Can energy efficiency become negligible for consumers?

[Aajo]

I was wondering if it is possible or even likely that ASIC power consumptions < 1 W/GH will not matter in the future (years to come).

Calculating with the following constants:
- 25 BTC block reward (assuming that after the next halving the fees will make up for the reward loss)
- 25 dollar cents / KWh

Currently, with a 1 W/GH ASIC you pay ~0,5% of your income for power (350TH/s network rate, 100 USD/BTC)

Fast forward until the network hashrate is 3.5PH/s and lets say BTC still trades at 100 USD - the power cost will now be 5% of your income.

Does that mean it needs a network of 35 PH/s and a BTC price of 100 USD in order so you have to pay half of your mining reward for power cost?

Am I missing something (propably I am) or is it possible that - in case of bitcoin price rising - everything that matters for consumers in the future will be $/GH?

[crazyates]

Power consumption is NOT negligible. Consider this:

At your numbers of 100USD/BTC and $0.25/kW, we can tell when each miner will no longer be profitable (meaning when the cost of electricity is more than the miner earns).

Avalon: 66GH/s @ 620W = 0.9Billion
BFL Single: 60GH/s @ 240W = 2.1Billion
KNC Jupiter: 400GH/s @ 1000W = 3.3Billion
BitFury: 400GH/s @ 400W = 8.4Billion

Longevity. Where it's at.

[Aajo]

thanks for your numbers! 8.4Billion difficulty should equal 60 PH/s network hashrate.
It could be that I'm greatly underestimating the ASIC revolutions impact on the network but I currently cannot see that happening without mainstream adoption.

[crazyates]

thanks for your numbers! 8.4Billion difficulty should equal 60 PH/s network hashrate.
It could be that I'm greatly underestimating the ASIC revolutions impact on the network but I currently cannot see that happening without mainstream adoption.

At 60PH/s, BitFury would be the only miner that would be profitable to run. And it would take 150,000 BitFury miners to get to that speed, which at $8kUSD a pop, would be a $1.2Billion USD investment. I don't think we'll get to that point anytime soon, unless newer miners come out over the next 2-3 years that allow for higher speeds at lower prices. In 5 years, I'd love to see a 1TH/s for $500 that only uses 200W. Hey, I guy can dream, can't he? 

[eldentyrell]

At your numbers of 100USD/BTC and $0.25/kW

We're actually very close to the point where the cost-at-the-foundry of mining chips meets the cost of solar panels required to power them in areas with good insolation (southwestern USA, for example).

Beyond that point energy efficiency won't matter as much as GH/s/$, at least for those who can get chips direct from the fab and run them unpackaged (and perhaps even uncut in whole wafers) with direct DC power.  The solar industry's economies of scale make the blockchain look like somebody's weekend hobby -- they can drive down their costs far faster than chip designers or the fabs can drive up their power efficiency.

Solar puts a cap on the demand for increased GH/J.  Even if retail miners won't hit that cap for another year or two (at least) there is at least one organization that has almost reached it already.  You'd be amazed to know what proportion of the retail cost of mining hardware comes from having to make it idiot-proof and warranty-safe.

The future is in circuit styles that operate smoothly over the broadest range of power levels.  Max-hashrate solar during the day, min-PDP trickle off the grid at night.  Batteries probably don't make sense; just use more chips instead of trying to time-shift the energy.