Bitcoin Forum
October 18, 2017, 08:57:58 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.0.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [Announcement] Avalon ASIC Development Status [Batch #1]  (Read 152136 times)
DoomDumas
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 966


Bitcoin forever !


View Profile WWW
October 26, 2012, 01:54:32 AM
#61

Why would the pools disappear?
If someone mines with a single gpu now and has 1/10000th of the total networkspeed and gets a asic and still has a 1/10000th of the total networkspeed, it's still a good idea to use a pool.

A mining rig of 500MH/s today have 1/40000 of network power a single 60GH ASIC at the beginning will be near 1/2000 (like a 2GH today) and a 1TB rig will be in the 1/100th range like a small pool today (30-40GHs of today rigs); pool still can work, but it's quite easy for who have 2-3 60GH ASIC mine in solo and get 1-2 block a month in the first month.

Maybe Im wrong, but mining on a pool or solo would get almost the same result, even in a few month time span...   your tought ?
1508360278
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508360278

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508360278
Reply with quote  #2

1508360278
Report to moderator
1508360278
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508360278

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508360278
Reply with quote  #2

1508360278
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
Bogart
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938


View Profile
October 26, 2012, 02:29:45 AM
#62

Why would the pools disappear?
If someone mines with a single gpu now and has 1/10000th of the total networkspeed and gets a asic and still has a 1/10000th of the total networkspeed, it's still a good idea to use a pool.

A mining rig of 500MH/s today have 1/40000 of network power a single 60GH ASIC at the beginning will be near 1/2000 (like a 2GH today) and a 1TB rig will be in the 1/100th range like a small pool today (30-40GHs of today rigs); pool still can work, but it's quite easy for who have 2-3 60GH ASIC mine in solo and get 1-2 block a month in the first month.

Maybe Im wrong, but mining on a pool or solo would get almost the same result, even in a few month time span...   your tought ?

I don't understand why so many people are confused about this.

Yes, statistically it should work out exactly the same.  Solo just tends to be a lot more "chunky" in its payouts.

(minus any variance based on server reliability, server operator fees, etc.)

"All safe deposit boxes in banks or financial institutions have been sealed... and may only be opened in the presence of an agent of the I.R.S." - President F.D. Roosevelt, 1933
Aseras
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658


View Profile
October 26, 2012, 04:10:19 AM
#63

Why would the pools disappear?
If someone mines with a single gpu now and has 1/10000th of the total networkspeed and gets a asic and still has a 1/10000th of the total networkspeed, it's still a good idea to use a pool.

All the major pools now won't support an ASIC. There has to be major changes for them to support ASIC. Especially at the beginning when ASIC are returning easy work extremely fast. Even with stratum there's going to be major bandwidth problems in the beginning.
Inaba
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260



View Profile WWW
October 26, 2012, 04:15:56 AM
#64

That would not be true.  EMC, BTCguild, Slush and Eligius are all ready and waiting for ASIC.

If you're searching these lines for a point, you've probably missed it.  There was never anything there in the first place.
ercolinux
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938



View Profile WWW
October 26, 2012, 06:23:25 AM
#65

Why would the pools disappear?
If someone mines with a single gpu now and has 1/10000th of the total networkspeed and gets a asic and still has a 1/10000th of the total networkspeed, it's still a good idea to use a pool.

A mining rig of 500MH/s today have 1/40000 of network power a single 60GH ASIC at the beginning will be near 1/2000 (like a 2GH today) and a 1TB rig will be in the 1/100th range like a small pool today (30-40GHs of today rigs); pool still can work, but it's quite easy for who have 2-3 60GH ASIC mine in solo and get 1-2 block a month in the first month.

Maybe Im wrong, but mining on a pool or solo would get almost the same result, even in a few month time span...   your tought ?

I don't understand why so many people are confused about this.

Yes, statistically it should work out exactly the same.  Solo just tends to be a lot more "chunky" in its payouts.

(minus any variance based on server reliability, server operator fees, etc.)

If your hash rate is very high mining in solo is more convenient: you don't have the fees to pay to pool and you get also all the transaction fee. On the long run even with the variance in payouts you can easily earn a 2-5% more with solo mining.

Bitrated user: ercolinux.
pieppiep
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 551



View Profile
October 26, 2012, 06:44:53 AM
#66

Why would the pools disappear?
If someone mines with a single gpu now and has 1/10000th of the total networkspeed and gets a asic and still has a 1/10000th of the total networkspeed, it's still a good idea to use a pool.

