Swedish ASIC miner company kncminer.com

[Puppet]

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).

[1713927017]

1713927017

[1713927017]

1713927017

[Bitcoinorama]

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.

[xstr8guy]

Does anyone know for sure if KNC will be selling expansion modules?  Right now I'm ordering a Bitfury board every time I accumulate enough BTC for another one.  I might put some aside if I knew that KNC was planning on adding them to the store soon.  I'll have 3 slots to fill since I only ordered a Mercury.

They said they would, and I dare say quite a few Mercury orderers would be pissed if they don't come good on that promise as it's been factored into some peeps purchase decisions

Cool, maybe I'll hold back from any new preorders for a couple weeks and accumulate some coins.  Ah but I forget!  I can actually use a CC to order from KNC.  

[btc_uzr]

Can those asics be down clocked in order to improve the W per GH/s significantly ?
I'm not aware of infos regading this or I might have missed it somehow.

1.6W per GH/s seems quite bad in long term, no?

[erk]

Can those asics be down clocked in order to improve the W per GH/s significantly ?
I'm not aware of infos regading this or I might have missed it somehow.

1.6W per GH/s seems quite bad in long term, no?

If your competition is mining at 1Watt per GH/s or less,  then yes that's bad, as it means they can pump up the net hash until you can no longer afford to mine, and they still can, unless you can find cheaper electricity.

[Puppet]

They aren't significantly worse GH/J than any other competing 28nm company, which has been my entire point the whole time.

Their specs most certainly are, even compared to actual shipping 55nm products. That hashfast and cointerra and VMC and black arrow and Coincraft and BFL and whomever Im forgetting are all exaggerating remains to be seen (Ill grant you BFL) , but for bitfury we have tested numbers. Those numbers make  KnC's promised efficiency look anything but impressive and makes the other vendors claims for 28nm entirely believable.

The competing 28nm companies are using the same process, at the same node.

which leads you to believe everyone except KnC is lying through their teeth about their specs, and which leads me to question if KnC are doing a full custom design.
btw, VMC is doing a structured ASIC and their efficiency projections are better than KnCs. OF course they may also be overly optimistic, but still.

Besides, you havent explained the die size.

28nm standard cell, is a 28nm standard cell, either you realise this now, or time will demonstrate this fact.

How exactly would you tell? And how do you explain the picture of the PCB with a cyclone FPGA that was used to test the board? What are the odds a full custom asic would end up with the exact same compatible pinout as a cyclone/hardcopy?

[bbxx]

still not chips and 2 working days left. lol.
on shedule for sure.

[naRky]

still not chips and 2 working days left. lol.
on shedule for sure.

3 working days monday is 30th, and 5 working days for KnC

[Xialla]

3 working days monday is 30th

porad tomu veris?.)

[Bitcoinorama]

They aren't significantly worse GH/J than any other competing 28nm company, which has been my entire point the whole time.

Their specs most certainly are, even compared to actual shipping 55nm products. That hashfast and cointerra and VMC and black arrow and Coincraft and BFL and whomever Im forgetting are all exaggerating remains to be seen (Ill grant you BFL) , but for bitfury we have tested numbers. Those numbers make  KnC's promised efficiency look anything but impressive and makes the other vendors claims for 28nm entirely believable.

The competing 28nm companies are using the same process, at the same node.

which leads you to believe everyone except KnC is lying through their teeth about their specs, and which leads me to question if KnC are doing a full custom design.
btw, VMC is doing a structured ASIC and their efficiency projections are better than KnCs. OF course they may also be overly optimistic, but still.

Besides, you havent explained the die size.

28nm standard cell, is a 28nm standard cell, either you realise this now, or time will demonstrate this fact.

How exactly would you tell?

We'll have to wait and see, hence time will demonstrate the fact, but I personally feel those that are late have to exaggerate as no one is interested in funding someone who errs on the side of caution this late in the game. Whether some have outright lied will also have to be seen. I don't think Cointerra are deceiving with respect to their delivery time, and that said, I think that honesty is harming them (in the short term as other competing manufacturers cash grab pre-orders), where upon I feel others are capitalising on being deceitful (read their terms and how they excessively go out of their way to distance them selves from any liability and accountability). Hence those that accept, and those that choose to go out of their way purposely avoid third party liability backed secured payment methods as at least a choice is a huge red flag. This is logical, and to me speaks volumes with respect to manufacturer integrity.

