Bitcoin Forum
November 23, 2017, 07:58:41 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 [178] 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 ... 2138 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Swedish ASIC miner company kncminer.com  (Read 3011927 times)
canth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1442



View Profile
July 13, 2013, 07:37:18 PM
 #3541

who cares about that...not me, it's about end user performance & efficiency, period.
By that I mean: He with the most efficient machine will be the last man standing.

The why you should care is because low chip yields = fewer chips = slower production = delays in getting to customers.

You can have the most efficient design in the world, but if you cannot reliably produce it or make enough to sell in any significant quantity, it's worthless.

Die size, defects, power efficiency - who cares about *blah, blah* 40 years of microprocessor production history? I like the magic money production factory description better too. Wink

Keep up on the education, bkpduke - some will care.

1511423921
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511423921

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511423921
Reply with quote  #2

1511423921
Report to moderator
Join ICO Now A blockchain platform for effective freelancing
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1511423921
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511423921

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511423921
Reply with quote  #2

1511423921
Report to moderator
Phoenix1969
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938


LIR DEV


View Profile
July 13, 2013, 07:37:43 PM
 #3542

Please do, We're tired of hearing you whine about nonsense. no other company can compare. I like the coolaid, it's a winning recipe, thank you.


                     ▀▀█████████▀████████████████▄
                        ████▄      ▄████████████████
                     ▄██████▀  ▄  ███████████████████
                  ▄█████████▄████▄███████████████████
                ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀████████
                                               ▀▀███▀
    ▄█▀█       ▄▀  ▄▀▀█  ▄▀   █████████████████▄ ██▀         ▄▀█
   ▄█ ▄▀      ▀█▀ █▀ █▀ ▀█▀  ███████████████████ █▀ ▀▀      ▄▀▄▀
  ▄█    ▄███  █     █   █   ████████████████████  ▄█     ▄▀▀██▀ ▄███
███▄▄▄  █▄▄▄ █▄▄ ▄▄▀   █▄▄ ██████████████████▀▀   █▄▄ ▄▄ █▄▄█▄▄▄█▄▄▄
                           ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
                            ▀▀█████████████▄
                                █████████████▄
                                  █████████████▄
                                    ▀███████▀▀▀▀▀
                                      ▀████▀
                                        ▀█▀
LetItRide
                        ▄███████████▄
                       ██  ██████████▄
                     ▄█████████████  ██▄
            ▄▄▀█▄▄▄▄▄████████████████████▄
        ▄▄█▀   ███████████  █████  ████  █
    ▄██████ ▄▄███████████████████████████▀
 ▄▀▀ ██████████████████████████  ████  █
█  ▄███████████▀▀▀█████████████████████
██████████████    ████████▀▀██████  █▀
██████████████▄▄▄██████████   ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
███▀ ▀██████████████████████
██    ███████████████████████
██▄▄██████████████████████████
██████████████▀   ██████████
  █████████████   ▄██████▀▀
     ▀▀██████████████▀▀
         ▀▀██████▀▀
[BTC]▄█████████████▀ ▄█
██            ▄█▀
██          ▄██ ▄█
██ ▄█▄    ▄███  ██
██ ▀███▄ ▄███   ██
██  ▀███████    ██
██    █████     ██
██     ███      ██
██      ▀       ██
██              ██
▀████████████████▀
bkpduke
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 158



View Profile WWW
July 13, 2013, 07:46:33 PM
 #3543

Please do, We're tired of hearing you whine about nonsense. no other company can compare. I like the coolaid, it's a winning recipe, thank you.


Funny that KNC's "more advanced" miner that isn't out yet will consume "up to" 1kW to produce 400GH/s.

Bitfury, which is demo'ed at least, does the same 400GH/s with "up to" 400W.

Hrm . . . they are going to need to improve their "efficiency" by 2.5 X just to get even with the competition.
2112
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1974



View Profile
July 13, 2013, 07:54:46 PM
 #3544

The bigger the dies, the lower the yield, the more you have to charge to cover your costs on the wasted dies from a wafer.
Your analysis is 100% correct and 100% inapplicable to the SHA-256 hashing chip.

You cannot compare yield of a supremely-complex OoO CPU like x86 with a dumb repetitive SHA-256 hasher.

Nearly any defect on a CPU is a chip-killer, probably with an exception of defect in a cache line or virtualization support when then chip can still be sold as a cheaper model.

