Swedish ASIC miner company kncminer.com

[jelin1984]

Why no photos
Of the new 20nm chip?

Something is wrong here

[1529846352]

1529846352

[1529846352]

1529846352

[1529846352]

1529846352

[1529846352]

1529846352

[1529846352]

1529846352

[Zelek Uther]

Disappointed. It was my understanding that Plan B cloud hashing was to compensate for any delay in delivery.

When they announced the 2-for-1 second Neppy in August they gave the impression that it was in addition to, not a replacement of, Plan B. Seemed to me that they made the 2-for-1 offer to compete with Spond who were selling their August SP30 Group Buy at that time... to reduce the number of Neppy refunds.

I was pretty happy with Plan B, until now (apart from the fact that they promised it in "early June" for CA batch, and it won't start until 23 June). Now, why would I trade a few weeks (i.e. hopefully they ship soon) of cloud hashing for an entire Neptune im August?

[HardwareReviewer]

Disappointed. It was my understanding that Plan B cloud hashing was to compensate for any delay in delivery.

When they announced the 2-for-1 second Neppy in August they gave the impression that it was in addition to, not a replacement of, Plan B. Seemed to me that they made the 2-for-1 offer to compete with Spond who were selling their August SP30 Group Buy at that time... to reduce the number of Neppy refunds.

I was pretty happy with Plan B, until now (apart from the fact that they promised it in "early June" for CA batch, and it won't start until 23 June). Now, why would I trade a few weeks (i.e. hopefully they ship soon) of cloud hashing for an entire Neptune im August?

Jeezes dudes, they are even worse than I thought.

[Pt0x]

You got a tracking number?  What number was your order?

Yes: 111xx

Nice.  My first order is 118xx and my other orders are 4 hours later.  Hopefully they all ship out this week.

Mine is 115xx, I'll post here when it ships.

[greghawk]

Disappointed. It was my understanding that Plan B cloud hashing was to compensate for any delay in delivery.

When they announced the 2-for-1 second Neppy in August they gave the impression that it was in addition to, not a replacement of, Plan B. Seemed to me that they made the 2-for-1 offer to compete with Spond who were selling their August SP30 Group Buy at that time... to reduce the number of Neppy refunds.

I was pretty happy with Plan B, until now (apart from the fact that they promised it in "early June" for CA batch, and it won't start until 23 June). Now, why would I trade a few weeks (i.e. hopefully they ship soon) of cloud hashing for an entire Neptune im August?

Jeezes dudes, they are even worse than I thought.

Exactly!
I really don´t understand why they are doing this to us.
Don´t they want to have happy customers?

and tomorrow is holiday:
http://www.timeanddate.com/holidays/sweden/

so, if I´m too late now to change back because they started shipping and tomorrow is holiday, then on monday my status Paid will be changed into shipping and so I won´t get a single day hashing and no second neppy.
Checkmated! Fuck!

[s1gs3gv]

Best regards
Anna Jagdhar

Indeed.

I've learned from experience that when people start the 'Best Regards' act, its time to start watching your back.
FWIW, The expression is common over at the  alpha-t customer forums too ...

[Pt0x]

and tomorrow is holiday:
http://www.timeanddate.com/holidays/sweden/

so, if I´m too late now to change back because they started shipping and tomorrow is holiday, then on monday my status Paid will be changed into shipping and so I won´t get a single day hashing and no second neppy.
Checkmated! Fuck!

Now I'll  have to wait until Monday  

[Phoenix1969]

Disappointed. It was my understanding that Plan B cloud hashing was to compensate for any delay in delivery.

When they announced the 2-for-1 second Neppy in August they gave the impression that it was in addition to, not a replacement of, Plan B. Seemed to me that they made the 2-for-1 offer to compete with Spond who were selling their August SP30 Group Buy at that time... to reduce the number of Neppy refunds.

I was pretty happy with Plan B, until now (apart from the fact that they promised it in "early June" for CA batch, and it won't start until 23 June). Now, why would I trade a few weeks (i.e. hopefully they ship soon) of cloud hashing for an entire Neptune im August?

Jeezes dudes, they are even worse than I thought.

Exactly!
I really don´t understand why they are doing this to us.
Don´t they want to have happy customers?

and tomorrow is holiday:
http://www.timeanddate.com/holidays/sweden/

so, if I´m too late now to change back because they started shipping and tomorrow is holiday, then on monday my status Paid will be changed into shipping and so I won´t get a single day hashing and no second neppy.
Checkmated! Fuck!

