Can I get some clarification on this BFL product?

[titomane]

Jalapeño is very spicy for summer dining. jajajjaja summer before had been very good, spicy spicy spicy now

[cp1]

I'm sure mega and giga are SI prefixes in this case, not the stupid made up byte prefixes used in hard drives.

[k9quaint]

Couldn't help it. 5Gh/s is not 5000 Mh/s. Rather it is 5120Mh/s. Basic computer science:

1 Bit = Binary Digit
8 Bits = 1 Byte
1024 Bytes = 1 Kilobyte
1024 Kilobytes = 1 Megabyte
1024 Megabytes = 1 Gigabyte
1024 Gigabytes = 1 Terabyte

Wrong! Hash has nothing to do with byte! Therefore, 5 GH/s = 5000 MH/s!

This is correct.
When we talk about hashing, we are talking about frequency (each hash = 1 cycle), not bytes. In frequency measurements, 1 MHz = 1000000 hertz. 1 GHz = 1000000000 hertz. So 5 Gigahashes per second is hashing with a frequency of 5 billion times a second. 

[Loredo]

Couldn't help it. 5Gh/s is not 5000 Mh/s. Rather it is 5120Mh/s. Basic computer science:

You know this is 1st gen. BFL equipment, though, right?  So 5 Ghps could translate to 6.1, or then again, 4.7.  Either way, of the 10 types of people in the world, who understand binary or don't, I suspect your one of those.

[cp1]

It's such a shame that computer people use Mega and Giga so incorrectly -- leads to people like Balthozar thinking they know everything.  I'm sure one day some self-proclaimed know it all will incorrectly supply 2^20 W instead of 1e6 W to some poor device.

[Delitus]

Couldn't help it. 5Gh/s is not 5000 Mh/s. Rather it is 5120Mh/s. Basic computer science:

1 Bit = Binary Digit
8 Bits = 1 Byte
1024 Bytes = 1 Kilobyte
1024 Kilobytes = 1 Megabyte
1024 Megabytes = 1 Gigabyte
1024 Gigabytes = 1 Terabyte

If you wanted to be correct, you should have used Kibibytes, Mebibytes and Gibibytes instead. What you have listed are SI prefixes of measure, which are always based on powers of ten, not two.

[jbreher]

Further, all accredited standards organizations with which I am familiar (ANSI, BSI, IEC, ISO, NIST, etc...) are unified in stating that (e.g.) kilo is a prefix _always_ meaning 1000 (10^3) and _never_ meaning 1024 (2^10). It matters not one whit whether or not one is discussing bytes or onions.

Yes, the terms kilo, mega, giga, etc. have been MISapplied in the computer industry for several decades. And it was once accepted practice. No longer.

Using these kilo, et al prefixes to refer to 10^(n*3) is an anachronism that perpetuates a needless ambiguity, and must cease - before it kills again.

You want shorthand for 2^(n*10), you use kibi, mebi, gibi, etc.

[Inaba]

The problem with kibi, mebi, gibi, etc... is that it will likely never achieve widespread adoption in US English (at the very least) because the phonemes used are very close to what us Americans perceive as "baby talk."  If they had gone with a less offensive sounding set of prefixes, they'd have likely had wider adoption by now.  Not that I disagree with the sentiment though.