Fabb'ing a chip to tape out (in qty's of 250,000 minimum) is about 2 million. Don't see that happening anytime soon.

$13/chip is ~$10/chip over the cost to develop, manufacture, fabricate.
It's typical to ~double the cost to produce a product in setting a MSRP.
By my math, they ought to be around ~$6-$7 each, in any quantity.

These estimates are valid for the first production run.
Follow on production runs have no or significantly reduced embedded RD&D costs, so the price should drop, slightly.
To say $5-$6 /  chip.

Likely there are several reasons supporting the $13/chip MSRP:
1) They are the "only game in town",
2) There are significant benefits from an accounting standpoint for chips used internally priced at $13/chip,
3) Provides justification to "discount" chips supplied to other larger-ish board producers if sales to the community project are charged $13/chip,
4) and lastly, companies are in the business to make money. Maximizing that benefits shareholders. Upper level management reports to and maintains employment from the board of directors. If it came to light that profits were not maximized on a given product line that "official" would be eligible for termination.

As I see it, the community project has 4 choices:
1) "Bite the bullet" and pay the $13/chip,
2) Buy a bunch of S7's, rape the chips off the boards, and let sidehack work his magic on/with efficient board design,
3) A group of community members could band together and create AM version 2, fab a chip (BE400 ) and then produce boards/machines based off that chip,
4) lastly and least likely, a crowd funded community effort to produce a community chip sold at or near cost.

Personally, I like none of the above, for a variety of reasons.

Am interested.
The last serious coding I did was back in '94 (assembly, C, C++).
Have done some casual embedded coding in the interim.
My "compadre in crime" is well versed in the modern languages.
Have emailed him to see if he's interested/has the time.

Haven't looked at the cgminer source.
What languages are used and what language(s) expertise are you looking for?

We might be able to help.

Me = admin@planetcrypto.com
cc = support@planetcrypto.com

"... total outlay and running / maintenance cost compared to just buying power from the electricity company?"

Yes, since 1998. I re-evaluate every 6 months or so.

Initially in 1999 the power company gave me an estimate of $20,000+ to run in power to my place (I'm almost a 1/4 mile off the main road and I'm the only customer on my road, which I own). As a submariner (nuc powered) I had been investigating being self sufficient since the late 70's. So needless to say instead of giving them 20 grand I spent it on RE hardware (batteries, solar, wind, genny's, etc.). In Decmber of 2005 I "bit the bullet" and had them connect me to the grid (at a cost of ~$5,000). At the time regular service was $0.055/KWh and off peak was $0.028. I still generated most of the power and bought small amounts from them during peak demands (water heater, electric stove). Then 3 years ago got into BTC mining and became a heavy power purchaser (~$2,500/Month). Recently my power coop announced rate hikes as a result of the EPA's "carbon tax" (CPP Clean Power Plan). This initiated, and is still ongoing, a research endeavor regarding the future pricing and availability of electrical power. Basically my research and analysis to date indicates that within the next 5-10 years electricity will become a luxury item, nationwide. Priced out of the reach for low and middle income wage earners. My renewed self generation fervor revolves around "getting in front of" an impending decrease in quality of life. Survival.

A properly designed renewable generation system, OVER TIME, will always be cheaper (and OBTW better for the environment) than buying power from an external source. For one simple reason, You're buying power with today's dollars and "locking in" your cost / KWh over the life of the system (15-30 years). As such I am NOT a fan of tax incentives, rebates, or other incentives. Those can disappear and have disappeared with the stroke of a pen and public opinion. An improperly designed system will never break even/pay for it's self. It's real easy to design a system wrong and are typically the systems that fossil fuel generation company's like to broadcast about.

I'm a fan of a particular kind of nuclear power not currently operating here in the US. Thorium fuel cycle molten salt reactors. Having lived for 12 years less than 250 feet away from the core of a LWP (light water pressure) reactor (Nuclear powered submarine) my previous statement comes from experience. LWP's are a problem looking for a place/time to happen. Checkout: http://www.ted.com/talks/kirk_sorensen_thorium_an_alternative_nuclear_fuel

So is paying endlessly increasing (due to rate increases) electrical bills.

