Yes, ujka, and I am glad you're here to add balance  If we were still with FPGA and GPU we would have still probably seen an 8-12% rise in the next year right? It's never been lower than that. Why is it out of bounds to think that we could have 15-20%? The numbers are really high, but if the chips keep improving difficulty is bound to skyrocket. We should see at least one more improvement in the technology available for sale by the time a year is done, and likely more. I'm sure there are people planning the next step, or even the step after that, right now. |
|
|
|
|
Actually yeah, I was going to do that yesterday but never got around to it.
wanted to change to:
8 11 14 17 20
If I go more than 3 steps the range gets really wide. People get annoyed at me saying there is no chance of having a 20%+ raise. I'm not so sure. Just taking the average of all percentage rises you get 17%. That's counting all the low periods, including the year or so there was 0% rise. Take those out and it's 20%.
There have been very high growth periods in the past. From 5/29/10 to 5/26/11 we averaged 40%.
The growth has been stable and calm since the GPU surge, I think people are used to that, not realizing the possible impact of a new technology. Lol.. Thinking in that context makes me want to go back to 10-25%, and add a 40% just in case.
|
|
|
|
i see the column tested ... what is the meaning of it ...
KnC Jupiter Tested = yes ... ?
Sorry no. I meant to change that back, thanks for the reminder. Yes exactly klondike |
|
|
|
Dude, your blog isn't "Press", even when if it reached the Reddit frontpage.
Moved to Off-topic as you just pasted a link in the OP and aren't expecting any discussion.
I see a lot of links posted without any context. The forum rules say that the old section discouraged discussion, not that the new one requires it. Go get rid of all those too. The word "press" originally refers to printing presses. There is kind of a feeling that to call something press there has to be an organization behind it. Printing presses were not cheap to make or run, like large news media of today. Luckily the internet is allowing us to decentralize this power. The writing was bad this week, I should have done better before posting it. There is very little vetting in individual operations, but that doesn't mean that they are not valid, and should not be given a chance. The last couple weeks I put more time in and made good articles, I got a lot of good feedback here and other places. People say I'm not press when my articles suck. No that's just bad writing. You see that in mainstream media too. Thanks for the feedback, I'll try harder next time. Don't attempt to invalidate me though. There is no reason for that. |
|
|
|
|
I'd like it just fine if you were trying to help promote good information in the bitcoin world. If you take issue with a particular slant or logical step in an article I would love to hear about it. Otherwise you are basically saying that I'm too small time to matter and shouldn't be here. You like the mainstream media? Think they do a good job? Why not promote more alternative sources?
|
|
|
|
|
I'm only putting a few stories up a week. Have you ever tried writing online without major news credentials?
If you look at what my stories are about you will see that I'm working to promote bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
they need to give moderator status to kiba so he can delete all these topics. no reason to post on every mislabeled topic, poor guy
I think he has an air raid siren that goes off any time a new topic is posted here |
|
|
|
|
They don't sell miners any more. I'll put an Avalon page on the new list as I make it for the secondary market.
|
|
|
|
That's odd. According to the current exchange rate, evilscoop's service is more expensive than mine, and yet he gets better ROI.  lol, I'll take a look. Some crazy stuff happened when I started reorganizing. I was going to invite others to take a look to see if their numbers look right. About 10% at any point can be from currency exchange waiting to be arbitraged. Ok, found it. He had only 8% difficulty. Went through every cell and checked, everyone else was good. |
|
|
|
Unsurprisingly ASICminer 's units are still a total waste of time...
Right now they still have the benefit of being the least unreliable as far as delivery is concerned. I wonder if they'll change to more competitive prices once the market and range of producers as grown. I'm surprised about this... I fixed the biggest problem just now. VLOOKUP(1,table,3,FALSE) will look for values even if you don't tell it to if you don't have the FALSE statement. I can't imagine why though. omg I need to take my eyes off the screen for a while! |
|
|
|
That's better!  I doubt if knc jupiter or saturn are "tested". There is nothing to test afaik. At the same time bitfury chips for 100 TH project in Poland are being placed on boards now. Metabank is currently arranging everything with local assembler in Russia, board design is to be demonstrated this week. So one could say it's kinda much more close to "tested". Anyway, you are doing very useful job. I believe arranging all this data is such a headache. I never made a single website in my life and most probably never will. Really? I obviously need to watch those demo videos again lol.. I thought KnC had some tests done? Yeah I remember hearing that about BitFury, I'll put a tested on them. There is something odd with the Bitburner boards. The 10 chip board is relatively more expensive than the 20 chip board, but still has a higher profit % ?!
You're right about that, on the surface all the references look right unfortunately. I'm still only half way through going through them, so I'm sure I'll find it soon. Hopefully I'll get a chance to finish tonight. |
|
|
|
|
Ok, I've been sitting here referencing as much as I could. I have just enough done that I can put the new tables out. I've been meaning to do this for a while, and I think I fixed a couple problems already. The DIY section seemed a bit low, with a couple of them not looking right at all, this is fixed. I can't wait to finish to see if I find anything else. Over half way done now.
