Which ASIC device will ship first? [Poll and Discussion]

[bitboyben]

OV ANAL ?

[1715017820]

1715017820

[psilan]

Much better lol.

[abeaulieu]

Everyone, please buy Avalons.

kthxbye

Coming from a guy with a bASIC ad in this sig

He might have meant buy an ABACUS

Good point. As far we we know Abacus's are quicker hashing devices than ASICs right now

Not really sure why this thread got moved to speculation. It's kind of BS. It's directly related to custom mining hardware (ASICS).

[bitboyben]

With the forums chalked full of BFL chatter i sometimes forget that there are other potential ASIC vendors.
Maybe we need a "review/preview" online review magazine type thing set up with all the info. I suppose the wiki page is good enough but I'm looking for more drama.

[hotdealdave]

NO LA VA = really bad Spanish for "she doesn't go"

[LiteBit]

Today I say BFL. I bet they're ready but want to do a big first shipment.

Tomorrow it might be bASIC...

[dust]

There is a good chance none will ship at all.

Do you want to bet on that?

On topic: I think bASIC will ship first and BFL will ship more efficient devices.

Why am I always asked out to bet when I am stating the mere possibility of something?

I mean BFL is run by a convicted felon, and the rest of them announced them afterwards, with almost identical specs. What is so hard to grasp that given the circumstances, even if this weren't bitcoin there would be the strong possibility of fraud. Could it all turn out to be genuine? Or even based on false accusations? Who the frack knows.
But until something else has been established you guys have to at least acknowledge that doing business with BFL and their imitators is significantly more risky than lets say buying socks.

You said there is a "good chance" none of the ASIC manufacturers will ship.  What is a good chance, >10%, >25%, >50%? I agree there is a possibility that one or more companies are scamming or will fail to deliver, but it is highly unlikely that all of them will fail.  The advertised specs are very plausible for specialized hardware.

[ElectricMucus]

These things aren't quantifiable since there it no single way to judge how the many different factors involved should be taken into account.

But lets say we would come up with statistics about business run by convicted felons and how many of them had a relapse and what not... Would you accept that figure? I think not. You'd still try to relativize it, while this is not merely an exercise in numbers but common sense.  

But I can tell you this: If BFL were a scam it is likely (for you that is over 50%) that the rest of the offers are one too.

[Merrick]

Today I say BFL. I bet they're ready but want to do a big first shipment.

Tomorrow it might be bASIC...

They have recently stated on their forums that they are very much not ready, sadly. However, I don't think anyone else is much closer yet, really.

[creativex]

Today I say BFL. I bet they're ready but want to do a big first shipment.

Tomorrow it might be bASIC...

They have recently stated on their forums that they are very much not ready, sadly. However, I don't think anyone else is much closer yet, really.

True, both BFL and BTCFPGA are currently expected to deliver late November/early December, yet BFL has a history of pushing back delivery dates and BTCFPGA does not. At this point I think it's safe to conclude that BTCFPGA is in the lead to ship first. One more delay announcement from BFL will make it clear that their customers have backed the wrong horse.

[Merrick]

Today I say BFL. I bet they're ready but want to do a big first shipment.

Tomorrow it might be bASIC...

They have recently stated on their forums that they are very much not ready, sadly. However, I don't think anyone else is much closer yet, really.

True, both BFL and BTCFPGA are currently expected to deliver late November/early December, yet BFL has a history of pushing back delivery dates and BTCFPGA does not. At this point I think it's safe to conclude that BTCFPGA is in the lead to ship first. One more delay announcement from BFL will make it clear that their customers have backed the wrong horse.

BFL = waiting for parts to assemble.
BTCFPGA = designing the board.

*shrugs* doesn't matter who is where though, it matters who finishes first. Until someone does, we're not really going to know who is "ahead".

[psilan]

I understood they were both just waiting for parts.
Bfl wait for a fab house, basic waiting on parts to assemble themselves.

[creativex]

I understood they were both just waiting for parts.
Bfl wait for a fab house, basic waiting on parts to assemble themselves.

My understanding as well. At any rate neither has ASICs on hand, so again, they appear neck & neck but one of the two keeps pushing back delivery dates whilst the other does not.

*shrugs* doesn't matter who is where though, it matters who finishes first. Until someone does, we're not really going to know who is "ahead".