Where I am, my electrical coop(s) are real crooks. They managed to get into law a requirement for the owner to have a liability insurance policy. The cost of the policy exceeds even the maximum revenue stream for selling power back (+ net excess generation metering) as an IPP (Independent Power Producer 40 KW nameplate capacity or less) under the Minnesota Statute. If you exceed 40Kw nameplate capacity generation you're classified just as they are and have to negotiate a contract, typically at the "avoided cost rate". Which is the lowest priced rate class, and here, about $0.005 per Kwh (That's 1/2 cent per Kwh). They sell regular service power to the retail customer @ $0.1235. Hence my crook comment.

I decided long ago (1999) that it would be a cold day in Hell and the little devils would go skating when they got 1 miliwatt from me. F'em if they can't take a joke.

Oh, and yes, I have a sizable battery bank of U.S, Battery L16HC XC2's (20 Hour Rate: 420) and ~150 lbs each. The first batch of these wore out after 10 years of service, I abused them, else I'd a got 15 years out them. http://usbattery.com/products/6-volt-batteries/us-l16hc-xc2/ Best "bang-for-the-buck".

To avoid the insurance cost, I run a "hybrid" system. Solar charges the batteries (and a little AirX, which is really just a toy comparatively). If the solar charging system comes up short for the day, I have a Morningstar relay driver that senses battery voltage and turns on some high current (100A each) RV power converters (battery chargers http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00F8MC45E?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o01_s00) feed by off peak power ($0.048 per Kwh) at night. At 8:30 AM it turns them off in preparation for another solar charging day. This is by far cheaper than running a gas/diesel fueled generator (and a hell of a lot quieter) for "make up" power/charging. The size of the bill at the end of each month is indicative of how "sun shiny" the month was. After 17 years I can pretty much predict what next months bill will be. Even with the converter and inverter losses it's still way cheap power. And I have the peace of mind that everything electrical on the property is UPS'ed.

I've rambled off topic long enough.

In my electronic tinkerings I've bought stuff from All Electronics.
Really good pricing because they buy overstocks, discontinued items, and production overruns.
As such, a manufacturer of boards might have a concern that spec'ed parts from them may not always be available or available at the current cost.
Beyond price I'd be thinking about the supply chain and all that brings to the table.

Just sayin'

After I got out the Navy (Sub sailor) spent many a year in Dover DE. Am familiar with the trickery in government in that region.

Here we don't have a choice for power suppliers. It's a coop run by corrupt administrators. We're currently paying $0.13/KWh. Who signed a 38 year (terminating in 2045) sole source purchase agreement with a company that only has coal fired generation. Whether one agrees with it or not, coal is doomed. The EPA just won a case in the supreme court over the CPP (Clean Power Plan) which is the beginning of a carbon tax. When that is implemented (again whether or not one supports such a concept) it will drive coal fired electrical costs through the roof. While no one can precisely predict future pricing 5, 10, or 20 years out, my estimates indicate that within the next 10 years it will double or triple. This will put electrical consumption into the luxury item category.

I too am disabled and, personally, live on a fixed income (like other seniors). Fortunately I had the foresight and wherewithal to own my home (i.e. no mortgage). Many, if not all of my peers don't. Many of those that are surviving exclusively on SSA are currently making choices between food and drugs. If their electrical costs doubled or tripled I fear we will be finding them frozen in the dark, literally. All due to a handful of the greedy few.

I have tried to work within the system to reform it to no avail. The only option left is for me is to attempt to insulate myself from the pending doom and if able assist the few I can.

From a personal electrical consumption basis, I'm well on my way to being electrically independent. Have a plan in place where by the time the "snow flies" this year I will attain that goal. BTC has played an important role. And while I'm in the giving credit where credit is due mode sidehack and novak have been instrumental in many respects.