If the KnC designed their chip with redundand I/O (multiple clock pins, etc) the probabiity that the particular defect is chip killing is very close to zero. The defective chips will simply have lower performance.

All in all, you've made a competent but nearly nonsensical post.

Edit: Included a full quote to insure against modifications.


This is the best piece of info in this entire discussion.  Unfortunately Fabs almost never release their defect density and yields, unless you are a customer under a Non-Disclosure Agreement.  In almost two decades following CPU/IC production I have never willingly seen a fab release this info.  Very rarely you can get it leaked from a former employee, but then it is always tainted and uncertain if that person has an axe to grind with his former employer or not.  Alternatively, sometimes, you will get vague impressions from the executives during financial disclosures, but never the detailed info you want.

Now, the only thing apparently known about KNC is that the package size is about 3000 mm2.  Let's assume I am wrong, would not be the first time, and that they have a relatively small chip for the package size.  Say 15-20%.  That would be a die size of 450-600 mm2.  That would still be BELOW the lowest curve on the above diagram.  That's really scary for yields, but not impossible to obtain working product by history.  But any customer with a die size that large would have to expect very low yields, and they probably had to sign a waiver from the foundry about guaranteed yield due to "design constraints".

Here are some historical data points for 3rd party fab yield problems with some of the larger GPU dies, for bigger customers:
http://www.geek.com/games/ati-and-nvidia-have-troubling-40nm-yields-from-tsmc-815501/  which were "fixed" a year later:
http://www.dailytech.com/TSMC+Says+40nm+Problems+Resolved+Preparing+28nm+Fab+Production+/article17355.htm
http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1261006  which were "fixed" about 10 months later:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2411985,00.asp

Now, a TSMC/UMC is going to work with an AMD/NVidia to improve yields because they are producing 10-100s of millions of chips.  For a smaller companies, they will not go to great lengths to help them revise designs and processes to improve yields.  You get what you get.

Traditionally GPU dies have been some of the largest dies, with the high-end (low yield) parts topping out around mid-500 mm2 in size.  And the parallel structure of a GPU is what most closely resembles the SHA256 ASICs being designed and produced by companies today (Avalon, BFL, KNC, BitFury, etc.).  So from a manufacturing standpoint, we can probably infer a lot from large ASIC production issues by looking at issues that GPU manufacturers have had in the past.

The bigger the dies, the lower the yield, the more you have to charge to cover your costs on the wasted dies from a wafer.  Therefore it is always good to make your dies as small as possible.  Just 10 mm2 per die, when factored over an entire wafer, can mean tens of thousands of dollars in improve yield per wafer.

For comparison, here is a good illustration from the 45 nm days, with Intel - who historically have much higher yields than the rest of the industry (the invest more in their process and refinement).



Again, I hope KNC brings to market a good product, and in a timely fashion.  The more competition, the better we all do in terms of up-front pricing for our miners.  I just am concerned that we haven't see any substantial data about the processor (number of SHA256 cores, clock frequency, die size, heat production, etc.).

Considering the 10+ million dollars of orders they have had, you would hope they would publish this info to keep their investors/customers happy.

Please comment, critique, criticize or ridicule BIP 2112: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=54382.0
Long-term mining prognosis: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=91101.0
Phoenix1969
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938


LIR DEV


View Profile
July 13, 2013, 07:58:25 PM
 #3545

BS. You are totally lying now. Welcome to the list of trolls.(bdpuke)
Bitfury's 110gh rack is HUGE, and consumes 10 kilowatts!!!!
http://www.bitfury.org/bitfury110.html