All the major pools now won't support an ASIC. There has to be major changes for them to support ASIC. Especially at the beginning when ASIC are returning easy work extremely fast. Even with stratum there's going to be major bandwidth problems in the beginning.
Why is the 1kB/s (regardless of miningspeed) a major bandwidth problem?

Soros Shorts
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1585



View Profile
October 26, 2012, 09:59:30 AM
#67

Why would the pools disappear?
If someone mines with a single gpu now and has 1/10000th of the total networkspeed and gets a asic and still has a 1/10000th of the total networkspeed, it's still a good idea to use a pool.

All the major pools now won't support an ASIC. There has to be major changes for them to support ASIC. Especially at the beginning when ASIC are returning easy work extremely fast. Even with stratum there's going to be major bandwidth problems in the beginning.
Why is the 1kB/s (regardless of miningspeed) a major bandwidth problem?
If there were a period where a block was solved once every 5 seconds (just making this number up) until difficulty caught up I am guessing that there could be a temporary network congestion problem. Mining might only be 1kB/s but block propagation could take up a large chunk of network bandwidth. You could see p2pool-like problems manfesting on the main Bitcoin network, the major one being collisions of solved blocks that will result in many orphans. This wouldn't be a pool issue, though.
pieppiep
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 551



View Profile
October 26, 2012, 10:17:00 AM
#68

Why would the pools disappear?
If someone mines with a single gpu now and has 1/10000th of the total networkspeed and gets a asic and still has a 1/10000th of the total networkspeed, it's still a good idea to use a pool.

All the major pools now won't support an ASIC. There has to be major changes for them to support ASIC. Especially at the beginning when ASIC are returning easy work extremely fast. Even with stratum there's going to be major bandwidth problems in the beginning.
Why is the 1kB/s (regardless of miningspeed) a major bandwidth problem?
If there were a period where a block was solved once every 5 seconds (just making this number up) until difficulty caught up I am guessing that there could be a temporary network congestion problem. Mining might only be 1kB/s but block propagation could take up a large chunk of network bandwidth. You could see p2pool-like problems manfesting on the main Bitcoin network, the major one being collisions of solved blocks that will result in many orphans. This wouldn't be a pool issue, though.
5 seconds a block won't be a big problem because it won't generate extra transactions. Each block will be the 80 bytes header with a little data for the block reward, at most 1/4kB.
There probably won't even be much collisions because I really doubt an increase of 100k of speed will come at once from multiple sources.

5 seconds a block takes at most 2016 * 5 = 10080 seconds = 2 hours 48 minutes to change the difficulty to 20 seconds a block. (maximum increase is times 4)

BitSyncom
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336

Avalon ASIC Team


View Profile
October 26, 2012, 12:39:33 PM
#69

Most pool can queried for 120 getworks at a time, noticeably the ecoinpool variant. With other new systems like Stratum with aims to solve any other potential problem and future proofing the network.

In addition, like I have previously stated, Avalon will be releasing our image.iso for the controller sometime in December this will include documentation on how our ASIC will communicate with mining softwares and pools. we will also be providing patches to opensource miners like CGminer.

With that said, we are aware of this bandwidth concern and do not deem it to be a problem at the moment.

Aseras
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658


View Profile
October 26, 2012, 06:10:39 PM
#70

That would not be true.  EMC, BTCguild, Slush and Eligius are all ready and waiting for ASIC.


No one knows if they are ready because no one has a working asic to test.

The BFL singles had issues with pools and clients when they first came out. They still don't work well with p2pool because of how the bitstream works.

Asic are basically just hardcoded fpga, but faster. No one really knows yet exactly what hiccups there will be, but I think for the first few weeks after they hit it's going to be very interesting and very bumpy.

The majority of the asics save the japalepeno? are going to be multithreaded or appear as a multi gpu/asic device, so each device is going to request several works at once and return several at once, hundreds or thousands of times faster than now. Even with stratum and nrolltime allowing the miner to save requesting and generate it's own work, they have to go back up to a pool and get confirmed. It's going to be interesting
Inaba
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260



View Profile WWW
October 26, 2012, 06:46:51 PM
#71

Heh.. if you say so!

If you're searching these lines for a point, you've probably missed it.  There was never anything there in the first place.
Aseras
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658


View Profile
October 26, 2012, 09:02:12 PM
#72

Heh.. if you say so!


well hurry up and build a working asic so we will all know already. Stop farking off in the forums and start soldering or cursing at someone in mandarin Tongue
squeept
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 154


View Profile
October 26, 2012, 09:09:35 PM
#73

Heh.. if you say so!


well hurry up and build a working asic so we will all know already. Stop farking off in the forums and start soldering or cursing at someone in mandarin Tongue

I'm sending Inaba a care package of the mandarin Rosetta Stone and a used Weller hobby iron. Do work, son.

