Great news! Just make working 1-chip miner with or without the chip a priority please, everything else will be easier and you will be out of the awful pre-order loop. People will get hold of the chips one way or the other, there are *no* kits on the market right now, especially open source ones. It will be a hit.
Will do! Hardware hacking is sort of both a hobby and profession for me. In fact, I literally just noticed that two MSP430 FRAM dev kits showed up on my desk this morning ;-) by the way - there are 1-chip projects out there - e.g. mine / NanoFury  (and the plan is to have that as an open source too) The one chip projects seem to be a bit over priced. Look for a multi-chip board if you can. Though some of those are expensive too. The sweet spot is anything below $25 per GH/s. |
|
|
|
|
Has anybody experimented with under clocking the Jalapeno to see how far they can get the power consumption down? Most people seem to be fixated with trying to get the things to hash faster at the expense of power consumption.
Obviously at some point the BTC mined by the device ceases to cover the electricity cost, when that happens with one of my GPUs I reduce the clock speed until it's profitable again. I can see the need for doing so with the Jalapeno as well, exactly how low depends on your local cost per kWh.
|
|
|
|
|
Seems to be a ongoing effort to derail this thread with noise, I presume it's either shill or fanboys of other ASIC vendors. We are in the final week of Sep waiting for news of the production, we don't need off topic posts.
|
|
|
|
In all seriousness, a good proof that they were sitting on their components and mining, would be if mining suddenly became much harder and BFL products started flying out the door.
It would also give them a chance to go "hey, look, Monarch go hash hash fast fast".
This way they could pump more cash from the few zombies still following the stench fest.
Numerous times the network saw a massive spike in hashrate with no known massive shipments of units. So someone had their private farm of ASICS. It could have been a rich millionaire or the Chinese government or the NSA, who knows. But you could mine with customer's rigs and not let on. Say you have 100 mini rigs mining. It's not like you flipped them on all at once. It was gradual, like say a couple per day. The wouldn't look odd as many various ASICS were being shipped all around the world. Now say Sonny has 100 mini rigs mining in his basement. It's not like he's gonna shut them all off at once and ship them. No, he's gonna shut down a couple per day and ship them and most likely replace them with newer orders so there will always only be a gradual scaling up of the network so it will not look obvious at all. A 100 minrigs is nothing nowadays, they suck so much power that they are not worth owning. |
|
|
|
Somebody just dumped 10 Bilions IFC which is 11% of existence. Any ideas why?
It wasn't on the main block chain, that hasn't advanced in days therefore no transactions. dumped on cryptsy so i am guessing that it was already on the exchange I have an IFC deposit on Cryptsy stuck on 5 confirms for days now, I will not be the only one, so I think they might freeze the coin, who knows they might reverse the dump, but whoever bought the coins wont be able to withdraw them so it doesn't really matter. The will just be stuck on Cryptsy forever if the block chain doesn't get fixed. |
|
|
|
Somebody just dumped 10 Bilions IFC which is 11% of existence. Any ideas why?
It wasn't on the main block chain, that hasn't advanced in days therefore no transactions. |
|
|
|
|
I like the windows installer, a bit more pro than a lot of the other coins that you basically unzip.
|
|
|
|
Anybody else been banned from the BFL site for simply posting regarding wanting a refund.
I find this a but desperate and extreme:
You have been banned for the following reason:
No reason was specified.
Date the ban will be lifted: Never
But when I think I got all my $6,000 back, it makes me wanna laugh so hard. Hahahahahahhaa.
So you achieved absolutely nothing other than a ban, no mining gear, a total waste of time, and you gloat about that, good one. |
|
|
|
Dev already changed the diff retarget to the PPCoin algorithm, and set the switch block to be 248000. I think this algorithm should be reliable, as it has been used by all pos coins. The block 248000 may be a little conservative, but if people don't switch then we are in a bigger problem. It really depends on the diff, some cycles the diff did not go very high, but some are really high, it may depends on the hashrate at that time. It was faster a few days ago.
Some people attacked the IFC for sure. Any pow coin with 60 blocks or above retarget diff cycle can be attacked exactly the same way as IFC. That is, use high hash to boost the diff, then leave, then come back at low diff etc. After a few cycles, the coin will likely be blocked due to its high diff. IFC being the first one attacked this way possibly because its popularity.
But it looks like I am in another chain... I am at block 247330 sync'ed.
There maybe multiple chains out there, I saw one at 254488, another at 244999, but these two are not sync'ed though.
246953 looks like the last block. If you sync from scratch with version 1.7, I think you will sync to this chain, which is currently at block 247332, this looks the correct chain to me. I tried it in another computer, I got the same thing. Looks like this is a forked blockchain that gets around that block that has huge diff, which virtually jammed the chain. Let me see if I can sync to it. Trouble is that the shorter chain is jammed on Cryptsy at high diff with transaction confirmations riding on it. |
|
|
|
gox taking forever to cash out, coinabase with a limit of 10 (!) btc a day...
what are those exchanges doing to us ?