                     ▀▀█████████▀████████████████▄
                        ████▄      ▄████████████████
                     ▄██████▀  ▄  ███████████████████
                  ▄█████████▄████▄███████████████████
                ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀████████
                                               ▀▀███▀
    ▄█▀█       ▄▀  ▄▀▀█  ▄▀   █████████████████▄ ██▀         ▄▀█
   ▄█ ▄▀      ▀█▀ █▀ █▀ ▀█▀  ███████████████████ █▀ ▀▀      ▄▀▄▀
  ▄█    ▄███  █     █   █   ████████████████████  ▄█     ▄▀▀██▀ ▄███
███▄▄▄  █▄▄▄ █▄▄ ▄▄▀   █▄▄ ██████████████████▀▀   █▄▄ ▄▄ █▄▄█▄▄▄█▄▄▄
                           ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
                            ▀▀█████████████▄
                                █████████████▄
                                  █████████████▄
                                    ▀███████▀▀▀▀▀
                                      ▀████▀
                                        ▀█▀
LetItRide
                        ▄███████████▄
                       ██  ██████████▄
                     ▄█████████████  ██▄
            ▄▄▀█▄▄▄▄▄████████████████████▄
        ▄▄█▀   ███████████  █████  ████  █
    ▄██████ ▄▄███████████████████████████▀
 ▄▀▀ ██████████████████████████  ████  █
█  ▄███████████▀▀▀█████████████████████
██████████████    ████████▀▀██████  █▀
██████████████▄▄▄██████████   ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
███▀ ▀██████████████████████
██    ███████████████████████
██▄▄██████████████████████████
██████████████▀   ██████████
  █████████████   ▄██████▀▀
     ▀▀██████████████▀▀
         ▀▀██████▀▀
[BTC]▄█████████████▀ ▄█
██            ▄█▀
██          ▄██ ▄█
██ ▄█▄    ▄███  ██
██ ▀███▄ ▄███   ██
██  ▀███████    ██
██    █████     ██
██     ███      ██
██      ▀       ██
██              ██
▀████████████████▀
bkpduke
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 158



View Profile WWW
July 13, 2013, 07:59:56 PM
 #3546

Your analysis is 100% correct and 100% inapplicable to the SHA-256 hashing chip.

You cannot compare yield of a supremely-complex OoO CPU like x86 with a dumb repetitive SHA-256 hasher.

That's why I compared it to GPUs.  Which, like ASICs, are dumb repetitive.
bkpduke
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 158



View Profile WWW
July 13, 2013, 08:01:33 PM
 #3547

Please do, We're tired of hearing you whine about nonsense. no other company can compare. I like the coolaid, it's a winning recipe, thank you.


Funny that KNC's "more advanced" miner that isn't out yet will consume "up to" 1kW to produce 400GH/s.

Bitfury, which is demo'ed at least, does the same 400GH/s with "up to" 400W.

Hrm . . . they are going to need to improve their "efficiency" by 2.5 X just to get even with the competition.

Not sure if you are actually trolling now.....

Bitfury's chips can go up to 5 GH, but their power consumption goes WAY up.

They choose to keep their power levels down to around 1W/GH which only allows the chips to get maybe 2.5-3 GH I think last I checked

I MUCH rather have a KnC Chip that goes 100GH and uses a little more power then it be throttled to 50GH and use only 50W.

This discussion has already been made, the cost of power vs the amount you are getting from mining is negligible currently at even what you just stated.

If you are worried about the future, it will be a long long while before power costs = mining revenue (By then there will be many more generations of these chips).

Not trolling, comparing ACTUAL sold devices.

Here:
https://www.kncminer.com/categories/miners

And Here:
https://megabigpower.com/shop/index.php?route=product/product&path=59&product_id=50
(these chips are actually clocked at 1.2GH/s so as to conserve power and not need heatsinks)
bkpduke
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 158



View Profile WWW
July 13, 2013, 08:02:34 PM
 #3548

BS. You are totally lying now. Welcome to the list of trolls.(bdpuke)
Bitfury's 110gh rack is HUGE, and consumes 10 kilowatts!!!!
http://www.bitfury.org/bitfury110.html


Obviously you haven't kept up much.

That's a rack of FPGAs, not ASICs.  It's over 2 years old.

This is what they are actively selling:
https://megabigpower.com/shop/index.php?route=product/product&path=59&product_id=50
2112
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1974



View Profile
July 13, 2013, 08:06:58 PM
 #3549

That's why I compared it to GPUs.  Which, like ASICs, are dumb repetitive.
You are just digging your grave of incompetency even deeper.

Only shaders on the GPU are repetitive. All the I/O: clocking, PCIe interface, memory interface, video interface and most of all the supervisory execution logic are non-repetitive.

Please comment, critique, criticize or ridicule BIP 2112: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=54382.0
Long-term mining prognosis: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=91101.0
Phoenix1969
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938


LIR DEV


View Profile
July 13, 2013, 08:09:43 PM
 #3550

if what you're saying is true, and this other site is real, then hats off to bitfury, but ill stick with knc..... I'm skeptical of the post, because its not on bitfury's site even. bitfury.org doesn't mention it.


