BlockBurner LLC - Crucible FPGA Scrypt Miner - Announcement Aug-19

[newtothescene]

I am very interested in this development.  Great to hear that an official dev team has been setup.  Looking forward to additional updates and opportunities to get involved (probably mostly in the form of funding or pre-order) but I am very interested.  Good luck!

[1715237191]

1715237191

[mr_random]

I have my own Scrypt code for Xilinx FPGA and a pluggable rack system, that takes 10 boards, I had to mux them as 8+2 hot spares.(yep sometimes they drop in & out of service randomly)

Unfortunately...
Performance is shite...... insofar as comparison to high-end CPU or GPUs.
Who knows if I can get an improvement but it is going to be very hard to beat the GPU thrughput Vrs cost.

Interesting. Thanks for the detailed post, especially the last part where you share your results.

This is good news as far as I am concerned, the whole point of Litecoin using Scrypt was so it would be difficult for specialised hardware to have a massive performance edge.

[phk]

Also: Not to be the guy asking the stupid questions here, but what is stopping bulk purchases of GPU chips (specific clocking/memory designed for mining) in bulk from AMD? With say 25 undervolted and finetuned 7850 chips on a fairly simple board that would plug via USB and be recognized as a multi-crossfire system I can see that being a $$ while solution. Or maybe I am just dreaming..

You need to have product volume in order to get the chip vendors attention.

FPGA you can go to any number of distributors and buy them one at a time if you like (with discounts at various volumes).

[phk]

This is good news as far as I am concerned, the whole point of Litecoin using Scrypt was so it would be difficult for specialised hardware to have a massive performance edge.

SCRYPT doesn't attempt to make it difficult for special hardware to have a performance edge.  Instead, it tries to make it more expensive.  Depending on RAM requires die area which translates directly to unit cost.

In the case of an ASIC, this is something to be considered.  The 128KB used by litecoin translates to 1 million bits of SRAM, which might multiply the ASIC unit cost x2/x4/x10?.

In the case of an FPGA, you already bought the RAM.  In the case of the popular Spartan 6 LX150 used in bitcoin mining, you already bought over 4 million bits worth.

So, whomever picked the 128KB size for litecoin didn't go out of their way to make it that hard for "special" hardware already in circulation.

[Cheshyr]

This is good news as far as I am concerned, the whole point of Litecoin using Scrypt was so it would be difficult for specialised hardware to have a massive performance edge.

SCRYPT doesn't attempt to make it difficult for special hardware to have a performance edge.  Instead, it tries to make it more expensive.  Depending on RAM requires die area which translates directly to unit cost.

In the case of an ASIC, this is something to be considered.  The 128KB used by litecoin translates to 1 million bits of SRAM, which might multiply the ASIC unit cost x2/x4/x10?.

In the case of an FPGA, you already bought the RAM.  In the case of the popular Spartan 6 LX150 used in bitcoin mining, you already bought over 4 million bits worth.

So, whomever picked the 128KB size for litecoin didn't go out of their way to make it that hard for "special" hardware already in circulation.

So all they needed to do it ramp up the 128k number to make it cost-prohibitive on FPGAs for the next few years?  That seems a fairly glaring oversight given their stated goal.

[phk]

That seems a fairly glaring oversight given their stated goal.

Yes, it does.

[CoinHoarder]

Interesting. Thanks for the detailed post, especially the last part where you share your results.

This is good news as far as I am concerned, the whole point of Litecoin using Scrypt was so it would be difficult for specialised hardware to have a massive performance edge.

Hi mr_random!

I think it's a good thing. Although Litecoin was made so that it could only be mined on CPUs, that has been proven wrong and now GPUs can mine it much more efficiently. This allows the evil bloodsuckers that are bot nets to feed off our Litecoin ecosystem, just like they did on Bitcoin for years.

Specialized hardware will make strides to push bot netters off the network and on to some other ALT coin. Once they can't compete profitably, they'll be outta here. I don't thing FPGAs will completely accomplish this goal, but ASICs will just like they have/will do with Bitcoin.