Send the email to opt out right away.

[rograz]

Claiming they beat Intel to 20nm?I guess they are right apart from Intel never planing or having any intentions of manufacturing anything on 20nm since they never do half node shrinks, talk about grasping for straws to fuel their delusions!

The reason they beat other TSMC customers to 20nm is that no one wants it, they are almost all of them waiting for 16nm since 20nm will have such a short lifespan.

[samsonn25]

And an asic chip is much different than a cpu.

[Puppet]

Intel have been doing 20nm since 2012.. well, in a way:
http://ark.intel.com/products/71527/Intel-SSD-335-Series-240GB-2_5in-SATA-6Gbs-20nm-MLC

[rograz]

Intel have been doing 20nm since 2012.. well, in a way:
http://ark.intel.com/products/71527/Intel-SSD-335-Series-240GB-2_5in-SATA-6Gbs-20nm-MLC

nand doesn't really count

edit: as i've understood it the nand manufacturing uses completely separate fabs

[Biodom]

There is some very compelling evidence that supports this hypothesis. But the most glaringly obvious is the single PCI power connector. They're not so stupid to design it to handle 420w. But they were compelled to squeeze as much hash out of each chip that they threw away common sense.

With regards to the single PCIe connector and 425W... Understandably, this is WAY over the 150W limit and they WILL be liable if there will be fires because KnC deliberately made this a single connector. Perhaps, they are scrambling now to get a second one in....hence the hash while you wait.

From a practical point of view (try it on your own risk-this is NOT a rec)-many people had run antminer S1 dual blade on Corsair CX500M. This PSU has a single PCIe cable with a split (each half of the split feeds 180-200W blade). When I used it on one of my overclocked S1 (rated at ~400W), the cables were quite worm, but it still run OK, however the machine would not tolerate overclocking further (to 422-435W), so this was probably the culprit. The conclusion: there might be difficulties in running a single PCIe connector at 425W, but up to 400W worked (at least for a short time-I since switched to a different PSU)

[tarmi]

are those PSU's for the Neptunes?

No they're the five ASIC boxes.  Those things plus a controller and a pile of PSUs are the "neptune".

I really don't get this company, how could they change the design of the final products at the last moment, without even telling the customers, they showed a single box when they did the pre-sale and now you have 5 boxes, why didn't they just stick with the 28nm and make a bunch of single miners, they just could have hired bitmain to do the final product, looks like the upcoming Antminer S1 will be similar looking.

They could have used the same 28nm chip and undervolt them, and it would have been out 5 months ago, when difficulty was 1.5 Billion

yes they could have, but they needed a data center crowdfunded.

[Tigggger]

There is some very compelling evidence that supports this hypothesis. But the most glaringly obvious is the single PCI power connector. They're not so stupid to design it to handle 420w. But they were compelled to squeeze as much hash out of each chip that they threw away common sense.

With regards to the single PCIe connector and 425W... Understandably, this is WAY over the 150W limit and they WILL be liable if there will be fires because KnC deliberately made this a single connector. Perhaps, they are scrambling now to get a second one in....hence the hash while you wait.

From a practical point of view (try it on your own risk-this is NOT a rec)-many people had run antminer S1 dual blade on Corsair CX500M. This PSU has a single PCIe cable with a split (each half of the split feeds 180-200W blade). When I used it on one of my overclocked S1 (rated at ~400W), the cables were quite worm, but it still run OK, however the machine would not tolerate overclocking further (to 422-435W), so this was probably the culprit. The conclusion: there might be difficulties in running a single PCIe connector at 425W, but up to 400W worked (at least for a short time-I since switched to a different PSU)

I spoke with one of their engineers on IRC about this.

The information he provided was that the 150w listed in the specs for PCI-E isn't a limit it's the minimum requirement for it to be PCI-E compatible, and that that good quality PSU's can handle it fine.

I'm going the Dual EVGA 1300W route as I have them handy, early order so will report back how it goes.

[midyatspor]

There is some very compelling evidence that supports this hypothesis. But the most glaringly obvious is the single PCI power connector. They're not so stupid to design it to handle 420w. But they were compelled to squeeze as much hash out of each chip that they threw away common sense.