I'm just going to keep repeating "it's an Altera HardCopy" because I haven't the slightest clue what I'm talking about.
gmaxwell
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2324



View Profile
October 26, 2012, 10:43:08 PM
#74

No one knows if they are ready because no one has a working asic to test.
The BFL singles had issues with pools and clients when they first came out. They still don't work well with p2pool because of how the bitstream works.
It's quite easy (two lines changed or so) to modify pool software to accept 'difficulty 0' shares, and a regular cpu miner to consider every attempt a winner.. by doing this you can produce rates enormously faster than any asic.  If you're board its only a few more lines changed to fork testnet or bitcoin and mine a bunch of fake blocks to test the whole system. 

There may be some burps in practice but you can certainly get some reasonable testing in.

Bitcoin will not be compromised
eldentyrell
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


felonious vagrancy, personified


View Profile WWW
October 27, 2012, 09:42:25 PM
#75

They've admitted to using a larger die size than their competitors.

Link?  I haven't seen anything from them regarding die size, but I haven't been following too closely.

I'm also worried by their refusal to say how many chips are in the 60GH/s device.  I count at least five people asking in this thread and still no answer.

The printing press heralded the end of the Dark Ages and made the Enlightenment possible, but it took another three centuries before any country managed to put freedom of the press beyond the reach of legislators.  So it may take a while before cryptocurrencies are free of the AML-NSA-KYC surveillance plague.
crazyates
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 952



View Profile
October 28, 2012, 01:53:54 AM
#76

They've admitted to using a larger die size than their competitors.
Link?  I haven't seen anything from them regarding die size, but I haven't been following too closely.

I'm also worried by their refusal to say how many chips are in the 60GH/s device.  I count at least five people asking in this thread and still no answer.

Dude, he listed that information in the very first post of this thread: 110nm.

Code:
Chip Specification
Technology Summary:
    TSMC 0.11- micron G process

He has previously posted that they would be using either 110nm or 130nm, but confirmed the details here.


Tips? 1crazy8pMqgwJ7tX7ZPZmyPwFbc6xZKM9
Previous Trade History - Sale Thread
MrTeal
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1274


View Profile
October 28, 2012, 01:56:38 AM
#77

They've admitted to using a larger die size than their competitors.
Link?  I haven't seen anything from them regarding die size, but I haven't been following too closely.

I'm also worried by their refusal to say how many chips are in the 60GH/s device.  I count at least five people asking in this thread and still no answer.

Dude, he listed that information in the very first post of this thread: 110nm.

Code:
Chip Specification
Technology Summary:
    TSMC 0.11- micron G process

He has previously posted that they would be using either 110nm or 130nm, but confirmed the details here.
Die size isn't the process node, it's how physically large the die is. IE, 5mmx5mm or 25mm^2, something like that.
crazyates
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 952



View Profile
October 28, 2012, 02:20:43 AM
#78

They've admitted to using a larger die size than their competitors.
Link?  I haven't seen anything from them regarding die size, but I haven't been following too closely.

I'm also worried by their refusal to say how many chips are in the 60GH/s device.  I count at least five people asking in this thread and still no answer.

Dude, he listed that information in the very first post of this thread: 110nm.

Code:
Chip Specification
Technology Summary:
    TSMC 0.11- micron G process

He has previously posted that they would be using either 110nm or 130nm, but confirmed the details here.
Die size isn't the process node, it's how physically large the die is. IE, 5mmx5mm or 25mm^2, something like that.
My bad. /facepalm

Tips? 1crazy8pMqgwJ7tX7ZPZmyPwFbc6xZKM9
Previous Trade History - Sale Thread
crazyates
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 952



View Profile
October 28, 2012, 02:21:38 AM
#79

Code:
Chip Specification
Technology Summary:

Packaged Chip Size: 7 mm x 7 mm
?

Tips? 1crazy8pMqgwJ7tX7ZPZmyPwFbc6xZKM9
Previous Trade History - Sale Thread
Cablez
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400


I owe my soul to the Bitcoin code...


View Profile
October 28, 2012, 02:23:12 AM
#80

Code:
Chip Specification
Technology Summary:

Packaged Chip Size: 7 mm x 7 mm
?

That would be the fully packaged chip size. The die size would be a fraction of that in ex. 5x5mm or so.

Tired of substandard power distribution in your ASIC setup???   Chris' Custom Cablez will get you sorted out right!  No job too hard so PM me for a quote
Check my products or ask a question here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=74397.0
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!