Future Hash Rate Poll 1/2013

[bitboyben]

I've seen this question being tossed around in various forum topics.
Hopefully I'm not repeating a thread.
I thought it would be fun to see what everyone was thinking...

I made the pole so you could change your vote.
Hopefully after some well thought out arguments some may change their minds.

 

[Akido]

I have a question, does network hash rate directly correlate to difficulty?
For example, right now if 21 TH/sec with a difficulty of 2.86M were to double to 42TH/sec would that directly double the difficulty to 5.72M and so on?

[KIDC]

I have a question, does network hash rate directly correlate to difficulty?
For example, right now if 21 TH/sec with a difficulty of 2.86M were to double to 42TH/sec would that directly double the difficulty to 5.72M and so on?

I believe that is correct - a direct linear correlation. I'm not certain however, and would definitely like to hear from others that may know more about this.

[DeathAndTaxes]

Yes difficulty and hashrate are directly linear.  Also technically the current exact hashrate is never known.  It is simply estimated from difficulty and the average rate of block generation.

[bitboyben]

So correct me if I'm wrong but ball parking the monthly revenue for a 40Ghs Mining hardware would be ~420BTC at today's difficulty?
~9100BTC/day @ 26Ths @ 50BTC/block

Therefore:
$12 per BTC

5x = 84BTC = $1008
10x = 42BTC = $504
20x = 21BTC = $252
35x = 12BTC = $144
50x = 8.4BTC = $100.8

[dunand]

No customer will mine with a BFL asic miner @ 50BTC/block.

[bitboyben]

Oh duh...  my mistake. Yes the block reward will be at 25 by then... guess I'll have to half those estimates...

I may have to make another poll:
Which will have greater returns?
Buy ASIC Mining Hardware or just invest in BTC directly.

I'm also coming to the conclusion that despite the technological leap that ASICs are, the $ Invested to $ Returns ratio will be similar to what we had in the GPU days once dificulty/hash rate balances out with most of the gains being as a result of power savings.

[Unacceptable]

I'm also coming to the conclusion that despite the technological leap that ASICs are, the $ Invested to $ Returns ratio will be similar to what we had in the GPU days once dificulty/hash rate balances out with most of the gains being as a result of power savings.

Exactly 

The power consumption will be reduced by at least 60-80%,supposedly 

[arklan]

Oh duh...  my mistake. Yes the block reward will be at 25 by then... guess I'll have to half those estimates...

I may have to make another poll:
Which will have greater returns?
Buy ASIC Mining Hardware or just invest in BTC directly.

I'm also coming to the conclusion that despite the technological leap that ASICs are, the $ Invested to $ Returns ratio will be similar to what we had in the GPU days once dificulty/hash rate balances out with most of the gains being as a result of power savings.

yup. i am figuring the only way to keep my meager mining income (i only have about 300mhash) will be to increase my hash rate by at least a factor of ten... so, at a minimum, a jalpeno from bfl. i'm hoping, on the other hand, to get enough cash together to get something more like 30ghash or up... who knows, eh?

[bitboyben]

I'm just re-posting this math from the BFL ASIC orders page...


30.768 Th confirmed so far...
455 Confirmed orders...

67.62GH per order average...
* 7029 orders =
475.315Th

19x Current ~25Th

No adjustments for unfilled orders

[benco]

I'm just re-posting this math from the BFL ASIC orders page...


30.768 Th confirmed so far...
455 Confirmed orders...

67.62GH per order average...
* 7029 orders =
475.315Th

19x Current ~25Th

No adjustments for unfilled orders

Hi,

I think that:

* 7000 valid orders is a nonsense, maybe 2000
* most of valid orders are 3.5GH jalapenos

I'm sure that BFL hardware will change the mining completely, but expect more than +100TH from 01.01.2013 is simply unrealistic

[slush]

* most of valid orders are 3.5GH jalapenos

But many of valid orders are more Singles SC...