There are not shortages of exchanges. If necessary, convert your BTC to some other fiat, then convert that to USD using a traditional forex dealer. |
|
|
|
Dev already changed the diff retarget to the PPCoin algorithm, and set the switch block to be 248000. I think this algorithm should be reliable, as it has been used by all pos coins. The block 248000 may be a little conservative, but if people don't switch then we are in a bigger problem. It really depends on the diff, some cycles the diff did not go very high, but some are really high, it may depends on the hashrate at that time. It was faster a few days ago.
Some people attacked the IFC for sure. Any pow coin with 60 blocks or above retarget diff cycle can be attacked exactly the same way as IFC. That is, use high hash to boost the diff, then leave, then come back at low diff etc. After a few cycles, the coin will likely be blocked due to its high diff. IFC being the first one attacked this way possibly because its popularity.
But it looks like I am in another chain... I am at block 247330 sync'ed.
There maybe multiple chains out there, I saw one at 254488, another at 244999, but these two are not sync'ed though.
246953 looks like the last block. http://exploretheblocks.com:2750/chain/Infinitecoin |
|
|
|
I looked at the block explorer in the OP, and it shows at block 246953 for about 2 days, is the block explorer stuck? or there's a fork?
In my opinion this is not the result of a fork, but a difficulty adjustment stall. At block 245000, the developer changed the difficulty retarget method. Before 245000, the code appeared to adjust the difficulty every 120 blocks, based on the block solving time of those 120 blocks. The Difficulty would adjust by a maximum of 4x (four times). After 245000, in an effort to reduce the strip mining effects by the multipools, the retarget scheme changed to adjust every block based on the block solving time of the previous 120 blocks with a maximum adjustment of 4x. This turned out to be a disaster with the most recent hash rate increase on the coin, because in the space of 10 blocks, the difficulty increased by a factor of over 1 million. Using the old method (pre 245000), the difficulty would have only increased by a factor of 4. Block Difficulty
246943 0.00024414
246944 0.0004377
246945 0.0017508
246946 0.007
246947 0.028
246948 0.112
246949 0.448
246950 1.792
246951 7.171
246952 28.685
246953 114.742
246954 249.59 Not solved ... Gamecoin GME has a similar problem. You can't average your diff over a large number of block without making it overshoot and lock you at high diff. To solve it, they settled on a recalc ever 12 block with a 48 block history, even that's too much history to average over, but they only do a 10% diff change on each recalc so it compensated a bit. If you were going to do a diff recalc every block, you wouldn't want to average over the last 120blocks, more like 4 or 5 blocks would be enough. Now you have a real problem, it will probably need a new client release to fix as the next diff change will be higher not lower. Better get onto it quickly before exchanges and pools get mad. The changes will probably have to kick in on the next block, or the client will have to start at a lower diff somehow. |
|
|
|
Of course he does. His logic is simple: KNC uses big expensive heat sinks and fans because they are over compensating for their poorly designed chip.
He's wrong, of course, I just understand the confused logic.
What makes you think the KNCminer chip is poorly designed? Just because they choose to over clock it? GPU vendors over clock their chips too, but they are not trying to make a positive ROI on mining crypto, they are pandering to gamers who don't care about power consumption. I never said I thought it was poorly designed. I put a qualifier in front of the statement "His logic is simple:". Therefore, I was referring to what I think you believe. Yeah, that would be called trolling. When the KNCminers arrive we will see if they can be adjusted to run more efficiently. As long as they haven't locked it out it should be possible. 400GH/s at 640watts is not as profitable as 300GH/s at 440watts. |
|
|
|
Of course he does. His logic is simple: KNC uses big expensive heat sinks and fans because they are over compensating for their poorly designed chip.
He's wrong, of course, I just understand the confused logic.
What makes you think the KNCminer chip is poorly designed? Just because they choose to over clock it? GPU vendors over clock their chips too, but they are not trying to make a positive ROI on mining crypto, they are pandering to gamers who don't care about power consumption. I run my Gigabyte 7970 GHz card at --gpu-engine 700 --gpu-memclock 840 --gpu-vddc 0.95 which gives me maximum profit due to Watts/GH/s but only 500kH/s on scrypt coins, that card can go way faster than that but the power use goes up exponentially. |
|
|
|
I asked KNC to confirm that the 1.6 J/GH is at the wall but they did not. Given that the at the wall efficiency will depend on the user supplied power supply efficiency I think the most probable scenario is that the 1.6 J/GH represents the entire system DC wattage. At the wall would be ~10% lower for the average 80Plus Gold PSU. Unless KNC states in clear terms the at the wall/plug efficiency we won't know until some units get to users.
