|
741
|
Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Avalon Asic Design Discussion
|
on: February 08, 2013, 07:08:15 PM
|
Well this is a topic of design so we need to stop talking about shipping who was first or last cause technically no one has one, so there is yet to be a first shipper
Anyway, talking about who shipped or not is irrelevant to prove my point: Avalon is first to mine. This would not have been possible had they chosen a more complex 90nm or 65nm design, therefore 110nm was the right choice in order to beat BFL on time having devices mining as we speak (prototype or not, shipped or not). Nemesis: watch your language - this is your 2nd warning. Next time you will find yourself in my ignore list. |
|
|
|
|
742
|
Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Avalon Asic Design Discussion
|
on: February 08, 2013, 10:04:45 AM
|
How you define "should have been done" is arbitrary. Obviously Avalon has done it the right way for them: a design with many small 110nm chips was simpler and allowed them to ship before BFL who is struggling with fewer more complex 65nm chips.
by ship, you meant you received one? If not, STFU already. You seem upset that BFL did not ship first. That is not a reason for writing an abusive post. Watch your language. |
|
|
|
|
743
|
Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: AVALON ASIC has delivered first RIG (68GH/s Confirmed) 2nd out proof
|
on: February 08, 2013, 06:05:00 AM
|
Already tried and failed mining solo with: bitcoind, p2pool, eloipool. And I know enough to know that my own pushpool, unmodified, cannot keep up either  Need to hack pushpool or use another proxy server that can keep up. Set up eloipool with the difficulty set to some high value (eg. 64 with ShareTarget = 0x0000000003ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff). Mine with getwork, not getblocktemplate. And make sure roll-n-time is functional. That setup should be able to handle hundreds of Ghash/s easily. That's what I use for my FPGA farm. IIRC your pushpool and p2pool both hard-code the diff to 1. Isn't it why they can't keep up with the many getwork calls? |
|
|
|
|
746
|
Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Avalon Asic Design Discussion
|
on: February 08, 2013, 04:05:41 AM
|
|
How you define "should have been done" is arbitrary. Obviously Avalon has done it the right way for them: a design with many small 110nm chips was simpler and allowed them to ship before BFL who is struggling with fewer more complex 65nm chips.
|
|
|
|
|
747
|
Economy / Securities / Re: [PicoStocks] 100TH/s bitcoin mine [100th]
|
on: February 08, 2013, 03:31:09 AM
|
Dude, bitfury is the lead designer at their shop. If I know anything about the people of bitfuty's calibre I'll say that he will have driver's core already debugged on the simulator before the tapeout. This really isn't looking like another seat-of-the-pants outfit.
Yes. this is why I have not posted. [...] Performance: 3.3 GH/s _rated performance_, about 7 GH/s maximum Power consumption: 1 W at _rated_ performance @ 0.6 V, 6 W _maximum_ performance @ 1.0 V. Thermal characteristics of package: 2 K / W junction-to-pcb and 34 K / W junction-to-ambient. I am surprised to see you confirm this ASIC project. Assuming that your bitcointalk.org account wasn't hacked (and I don't think it was, given that I am familiar with your writing style), I withdraw my accusation of this project being a scam. Also, your power estimate range (1170-3300 Mhash/Joule) is more realistic than what tytus posted (3300-5000 Mhash/Joule). Anyway. You posted a lot of details, but you didn't say precisely what process node you were targetting. 110nm? 90nm? 65nm? |
|
|
|
|
752
|
Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Avalon Asic Design Discussion
|
on: February 07, 2013, 09:25:18 AM
|
|
Rackable server chassis pull air from the front, and push it to the back. Any opening on top or bottom of the chassis must assume it is obstructed by the chassis below or above.
|
|
|
|
|
756
|
Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: [Scam] student from Romania is claiming to have ASIC units for sale at 85 GH/s
|
on: February 07, 2013, 03:57:02 AM
|
I got a good chuckle out of people mocking the credibility of Romanians in these threads. hmm, what has a Romanian ever contributed to Bitcoin?
Do not insult countries. You would not like someone to come to you and say "what has your country done to Bitcoin? LOL". Be respectful. I wasn't mocking a country! Sorry if I my post came across wrong. I meant to say that I laughed at those who were mocking Romania, seeing as one of the most successful Bitcoin properties (MPEX) is based there. Ok. This was not clear. |
|
|
|
|
759
|
Economy / Securities / Re: [PicoStocks] 100TH/s bitcoin mine [100th]
|
on: February 04, 2013, 04:27:47 AM
|
I completely agree with MPOE: tytus' proposal seems to be the one of a scammer. Other data point: he claims "0.2-0.3 Watt per GH/s". This is completely unrealistic. This means 3300-5000 MHash per Joule. To get anywhere close to this, you would need to design the chip around the 22-32nm process node! |
|
|
|
|
760
|
Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: why sell avalon box when they could mine themselves...?
|
on: February 04, 2013, 01:25:43 AM
|
|
So many responses and yet, nobody has given the correct answer...
You have to realize that the Avalon team is not a large company with lots of money. They did not have the $200-300k to cover the NRE costs to design even just a handful of these 110nm chips. They had no choice but to pre-sell 300 devices in order to get funding. And now that the chips are made, Yifu and ngzhang are obviously ethical people who are not going to steal customers' money by deciding to keep the devices and mine for themselves.
hi: yes, 300 units at $1300 does seem to cover the $200-300k NRE cost from TSCM + whatever other overhead they have.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
