AM is out far ahead of everyone and I expect them to put serious pressure on the price once competitive units emerge into reality. Especially if they can kick out a 65nm product before the end of the year. All bets are off if they announce an acquisition of someone else's IP and they stuff it into their manufacturing chain.
ASICminer are around 48Th/s http://www.asicminercharts.com/live/Avalon have shipped way more than that ASICminer in just batch #1 and #2, they have volume chips going out to the DIY market, and second generation product in the design phase. I think Avalon will keep ahead of the pack unless BFL can find away to increase their output. I am quite sure BFL could sell a heap more product if they could deliver in an acceptable time frame eg. weeks not months or years, but at this point there is no sign of them doing so. I still see Avalon leading the race for the next 6mths. or more. |
|
|
|
Dumped all my DGC, DGC is dying fast now, PXC is the way to go, rising well above DGC
Why? DGC has a similar price but over 50% more trade volume on Cryptsy even in spite of the PXC pump and dump that been going on for the last hour or so. |
|
|
|
What is with this price drop on DGC? Great buy, but wonder if I am missing something?!  DGC had a bit of a price rise just before July 10th. when BTC-e was officially deleting CNC from their exchange. There was speculation that they might replace CNC with DGC, so many people started accumulating DGC. However, as it turns out, BTC-e haven't replaced CNC with anything yet, so people are now getting rid of the DGC they had speculatively accumulated. |
|
|
|
We don't have the numbers in yet to be able to say for sure. But partly Bitfury is doing a full custom ASIC and will likely result in a more efficient chip overall than KNC's, at least for this generation.
If Bitfury are getting so many dies per wafer, why are they charging so much for it? They are basically charging similar to BFL to the prices I have seen, yet they are getting twice as many GH/s per wafer. So far KNCminer seem to be the only ones trying to get the ASIC price a bit more reasonable. |
|
|
|
Every time my Jally mines out 4 BTC I am ordering a new Jally... When they catch up to my orders it will be like Christmas off in this beeotch! Got 2 on order and working on the third!
Sounds reasonable, I guess you have to do that to keep up with the difficulty increases. |
|
|
|
With the main board resting on a table with hashing boards plugged into it...what is the total height?
There is no "main board" KI6 are stand alone devices. |
|
|
|
Computing power and electrical power are mostly unrelated. I know. There is, however, a relationship between reading what people say and the ability to assess what they intended to communicate. The more you read of what they said, the more you might comprehend it. I understand exactly what you were trying to communicate, a flawed analogy between Moore's law ie. the increase of computer performance over time, with the increase of USB power available at the socket. The former requiring a leap in technology, the latter simply requiring an adjustment of the standard specification to the cable and plugs, as the technology has already been available for decades and is nothing new. Computer speed is a prediction of future requirements, USB power is a lagging response to the increase in gadgets people are already trying to plug in at once. You only have to look at some of the Block Erupter rig photos to confirm this. |
|
|
|
Well, at least the new standard will allow for powered hubs that can make use of the extra amperage on offer. How the hell are they going to power 20A over multiple USB ports? That sounds crazy.
Progress always sounds crazy. Until it isn't!  Lol, I remember discussing the original Intel Pentium series with my very first boss. Upon hearing I was looking at getting a 75 Mhz machine, he claimed: "You couldn't possibly use all that compute power!". I had a similar discussion with some idiot kid on my college computing course a few years later who claimed that it was literally impossible to use all the processing capabilities of an original Xbox console. Despite how stupid it sounded, I had to keep talking to him to check that he really meant what he was saying, and that he understood what he meant. He did. I expect he's not doing so well these days. Computing power and electrical power are mostly unrelated. Perhaps if you were talking about the bandwidth of USB 3.5 it might be more relevant. USB power is limited by the size of the cables and connectors, not by some magical Moore's law. |
|
|
|
|
I don't think you are going to see too many vendors with 20A USB cables/sockets. The spec may say 100watts but that doesn't mean manufacturers are going to waste money implementing it on their motherboards! 25watt 5 volt cables might be realistic.
