Bitcoin Forum
April 19, 2024, 01:27:15 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 26.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Warning: One or more bitcointalk.org users have reported that they strongly believe that the creator of this topic is a scammer. (Login to see the detailed trust ratings.) While the bitcointalk.org administration does not verify such claims, you should proceed with extreme caution.
Pages: « 1 ... 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 [519] 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 ... 2137 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Swedish ASIC miner company kncminer.com  (Read 3049457 times)
RChevalier
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 94
Merit: 10



View Profile
September 23, 2013, 06:25:23 PM
 #10361

...you let one person walk over you the rest start a charge towards.

Special needs guy #1:  Doo Doo! (points at a jar of peanut butter)

Bitcoinorama:  No no, that's not diarrhea, let me explain...(4 hour long articulated reason/logic/whatever else)

Special needs guy and friends: DOO DOO!!!! (puts their arms up and cheers incoherently)

Bitcoinorama: No wait! It's not...  Hey! No all of you stop! pull your pants back up right now!!  NO!! BILLY!! NOT ON THE FLOOR!!!
In order to achieve higher forum ranks, you need both activity points and merit points.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1713490035
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1713490035

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1713490035
Reply with quote  #2

1713490035
Report to moderator
1713490035
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1713490035

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1713490035
Reply with quote  #2

1713490035
Report to moderator
1713490035
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1713490035

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1713490035
Reply with quote  #2

1713490035
Report to moderator
rizzman
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196
Merit: 100



View Profile
September 23, 2013, 06:34:16 PM
 #10362

I am getting tired of you.


if you never doubted bitfury, why did you ask for some videos of working bitfury miners few days ago? why do you keep repeating that KnC has no real competition?

and how did you exactly took a bullet? its obvious that you didnt pay for your knc miner.

also, the part "in a week we will know if they can deliver" I found hilarious.

Dude, your question shows exactly how far back you read... The whole reason this shit about bitfury cropped up is because people were claiming ridiculous numbers on the efficiency of a 65nm chip which for all intensive purposes should not have been possible and then transformed into an argument over whether or not the BF chip was more efficient than KNC's. That was the point he was getting at I believe, people where claiming some crazy shit, with out any proof to back it up...

On your second statement, didn't read far enough back as well... from the beginning Bitcoinorama has done nothing but provide useful information to the thread... He may be a little over zealous at times, but he has been the arguably the most helpful contributor to this thread - This is Fact.

Also, at some point earlier in the thread he did said he was making a purchase from KNC - Jupiter if memory serves me right, whether the model is accurate I cannot say for certain but he definitely said he was a customer WAY before all this shit got stirred.

In short, Do yourself / everyone else in this forum a favor and wait till next week before you start throwing conspiracy theories around...
DPoS
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 462
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 23, 2013, 06:35:48 PM
 #10363

...you let one person walk over you the rest start a charge towards.

Special needs guy #1:  Doo Doo! (points at a jar of peanut butter)

Bitcoinorama:  No no, that's not diarrhea, let me explain...(4 hour long articulated reason/logic/whatever else)

Special needs guy and friends: DOO DOO!!!! (puts their arms up and cheers incoherently)

Bitcoinorama: No wait! It's not...  Hey! No all of you stop! pull your pants back up right now!!  NO!! BILLY!! NOT ON THE FLOOR!!!

he may need therapy to stop his troll chasing/feeding

~~BTC~~GAMBIT~~BTC~~Play Boardgames for Bitcoins!!~~BTC~~GAMBIT~~BTC~~ Something I say help? Donate BTC! 1KN1K1xStzsgfYxdArSX4PEjFfcLEuYhid
Micky25
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 974
Merit: 1000



View Profile
September 23, 2013, 06:46:25 PM
Last edit: September 23, 2013, 08:19:13 PM by Micky25
 #10364

you confuse that with another company, this is not HashFast, this modell is from ArseFarts.

On "Baby Jet" I was thinking more along the lines of...


Bitcoinorama
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532
Merit: 500



View Profile
September 23, 2013, 07:27:07 PM
 #10365

...you let one person walk over you the rest start a charge towards.

Special needs guy #1:  Doo Doo! (points at a jar of peanut butter)

Bitcoinorama:  No no, that's not diarrhea, let me explain...(4 hour long articulated reason/logic/whatever else)

Special needs guy and friends: DOO DOO!!!! (puts their arms up and cheers incoherently)

Bitcoinorama: No wait! It's not...  Hey! No all of you stop! pull your pants back up right now!!  NO!! BILLY!! NOT ON THE FLOOR!!!

he may need therapy to stop his troll chasing/feeding

If I read you right, this is a gold rush, the boy needs therapy, and I've become some sort of...frontier psychiatrist?