That said we only know KnC's package size, not die size. Large package size, does not necessarily correlate to a large die size. Although you wouldn't conversely be able to house a large dies in a small package, but there could be many reasons behind the choice. I could try and press them on this in a few days, but if they haven't mentioned it now, I presume they will likely be more cagey this time round when they have nothing more to prove than performance figures.

[naRky]

3 working days monday is 30th

porad tomu veris?.)

yes:)

[erk]

They aren't significantly worse GH/J than any other competing 28nm company, which has been my entire point the whole time.

Their specs most certainly are, even compared to actual shipping 55nm products. That hashfast and cointerra and VMC and black arrow and Coincraft and BFL and whomever Im forgetting are all exaggerating remains to be seen (Ill grant you BFL) , but for bitfury we have tested numbers. Those numbers make  KnC's promised efficiency look anything but impressive and makes the other vendors claims for 28nm entirely believable.

The competing 28nm companies are using the same process, at the same node.

which leads you to believe everyone except KnC is lying through their teeth about their specs, and which leads me to question if KnC are doing a full custom design.
btw, VMC is doing a structured ASIC and their efficiency projections are better than KnCs. OF course they may also be overly optimistic, but still.

Besides, you havent explained the die size.

28nm standard cell, is a 28nm standard cell, either you realise this now, or time will demonstrate this fact.

How exactly would you tell? And how do you explain the picture of the PCB with a cyclone FPGA that was used to test the board? What are the odds a full custom asic would end up with the exact same compatible pinout as a cyclone/hardcopy?

KNCminer ASIC is:

28nm standard cell ASIC mining chips (which are being designed exclusively for KnCMiner by ORSoC).

[Puppet]

That said we only KnC's package size, not die size. Large package size, does not necessarily correlate to a large die size.

Ill grant you that, but I havent heard anyone refute hashfast's argument that the minimum estimate of KnC's die size based on the package/underfull dimensions would be on the order of 900mm³. Thats not just a little bit bigger, thats an epic size.

Although you wouldn't conversely be able to house a large dies in a small package, but there could be many reasons behind the choice. I could try and press them on this in a few days, but if they haven't mentioned it now, I presume they will likely be more cagey this time round when they have nothing more to prove than performance figures.

Please do also ask about the PCB testing with the cyclone fpga (see my last post edit at the end).  How come their "full custom" asic happens to be electrically and pin compatible with an altera cyclone IV (and therefore, hardcopy IV) if its not a hardcopy?

https://www.kncminer.com/userfiles/image/ASIC_PCB.jpg

It just doesnt seem very likely or credible to me.

edit: should have read the text better.

[Bitcoinorama]

That said we only KnC's package size, not die size. Large package size, does not necessarily correlate to a large die size.

Ill grant you that, but I havent heard anyone refute hashfast's argument that the minimum estimate of KnC's die size based on the package/underfull dimensions would be on the order of 900mm³. Thats not just a little bit bigger, thats an epic size.

Although you wouldn't conversely be able to house a large dies in a small package, but there could be many reasons behind the choice. I could try and press them on this in a few days, but if they haven't mentioned it now, I presume they will likely be more cagey this time round when they have nothing more to prove than performance figures.

Please do also ask about the PCB testing with the cyclone fpga (see my last post edit at the end).  How come their "full custom" asic happens to be electrically and pin compatible with an altera cyclone IV (and therefore, hardcopy IV) if its not a hardcopy?

https://www.kncminer.com/userfiles/image/ASIC_PCB.jpg

It just doesnt seem very likely or credible to me.

edit: should have read the text better.

Puppet, mate, on your link that board with the FPGA and the pen, could that have been a dev board for testing?

In the video they released the other day those quadrants no longer appear to be present?

Take a look apprx ~10 seconds in;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IdiBynh8Wo

I'll ask, but it makes sense, i think. I mean the board being manufactured is different.

[Puppet]

Yeah there is a reason I edited the post That does make sense. I didnt realize those boards only held a single large asic.
Did I say large? I meant frigging unbelievably gigantic.

[crumbs]

That said we only KnC's package size, not die size. Large package size, does not necessarily correlate to a large die size.

Ill grant you that, but I havent heard anyone refute hashfast's argument that the minimum estimate of KnC's die size based on the package/underfull dimensions would be on the order of 900mm³. Thats not just a little bit bigger, thats an epic size.
...

I'm sure most here don't care if KNC chips are, indeed, full-custom or standard cell -- as long as the performance is within spec.  I know there are some 28nm fetishists around, who think 28nm node = god, but hopefully Bitfury 55nm chips castrated their nanolust.

