New antminer S-5+ selling options

[valkir]

Im still able to do some profit with the gear so I vote for option 3. Center + options left right. 

[1715017361]

1715017361

[1715017361]

1715017361

[1715017361]

1715017361

[1715017361]

1715017361

[chiguireitor]

...
There's nothing to suggest, beyond speculation, that a BM1386 actually exists. The S5+ suggests that Bitmain has plenty of BM1384 parts for now.

Not too long ago, one of Bitmain's account here went and said that they wouldn't be doing tape-out of the "new chip" and that they wouldn't be selling it soon because competition failed to achieve a better/efficient chip.

There's probably already design and testing units in Bitmain's HQ, but besides that, there's no telling if/when a new product is coming out soon-ish.

Also... i was just joking

I'm pretty darn happy with my S5s as it is

[alh]

The current 7.7 TH miner make complete sense if you figure that they want to sell to big mining farms. It's got to be somewhat lest costly to manage N S5+ miners than 3N of something smaller. Not to mention some reduced cost for a single "bigger" controller compared to the existing S5.

It just isn't a "hobby" (used to be "home) miner. (Hobby term stolen from Phillip).

[alh]

This also makes me wonder if the S5+ hashing boards will work with an S5 controller? It will be interesting if/when somebody that's interested gets their hands on one to start taking close-up pictures and measurements, both physical and electrical.

[QuintLeo]

I'd be a TON happier with the S5 if it had an undervolt option (per the ORIGINAL claims for it).

 I agree that this S5+ isn't targeted at home miners - still think it should be called the S6.

[tss]

for those "committed" the full setup of 3450 watts would make sense.  set it up in the basement on a 220v dryer circuit and vent outside would be ideal.

a home miner would go for mid range @ 5th @ 2300watts is just perfect for a 20a 110v circuit.

although the price is quite high.

am i off or does this seem more expensive then a year ago?  forget the difficulty difference.

[philipma1957]

for those "committed" the full setup of 3450 watts would make sense.  set it up in the basement on a 220v dryer circuit and vent outside would be ideal.

a home miner would go for mid range @ 5th @ 2300watts is just perfect for a 20a 110v circuit.

although the price is quite high.

am i off or does this seem more expensive then a year ago?  forget the difficulty difference.

well lets say it goes for 2750 + 150 to ship that is 2900    for a .445 watt per gh .

so you could buy s-5's last jan for 310 plus shipping.  But we had a price war s-5 vs sp20

On thanksgiving last year sp20 was 600 and 5 of them would be 3000 usd   and do 7000 gh at 4600 watts.

But btc was about 400 a coin last thanksgivng   so we may have been better off with those sp20's

also paycoin made 5x to 10x the coin if you rented to nicehash.  that meant 75 days worth of coin in about 13 days.

So last fall you could argue was much better to buy gear.

We then crashed btc  price once bitmaintech went into the price war against spondoolies.

I would argue we are yet to recover from that price war.

[valkir]

Pretty sad that now only bitmain will do small form miner.

Lets hope lketc will provide one too but Im pretty sure they will not be able to fight bitmain.

[philipma1957]

Pretty sad that now only bitmain will do small form miner.

Lets hope lketc will provide one too but Im pretty sure they will not be able to fight bitmain.

no one is selling us gear except bitmain.

sfards is just way too high priced.  and while I have seen a few photos no one has done a real review of one.

[QuintLeo]

Lktec probably in December per a few comments I've seen. Might be as early as this month but I suspect their August 20 announcement is more likely to be "more exact specs" and possibly "you can now preorder" their unit(s). Not sure if they're going to be SFF though, their previous units weren't real small.

Possibly Innosilicon with a direct unit of it's own around the same timeframe, but their previous unit was a rack-mount size design not SFF.

In theory SFards should have the SF100 available in retail quantities by then, but I want to see how reliable those are going to be at the BOARD level - Gridseed tended to be GARBAGE as a board-level designer and so far what little feedback I've seen on the SF100 is VERY much "more of the same bad design work" or just bad manufacuring/shipping causing too many dead units.

