He was implying that they should do testing.
I know KnC is on record saying this is a cell based asic, not a hardcopy. But that was said a long time ago, and if you look at the known facts:
- significantly worse GH/J than competing 28nm (and even 55nm) chips,
- judging by the chip package, massive die size, ~3x larger per GH than cointerra and hashfast
- extremely fast TTM (assuming they meet their goals), with apparently no need for any chip testing
- Chip developed by a company with a trackrecord in doing altera harcopy conversion
- Originally planned to do an FPGA
- PCB tested/photographed with an altera cyclone FPGA that just happens to fit
I have a hard time believing this is not a hardcopy or some other structured asic.
(Note: Im not saying thats a bad thing. Its what I would have done too).
KnC have created a standard cell ASIC.
They aren't significantly worse GH/J than any other competing 28nm company, which has been my entire point the whole time.
The competing 28nm companies are using the same process, at the same node. Just KnC were first and have been honest, and realistic with their expectations, letting the evidence talk for itself when they have something to show.
The other competitors were months late and had to embellish upon marketing to tie up funds and promise figures based on best case simulations, just some have taken it a step further and been very dishonest.
28nm standard cell, is a 28nm standard cell, either you realise this now, or time will demonstrate this fact.
Sure KnC have probably employed margins that may have erred on the side of caution as they saw speed and mitigating risk as the main priority, but we are talking a minor percentage performance difference between competitors from the final result, not major as has been claimed.
That doesn't occur until the next major step down in geometry from 28nm.
