofest filled with ball guzzling to the max. The only reason somebody would act like this is due to either a payoff, or that they've invested way to much to believe in anything that may differ from what they were told by <insert douche here>.
Before you start complaining about the company being to big, or having to much rep, need i remind you about pirate? Up to 5 million usd stolen, and perfect rep before the payouts died ....
I think you should bet against that guy who put 50 BTC up for believing in BFL's ability to deliver: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=109357.0http://betsofbitco.in/item?id=665If you are right that BFL is a scam, you will make money Why is it deceptive? You too take pre-orders for a product of roughly similar performance at a similar price... ? |
|
|
|
If you require 500:1 odds to bet, this means you think 350 Mhash/J may be doable. Therefore you are not the person I want to bet against. I want to bet against those who claim 350 Mhash/J is plainly impossible |
|
|
|
I don't care what the USB specs says: for all we know, BFL could violate them and have the device pull 1000mA instead of 500mA like some phones do when charging over USB ports of Macs (and some PCs I believe). The source for your "4x claim" is quoted below. I did not remember that you also said that 10x is at the far end of the possible. So, since 45nm FPGAs do 20 Mhash/J, should I interpret your claim as 200 Mhash/J barely doable with really good engineers on a 45nm ASIC? On top of that, most people (including me) don't believe BFL has the capital to develop at 45nm. 65nm would be more realistic, which would put them at half the efficiency, or 100 Mhash/J. I still don't understand why you don't take the bet, since I place the bar much higher, at 350 Mhash/J. In case my intentions aren't clear: I am pushing you to either (1) make you bet money (even a symbolic amount), or (2) force you to concede that 350 Mhash/J is plausible (which would be a reversal of your previous claims, see below) Another thing that makes the BFL announcement rather
of hard to believe is the very large performance increase
they claim to be able to achieve on an ASIC as compared
to the existing FPGA solutions.
I'd have expected maybe a x3 improvement on - say - the
MH/s/Watts numbers, but the numbers they've announced
are hard to stomach.
I would love for someone really knowledgeable on this topic
(how much more efficient can a chip be made when moving
from FPGA from full custom ASIC).
This. Just taking your FPGA-tested verilog and pushing it through the Synposys tools will usually get you an ASIC with 4x power improvement. Working really hard to re-do the design from scratch will get you 8x. Maybe 10x if you have really good engineers. A 56x improvement in power consumption is just plain absurd. |
|
|
|
(FYI the exact way the losing bets are distributed amongst the winner is described in How are the losing bets distributed?) runeks, your analogy is flawed. From eldentyrell's viewpoint, flipping a coin gives him only a 50% probability of winning, however my bet gives him a 100% probability (according to him.) I find it interesting that he refuses to bet even a symbolic small 5 BTC... |
|
|
|
Also, you got the bet wrong: [...] BFL is claiming 1400 Mhash/Joule, not 350. Â The bet as it is written lets them under-deilver by a factor of 4. Â That's a pretty enormous margin of error you're allowing them... No, the bet is not wrong. I have explained multiple times that I believe the Jalapeno will be powered by 2 USB plugs ( here, here, and here), that is 700 Mhash/Joule, but I give myself a 2x margin error in this bet, so 350 Mhash/Joule. However, you have made the claim that ASICs can only be about 4x more efficient than FPGAs at the same process node, so 80 Mhash/Joule. Therefore this bet gives you a greater margin of error: 4.4x. as well as possibly any unannounced product that the company will be shipping by June 30, 2013.
I am not interested in exposing myself to betsofbitcoin's counterparty risk with for nine months. Or in waiting that long to resolve the bet, to be honest. You can bet very little if you wish. If you bet only, say, 5 BTC, you would win most of my 50 BTC (assuming you win and no one else bets more on your side). Betsofbitcoin desperately needs to offer an "abort" option, i.e. criteria under which the bet will be nullified and all funds returned to bettors. Then we could have a more reasonable bet that would abort if BFL doesn't deliver by, say, January 1st.
The bet submitter can define conditions that would nullify the bet. In my case, I decided that if BFL does not deliver, the bet would be lost for me instead of being nullified. They also really need to switch to intrade-style bid/ask markets. Â Since you know how much you stand to lose but do not know how much you stand to win, betsofbitcoin has no predictive power.
You know that if you win, you would at least win the initial amount you bet, plus a variable amount of money. Isn't that sufficient to convince you to bet? |
|
|
|
There's no reason to expect ASICs would require X, and I highly doubt any ASIC vendor would make that mistake.
Yes - it's just that there seem to be a lot of people out there who seem to want/need a GUI What Luke-Jr meant is that X should not be required. A GUI should be optional. |
|
|
|
My point being: BFL the way it is presented to us certainly hasn't got the resources and funds to develop custom chips.