Somewhere near the end of this month I'm going to "trip the mains" on the domicile isolating me from the grid. At the same time I'll shut off all the .8 and .5 W/GH/s miners in anticipation of sidehack's BF replacement boards.As I have a BUTTLOAD of S1/S3/C1/S5's looking for an up grade's I'll never shut off the compac's and the U2's as they are just too cute  

The previous rant was WAY off topic, so I'll refrain going forward.

I pay $0.58 - $0.68 per watt for the panels. UL listed. 60 cell 250W
Last 2.25 KW was @ $0.74 per watt
Where I live, northern MN, panels on the roof is suicide.
Mine are on racks on the ground. Can't fall off the ground.

Check your states net metering laws regarding the price (rate) they buy back, usually it's one sided.
And the increase in your home owners policy.

Net - net it may not be worth it or a potential loss.
I've been doing wind and solar for 10+ years, learned alot along the way.
Am willing to share.

Am finishing up a report/analysis on the state of our electrical system here in the US.
The future does not bode well.

admin@planetcrypto.com

Have off grid solar running most of the domicile.
The 100A @ 12V nominal battery chargers (RV industry calls'em converters) use 3 40A ATC fuses, I assume their wired in parallel.

Shout out to toptek. Thought I was the only hexa-genarian in the crowd. 

+1

"You can ignore reality, but you can't ignore the consequences of ignoring reality." -- Ayn Rand

or

"If 50,000 people share a bad idea, it's still a bad idea." -- J. Schlenker

That is also a troubleshooting technique called "smoke testing".
Put in too large of a fuse and see what smokes.
Then replace it.

If the larger fuse still blows, replace with larger fuse and repeat.

 

I can relate to not relating (said in a serious tone and not intended as a play on words).
And I've always been in a different place physically and mentally (said in a self deprecating serious tone).

sidehack

I have a design requset:
Allow the hash board input voltage to be from 10.5Vdc to 15.5 Vdc.

Here's the reason:
An input V range of 10.5V-15.5V would allow the boards to be driven by a battery bank which is in turn charged by solar.
And eliminates the need for a high current sepic converter

Here's a sample scenario that would scale:
3x 60 cell panels (250W-300W) in series (nominal 105Vdc input) feed to a Morningstar MPPT-60 (other brands exhibit similar tolerances) that charges the battery bank.
In this scenario, one can expect or should design for, a battery bank voltage to swing from 10.5V (completely discharged) to 15.5V (fully charged in winter and/or battery equalization charge levels).

Driving a miner directly from a DC source (12V battery bank) has at least one advantage, it escapes the losses in converting DC to AC (i.e. inverter inefficiencies).
Inverter efficiencies can be as low as 82% (sometimes worse with cheap China originated inverters).


Another request, regardless of input source, is that the hash boards implement a low voltage cutoff @ 10.5V.
This would prevent an over current condition when the bucks are feed a low supply voltage.
Which would assist in saving the hash board when a PSU screws up or is overloaded.

Maybe a simple fuse inbetween the PCI power input and the buck(s) supply rail???

Thanks in advance for the consideration.

Pup Tentacle

Roger that.


To each his own.

I need 2 cups in the AM or waking up takes too long.

Odd you mentioned the Prisma fires as our last Prisma burst in flames about 2 weeks ago.
Quite an impressive little foul smelling "campfire".
It continued to hash, for a short time, during the fire.
I let run, until it self destructed.
As it was obvious the Prisma was toast, and was curious to see just how long it would hash before giving up the ghost.

The IBM PSU (with your most durable adapter board) just hunkered down and keep feeding it current.
Both the supply and adapter board survived the ordeal.
The Prisma not so much.

Morning sidehack, hope you've had your morning coffee. I'm working on #2.

I have a design requset:
Allow the hash board input voltage to be from 10.5Vdc to 15.5 Vdc.