In theory the Avalon project could have something out soon - they've been VERY quiet for quite a while, have had plenty of time to get a good start on a "next gen" product past the 4.1

[sobe-it]

so 48 chips per board so that would be ~855 gh/s per board, and if they kept it simple (like they usually do) they would of used the same pin-out so I would say the boards would/should plug into the s5 controller and work fine. we should see if they sell just *replacement boards* for this miner and then it would be like an s5 upgrade and could possibly tweak it to get better efficiency than the stock s5 boards. seeing how 2 of these would put an s5 at 1.7 th/s and the stock controller can take up to 4 boards, I would be fine loosing some gh/s for better watt to ghs than the stock s5 set up. this could get interesting.

we could also do a mini group buy, a few pitch in on the s5+ then the head person gets the miner and ships out boards as paid for.

[notlist3d]

we could also do a mini group buy, a few pitch in on the s5+ then the head person gets the miner and ships out boards as paid for.

Do you mean head person gets one whole miner?  On a miner at this price it would need to be a large group buy to provide person in charge a miner.

I think our best bet is if they add it on bitmain's main site.   As of right now I would say they want to keep it more local in China market.  I am not sure we could get a price that ROI is possible.   Current price is high.  To ask Bitmain to work with a small group and to lower price is going to be hard.

I predict this miner mainly goes into China data centers for better or worse that is main market.  And most of us will be waiting till next gen.

[Meech]

Center section only.   Can't see myself wasting more on + models.  The wait has been long but will need to wait a little longer (biting lip).

[MarkAz]

What do you expect the controller's consumption to be, like 10W (ex fans)?

I looked over some power monitoring data I've been doing on a S5 I have - and when it's not hashing, and when the fan is on another power supply, it looks like it consumes about 50W (it periodically dips down to 17W, but for the most part 50W seems to be when it's doing something with the FPGA, but hashing hasn't begun).

If that's the overhead, then for 7 S5's, it would be 350W total for BB/controller - and without the BB/controller as part of the power calculation the S5 drops from 0.51W/GH to 0.46W/GH (pretty close to 0.44W).  Now 7 S5's is obviously 7 fans and the S5+ only has 6 - the fan at full power consumes 0.20 amps (~24w), so the system savings would be 324W over the same S5 configuration.  Not bad, more than 1/2 the wattage of another S5 by just changing the configuration around a bit..

From this I would say that they've done almost nothing in hardware design to increase efficiency of the S5+ (as opposed to the work Sidehack has done), and instead have made their gains by optimizing the system.

[sobe-it]

we could also do a mini group buy, a few pitch in on the s5+ then the head person gets the miner and ships out boards as paid for.

Do you mean head person gets one whole miner?  On a miner at this price it would need to be a large group buy to provide person in charge a miner.

no I mean like we get a few guys interested to split 1 or more s5+ miners and the trusted member ships the boards to the people that paid accordingly but trying to get a good price point would make it hard to do. I'm more interested to see if they sell replacement boards for this. I have seen about 3 different listings for the s5+ on ebay and they are in the US.

[BITMAIN_YHQIN]

https://i.imgur.com/W8540cE.png

Hashnest is pleased to announce the latest version of our PACMiC cloud mining subscription! This newest offering, Version 3, offers a cheaper per-terahash price point and higher reward payouts than before.

https://i.imgur.com/xSiJNHE.png

Click to see PACMiC on Hashnest

Hashnest continues to be the world's leading cloud mining platform, and is one of the few cloud mining services to manufacture its own hardware. This significant advantage allows Hashnest to maintain a competitive edge over sites offering similar services. As a trusted supplier of physical mining hardware and ASIC chips, Bitmain & Hashnest are able to supply the large amounts of real hardware required to run such mining operations.

The PACMiC is a cloud mining offering for those who would like lower risk but more predictable and reliable payouts from their cloud mining contracts. PACMiC contracts do not charge a maintenance fee, and do not expire based on the cost of bitcoin. In fact, owning PACMiC is a way to hedge against bitcoin price drops, as PACMiCs give their owners mining revenue payouts even when the price is low.