It obviously a mathematically modeled efficiency as there have never been any KNCminer chips to actually measure, it might be right out! They should have the chips this week so it wont be long until we know the real figures, no point speculating. Their design needs several power hungry fans and big expensive heat sinks, which means the chips were planned on being driven hard. If they ever sold the chips separately I would under clock them until they only needed a basic case fan. |
|
|
|
I open this thread to bring awareness of how hashrate will grow based on data we get from the vendors. This is the data that NONE of hardware vendor would like to share. So all of these are reasonable projection only. Any info thats contributed will get updated in this post. This thread is essential for anyone looking into mining investment, so ppl dont make blind decision and convinced by shills or anyone with their own agenda. I will break it down month by month (at the end of each month) October 2013: + KNC mining: ~250THs (filled me in pls as i dont follow every update) + BitFury: ~200THs (second batch, altho it might be pushed into Nov) + HashFast: 200THs (500 Babyjet sold in first batch) November 2013: + HashFast: ~100Ths (anyone will better projection can give their background info) March 2014: + BFL Monarch: ~ 200THs (i would expect $1million in sale the minimum, big customers from BFL alone would beat this figure ) + Black Arrow:  Will be updated once we have better info I left out all the mining company because i've not checked into them. So anyone please give me more info about them. I will keep this post and updated as we have more contributions. I'm not looking into any mining investment right now so definitely i need more contribution to keep the data more useful. Use this data and do your own mining profit calculation. Ignore all the shills and advices from anyone. . Check the current hashrate increase here: https://blockchain.info/charts/hash-rateThese numbers can't be right as it would require each vendor to precisely disclose their sales figures. Good like prising that data from them! |
|
|
|
Exactly, Bitcoin mining is the only industry I can think of where one pre-order company pops up almost every week with their hat out.
They are almost as common at new alt-coins. In every other industry people make their products first, then release them to the market.
I'm not ready to take sides yet, and I'm still stinging from paying for an early BFL pre-order where, in hindsight, I'd have been much better off holding my BTC. However, it strikes me that in every other industry companies must go to the banksters, hat and business plan in hand, and ensnare themselves before they can produce anything. At least in BTC-world the pre-order companies are dependent on us miner wannabes rather than on the banksters we'd like to make redundant. Maybe it's not so bad, in Big Picture terms, for us to subsidize the pre-order startups. The GPU miner market has been doing just fine with only ATI/AMD supplying the lions share of the hardware. Yet in the ASIC hardware market we have how many players? Lots! It's high risk unsustainable, just a price war fueled by pre-order money. |
|
|
|
No one will actually know until KNC does at-the-wall tests on a real unit hashing.
My two bitfury cards pull ~ 46 watts at 66 Gh/s
Is that each of combined? It wouldn't surprise me if a 55nm full custom design turned out to be more power efficient than a 28nm standard cell design. I would assume that it's possible to under clock the KNCminer chip to get the Watts/GH/s down. Looking at the cooling hardware they have used, you can see the KNCminer chip is extremely overclocked, they are trying to squeeze the most out of it at the expense of efficiency. It would have made more sense to use twice as many chips at half the clock rate to get the power usage down, but that means they could only build half the units per wafer. In the end the machines left mining will be the ones that use the least Watts per GH/s. There is no room in mining for overclocking, else we would all still be using GPUs and ASIC miners wouldn't exist would they. It's all about Watts per GH/s. |
|
|
|
Dude, your question shows exactly how far back you read... The whole reason this shit about bitfury cropped up is because people were claiming ridiculous numbers on the efficiency of a 65nm chip which for all intensive purposes should not have been possible and then transformed into an argument over whether or not the BF chip was more efficient than KNC's. That was the point he was getting at I believe, people where claiming some crazy shit, with out any proof to back it up...
...
The KNCminer specs from there own data is Energy consumption: 1.6 W/Gh/s. the Bitfury is 1.0W/GH/s what's so hard about that to understand? The Bitfury is more energy efficient, though they both are pretty good. The KnC 1.6 is at the wall though, right? What is bitfury's at the wall? -MarkM- Nonsense, KNC has not been measured at the wall as it's never shipped, where Bitfury has been, neither of which come with a PSU so the point is BS anyway, as it will vary on the brand and model PSU you choose. If you are being scientific you measure the the unit at it's power connector bypassing the 3rd party power supply. |
|
|
|
We all should really stop with this preorder shit. Its nothing else then free loan to the company. If company has a solid plan worth risking, then go to the bank and ask for loan.
In earlier blackarrow explanation I have noticed that he speaks of btc price implying it will rose among the difficulty. That was adsressed milion of times; then we are better of just buying and holding bitcoins at today market price.
Exactly, Bitcoin mining is the only industry I can think of where one pre-order company pops up almost every week with their hat out. They are almost as common at new alt-coins. In every other industry people make their products first, then release them to the market. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