                     ▀▀█████████▀████████████████▄
                        ████▄      ▄████████████████
                     ▄██████▀  ▄  ███████████████████
                  ▄█████████▄████▄███████████████████
                ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀████████
                                               ▀▀███▀
    ▄█▀█       ▄▀  ▄▀▀█  ▄▀   █████████████████▄ ██▀         ▄▀█
   ▄█ ▄▀      ▀█▀ █▀ █▀ ▀█▀  ███████████████████ █▀ ▀▀      ▄▀▄▀
  ▄█    ▄███  █     █   █   ████████████████████  ▄█     ▄▀▀██▀ ▄███
███▄▄▄  █▄▄▄ █▄▄ ▄▄▀   █▄▄ ██████████████████▀▀   █▄▄ ▄▄ █▄▄█▄▄▄█▄▄▄
                           ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
                            ▀▀█████████████▄
                                █████████████▄
                                  █████████████▄
                                    ▀███████▀▀▀▀▀
                                      ▀████▀
                                        ▀█▀
LetItRide
                        ▄███████████▄
                       ██  ██████████▄
                     ▄█████████████  ██▄
            ▄▄▀█▄▄▄▄▄████████████████████▄
        ▄▄█▀   ███████████  █████  ████  █
    ▄██████ ▄▄███████████████████████████▀
 ▄▀▀ ██████████████████████████  ████  █
█  ▄███████████▀▀▀█████████████████████
██████████████    ████████▀▀██████  █▀
██████████████▄▄▄██████████   ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
███▀ ▀██████████████████████
██    ███████████████████████
██▄▄██████████████████████████
██████████████▀   ██████████
  █████████████   ▄██████▀▀
     ▀▀██████████████▀▀
         ▀▀██████▀▀
[BTC]▄█████████████▀ ▄█
██            ▄█▀
██          ▄██ ▄█
██ ▄█▄    ▄███  ██
██ ▀███▄ ▄███   ██
██  ▀███████    ██
██    █████     ██
██     ███      ██
██      ▀       ██
██              ██
▀████████████████▀
bkpduke
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 158



View Profile WWW
July 13, 2013, 08:11:13 PM
 #3551

That's why I compared it to GPUs.  Which, like ASICs, are dumb repetitive.
You are just digging your grave of incompetency even deeper.

Only shaders on the GPU are repetitive. All the I/O: clocking, PCIe interface, memory interface, video interface and most of all the supervisory execution logic are non-repetitive.


If you have ever seen a GPU die, then you know the shaders constitute the bulk of the chip.  > 80% of it.

Similar logic exists with ASICs, and based upon die shots of Avalon, BFL, and Bitfury processors, I would put the non-SHA256 components at 5% or so in total area.


How do you think different product tiers in GPUs exist?  7830 / 7850 / 7870 etc.  The are ALL the same die, just the lower-end products have various shaders turned off in post-processing because there are defects in there.  Even with this post-processing, the simple laws of IC manufacturing apply - bigger dies = BAD for yields.
bkpduke
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 158



View Profile WWW
July 13, 2013, 08:12:58 PM
 #3552

if what you're saying is true, and this other site is real, then hats off to bitfury, but ill stick with knc..... I'm skeptical of the post, because its not on bitfury's site even. bitfury.org doesn't mention it.

Bitfury uses a "reseller" type system, they don't sell direct.  Here is the thread where US sales were conducted:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=251966.0

EU Sales:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=250249.0


Like KNC, they are presales, so all buyers be warned.


EDIT: Bitfuy does post directly in those threads to validate them as official resellers.  FYI.
Phoenix1969
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938


LIR DEV


View Profile
July 13, 2013, 08:14:04 PM
 #3553

28nm is tiny, not huge. same as in my 7970
with same chip size, the 7970 has a 365mm2 wrapper, which is a heck of alot bigger than the 55mm wrapper on knc's chip, so respectfully disagree.