This latest version of PACMiC offers users a bonus payment of 0.8 satoshis per second, per bitcoin outstanding until the contract ends.

Download the Hashnest App!
iPhone：https://itunes.apple.com/app/hashnest/id1005050524
Android：https://www.hashnest.com/app

About PACMiC

Each PACMiC V3 represents one terahash of mining power, and is sold for 0.666 BTC. The contract begins immediately upon completion of payment. Once the contract is in effect, users will immediately begin receiving the mining revenues from 1TH/s of mining power; payouts are according to AntPool’s PPLNS method. Electricity and maintenance fees will be borne
  
Each time a PPLNS payout is made, it will go towards paying back the 0.666 BTC initial purchase price. Additionally, a bonus payout of 0.8 satoshis per BTC per second is also made to the user. The contract expires when the user has mined the original 0.666 BTC purchase price. In the event that the mining machine becomes unprofitable (calculated using the electricity cost of USD$ 0.098), the contract will be suspended until such time that payouts are able to made again. Unlike regular cloud mining contracts, a PACMiC does not terminate when the bitcoin price falls too low, it just becomes inactive.

A 0.666 BTC PACMiC V3 contract represents 1 terahash of mining power, making the PACMiC V3 the cheapest cloud mining contract yet. Other cloud mining services generally price one terahash of mining power between 1.5 and 2 BTC.

With PACMiC, users no longer need to worry about high electricity fees or soaring difficulty. Mining with PACMiC is less stressful.

PACMiC Details

What is a Payout Accelerated Cloud Mining Contract (PACMiC)?
The PACMiC is a value-added cloud mining service product from Hashnest. The PACMiC is an electronic contract structured in a new way. BITMAIN will pay all the maintenance costs of the mining rigs, and all mining revenue will be used to pay back the PACMiC owners. While the principal is not yet paid back in full, it also makes bonus payments to PACMiC owners. When the principal is paid back, the mining rigs continue belong to BITMAIN. Both principal and bonus payments will be made to the contract holder based on the mining revenues of AntPool. Because PACMiC owners do not have to pay for maintenance or electricity on the machines, the payout is accelerated.

Purchasing a PACMiC
Each unit of PACMiC V3 will cost 0.666 BTC. Each PACMiC represents one terahash of hashing power. The contract will become active immediately upon receipt of full payment.

Computing principal and profit of an PACMiC
As soon as the PACMiC is activated, payouts will be made through Hashnest in accordance with the mining revenues generated by AntPool’s PPLNS payout method. Reward payments will be made beginning with the first block found by AntPool after the contract’s activation. From the first block until the contract’s expiry, reward payment will be accumulated every second, based on the total amount of the purchase price which has not yet been earned back through mining revenues.

Example: Alice’s PACMiC has already mined 0.166 BTC, so the contract will expire after mining 0.5 BTC more. Alice earns a reward payment of 0.4 satoshis per second based on her outstanding balance of 0.5 BTC. After mining 0.1 BTC more, her rewards rate is now 0.32 satoshis per second.

Profit Calculation Method
Outstanding [not yet mined] coins (BTC) * 0.8 (satoshis per BTC per second) * time to find a block (seconds). For every block found, the remaining mining revenues after the bonus is paid will count towards the outstanding bitcoin.
 
Please note: information on blocks found will only be transfered to Hashnest.com from AntPool after receiving six network confirmations. Because of this, profit and principal payments will be on a slight delay from the bitcoin network.

Contract Suspension
If after 120 days, a PACMiC has still not mined back its initial purchase price for the owner, and is not mining enough bitcoin to pay for its own electricity cost (fixed at 0.098 USD per kWh, calculated using AntMiner S5 specs, hashing at 100% uptime on PPLNS method), whether due to difficulty increase or BTC price decrease, the PACMiC will continue paying out for ten days as though it were running, even if the machine is turned off. If these conditions persist for ten continuous days, the contract will be considered temporarily suspended. During the suspension period, mining revenues and profit payments will be temporarily halted. If after the suspension period, difficulty has dropped or bitcoin price has risen, making mining possible again, the contract will be reinstated and continue from where it left off.