Added new AM and fixed BitFury. Thanks guys.
(I realize I have a lot more work to do on BitFury before it shows the real statistics, I think I'll do their page today or tomorrow so we can see how this turns out.)
|
|
|
|
Very useful table comparing equipment from different vendors. Useful but somewhat unfair too bitfury asics.
1. Lead time for 400GH/s unit being sold for 15000 EUR is August, not October. This makes difference, you know.
2. 400 Gh unit with delivery in October costs two times less - 7500 EUR. Big difference again.
3. Moreover, one could order a Starter kit with delivery date in August and 15 extension boards with delivery in October, mine with with 25Gh hashing power for two months then install extension boards in October. 1000 + 15 x 350 = 6250 EUR only, not 7500. Im not sure how exactly you will calculate ROI in this case, but for me it looks like 400GH bitfury unit is going on the first row of your table.
All this numbers are without VAT. But VAT differs between countries, sometimes you can have reduced VAT and also many miners bought equipment for their registered
businesses so they didn't pay VAT at all. I've seen at least two European customers on this forum who didn't pay VAT, there should be more of them. To be honest, I don't know if KNC miner price is final and everything is included.
I remember there was bitfury/metabank device on the first row of your table with 120GH/s for $2160 and delivery in August. Yes it was for Russian market only, is this a reason you don't mention it anymore? Could we have it back, probably with some remark "For Russia only" or something. Thank you.
From your table one can decide that bitfury and knc are on the same stage of development/production, but that's just not true. Bitfury chip is tested by many testers already. It works. New tests show higher hash rate or lower consumption, if needed. Boards are developed. And we didn't see anything from KNC besides words and some strange FPGA prototype. Of course you can't show all details in your table, I just want to demonstrate that devices being on quite different stages of development/production look similar in your table.
I believe if you fix those "small mistakes" in your table, it's gonna look very different from current version.
For reference: Im not in bifury team or anything, Im his customer. I wish KNC and others to deliver on time and yet honor their promises on hashing speed and power consumption. We don't need monopoly here.
Hope I was helpful, thanks and regards.
Ouch! I thought I had fixed that. I'm about 1500 REF# tags away from being able to post a fixed copy too. Do note at least that in the profitability charts above that I do have it right. Wow, I was off on the 120GH too? I couldn't find it available anywhere, so I assumed they switched over to the 400. As far as the unfair treatment of some companies, I agree that the simplistic format doesn't necessarily encourage a full understanding. As I switch to the new method I think this will naturally be taken care of. For instance I will add a worst/best case scenario portion that shows maximum tax shipping and electricity cost. the bitfury 400gh/sec (august) is out of stock so cant order that one anymore
It's all out of stock in few days after sales were started. Does it mean bitfury devices are to be deleted from the table? I don't know..
KNC is not taking pre-orders any more as well, right?
KnCMiner say they are still taking preorders and have not sold out on their first batch.. at least a few days ago. I didn't realize the 400 was out of stock.. No I won't be taking anything off the list. I'm going to find a new way to make it clear which units are currently available for sale, and try to keep track of the secondary market too. Thanks for the effort! This seems like an awful lot of work, especially keeping it updated, and the fairly demanding crowd watching your every move! Hehe, if it wasn't for everyone keeping me on my toes this project would get stale I actually wasn't going to release at first, but am certainly glad I did. Ok I rechecked the profitability table and that was wrong too. I really did fix this! Seems like this has been happening. I must have saved over a days work at some point. =\ Luckily I was able to at least fix it on the new table, the old one will have to wait. I'll make a note on it till I can fix it. Thanks! |
|
|
|
Very useful table comparing equipment from different vendors. Useful but somewhat unfair too bitfury asics.
1. Lead time for 400GH/s unit being sold for 15000 EUR is August, not October. This makes difference, you know.
2. 400 Gh unit with delivery in October costs two times less - 7500 EUR. Big difference again.
3. Moreover, one could order a Starter kit with delivery date in August and 15 extension boards with delivery in October, mine with with 25Gh hashing power for two months then install extension boards in October. 1000 + 15 x 350 = 6250 EUR only, not 7500. Im not sure how exactly you will calculate ROI in this case, but for me it looks like 400GH bitfury unit is going on the first row of your table.
All this numbers are without VAT. But VAT differs between countries, sometimes you can have reduced VAT and also many miners bought equipment for their registered
businesses so they didn't pay VAT at all. I've seen at least two European customers on this forum who didn't pay VAT, there should be more of them. To be honest, I don't know if KNC miner price is final and everything is included.
I remember there was bitfury/metabank device on the first row of your table with 120GH/s for $2160 and delivery in August. Yes it was for Russian market only, is this a reason you don't mention it anymore? Could we have it back, probably with some remark "For Russia only" or something. Thank you.