[bitboyben]

I did some quick figuring,
of the first ~200 order numbers about ~50 were reported. (ignoring dates only paying attention to order numbers ~1650- ~1850)
So assuming that 100% of those 200 order #s were actually turned in to ASIC orders AND reported you'd have a lower limit of 4:1 ratio of order numbers to actual orders...
Of course it's hard to believe that would continue across the entire order list.
However it may serve as a possible lower limit to all this guesstimation.

so 1/4 of ~20x is of course ~5x increase.

So ~5x increase to ~20x seems to be a fairly reasonable possibility.

Thoughts? data?

[Korbman]

I did some quick figuring,
of the first ~200 order numbers about ~50 were reported. (ignoring dates only paying attention to order numbers ~1650- ~1850)
So assuming that 100% of those 200 order #s were actually turned in to ASIC orders AND reported you'd have a lower limit of 4:1 ratio of order numbers to actual orders...
Of course it's hard to believe that would continue across the entire order list.
However it may serve as a possible lower limit to all this guesstimation.

so 1/4 of ~20x is of course ~5x increase.

So ~5x increase to ~20x seems to be a fairly reasonable possibility.

Thoughts? data?

Inaba has already confirmed that it'll be well under 10x for BFL orders.

Predictions on where things will go within 12 months sit at around 10-15x max. My own calculations last month put it around 7x for the first 3 months or so.

[bitboyben]

Agreed,
I read your paper, it was very good. I came up with a similar number in August, 8x, but for slightly different reasons. I just can't find the link where I posted it....

I suppose those numbers may have to be adjusted up to account for the +50% efficiency of the BFL equipment.

I wonder if Inaba made his calculations of "under 10x" before or after he knew of the final specs...

[Korbman]

I read your paper, it was very good. I came up with a similar number in August, 8x, but for slightly different reasons. I just can't find the link where I posted it....

Thanks! But now the data is outdated, so I'll be reworking it this month at some point. I'll keep the original as a reference and see how much as changed in 2 months. That might also give me a glimpse of the future.

Always happy to read other people's analyses as well, since it helps to give me a different perspective. If you find your post, link it here!

I wonder if Inaba made his calculations of "under 10x" before or after he knew of the final specs...

I thought about that the other day as well. Even so, under 10x just means that the network rate will be under ~250TH/s [+/- 30TH/s] for the beginning of the ASIC changeover...which I still think is accurate even after the 50% increase for BFL.

[IMakeComps]

Don't forget the ASIC order #'s started around ~1600. My estimate is the total network hashrate will be around 400TH/s by Jan 2013.

[Korbman]

Don't forget the ASIC order #'s started around ~1600. My estimate is the total network hashrate will be around 400TH/s by Jan 2013.

Already know. The majority of those orders are fakes or incomplete. They can't be used to create an accurate model of future hash rates.

Any backing behind your estimate, or is it just a hunch?

[Frequency]

Don't forget the ASIC order #'s started around ~1600. My estimate is the total network hashrate will be around 400TH/s by Jan 2013.

Already know. The majority of those orders are fakes or incomplete. They can't be used to create an accurate model of future hash rates.

Any backing behind your estimate, or is it just a hunch?

it is all estimate because it all has to be calculated on the theory that asic systems bring what is promised,  and they could just suddenly adjust there specs 2 mnd before shipments ... nobody knows. everybody paid... i am sceptic until the contrary is proven.....

[Korbman]

it is all estimate because it all has to be calculated on the theory that asic systems bring what is promised [...]

Quite right. But there's a difference between "pooping out random numbers on paper" and "backing your estimate with a well thought out analysis consisting of arithmetic and statistics".

[...] and they could just suddenly adjust there specs 2 mnd before shipments ... nobody knows.

Unlikely for first generation ASIC chips. They (meaning all known ASIC companies) low-balled it before to make sure they could all meet their original specs. Turns out, the chips can perform quite a bit better with some tweaking, so everyone adjusted their specs to properly compete with one another.