That, or call me Dexter, and find me one?

http://youtu.be/U8BWBn26bX0

Cracking tunage. Grin

Make my day! Say thanks if you found me helpful Smiley BTC Address --->
1487ThaKjezGA6SiE8fvGcxbgJJu6XWtZp
erk
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 826
Merit: 500



View Profile
September 23, 2013, 07:50:53 PM
 #10366



Dude, your question shows exactly how far back you read... The whole reason this shit about bitfury cropped up is because people were claiming ridiculous numbers on the efficiency of a 65nm chip which for all intensive purposes should not have been possible and then transformed into an argument over whether or not the BF chip was more efficient than KNC's. That was the point he was getting at I believe, people where claiming some crazy shit, with out any proof to back it up...
...
The KNCminer specs from there own data is Energy consumption: 1.6 W/Gh/s. the Bitfury is 1.0W/GH/s what's so hard about that to understand? The Bitfury is more energy efficient, though they both are pretty good.


Micky25
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 974
Merit: 1000



View Profile
September 23, 2013, 07:54:16 PM
 #10367

Dude, your question shows exactly how far back you read... The whole reason this shit about bitfury cropped up is because people were claiming ridiculous numbers on the efficiency of a 65nm chip which for all intensive purposes should not have been possible and then transformed into an argument over whether or not the BF chip was more efficient than KNC's. That was the point he was getting at I believe, people where claiming some crazy shit, with out any proof to back it up...

Pencil modded to about 1.1k resistance (the actual is slightly better because the graphite reacts that way to heat), added heatsinks and fans and tuned chips speeds to lower errors below 10% and the pool stats for the past 15-20h are:


This figure includes 3440Mh/s worth of fpga hardware, so the actual hashrate of the Bitfury is 72,902 Gh/s

and the all time reject rate for my Bitfury:


;tldr; Im pushing almost 36.5Gh/s per board
markm
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2940
Merit: 1090



View Profile WWW
September 23, 2013, 07:55:23 PM
 #10368



Dude, your question shows exactly how far back you read... The whole reason this shit about bitfury cropped up is because people were claiming ridiculous numbers on the efficiency of a 65nm chip which for all intensive purposes should not have been possible and then transformed into an argument over whether or not the BF chip was more efficient than KNC's. That was the point he was getting at I believe, people where claiming some crazy shit, with out any proof to back it up...
...
The KNCminer specs from there own data is Energy consumption: 1.6 W/Gh/s. the Bitfury is 1.0W/GH/s what's so hard about that to understand? The Bitfury is more energy efficient, though they both are pretty good.

The KnC 1.6 is at the wall though, right? What is bitfury's at the wall?

-MarkM-

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

Activity: 826
Merit: 500



View Profile
September 23, 2013, 07:57:30 PM
 #10369



Dude, your question shows exactly how far back you read... The whole reason this shit about bitfury cropped up is because people were claiming ridiculous numbers on the efficiency of a 65nm chip which for all intensive purposes should not have been possible and then transformed into an argument over whether or not the BF chip was more efficient than KNC's. That was the point he was getting at I believe, people where claiming some crazy shit, with out any proof to back it up...
...
The KNCminer specs from there own data is Energy consumption: 1.6 W/Gh/s. the Bitfury is 1.0W/GH/s what's so hard about that to understand? The Bitfury is more energy efficient, though they both are pretty good.

The KnC 1.6 is at the wall though, right? What is bitfury's at the wall?

-MarkM-

Nonsense, KNC has not been measured at the wall as it's never shipped, where Bitfury has been, neither of which come with a PSU so the point is BS anyway, as it will vary on the brand and model PSU you choose. If you are being scientific you measure the the unit at it's power connector bypassing the 3rd party power supply.

af_newbie
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2688
Merit: 1468



View Profile WWW
September 23, 2013, 07:57:38 PM
 #10370



Dude, your question shows exactly how far back you read... The whole reason this shit about bitfury cropped up is because people were claiming ridiculous numbers on the efficiency of a 65nm chip which for all intensive purposes should not have been possible and then transformed into an argument over whether or not the BF chip was more efficient than KNC's. That was the point he was getting at I believe, people where claiming some crazy shit, with out any proof to back it up...
...
The KNCminer specs from there own data is Energy consumption: 1.6 W/Gh/s. the Bitfury is 1.0W/GH/s what's so hard about that to understand? The Bitfury is more energy efficient, though they both are pretty good.

The KnC 1.6 is at the wall though, right? What is bitfury's at the wall?

-MarkM-


KNC is a big fat zero at the wall.  Where is the chip hashing?

Bitfuries have been deployed in 1000s  of THs.  Right now.

-Redacted-
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 574
Merit: 501


View Profile
September 23, 2013, 07:58:42 PM
 #10371



Dude, your question shows exactly how far back you read... The whole reason this shit about bitfury cropped up is because people were claiming ridiculous numbers on the efficiency of a 65nm chip which for all intensive purposes should not have been possible and then transformed into an argument over whether or not the BF chip was more efficient than KNC's. That was the point he was getting at I believe, people where claiming some crazy shit, with out any proof to back it up...
...
The KNCminer specs from there own data is Energy consumption: 1.6 W/Gh/s. the Bitfury is 1.0W/GH/s what's so hard about that to understand? The Bitfury is more energy efficient, though they both are pretty good.