I think what they have planned is to deliver the 100watts at 20volts not 5volts, so it keeps the connector size manageable.
|
|
|
|
Now that there is new data on die size, I updated the GH/wafer table: wafer(mm) chip process(nm) die(mm^2) GH/s(per die) DpW GH/s(per wafer)
300 KnC 28 441,00 25 128 3200,00
300 bitfury 55 14,44 2 4717 9434,00
300 bfl 65 56,25 4 1167 4668,00
300 asciminer(?) 130 17,50 0,333 3877 1291,04
300 avalon 110 16,13 0,282 4214 1188,35
300 asciminer(?) 130 21,7 0,333 3112 1036,30
(DpW, die per wafer; yield percentage not taken into account)
Die size is less than 336mm2. I think 18x18mm Another detail for a better table. As far as I know, 130nm(110nm) are still manufactured based on 200mm wafers. 65nm(55nm) nodes were the first built with 300mm. Ummmm. KnC is doing a 28nm process and getting only a third of the GH/s per wafer that bitfury is getting at 55nm? What's more concerning is the 25GH/s per die. Where is the data that says they are using 4 dies per package? |
|
|
|
Looks like we got them guys. They put a lot of effort into looking like a real company. Partnering with a proven manufacturer, all the lies and deceit. We were all fooled. It has all been a scam, they don't even know how to fake temperature simulations right. Either the chip is on fire, or it must be run only in the winter cuz the scale must be farenheight.
Orsoc was never working on any asics, it was all a scam, sure they would be throwing away their reputation for what looks like peanuts, but sometimes it's more about the scam than the loot.
The mars prototype just shows you how much of a long game they have been playing here.
All that effort, just to be caught on such a small thing. It was almost the perfect crime, thank you dogie for opening our eyes.
tl;dr - sarcasm
And who's sock puppet are you again? Seems almost all your posts since you registered last month are about KNCminer. |
|
|
|
A large manufacturer mining / "burn testing" for 2 weeks does drive up the difficulty, which makes the unit less profitable. There won't be much problems if you did "burn testing" on testnet but of course nobody will do burn testing if it's on testnet.
The picture of their burn testing rack looks like it might handle a hundreds Jalapenos or a couple of dozen Singles. I don't think that's going to change the world. |
|
|
|
And in the time it took for a person to assemble all that, one man at BFL could have assembled several hundred Jalapenos making a lot more people happy than 7 Avalon units. |
|
|
|
MarsThis device will be the first mass produced product and is available for purchase in the next few days. The key details around this device are as follows: Over 6GH/s 48x IC CYCLONE IV FPGA 115K on board chips See the sites below for more details on the chips we will be using in our Mars product. 30% Improvement in hashing rate over standard Implementation Fan cooled with 48 heat sync’s and fans plus two case fans producing a cooling tunnel across the chips Modular design (we will carry this design throughout all of our products) USB attachment (software will be provided) Shipment begins on mass in just over 2 months. Earn coins while you are waiting in the queue for Jupiter External ATX power will be required (we will provide a recommended list) Upgrade protection built in to any Mars purchase with vouchers for up to $2000 off of any Jupiter purchase. Last but not least, any purchase of the Mars product automatically reserves you the same place in the order queue for the Jupiter product. The queue reservation will last 30 days. For more information about the chips used you can use the following links http://www.buyaltera.com/scripts/partsearch.dll?Detail&name=544-1468-ND http://www.digikey.com/product-search/en?x=18&y=12&lang=en&site=us&KeyWords=EP4CE115F23C8NJupiterThis device is being designed in parallel by the OrSoC engineers. It will offer industry leading performance and power consumption per GH. The final specifications for this device are being ironed out now but we can confirm the following: Minimum 250GH/s per device 7000-8000 USD predicted price 48 Chips (which are being designed exclusively for KnCMiner by ORSoC). An additional gain of 30% more hashing when the advanced algorithms provided by ORSoC are applied. Water cooled setup. Modular Design allowing for expansion at a later date. Embedded Linux device to allow for standalone mining. Shipment begins in early autumn. Those specs are nothing like what you can order, so I would disregard them totally. For starters the Jupiter is 400GH/s not 250GH/s. Secondly it's 4 chips not 48. |
|
|
|
Wasn't the original device supposed to be water-cooled? Would that make a difference?
