[Avalon ASIC] Batch #2 pre-Sale Thread

[creativex]

You mean 2000, right? Not 3000...

Nope $3000 is right for 6 modules. I'd take that, particularly as it's not vaporware and has the potential to be upgraded further if/when faster and/or more energy efficient modules become available. Speed is probably closer to 135Gh/s.

[1714839369]

1714839369

[1714839369]

1714839369

[Vicus]

Does the Terms of Sale page keep looping for everyone else too? I've tried 3 browsers and the "I understand..." button just goes takes me back to the top of the page  

No! I just ordered 20 units. page says there 10 units more is availible for that moment! Hurry!

[creativex]

WTH are you saying?

You just sent $30,000 to order from a batch that was postponed yesterday TBA within the week?

[BitcoinRate.com]

Does the Terms of Sale page keep looping for everyone else too? I've tried 3 browsers and the "I understand..." button just goes takes me back to the top of the page  

Yeah that's on purpose, they're not open for orders yet.

[Fuzzy]

Does the Terms of Sale page keep looping for everyone else too? I've tried 3 browsers and the "I understand..." button just goes takes me back to the top of the page  

No! I just ordered 20 units. page says there 10 units more is availible for that moment! Hurry!

NVM, got my order for 50 through, finally.  

Just waiting for 6 confirmations.





/troll

[cedivad]

The Trade-In Orders are not part of the 600 unit limitation existing in Batch #2.

[creativex]

Why is that a problem?

[darkip]

Nice. For $3,000 (not including shipping) you can have a 900 watt 'desktop' sized box running at 132GH/s. I suppose that's decent if you're thinking of short term gains.

This is what I'm considering. But I do have some concerns:
1. Will the power supply be overloaded with 6 hashing units? (Can it supply ~ 900w?)
2. I assume things are going to get mighty toasty in the box with 6 hashing units in there. Considering the review of the first unit and its problems with overheating, is this going to be even more unstable?

[cedivad]

Why is that a problem?

More units, less money per unit.

[cedivad]

Nice. For $3,000 (not including shipping) you can have a 900 watt 'desktop' sized box running at 132GH/s. I suppose that's decent if you're thinking of short term gains.

This is what I'm considering. But I do have some concerns:
1. Will the power supply be overloaded with 6 hashing units? (Can it supply ~ 900w?)
2. I assume things are going to get mighty toasty in the box with 6 hashing units in there. Considering the review of the first unit and its problems with overheating, is this going to be even more unstable?

let me add an IMAP header to your message.

x-troll-detected: yes

[MrTeal]

It might depend on shipping, but why would you buy one unit and three upgrades for $3000 when you could just buy two units for $3000? If you really want to space, gut one unit, mount the three boards in the other, and sell the PSU and other stuff.

[darkip]

let me add an IMAP header to your message.

x-troll-detected: yes

Pretty sure you mean a MIME / RFC 2047 header.

Also: Not trolling, I think they're perfectly reasonable questions?

It might depend on shipping, but why would you buy one unit and three upgrades for $3000 when you could just buy two units for $3000? If you really want to space, gut one unit, mount the three boards in the other, and sell the PSU and other stuff.

A pretty good point, although I guess you'd have to pay more shipping?

[creativex]

Why is that a problem?

More units, less money per unit.

Not too worried about a few more units from Avalon in the face of AsicMiner's 12Th and possibly even BFL(someday) if they manage to remove their thumbs from their nether regions. As I recall many hashrate doomsday prognosticators had us at many times current hashrate by now.

[cedivad]

Pretty sure you mean a MIME / RFC 2047 header.

Oh sh*t. I confuse the 2 every time, sorry.

[rocks]

OK, can someone explain this to me?

Why Batch Orders?
Utilizing a short time frame, batch based, and built-to-order sales method allows to manage finances properly and reduce risk for all parties.

For example, Avalon will not be responsible if a Bitcoin bug is introduced rendering it useless between the period of time which a batch of Avlaon units are build.

One way to read this is Avalon is saying if they make some technical update/changes to a batch, and that update causes problems and none of the units work correctly, that Avalon stays that is the risk of the customers of that batch and the customers will take the hit.

So if batch #1 and #2 work, and they make a modification that introduces a bug into batch #3, the batch #3 customer of SOL.

If Avalon has a working ASIC part there are ZERO reasons to make mask or wafer level changes for a while and they should be running the exact same ASIC design for several batches at the very least.

So why would Avalon add this disclaimer? Or am I just reading this wrong.

[creativex]

Bitcoin bug = changes to hashing algorithm or the like. Things beyond their control is how I interpreted.

[MrTeal]

OK, can someone explain this to me?

Why Batch Orders?
Utilizing a short time frame, batch based, and built-to-order sales method allows to manage finances properly and reduce risk for all parties.

For example, Avalon will not be responsible if a Bitcoin bug is introduced rendering it useless between the period of time which a batch of Avlaon units are build.

One way to read this is Avalon is saying if they make some technical update/changes to a batch, and that update causes problems and none of the units work correctly, that Avalon stays that is the risk of the customers of that batch and the customers will take the hit.

So if batch #1 and #2 work, and they make a modification that introduces a bug into batch #3, the batch #3 customer of SOL.

If Avalon has a working ASIC part there are ZERO reasons to make mask or wafer level changes for a while and they should be running the exact same ASIC design for several batches at the very least.

So why would Avalon add this disclaimer? Or am I just reading this wrong.

They aren't saying that a change on their end will not be granted a refund. They're saying that if a bug is introduced into Bitcoin or something else happens like a protocol change before you get your unit, you can't cancel and get a refund.

[fcmatt]

I am curious if you order a batch #2 unit.. and then order 3 extra modules.. how will they ship?
Do you get your unit sometime in the future and then the other 3 modules trickle in later on in
a different shipment?

Maybe you would be better off just ordering 2 units and having a shot at getting everything
at once or very close together. You could just combine the two units into 1 if you desire (i guess).

Price wise it does not make sense to buy extra units. Just buy more complete kit units. Then cooling
is less of an issue, more redundancy, etc...

[darkip]

As previously noted, it makes NO sense to buy individual hashing modules at the moment. You would have thought they'd be marketed as cheaper than just a 1/3 of the price of a full unit.

[rocks]

Bitcoin bug = changes to hashing algorithm or the like. Things beyond their control is how I interpreted.

OK, that can make sense and is reasonable for an ASIC company to take. If BitCoin changes the algorithm, the boxes are done.

But the statement refers to the time between when a customer orders and the batch is fulfilled, which is just 2-3 months. Considering the fact that there are zero chances of the algorithm changing this year, why bother to make the statement at all? The statement also refers to a bitcoin bug, the core developers still make updates to fix security issues, but my understanding is none of these changes have effected or will effect the core hashing algorithm. This is why the same FPGA bitstreams have worked for so long...

I just want to be sure the statement refers to changes outside of Avalon's control (completely reasonable), and not to development bugs on their end (worrying statement).