They do now.  By custom chips I mean Full Custom ASICs, that is what they are claiming they are making. That costs about 10M USD for starters. There might be some way to get it cheaper if you have the ties but unless whoever behind BFL is some engineering wizard he doesn't even have the means to develop it. If you know how the process of semiconductor manufacturing actually works the notation of a BFL custom ASIC is ridiculous. To get an idea what kind of people pulled this thing off in the past... (Ninja Style ASIC development using selfwritten software), he did it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_H._MooreIf you truly think that BFL cannot achieve, oh, say, 350 Mhash/Joule, then you can easily make 50 BTC by betting as little as 0.1 BTC (since people have yet to bet against my entry on betsofbitco.in). See https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=109357.0 |
|
|
|
I just opened a bet on our favorite betting platform: Butterfly Labs ASIC will achieve 350 Mhash/Joule Initial bet: 50 BTC http://betsofbitco.in/item?id=665 (full text below) Many people disagree that BFL will deliver this power efficiency. To these I say: put your money where your mouth is At least one ASIC-based Butterfly Labs product will demonstrate 350 Mhash/Joule or more, at stock frequency/voltage, at room temperature, for a sustained period of time of at least 60 minutes, with appropriate current-measuring equipment on the device's power input(s). Power consumption shall be measured by adding up current from all the device's DC inputs (12V jack, USB cable, etc.) It will not be measured "at the wall". The purpose of this bet is to avoid wildly varying efficiencies of power adapters and computer hosts. This bet applies to all ASIC-based products that Butterfly Labs will deliver to the general public. This includes the "SuperComputer" family (Jalapeno, Single SC, Mini Rig SC), as well as possibly any unannounced product that the company will be shipping by June 30, 2013.
This statement is true if, for example, the Single SC achieves 40 Ghash/s at 114 Watt or less (40000/114 = 351 Mhash/Joule) as measured with a clamp meter on its 12V DC input and 5V (USB) input.
This statement is false if all Butterfly Labs products fail to achieve 350 Mhash/Joule, or if Butterfly Labs fails to deliver any product at all.
|
|
|
|
|
I plan to buy one. If it succeeds, it will be really successful. The hardware form factor is awesome, the possibilities are endless. I hope they make the hardware platform open!
However I think the project has a high risk of failure because it might be too technically ambitious, especially features such as the distributed network of cards relaying packets (power consumption, software complexity, etc), and some technical choices are dubious (solar panel while the card will be in a wallet/pocket 95% of the time.)
|
|
|
|
Are there power dissipation estimations for any of the ASIC products available ? Not yet, I'm afraid to post simulation results as they may be wrong. AFAIK, our competitors didn't published their expectations too. But at least we know that it will be better than 45 nm FPGAs Actually Bitfountain did publish their expectations: Update
After further optimization and some trade-offs, we came up with this updated estimation results based on our improved design.
Hashrate: 1.00GH/s per chip
Area: 21.7mm^2 per chip
Power Consumption: 8.23W
Again remember that they are estimated from the RTL design and might have some differences to real products.
|
|
|
|
Based on the 130 nm technology in the paper there there (as far as I can tell the only real experimental data) and the clock rates they've given, you'd be looking at 6 GH/s with a TDP of ~90 W (100mm^2 die) considering how much space the hashing unit in the study takes up on the die. That'd be 66.7 MH/s/w. At 65 nm you're moving to maybe three times the efficiency (real life examples: AMD K8 vs. early Core2Duo), or 200 MH/s/w. Hence, you should NOT be able to achieve 700 MH/s/w without moving to 32 nm or below (even then it's likely below 700 MH/s/w). The pb is that you start your calculations from non-optimal numbers ("66.7 Mh/J"). Virginia Tech 130nm simulations estimated 75 Mh/J (13.42 mJ/Gbits); real chips did very, very close: 73 Mh/J (13.76 mJ/Gbits). The reason simulations predict very accurate numbers is because SHA-256 has a very predictable gate toggle rate.Bitfountain 130nm simulations estimate 122 Mh/J; therefore real chips are very likely to achieve the same. Then, even based on your very conservative estimation of 3x efficiency gain when moving from 130nm to 65nm, Bitfountain numbers should translate to 122 x 3 = 370 Mh/J, which even that is in the rough (~2x) ballpark of BFL's inferred claim of 700 Mh/J... |
|
|
|
I have the same card. One of the GPUs went out of it in May. I sent it to Diamond in May. I got an email today that I will get the money credited back to my account. That is the longest RMA I have personally every seen.
I think they must just go in spurts, as literally today I got a notice that my RMA was processed and a refund granted through newegg. +1 on agreement: the longest RMA process ever. You can't make generic statements like that based on only 2 or 3 data points. In fact neither of us can: I have had the exact opposite experience with Diamond. I have RMA'd cards with pretty much every vendors (Sapphire, Visiontek, Diamond, HIS), and in my experience Diamond was the fastest (8 days between shipping the defective 5970 and receiving a brand new replacement, that was in August 2011). The truth is that the quality and speed of the RMA process varies across the world and depending on which employees or business partners handles of your specific RMA request. It would take thousands of RMA experiences to accurately tell which vendor does the best job. |
|
|
|
Are you really going to need 3U of electronics/fans/etc for 80 Gh/s? BFL supposedly will be able to do 80 Gh/s with 2 tiny Single SC (which will be the same size as 2 current Singles), which suggest BFL will be massively more efficient in terms of Mh/Joule...
I think you're missing one small (but important factor): Reclaimer RM is a 3U 19"-compatible 'rackmount' device which can be controlled via Ethernet connection and work directly at selected pool/bitcoind without any PC. You'll be able to mine on any pool or your own mining server.
I saw this detail. But isn't it irrelevant? All you should need to drive 2 x Single SC is a wallet-sized ~3W Raspberry Pi. My question is why would Tycho need a full-blown 3U enclosure for similar hashing capacity? I am genuinely curious and trying to learn more about the product to evaluate my investment choices. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