From your table one can decide that bitfury and knc are on the same stage of development/production, but that's just not true. Bitfury chip is tested by many testers already. It works. New tests show higher hash rate or lower consumption, if needed. Boards are developed. And we didn't see anything from KNC besides words and some strange FPGA prototype. Of course you can't show all details in your table, I just want to demonstrate that devices being on quite different stages of development/production look similar in your table.
I believe if you fix those "small mistakes" in your table, it's gonna look very different from current version.
For reference: Im not in bifury team or anything, Im his customer. I wish KNC and others to deliver on time and yet honor their promises on hashing speed and power consumption. We don't need monopoly here.
Hope I was helpful, thanks and regards.
Ouch! I thought I had fixed that. I'm about 1500 REF# tags away from being able to post a fixed copy too. Do note at least that in the profitability charts above that I do have it right. Wow, I was off on the 120GH too? I couldn't find it available anywhere, so I assumed they switched over to the 400. As far as the unfair treatment of some companies, I agree that the simplistic format doesn't necessarily encourage a full understanding. As I switch to the new method I think this will naturally be taken care of. For instance I will add a worst/best case scenario portion that shows maximum tax shipping and electricity cost. the bitfury 400gh/sec (august) is out of stock so cant order that one anymore
It's all out of stock in few days after sales were started. Does it mean bitfury devices are to be deleted from the table? I don't know..
KNC is not taking pre-orders any more as well, right?
KnCMiner say they are still taking preorders and have not sold out on their first batch.. at least a few days ago. I didn't realize the 400 was out of stock.. No I won't be taking anything off the list. I'm going to find a new way to make it clear which units are currently available for sale, and try to keep track of the secondary market too. |
|
|
|
So is the actual sheet still available to view? I can't seem to find the link anywhere anymore? I would just like to review your formulas/code and potentially offer some improvements.
I have about 1k(maybe 2k idk) references to fix and change to VLOOKUP. It's pretty ugly right now, any information that anyone would want is just a #REF |
|
|
|
Bitcoinorama how is it coddling? From what little I know they changed their refund policy without telling anyone and won't answer why.
Go to some large companies investor meeting and you'll see some mollycoddling.
As far as what they're set up for they are a business and customers should be asking questions. If they don't answer and people get suspicious it is not out of line. I agree that they are trying and seem to be doing a good job of it, but these last few weeks have seen some changes.
It's a start up. It's a start-up with a very finite timeframe to succeed. It's questionable as to whether Terrahash actually fully comprehended the response when opening sales. They appear overwhelmed. We were around page 25 when orders opened, the rest has been impatient frustrated voices. As long as Terrahash are using their time effectively and ensuring the production and logistics are ready in receipt of chip delivery then I'd forgive them, for presumably doing what you are paying them for. When you purchase a pre-order you have to wait a period of time for receipt of goods. At no point has anyone promised it possible to answer every whim throughout the pre-order period. That may well take significant manpower. Terrahash certainly doesn't not have enough customer service for the amount of orders. Terrahash never promised customer service as a strong point. The more people complain and spread FUD (not you FCTaiChi) and the more competitors arrive on the scene, the more anxious and likely to jump ship some of you are increasingly becoming. Especially with more power efficient chip manufacture superseding Avalon bulk chips. Terrahash will have already spent significant funds readying for production. Terrahash were already shafted by the nitwit behind cloudhashing who left them in debt and forced the, to take pre-orders. I doubt Terrahash wants to be left in huge amounts of debt due to impatience and unrealistic expectations from more random internet crazies, like Cloudhashing who cannot make decisions based on their own research and be comfortable with their choices. Terrahash certainly doesn't deserve to be blamed for other people's lack of conviction in their own decisions, when they need to acknowledge their own mistakes. I guess the one thing that confuses me is that companies get in these situations constantly, and there seems to be a pretty easy way to silence 80% FUD. One person from the company takes a few hours to write a response to the criticism, then posts it in their main thread and on their page. Ask supporters to link to it when they see someone misinformed. If they have good reasons and spread the information everyone will be happy. When companies don't do this people wonder if there is more going on than is officially admitted to. Why not protect yourself? -edit Oh so you are saying that they have been negatively effected by refunds and are on the edge. I hadn't heard that, I'm so into getting a couple basic things fixed with my project that I haven't gotten the latest information. |
|
|
|
Value changed to profit. Percentages of profitability. May not sound simpler, but check it out, I like it much better. Easier to understand, I miss the "best case/worst case scenario" from the older version. Maybe two columns instead of one are better for pessimists like me It's still there, underneath. I'll make sure to keep it available until I have every manufacturer's page up. Exactly! Could you also change the big table with the different difficulty scenarios to percentage roi? Yeah I actually decided today that on each manufacturer page I'll put both 1 year ROI and Profit tables. Thanks a lot for the idea! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