It matters to me. It's an issue of credibility. BTCFPGA's chip is being designed on a 90nm process, this means there'll be plenty of room to shrink the die and provide further efficiency as difficulty rises and electrical costs become a larger concern for these units. When that time comes I'll again have to choose a company to deal with, and I will not forget who shipped when they said they would and who played shell games that could have cost me a great deal of money.

[Merrick]

*shrugs* doesn't matter who is where though, it matters who finishes first. Until someone does, we're not really going to know who is "ahead".

It matters to me. It's an issue of credibility. BTCFPGA's chip is being designed on a 90nm process, this means there'll be plenty of room to shrink the die and provide further efficiency as difficulty rises and electrical costs become a larger concern for these units. When that time comes I'll again have to choose a company to deal with, and I will not forget who shipped when they said they would and who played shell games that could have cost me a great deal of money.

I'd still stick with BFL, based on what I've seen. You wouldn't and you have given your reasons why. Makes sense to me. Best of luck.

[bitboyben]

I understood they were both just waiting for parts.
Bfl wait for a fab house, basic waiting on parts to assemble themselves.

My understanding as well. At any rate neither has ASICs on hand, so again, they appear neck & neck but one of the two keeps pushing back delivery dates whilst the other does not.

*shrugs* doesn't matter who is where though, it matters who finishes first. Until someone does, we're not really going to know who is "ahead".

It matters to me. It's an issue of credibility. BTCFPGA's chip is being designed on a 90nm process, this means there'll be plenty of room to shrink the die and provide further efficiency as difficulty rises and electrical costs become a larger concern for these units. When that time comes I'll again have to choose a company to deal with, and I will not forget who shipped when they said they would and who played shell games that could have cost me a great deal of money.

So do they know what the power usage will be for the BTCFPGA?

[creativex]

I'd still stick with BFL, based on what I've seen. You wouldn't and you have given your reasons why. Makes sense to me. Best of luck.

Why? What has BFL done to earn your loyalty? Thanks, best of luck to you as well.

So do they know what the power usage will be for the BTCFPGA?

No concrete power consumption spec has been released for any working ASIC products to my knowledge. Tom has repeatedly chosen to withhold estimates in favor of actual measurements from a prototype, but has said it will run off a molex connector which has a maximum power draw around 110w.

[Unacceptable]

I'd still stick with BFL, based on what I've seen. You wouldn't and you have given your reasons why. Makes sense to me. Best of luck.

Why? What has BFL done to earn your loyalty? Thanks, best of luck to you as well.

So do they know what the power usage will be for the BTCFPGA?

No concrete power consumption spec has been released for any working ASIC products to my knowledge. Tom has repeatedly chosen to withhold estimates in favor of actual measurements from a prototype, but has said it will run off a molex connector which has a maximum power draw around 110w.

For me,it comes down to ROI figures.NO OTHER FPGA has had a better ROI period than BFL.So I'm hoping its the same for thier ASIC's.

BFL's "projected" power consumption & the "trade in" on 1st gen ASIC's to second gen,made up my mind 

They may not be the first to ship,but I'm sure I'll still get my ROI in a reasonable time frame.

[abracadabra]

For me,it comes down to ROI figures.NO OTHER FPGA has had a better ROI period than BFL.So I'm hoping its the same for thier ASIC's.

BFL's "projected" power consumption & the "trade in" on 1st gen ASIC's to second gen,made up my mind 

They may not be the first to ship,but I'm sure I'll still get my ROI in a reasonable time frame.

BFL's previous history with schedules made up my mind

[SgtSpike]

Honestly, I think the other guys are going to run into snags as well.  BFL's dates have been pushed out for a variety of little reasons... what makes everyone think that the other vendors won't run into similar little issues here and there as well?

Do the bASIC and Avalon creators have experience in managing inventories?  Do they know how to track lead times, vendor inventory levels, and make sure that each of the hundreds of necessary components will arrive on time?  Do any of them have a working prototype?

I would be surprised if BFL wasn't first to ship.  But certainly, time will tell.  And certainly, I have been wrong before.

[creativex]

Trouble is BFL has been expected to ship first all along. If they aren't first then someone's ROI will be measured in days or weeks and BFL's customers' ROI will be lengthened considerably.