Also, custom mining hardware for a crypto currency is somewhat proof that you've actually "made it" as a currency, and you'll most likely be around for a while.

[peacefulmind]

1. Do you think the market and community is ready for FPGA Litecoin?

Yes!

2. Is there definite interest in FPGA Litecoin machines? Would you buy one if the price was reasonable? What is reasonable?

Yes!  It would have to have a significant price performance advantage over the nextgen AMD GPUs coming in the fall.

3. Would you pre-order one to support first round funding for prototyping and first wave production?

Yes, well really it depends - no BFL situations.  2 month lead time max.

If specs are right I would order a few, I know many others would also.

[Cheshyr]

That seems a fairly glaring oversight given their stated goal.

Yes, it does.

I noticed, in a thread from 2012, someone calling out current Scryot implementations as light/fake/tuned down. Botnet safe, as it were. Is this still the general feeling on it? Is this the variant used in LTC? And is there a significant problem with running the full version of the algorithm? Honestly, I would prefer my CPU mining to occur mostly unnoticed in the background.

[dan99]

Anyone know the hash rate with the proposed setup?

[Operatr]

That seems a fairly glaring oversight given their stated goal.

Yes, it does.

I noticed, in a thread from 2012, someone calling out current Scryot implementations as light/fake/tuned down. Botnet safe, as it were. Is this still the general feeling on it? Is this the variant used in LTC? And is there a significant problem with running the full version of the algorithm? Honestly, I would prefer my CPU mining to occur mostly unnoticed in the background.

With the advent of specialized devices simple botnets will become useless overall, the returns will become so low even on a million infected PCs putting a CPUs worth of hashpower into the network will still be eclipsed by ASIC and more powerful hardware. I would say the hacking game is on the way out for BTC, but Litecoin and other alts would still be suceptible to this as they are still primarily CPU/GPU based starting out. A USB type device could be secured easier from intruders and overpower them in raw computing power. Eventually botnets will be out of business but it will just spread to the altcoins instead until altcoin hardware is ready to grow up.

It seems Litecoin is ready, and so are you.


Presently I am just getting to know the dev team and organizing a proper home for us. This right here is the start of a brand new industry, by community, for community, as Satoshi intended

[Cheshyr]

That seems a fairly glaring oversight given their stated goal.

Yes, it does.

I noticed, in a thread from 2012, someone calling out current Scryot implementations as light/fake/tuned down. Botnet safe, as it were. Is this still the general feeling on it? Is this the variant used in LTC? And is there a significant problem with running the full version of the algorithm? Honestly, I would prefer my CPU mining to occur mostly unnoticed in the background.

With the advent of specialized devices simple botnets will become useless overall, the returns will become so low even on a million infected PCs putting a CPUs worth of hashpower into the network will still be eclipsed by ASIC and more powerful hardware. I would say the hacking game is on the way out for BTC, but Litecoin and other alts would still be suceptible to this as they are still primarily CPU/GPU based starting out. A USB type device could be secured easier from intruders and overpower them in raw computing power. Eventually botnets will be out of business but it will just spread to the altcoins instead until altcoin hardware is ready to grow up.

It seems Litecoin is ready, and so are you.


Presently I am just getting to know the dev team and organizing a proper home for us. This right here is the start of a brand new industry, by community, for community, as Satoshi intended

Sorry for the off topic.  It seemed relevant at the time.  Good luck.

[markm]

So is this a second team now working on scrypt FPGAs?

Are they starting from scratch or continuing along with work already started by the previous team?

-MarkM-

[jasinlee]

I have not received any requests for help with this project so it is independent of our project.

[Trommie]

The main thing with buying an FPGA (or ASIC for that matter) for me would be electricity use. It would have to run at better than 5khash/watt at the very least to get my interest.

Is there any specs for the hash costs for a bitcoin FPGA/ASIC? The memory accesses would presumablyincrease the power consumption for a litecoin system.