Contract Expiry
The contract expires when the user has mined enough BTC to cover their initial purchase price.
BITMAIN reserves the right to make mining payouts in advance, before the purchase cost has been paid back in full.

FAQ

Q: Can the PACMiC be sold or transferred to other users?
A: No, PACMiCs may not be traded or transfered to other users.

Q: Do PACMiCs deduct electricity and maintenance fees?
A: PACMiCs do not deduct electricity or maintenance fees, these expenses are covered by Bitmain.

Q: Can I redeem my PACMiC before contract expiry?
A: No. The contract will be closed automatically at the time that the initial contract price has been repaid in full. Contracts may not be terminated prior to this, although BITMAIN may exercise the option to make advance payouts of mining rewards.

Q: Does PACMIC offer hardware delivery after the contract ends?
No, PACMiC is different from Hashnest's other cloud mining services in this regard. After the contract ends, the machines remain the property of BITMAIN.

Q: If AntPool experiences bad luck, will this affect bonus payments?
A: Bonus payouts are calculated using the amount of initial contract price that has not yet been paid back, and are unrelated to the pool luck of AntPool. Changes in pool luck will only affect the speed at which mining revenues are paid. Bonus payouts are earned at a steady 0.8 satoshis per bitcoin outstanding per second.

Q: How can the user make a profit?
A: Bonus payouts are calculated using the formula: unpaid principal (BTC) * 0.8 (satoshis per outstanding BTC per second) * time to find a block (seconds). Mining revenue will first be used to make bonus payments, the remainder of mining revenue will then count towards paying back the initial purchase price.

Q:When does the user start to get the bonus payout? Where does the bonus go?
A: Bonus payout begins accumulating as soon as the first block after contract activation is found. The bonus is paid directly to user’s wallet on Hashnest.com.

Q: What does the Auto-Rebuy feature do?
After enabling the Auto-Rebuy feature, your bonus payout will be used to automatically and incrementally purchase more mining power through the PACMiC.
When the feature is disabled, mining revenue and bonus payouts will continue accumulating inside your account as usual.

Q: If I have auto-rebuy enabled, when do those GH/s expire?
Same terms as before -- PACMiC hashing power expires only when the purchase price has been paid back to the owner. If the BTC price drops too low and the contract does not generate revenue, the contract becomes suspended (but not ended) until such time that it may generate revenue again.

Q:When does the contract end?
A:When the initial purchase price has been paid back through mining revenues.

Q:Is the PACMiC risk-free?
A: Like all forms of bitcoin mining, there is a certain level of risk involved. If the Bitcoin network difficulty skyrockets, or if the price of bitcoin drops too much to cover the electricity fee, the Antminer S5 units backing the PACMiC may not be profitable to run and be forced to go offline, in which case contracts would be suspended (possibly indefinitely) and the user may not recover the initial cost of the miner. The AntMiner S5 is currently one of the most power efficient bitcoin miners available on the market, and would be among the last to be forced to power down under unfavorable market circumstances. All users should do their own research and understand the risks involved with bitcoin mining, and also to understand that there is no such thing as a risk-free product.

Click here to learn more!

Happy Hashing!

[philipma1957]

What do you expect the controller's consumption to be, like 10W (ex fans)?

I looked over some power monitoring data I've been doing on a S5 I have - and when it's not hashing, and when the fan is on another power supply, it looks like it consumes about 50W (it periodically dips down to 17W, but for the most part 50W seems to be when it's doing something with the FPGA, but hashing hasn't begun).

If that's the overhead, then for 7 S5's, it would be 350W total for BB/controller - and without the BB/controller as part of the power calculation the S5 drops from 0.51W/GH to 0.46W/GH (pretty close to 0.44W).  Now 7 S5's is obviously 7 fans and the S5+ only has 6 - the fan at full power consumes 0.20 amps (~24w), so the system savings would be 324W over the same S5 configuration.  Not bad, more than 1/2 the wattage of another S5 by just changing the configuration around a bit..