                     ▀▀█████████▀████████████████▄
                        ████▄      ▄████████████████
                     ▄██████▀  ▄  ███████████████████
                  ▄█████████▄████▄███████████████████
                ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀████████
                                               ▀▀███▀
    ▄█▀█       ▄▀  ▄▀▀█  ▄▀   █████████████████▄ ██▀         ▄▀█
   ▄█ ▄▀      ▀█▀ █▀ █▀ ▀█▀  ███████████████████ █▀ ▀▀      ▄▀▄▀
  ▄█    ▄███  █     █   █   ████████████████████  ▄█     ▄▀▀██▀ ▄███
███▄▄▄  █▄▄▄ █▄▄ ▄▄▀   █▄▄ ██████████████████▀▀   █▄▄ ▄▄ █▄▄█▄▄▄█▄▄▄
                           ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
                            ▀▀█████████████▄
                                █████████████▄
                                  █████████████▄
                                    ▀███████▀▀▀▀▀
                                      ▀████▀
                                        ▀█▀
LetItRide
                        ▄███████████▄
                       ██  ██████████▄
                     ▄█████████████  ██▄
            ▄▄▀█▄▄▄▄▄████████████████████▄
        ▄▄█▀   ███████████  █████  ████  █
    ▄██████ ▄▄███████████████████████████▀
 ▄▀▀ ██████████████████████████  ████  █
█  ▄███████████▀▀▀█████████████████████
██████████████    ████████▀▀██████  █▀
██████████████▄▄▄██████████   ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
███▀ ▀██████████████████████
██    ███████████████████████
██▄▄██████████████████████████
██████████████▀   ██████████
  █████████████   ▄██████▀▀
     ▀▀██████████████▀▀
         ▀▀██████▀▀
[BTC]▄█████████████▀ ▄█
██            ▄█▀
██          ▄██ ▄█
██ ▄█▄    ▄███  ██
██ ▀███▄ ▄███   ██
██  ▀███████    ██
██    █████     ██
██     ███      ██
██      ▀       ██
██              ██
▀████████████████▀
bkpduke
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 158



View Profile WWW
July 13, 2013, 08:15:32 PM
 #3554

28nm is tiny, not huge. same as in my 7970

See, you are confusing LINE width (the width of the individual transitors) with TOTAL CPU size.

28nm = process node = line width

CPU size is ALWAYS listed in mm2 (length x width of the entire CPU)
markm
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2002



View Profile WWW
July 13, 2013, 08:16:13 PM
 #3555

BS. You are totally lying now. Welcome to the list of trolls.(bdpuke)
Bitfury's 110gh rack is HUGE, and consumes 10 kilowatts!!!!
http://www.bitfury.org/bitfury110.html


Wow they had those running since march and april of last year? Yet its taken this long to prepare to be able to sell units?

-MarkM-

Browser-launched Crossfire client now online (select CrossCiv server for Galactic  Milieu)
Free website hosting with PHP, MySQL etc: http://hosting.knotwork.com/
bkpduke
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 158



View Profile WWW
July 13, 2013, 08:16:49 PM
 #3556

BS. You are totally lying now. Welcome to the list of trolls.(bdpuke)
Bitfury's 110gh rack is HUGE, and consumes 10 kilowatts!!!!
http://www.bitfury.org/bitfury110.html


Wow they had those running since march and april of last year? Yet its taken this long to prepare to be able to sell units?

-MarkM-


//facepalm

THOSE ARE FPGA - TOTALLY UNRELATED PRODUCT.
2112
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1974



View Profile
July 13, 2013, 08:18:02 PM
 #3557

If you have ever seen a GPU die, then you know the shaders constitute the bulk of the chip.  > 80% of it.

Similar logic exists with ASICs, and based upon die shots of Avalon, BFL, and Bitfury processors, I would put the non-SHA256 components at 5% or so in total area.


How do you think different product tiers in GPUs exist?  7830 / 7850 / 7870 etc.  The are ALL the same die, just the lower-end products have various shaders turned off in post-processing because there are defects in there.  Even with this post-processing, the simple laws of IC manufacturing apply - bigger dies = BAD for yields.
So what that shaders consist of 80% of the area?

They are still on the one single clock tree and the one single JTAG chain.

Please stop digging yourself deeper. You've made a methodological mistake that invalidates your results. Just admit it to yourself.

Edit: I see that bkpduke was posting those absurdly wrong yield estimates for a couple of days now. I don't want to necro the other thread, so I preserve it here so that even somebody without specific knowledge in the field can recognize the absurdity. Bolding is mine.
I cannot believe no one else has picked up on this as well.  KNCMiner's die size is 2.5 INCHES squared.  That's . . . . Titanic sized.

I hate do to be debbie downer here, but that means that on a standard 300mm wafer they will not get many chips, and that's assuming a 100% chip yield from the wafer.  Wafer's always have defects which cause some chips to go down.  The yield decreases exponentially as a the die size goes up (i.e. it only takes a tiny imperfection in the wafer to make the entire chip a paperweight).

Even if they get chips, the yield is going to be absurdly low, I would bet less than 25%.  They can probably recoup some investment by selling chips that are spec'd lower and have some "cores" disabled in them, but this is hit or miss depending on where in the chip the defect occurs.