[notung]

I was just taking a look to this prediction for a Jupiter:

http://btcinvest.net/en/bitcoin-mining-profit-calculator.php?diff=148623691.94537259&dcosts=7500&diff_mincrease=35&blpbtc=25&dhsmhs=500000&diff_mincreasedecrease=3&btcusd=128.53&dpowcon=650&btcusd_mincrease=0&pcost=0.25&calcweeks=20&dleadtime=1&action=calc#

Some notes:
- Optimistic hashrate of 500GH/s
- The cost of 7500 is including upgrade from Saturn to Jupiter, sending costs, power supply, etc.
- The difficulty setting I think that is conservative as it decreases too fast when we know that many asics are coming and it will contain higher jumps.
- If they deliver one week later is even worst.

Even registered as a company with electricity expenses covered and mining device as company expenses I don't really see any point. I am seriously thinking to cancel my order. Do you really think that there are still chances for ROI? Any suggestions?

Thanks!

[frankenmint]

I was just taking a look to this prediction for a Jupiter:

http://btcinvest.net/en/bitcoin-mining-profit-calculator.php?diff=148623691.94537259&dcosts=7500&diff_mincrease=35&blpbtc=25&dhsmhs=500000&diff_mincreasedecrease=3&btcusd=128.53&dpowcon=650&btcusd_mincrease=0&pcost=0.25&calcweeks=20&dleadtime=1&action=calc#

Some notes:
- Optimistic hashrate of 500GH/s
- The cost of 7500 is including upgrade from Saturn to Jupiter, sending costs, power supply, etc.
- The difficulty setting I think that is conservative as it decreases too fast when we know that many asics are coming and it will contain higher jumps.
- If they deliver one week later is even worst.

Even registered as a company with electricity expenses covered and mining device as company expenses I don't really see any point. I am seriously thinking to cancel my order. Do you really think that there are still chances for ROI? Any suggestions?

Thanks!

cancel that shit....be a naysayer on your bad decisions elsewhere 

[FeedbackLoop]

I was just taking a look to this prediction for a Jupiter:

http://btcinvest.net/en/bitcoin-mining-profit-calculator.php?diff=148623691.94537259&dcosts=7500&diff_mincrease=35&blpbtc=25&dhsmhs=500000&diff_mincreasedecrease=3&btcusd=128.53&dpowcon=650&btcusd_mincrease=0&pcost=0.25&calcweeks=20&dleadtime=1&action=calc#

Some notes:
- Optimistic hashrate of 500GH/s
- The cost of 7500 is including upgrade from Saturn to Jupiter, sending costs, power supply, etc.
- The difficulty setting I think that is conservative as it decreases too fast when we know that many asics are coming and it will contain higher jumps.
- If they deliver one week later is even worst.

Even registered as a company with electricity expenses covered and mining device as company expenses I don't really see any point. I am seriously thinking to cancel my order. Do you really think that there are still chances for ROI? Any suggestions?

Thanks!

cancel that shit....be a naysayer on your bad decisions elsewhere  

He has a good calculation and I as certainly many others would also like to see comments on it. Comments up to this point have focused on the genesisblock calculator. This calculation includes steps and a tapering growth rate.

[erk]

I was just taking a look to this prediction for a Jupiter:

http://btcinvest.net/en/bitcoin-mining-profit-calculator.php?diff=148623691.94537259&dcosts=7500&diff_mincrease=35&blpbtc=25&dhsmhs=500000&diff_mincreasedecrease=3&btcusd=128.53&dpowcon=650&btcusd_mincrease=0&pcost=0.25&calcweeks=20&dleadtime=1&action=calc#

Some notes:
- Optimistic hashrate of 500GH/s
- The cost of 7500 is including upgrade from Saturn to Jupiter, sending costs, power supply, etc.
- The difficulty setting I think that is conservative as it decreases too fast when we know that many asics are coming and it will contain higher jumps.
- If they deliver one week later is even worst.

Even registered as a company with electricity expenses covered and mining device as company expenses I don't really see any point. I am seriously thinking to cancel my order. Do you really think that there are still chances for ROI? Any suggestions?

Thanks!

cancel that shit....be a naysayer on your bad decisions elsewhere 

He has a good calculation and I would also like to see comments on it.

The calculation looked ok.  The ROI drops off rapidly, but it still look like it's worth mining until you have about 40BTC then maybe sell the rig, or try and running it under clocked for more ROI.