The KnC 1.6 is at the wall though, right? What is bitfury's at the wall?

-MarkM-


No one will actually know until KNC does at-the-wall tests on a real unit hashing.    

My two bitfury cards pull ~ 46 watts at 66 Gh/s
klee
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1498
Merit: 1000



View Profile
September 23, 2013, 08:00:00 PM
 #10372

Do people here seriously dare to compare BF with KnC? Hubris!
xstr8guy
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784
Merit: 1004


Glow Stick Dance!


View Profile
September 23, 2013, 08:00:36 PM
 #10373

Please remove the baby shit photo.
rizzman
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196
Merit: 100



View Profile
September 23, 2013, 08:01:28 PM
 #10374


No one will actually know until KNC does at-the-wall tests on a real unit hashing. 

...

Precisely. +1
markm
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2940
Merit: 1090



View Profile WWW
September 23, 2013, 08:04:39 PM
 #10375

My two bitfury cards pull ~ 46 watts at 66 Gh/s

Wow that is nice and low, I had tended to imagine figures like that were not at the wall but more like just the chip itself without the support stuff / board and wallwart or ATX etc.

-MarkM-

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

Activity: 826
Merit: 500



View Profile
September 23, 2013, 08:07:39 PM
Last edit: September 23, 2013, 08:19:27 PM by erk
 #10376


No one will actually know until KNC does at-the-wall tests on a real unit hashing.    

My two bitfury cards pull ~ 46 watts at 66 Gh/s
Is that each of combined?

It wouldn't surprise me if a 55nm full custom design turned out to be more power efficient than a 28nm standard cell design. I would assume that it's possible to under clock the KNCminer chip to get the Watts/GH/s down. Looking at the cooling hardware they have used, you can see the KNCminer chip is extremely overclocked, they are trying to squeeze the most out of it at the expense of efficiency. It would have made more sense to use twice as many chips at half the clock rate to get the power usage down, but that means they could only build half the units per wafer. In the end the machines left mining will be the ones that use the least Watts per GH/s. There is no room in mining for overclocking, else we would all still be using GPUs and ASIC miners wouldn't exist would they. It's all about Watts per GH/s.


rizzman
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196
Merit: 100



View Profile
September 23, 2013, 08:08:57 PM
 #10377

Please remove the baby shit photo.

Why? Funny as hell!
af_newbie
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2688
Merit: 1468



View Profile WWW
September 23, 2013, 08:18:10 PM
 #10378



Dude, your question shows exactly how far back you read... The whole reason this shit about bitfury cropped up is because people were claiming ridiculous numbers on the efficiency of a 65nm chip which for all intensive purposes should not have been possible and then transformed into an argument over whether or not the BF chip was more efficient than KNC's. That was the point he was getting at I believe, people where claiming some crazy shit, with out any proof to back it up...
...
The KNCminer specs from there own data is Energy consumption: 1.6 W/Gh/s. the Bitfury is 1.0W/GH/s what's so hard about that to understand? The Bitfury is more energy efficient, though they both are pretty good.

The KnC 1.6 is at the wall though, right? What is bitfury's at the wall?

-MarkM-


No one will actually know until KNC does at-the-wall tests on a real unit hashing.    

My two bitfury cards pull ~ 46 watts at 66 Gh/s
Is that each of combined?

It wouldn't surprise me if a 55nm full custom design turned out to be more power efficient than a 28nm standard cell design. I would assume that it's possible to under clock the KNCminer chip to get the Watts/GH/s down. Looking at the cooling hardware they have used, you can see the KNCminer chip is extremely overclocked, they are trying to squeeze the most out of it at the expense of efficiency. It would have made more sense to use twice as many chips at half the clock rate to get the power usage down, but that means they could only build half the units per wafer. In the end the machines left mining will be the ones that use the least Watts per GH/s. There is no room in mining for overclocking.

I suspect it is both. I have two bitfuries running 65-66GH/s at 88W at the wall, that includes 40W monster AC fan.

tolip_wen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 386
Merit: 250


View Profile
September 23, 2013, 08:23:36 PM
 #10379

rama I am dissapointed in you.

Constantly defending with 'I don't work for them' while technically true has an air of deception IMneverHO.

The unsaid implication that your opinion is/was unbiased can no longer be alluded to.

I doubt I'm alone.


'twisted research and opinion' donations happily accepted @
13362fxFAdrhagmCvSmFy4WoHrNRPG2V57
My sub 1337 vanity address Wink
Micky25
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 974
Merit: 1000



View Profile
September 23, 2013, 08:35:09 PM
 #10380

Pages: « 1 ... 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 [519] 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 ... 2137 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!