Please comment, critique, criticize or ridicule BIP 2112: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=54382.0
Long-term mining prognosis: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=91101.0
bkpduke
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 158



View Profile WWW
July 13, 2013, 08:20:53 PM
 #3558

If you have ever seen a GPU die, then you know the shaders constitute the bulk of the chip.  > 80% of it.

Similar logic exists with ASICs, and based upon die shots of Avalon, BFL, and Bitfury processors, I would put the non-SHA256 components at 5% or so in total area.


How do you think different product tiers in GPUs exist?  7830 / 7850 / 7870 etc.  The are ALL the same die, just the lower-end products have various shaders turned off in post-processing because there are defects in there.  Even with this post-processing, the simple laws of IC manufacturing apply - bigger dies = BAD for yields.
So what that shaders consist of 80% of the area?

They are still on the one single clock tree and the one single JTAG chain.

Please stop digging yourself deeper. You've made a methodological mistake that invalidates your results. Just admit it to yourself.

I have historical evidence here to back this up.  BFL has run into these problems as well (even if you hate BFL for their business practices, realize they didn't manufacture the chip themselves).

It's why you see the wide range in GH/s out of their single chips.  It is also why you will note that since they started selling their chips, they have different bins at different prices.  We don't know what their yield is, but they have a substantial number of lower-grade chips that cannot hit design targets due to chip defects.
Phoenix1969
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938


LIR DEV


View Profile
July 13, 2013, 08:24:42 PM
 #3559

aaah, binning,  Well, look at it this way...KNC has high-end machines, less orders to fill, with a long track record of development, I know they didn't overlook binning the chips. They will probably be selecting those with the best performance, and selling the rest, who knows.


                     ▀▀█████████▀████████████████▄
                        ████▄      ▄████████████████
                     ▄██████▀  ▄  ███████████████████
                  ▄█████████▄████▄███████████████████
                ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀████████
                                               ▀▀███▀
    ▄█▀█       ▄▀  ▄▀▀█  ▄▀   █████████████████▄ ██▀         ▄▀█
   ▄█ ▄▀      ▀█▀ █▀ █▀ ▀█▀  ███████████████████ █▀ ▀▀      ▄▀▄▀
  ▄█    ▄███  █     █   █   ████████████████████  ▄█     ▄▀▀██▀ ▄███
███▄▄▄  █▄▄▄ █▄▄ ▄▄▀   █▄▄ ██████████████████▀▀   █▄▄ ▄▄ █▄▄█▄▄▄█▄▄▄
                           ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
                            ▀▀█████████████▄
                                █████████████▄
                                  █████████████▄
                                    ▀███████▀▀▀▀▀
                                      ▀████▀
                                        ▀█▀
LetItRide
                        ▄███████████▄
                       ██  ██████████▄
                     ▄█████████████  ██▄
            ▄▄▀█▄▄▄▄▄████████████████████▄
        ▄▄█▀   ███████████  █████  ████  █
    ▄██████ ▄▄███████████████████████████▀
 ▄▀▀ ██████████████████████████  ████  █
█  ▄███████████▀▀▀█████████████████████
██████████████    ████████▀▀██████  █▀
██████████████▄▄▄██████████   ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
███▀ ▀██████████████████████
██    ███████████████████████
██▄▄██████████████████████████
██████████████▀   ██████████
  █████████████   ▄██████▀▀
     ▀▀██████████████▀▀
         ▀▀██████▀▀
[BTC]▄█████████████▀ ▄█
██            ▄█▀
██          ▄██ ▄█
██ ▄█▄    ▄███  ██
██ ▀███▄ ▄███   ██
██  ▀███████    ██
██    █████     ██
██     ███      ██
██      ▀       ██
██              ██
▀████████████████▀
bkpduke
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 158



View Profile WWW
July 13, 2013, 08:26:49 PM
 #3560

aaah, binning,  Well, look at it this way...KNC has high-end machines, less orders to fill, with a long track record of development, I know they didn't overlook binning the chips. They will probably be selecting those with the best performance, and selling the rest, who knows.

That would make the most sense to get all the GH/s from the wafer they can.


You guys get me wrong, that I want KNC to fail, and that is simply not the case.  I just want more evidence (chip shots please!) to feel better about them.


Anyway, time for lunch.  Take care gents (are there any gals in this place?).
Pages: « 1 ... 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 [178] 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 ... 2138 »
  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!