Here's the reason:
An input V range of 10.5V-15.5V would allow the boards to be driven by a battery bank which is in turn charged by solar.
And eliminates the need for a high current sepic converter

Here's a sample scenario that would scale:
3x 60 cell panels (250W-300W) in series (nominal 105Vdc input) feed to a Morningstar MPPT-60 (other brands exhibit similar tolerances) that charges the battery bank.
In this scenario, one can expect or should design for, a battery bank voltage to swing from 10.5V (completely discharged) to 15.5V (fully charged in winter and/or battery equalization charge levels).

Driving a miner directly from a DC source (12V battery bank) has at least one advantage, it escapes the losses in converting DC to AC (i.e. inverter inefficiencies).
Inverter efficiencies can be as low as 82% (sometimes worse with cheap China originated inverters).


Another request, regardless of input source, is that the hash boards implement a low voltage cutoff @ 10.5V.
This would prevent an over current condition when the bucks are feed a low supply voltage.
Which would assist in saving the hash board when a PSU screws up or is overloaded.

Maybe a simple fuse inbetween the PCI power input and the buck(s) supply rail???

Thanks in advance for the consideration.

Guess I'm "cornfused"
And your post is a learning/educational experience and a Homer Simpson moment for me. Doh!
I was thinking that the strings of chips would be, for lack of better words, wired up in parallel (regarding Vcore) versus in series.
Strings in series makes a buttload more sense from a simplicity standpoint (if nothing else component count) but loses the redundancy (or fault tolerance) of chips in parallel.

I come from a military background where things are grossly over engineered AND where cost is no object, so I think and engineer things in terms of continued operation with reduced capabilities.
i.e. everything is mission critical.
Obviously BTC mining doesn't exhibit that criteria.
It also explains why I have a box full of dead BM hash boards.

Thanks for the brain working.

Concur 99.9%.
I was referencing some of our early tests with Novec 7100 and the S3 boards (vid here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcb9TyQP5ZA ) regarding what it takes to boil 7100. Ambient during the our vid is 70F-80F. and is probably similar to Ambient in the BF vids. In operation, the tank was definitely warm to the touch. Board separation clearance was ~2mm (.006 inches) (i.e. chip surface to spacer plate distance). We fabricated spacer plates out of polycarbonate to minimize the amount of Novec required in the tank. Tank ran at 1 bar (1 atmosphere, 0 relative pressure), so not a pressurized system. Minimizing the amount of fluid contacting the chip/board promoted convection flow (along with the "sparkiling bubbles"). We experimented with clearances down to 1mm, and it worked. Just wasn't comfortable with that little clearance. Am familiar with Alex's Data Tank design. Didn't know there was that much clearance, never thought to look. We also played around with and developed blending tables for the various Novec fluids in an attempt to "dial in" the boiling point for a particular application.

"... is near ambient temp hence the lack of phase-change seen." Raising Ambient would expedite boiling and the converse is also true. Most of the heat removal, in 2-phase, is due to phase change and not in the warming of the fluid to the boiling point (unless of course there is a HUGE delta T between fluid temp and boiling point, but that effect will be short lived as the fluid comes up to temp). The fact that the fluid in the BF vid isn't boiling tends to indicate the chip surface hasn't reached the boiling point of the fluid, whatever it was, and am assuming it was a Novec fluid. Cuz' the Data Tank used by BF, at least initially, exclusively used the 3M product. The fluid in the BF vid, were I to hazard a guess, would be one of 7100's bigger brothers: 7300, 7400, or 7600. This is the difference between immersion cooling, say using an oil which never undergoes a phase change and 2 phase immersion cooling using an engineered/calibrated boiling point fluid which does. Heat removal and consequently power density are dramatically better when comparing immersion versus 2-phase immersion owing to Novec's latent heat of vaporization curve.

Concur
"That is provided the non-insulated data tanks don't already have enough outside surface area to keep the Novec below its boiling point. Doubt that is the case." Aluminum tanks dissipate/leak more heat into the surrounding space than, say, polycarbonate. Or better yet, an insulated polycarbonate container/tank. This is not desirable in 2-phase. As part of the design is to convey the heat away to a heat management system and not into the local area.