Only oversight is WTF do I put the PSU's.....(I'd banked on an ATX actually being able to supply the 3V3 supply, but they all lie about the capability)

Could you not voltage divide the 12v from the ATX and then use a 3v3 regulator? You'd want to divide first because you don't want to drop too much across a regulator or you'll be throwing away a lot of money as heat!

[TheSwede75]

The main thing with buying an FPGA (or ASIC for that matter) for me would be electricity use. It would have to run at better than 5khash/watt at the very least to get my interest.

Is there any specs for the hash costs for a bitcoin FPGA/ASIC? The memory accesses would presumablyincrease the power consumption for a litecoin system.

Only oversight is WTF do I put the PSU's.....(I'd banked on an ATX actually being able to supply the 3V3 supply, but they all lie about the capability)

Could you not voltage divide the 12v from the ATX and then use a 3v3 regulator? You'd want to divide first because you don't want to drop too much across a regulator or you'll be throwing away a lot of money as heat!

To me this is somewhat of an odd statement. As long as you can mine at a profitable rate of hash/watt I would assume (for me at least) that speed would be the absolute priority. Sure, you can prob build something that is extremely low watt, but what you really want to do is beat difficulty increase by mining FAST @ consistent and profitable hash/watt ratio. Diff is the killer!

[markm]

DIff is why you want high efficiency; all the fast-buck people with their marginal efficiency units will drive diff up fast, until their electricity costs put them out of business. Then the electrically efficient ones will keep on chugging along.

-MarkM-

[MKEGuy]

obviously I would be highly interested but I'm also high interested in what the performance increase is really going to be.   I think the excitement over these devices is based on the fact people know the next step in Bitcoin mining was FPGA's and they are expecting a similar improvement in hashing when thinking of a scrypt mining FPGA.  I just do not see the gains being worth it, but perhaps I will be wrong.  Considering something like a 7970 gets 650-700 kh/s at 200 watts a card (excluding cpu/mb wattage for arguements sake) and one can safely assume the 8970's will be in the 750-800 kh/s maybe even 850 kh/s at around the same watts or possibly less - I just do not see there being good enough gains to justify it. 

Trust me though - I PRAY that I am wrong.  But I'm also thinking these things aren't going to be cheap.  So while you may save on electricity because say it only eats 75-100 watts (its just going to consume more power then a bitcoin fpga because of the memory, lets face it) If your getting saying 800-900 kh/s for I''m guessing around $1000-1500 somewhere in there?   To get to my current hashrate I'd be looking at around a 7 unit array at 7000-10,000 investment. 

That' s a whole lot of electricity before I finally break even.  At roughly a 1300 watt savings a month, your looking at what... $1500 a year in savings for electricty.  The initial investment in my rigs was a little over 3k so your looking at a minimum of 2 years before you start to see any kind of return.  And that is figuring things at my high 13.8 cents a kw/h cost!  There are a lot of people that pay a lot less which means your looking at an even longer time frame before you are able to see any kind of return. 

And at the end of it what do you have?  Something you MAY be able to sell for use as a miner or sold to someone to re-purpose or play with for an extreme discount.  Where as the GPU's you would at least be able to offload to possibly miners - but there will ALWAYS be a gaming market.

Maybe I'm not looking at this 100% correctly and I'm completely open to hearing other peoples opinions on the matter.  I just can not see the benefit for scrypt mining.  Maybe in an asic device?  Because then you might be able to crank out redonkulous hashing power at very little wattage.  Then, we are talking about something that makes a bit of sense.  Sure, the asic device can't be used for anything else but mining.  But at least the hashing power to wattage used will be advantageous enough to warrant the risk.

[razorfishsl]

I have not received any requests for help with this project so it is independent of our project.

Sorry , you seem to have a very short memory....... or are you saying that it was not you that had the PM from me......

[jasinlee]

Not that I remember. But then again I get close to 100 pms every couple days and 100s of emails and IMs daily. What did you need help with? Or did you ask for something in our IP that I was not willing to disclose.