From this I would say that they've done almost nothing in hardware design to increase efficiency of the S5+ (as opposed to the work Sidehack has done), and instead have made their gains by optimizing the system.

you flux between 17 and 50 with no hashing.  It could stay stable at 17 when hashing.

 But for arguments sake  running 2 s-5's and using 1 controller.
then running 2 s-5's and using both controllers will give the true controller power draw.

17 is meh 50 is not.  

If I run 6 s-5's on 3 controllers I would save 150 watts. which is  about 110 kwatts per month.

But I read a post saying voltage was dropped to the chips on the s-5+. So I suspect your 17 to 50 with 0 hash while accurate has something to do with real numbers while hashing. along with the voltage setting dropped.

If you could run 2 s-5's machine on 1 controller and check watts  say 1150 is the watts.  then run 2 s-5's with  both controllers  and get 1200 watts  then you are correct.

I think you may get 1150 then 1170  my guess is the 17 watts number is more accurate not the 50 when hashing.

[Tupsu]

Why is it necessary to post your PACMiC scam  here ?

Before somebody  start to buy I recommend you read this forum.

https://forum.bitmain.com/?utm_source=hashnest

You're lucky if you can get back the original investment 

After purchase, there is no need to complain that you were not warned

[MarkAz]

you flux between 17 and 50 with no hashing.  It could stay stable at 17 when hashing.

 But for arguments sake  running 2 s-5's and using 1 controller.
then running 2 s-5's and using both controllers will give the true controller power draw.

17 is meh 50 is not.  

If I run 6 s-5's on 3 controllers I would save 150 watts. which is  about 110 kwatts per month.

But I read a post saying voltage was dropped to the chips on the s-5+. So I suspect your 17 to 50 with 0 hash while accurate has something to do with real numbers while hashing. along with the voltage setting dropped.

If you could run 2 s-5's machine on 1 controller and check watts  say 1150 is the watts.  then run 2 s-5's with  both controllers  and get 1200 watts  then you are correct.

I think you may get 1150 then 1170  my guess is the 17 watts number is more accurate not the 50 when hashing.

Excellent points - I'm planning on building one quad-blade machine just to kind of prove things out, plus I have a water cooling kit I haven't built yet, so it's a good excuse. 

If I SSH in and kill CGMiner, then it runs ~17w pretty consistently - it's once CGMiner runs and that it's not hashing that it maintains that pretty constant 50w for several seconds regardless of clock rate, then it kicks into gear and starts really hammering power.  But to your point, it could also be some characteristic of the ASIC's starting up, and not additional load of the FPGA starting up.

I also emailed Bitmain to see whether or not the new controller is compatible with the existing S5 blades - the connectors look the same, so if is, then it might be possible to cannibalize 4 S5's into a single mini S5+ - maybe call it an S5- perhaps?    It really depends on whether the controller ASIC just detects and adapts to the blades, or if it's got specific firmware on it for the newer S5+ blades.  At worse, even if it's not compatible, they'll hopefully sell me the cables which look to be much longer, so no need to hack up my existing ones.

[RichBC]

I also emailed Bitmain to see whether or not the new controller is compatible with the existing S5 blades - the connectors look the same, so if is, then it might be possible to cannibalize 4 S5's into a single mini S5+ - maybe call it an S5- perhaps?    It really depends on whether the controller ASIC just detects and adapts to the blades, or if it's got specific firmware on it for the newer S5+ blades.  At worse, even if it's not compatible, they'll hopefully sell me the cables which look to be much longer, so no need to hack up my existing ones.

It has got the 18 pin blade connector so you will need later hash boards (V1.91) with the 18 as opposed to 16 pin connector. I do not know what the additional 2 pins do, or if they are anything to do with the additional button on the controller board, or if a 16 pin blade can be used with a 18 pin controller? Perhaps someone does???

Rich