Sorry about the rant, I'll shutup now.

I missed ya'll. Good to communicate, again, with individuals with more than 4 active neurons.
That came out all wrong, but I think you get my meaning.

"Opinions are like butts, everybody's got one and they all stink."
So here's the logic behind my stench:

It's obvious, any implementation is going to require logic level shifting. Cuz' comms to/from the chip are likely to be at 1.8V (or higher 2.5V, 3.3V, or dare I put forth 5V). So that complexity needs to be included in any design.

In vid part 1 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zPpj1JYw38) he's demo'ing @ Vcore of .378V pulling ~6.0A which equals ~38GH/s per chip with efficiency @ .062W/GH/s.
COLD. A reasonable expectation is current draw will increase as the chip heats up, How much, no clue.
While not an easy 10A single phase buck design, it's doable and been done before. Heatsink optional.
My .06 thought was mirroring his demo. For an exclusively air cooled design I'd consider dropping that to .045 - .050. (buck efficiencies may drop horribly??).
That'd put it back to compac hash rates but with significantly better overall efficiencies.

vid 2, heatsink required.

Vid 3 where he "cranks it up" the heatsink is replaced with immersion cooling. Although the chip, conspicuously, is NOT boiling the Novec fluid. So it ain't getting THAT hot. And is probably still heatsink'able. For comparison Intel CPU's surface temperature in Novec run ~160F in 7100. And they boil like water on the stove. 3M (Phil Tuma) has vids on youtube showing this.

Novec 7000 boils @ 34C (93.2F), Novec 7100 boils @ 61C (141.8F), Novec 7200 boils @ 76C (168.8F), Novec 7300 boils @ 98C (208.4F)

The fact that the fluid is not boiling probably indicates poor heat transfer into the fluid (cuz' it's not hot enough to cause the fluid to change state) i.e. it can't contribute enough energy to rise above the latent heat of vaporization curve. Contributing to my belief that even at that Vcore/clock rate/current draw it's still heatsink'able and doesn't require immersion cooling to survive. Is it gonna' get hot, HELL YES. Does it require esoteric cooling, don't think so. Non boiling fluid provides little convection fluid flow, thereby leaving hot fluid on/near the surface of the chip. And even then, the fluid didn't boil.

The buck to drive it is another potential bone of contention. Cuz' it's drawing just under 40A (38.8A) @ a Vcore of ~.580V PER CHIP. Imagine the current draw of a string of 3 or 4 chips. Similar to the current draw that'll start a car (albeit at a higher V). Unless somebody knows of some magic I'm not aware of, that's probably a multiphase buck. Probably 4, 5, or 6 phases at least for dependability and longevity. Each supplying 10A+. These are a bitch to design, increase component cost, and copper trace content/width/cost/board real estate. All in all, would us immersion cooling guys like to see it, YUP. Matter of fact why not drive it to 60A  . Is it the market segment GS is trying to service, HELL NO 

Hence my upper limit cap of .15W/GH/s for this project.

Nuff said, time to lurk.

Getting back late to the discussion, so apologies if I state what has already been said.
I'll take the debit for the community ASIC discussion death.
I got sick and basically fell off the planet several months ago. Sucks to get old, BTW. Don't do it, if possible.

At a minimum, the cost to bring an ASIC to tape out is $1.5m
NotFuzzyWarm is spot on in his post.
From a business standpoint, for an entity to layout $1.5-$2.0 mil requires some surety of sales/profit.
If for no reason other than being able to continue operations (i.e. net revenue = $0).
On paper / in posts, it seems that BF has "stepped up to the plate" regarding chip availability.
Time will tell if/when chips actually make it into the community's hands.
And while I'm hopeful, I'm not "holding my breath" waiting for it to happen.

IMHO the kilo17/GS alliance is the communities best bet for affordable miners to empower the continued de-centralization of BTC.
For what little it's worth, we support this endeavor and look forward to it's success.

Also from a business standpoint, kilo17's financial participation is a gutsy move in an unsure industry.