Water cooling is not anymore efficient, unless the radiator is passive convection cooled. Most setups have pump and fans which consume power, and kind of spoil the efficiency. Good for tight areas though. I can see why WC would be handy on a GPU mining rig where the cards obstruct airflow from each other. The KNCminer drawings show it's definitely air cooling with a large fan on each ASIC heat sink, plenty of room for fans, and the ASIC modules seem to be placed so they don't block each others airflow. |
|
|
|
GPUs have power constraints, look at server grade processors if you want to what's possible. eg. The Intel Itanium (Hondo) CPU is 260watts TDP, a Sun SPARC T4 240watts, and KNCminer are quoting 250watts for the complete Mercury system not just the CPU.
Exactly, you need to be Intel or Oracle (or AMD or Nvidia) to be able to design such a high TDP chip, especially in such a short timeframe. By the way Hondo has 2 dies, not 1; not even Intel could manage 260 watt on a single die... There is a reason neither Intel nor Oracle continued to sell such high TDP chips. They have to bin the top 5% of their CPUs from the foundry, to find the ones that are stable despite the heat, and it's just too expensive and complex to design systems able to power and cool such chips. And in Mercury, at least 80% of the power will be consumed by the chip alone. 20% will be lost to AC/DC and DC/DC power conversion steps, and maybe 1% in ancillary support components. The number of dies is irrelevant, that's just a cost cutting measure to save having to make another type of wafer. What's relevant is the 12 year old PAC611 package could handle a TDP higher than the total KNCminer system is expected to draw, so it's not venturing into the unknown like you are trying to make out with your armchair FUD effort. |
|
|
|
I too was looking at the simulation.. Looks more like 125 than 150 but yea, still way too high. KnC =BFL_ng Armchair experts again. I am quite sure the foundry and chip makers will tell KNCminer what is too hot based on the properties of the materials they are using. |
|
|
|
Exactly. Even companies like AMD or Nvidia, with the best thermal engineers and ASIC designers on the planet, barely manage to approach 200-250W consumed by the GPU ASIC chip only (even then, a good 50W+ is consumed by the rest of the card, so the GPU ASIC itself is closer to 200W, not 250W).
KnCMiner is so ridiculously underestimating the complexity of their technical choices... There is absolutely no way they will ship a ~250W 100Gh/s chip (their claims) in October 2013. Mark my words.
It is mind-boggling to see the number of people who accept KnCMiner's claims of feasibility without blinking an eye.
KnCMiner will either spectacularly fail to deliver anything. Or they will have to underclock their chips and increase the number of chips per device to match their performance numbers per device (like BFL did with the Single SC).
GPUs have power constraints, look at server grade processors if you want to what's possible. eg. The Intel Itanium (Hondo) CPU is 260watts TDP, a Sun SPARC T4 240watts, and KNCminer are quoting 250watts for the complete Mercury system not just the CPU. |
|
|
|
*note disclaimer, I own no hardware (other than temporary stock), have no preorders and no affiliation* Something is wrong here with this simulation. Its a side view of the board at the bottom, with package and chip slightly above, with a 4 heatpipe heatsink. The left, blue side is showing an ambient intake of 25C, exhausting at ~50C. Now, look at the chip area; its deep oranges at best. Their own simulation is telling us the chip's heatspreader [not even the chip itself] is somewhere between 125-150C. I don't know a consumer grade chip that gets even close to these temps, nor materials creating using conventional techniques that would withstand 24/7 at these temperates. Its hard to tell without a larger image but it looks like an auto scaled legend, so its reporting a spot temperature somewhere on the chip of 223C. I am not aware of the limitations of the exact simulations they ran, but if mine came back and showed that I would be weeing myself. tldr: Either that simulation is made up, fake, wrong, set up horrifically - or the chips are running @150C+.  That's right imho. Any experts here to comment on that? @kncminer Could you clarify please? They could always use a Vapor Chamber heatsink if they need to, they can handle 300watts each, something like: http://www.radianheatsinks.com/VaporChamberTechnology.aspx200watts for a single chip is high, but manageable if the package us large enough, which it looks like it might be. |
|
|
|
So, has anyone noticed the dimensions? Looks like 20in x 16in x 8in is now stated on the Jupiter product page - that is a pretty drastic change from the originally stated 6in x 6in x 8in..
There is no way a 1000watt devices would have been 6in x 6in x 8in unless it was a fan heater, even then it's a bit small. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