With regards to the single PCIe connector and 425W... Understandably, this is WAY over the 150W limit and they WILL be liable if there will be fires because KnC deliberately made this a single connector. Perhaps, they are scrambling now to get a second one in....hence the hash while you wait.

From a practical point of view (try it on your own risk-this is NOT a rec)-many people had run antminer S1 dual blade on Corsair CX500M. This PSU has a single PCIe cable with a split (each half of the split feeds 180-200W blade). When I used it on one of my overclocked S1 (rated at ~400W), the cables were quite worm, but it still run OK, however the machine would not tolerate overclocking further (to 422-435W), so this was probably the culprit. The conclusion: there might be difficulties in running a single PCIe connector at 425W, but up to 400W worked (at least for a short time-I since switched to a different PSU)

I spoke with one of their engineers on IRC about this.

The information he provided was that the 150w listed in the specs for PCI-E isn't a limit it's the minimum requirement for it to be PCI-E compatible, and that that good quality PSU's can handle it fine.

I'm going the Dual EVGA 1300W route as I have them handy, early order so will report back how it goes.

 the problem is not going to be the PSU but the cable/connector from the PSU to the Unit.

[samsonn25]

There is some truth to this.

A amd r9  295x2  pulls 690 watts and uses a 6+8 pin dual power connector. Another version of the 290 dual card pulls 740 watts.

[faetos]

There is some very compelling evidence that supports this hypothesis. But the most glaringly obvious is the single PCI power connector. They're not so stupid to design it to handle 420w. But they were compelled to squeeze as much hash out of each chip that they threw away common sense.

With regards to the single PCIe connector and 425W... Understandably, this is WAY over the 150W limit and they WILL be liable if there will be fires because KnC deliberately made this a single connector. Perhaps, they are scrambling now to get a second one in....hence the hash while you wait.

From a practical point of view (try it on your own risk-this is NOT a rec)-many people had run antminer S1 dual blade on Corsair CX500M. This PSU has a single PCIe cable with a split (each half of the split feeds 180-200W blade). When I used it on one of my overclocked S1 (rated at ~400W), the cables were quite worm, but it still run OK, however the machine would not tolerate overclocking further (to 422-435W), so this was probably the culprit. The conclusion: there might be difficulties in running a single PCIe connector at 425W, but up to 400W worked (at least for a short time-I since switched to a different PSU)

I spoke with one of their engineers on IRC about this.

The information he provided was that the 150w listed in the specs for PCI-E isn't a limit it's the minimum requirement for it to be PCI-E compatible, and that that good quality PSU's can handle it fine.

I'm going the Dual EVGA 1300W route as I have them handy, early order so will report back how it goes.

Let me know if you want some Texas brisket to cook on those bad boys! I hope it works out for out and there aren't any problems.

[sikke]

so you wish to pull 400watts from random psu 3+3 pci-e
12V 11A from each pair of pins. Ya rly.

[rograz]

There is some very compelling evidence that supports this hypothesis. But the most glaringly obvious is the single PCI power connector. They're not so stupid to design it to handle 420w. But they were compelled to squeeze as much hash out of each chip that they threw away common sense.

With regards to the single PCIe connector and 425W... Understandably, this is WAY over the 150W limit and they WILL be liable if there will be fires because KnC deliberately made this a single connector. Perhaps, they are scrambling now to get a second one in....hence the hash while you wait.

From a practical point of view (try it on your own risk-this is NOT a rec)-many people had run antminer S1 dual blade on Corsair CX500M. This PSU has a single PCIe cable with a split (each half of the split feeds 180-200W blade). When I used it on one of my overclocked S1 (rated at ~400W), the cables were quite worm, but it still run OK, however the machine would not tolerate overclocking further (to 422-435W), so this was probably the culprit. The conclusion: there might be difficulties in running a single PCIe connector at 425W, but up to 400W worked (at least for a short time-I since switched to a different PSU)

I spoke with one of their engineers on IRC about this.

The information he provided was that the 150w listed in the specs for PCI-E isn't a limit it's the minimum requirement for it to be PCI-E compatible, and that that good quality PSU's can handle it fine.

I'm going the Dual EVGA 1300W route as I have them handy, early order so will report back how it goes.

Molex (company making the pci-e power connectors) dictates the max spec per pin to 8A according to an earlier posted PDF, so 400W is outside even the most optimistic estimates! Not saying it wont work, but why are they even gambling with this when it would cost them a few bucks tops to use 2 of them.