|
Epicblood
|
 |
April 15, 2013, 07:15:12 AM |
|
One of my friends and I are working on designing the PCB (he knows how to do it an stuff) so once I get that, I will be adapting the opensource FPGA miner to run on it (we will be using 2x Atrix-7)
will make a thread in proj dev to keep you all updated. I just updated the repo with a DSP48E1 design, for Kintex 7. 400MH/s using 80% of the DSPs, and ~25% of random logic. I don't have an Artix-7 to port to, but I think they also have DSP48E1's. I plan to start revamping the code base to better support multi-core designs and standardize the communication modules. Hope to get my Kintex up to at least 1GH/s by throwing in two regular hashing cores. Nice, I'll be sure to test it out on my eval board when I get a chance. Shouldn't have to change too much. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Governments are good at cutting off the heads of a centrally
controlled
networks like Napster, but pure P2P networks like Gnutella and Tor seem
to be holding their own." -- Satoshi
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
Dexter770221
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1029
Merit: 1000
|
|
April 15, 2013, 08:15:20 AM |
|
fpgaminer: your board it's KC705 with K7325T? 400 MH/s is not impressive compared to 300MH/s from cripled Spartan6 (bitfury aproach of small rolled cores). I know that you will throw a second core but IMHO still not worth a hassle  |
Under development Modular UPGRADEABLE Miner (MUM). Looking for investors.
Changing one PCB with screwdriver and you have brand new miner in hand... Plug&Play, scalable from one module to thousands.
|
|
|
|
makomk
|
|
April 15, 2013, 10:49:49 PM |
|
I think Artix-7 would be the best one/most cost efficient to mine BTC on, Virtex is a bit of overkill, and a lot more expensive.
Zynq would probably be amazing as well though (I think)
It seems to be a lot harder to get bitcoin miners to place and route successfully on Artix-7 than on Kintex-7. I just updated the repo with a DSP48E1 design, for Kintex 7. 400MH/s using 80% of the DSPs, and ~25% of random logic. I don't have an Artix-7 to port to, but I think they also have DSP48E1's. I plan to start revamping the code base to better support multi-core designs and standardize the communication modules. Hope to get my Kintex up to at least 1GH/s by throwing in two regular hashing cores.
Cool! |
Quad XC6SLX150 Board: 860 MHash/s or so. SIGS ABOUT BUTTERFLY LABS ARE PAID ADS |
|
|
|
Epicblood
|
|
April 15, 2013, 10:52:32 PM |
|
I think Artix-7 would be the best one/most cost efficient to mine BTC on, Virtex is a bit of overkill, and a lot more expensive.
Zynq would probably be amazing as well though (I think)
It seems to be a lot harder to get bitcoin miners to place and route successfully on Artix-7 than on Kintex-7. I don't think it's going to be that much of a problem, If it is I can/will use the Kintex, but trying to keep it as low cost as possible. |
|
|
|
phk
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
|
April 15, 2013, 11:25:30 PM |
|
I don't think it's going to be that much of a problem, If it is I can/will use the Kintex, but trying to keep it as low cost as possible.
Someone should sit down and do the math. I have a feeling that Artix/Cyclone is the families to go with. In the next step up, you're buying more than just gates, and these hashing functions really don't need anything. |
|
|
|
|
|
Epicblood
|
|
April 16, 2013, 12:14:21 AM |
|
While the artix family is probably the most cost effective, a few kintex boards would probably be better/more power efficient than a ton of artix boards.
|
|
|
|
phk
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
|
April 16, 2013, 12:50:27 AM |
|
While the artix family is probably the most cost effective, a few kintex boards would probably be better/more power efficient than a ton of artix boards.
Well, if you want to do that math, you need to use the power estimation tools from Xilinx/Altera. As far as "few" vs. "ton", I think roughly you need (2) low-grade for (1) medium-grade. In the case of Xilinx 7 devices, at $300 vs. $3k, that math is kind of easy. |
|
|
|
|
gmaxwell (OP)
Moderator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4158
Merit: 8382
|
|
April 16, 2013, 01:01:13 AM |
|
The really high end FPGAs are targeted at people doing large scale logic simulations and other stuff that _cannot_ be done in a smaller part and so they have a premium price, they also often have very fast specialized IO hardware and other stuff that mining doesn't need. I wouldn't expect them to be the most effective for mining. I expect mining to be most cost effective on whatever the largest or second largest low end devices is in any product line— keeping down the per chip costs and also dodging premium product pricing. Of course, nothing beats actually simulating a design.  |
|
|
|
|
gmaxwell (OP)
Moderator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4158
Merit: 8382
|
|
April 20, 2013, 06:52:38 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lacan82
|
|
April 20, 2013, 09:14:06 PM |
|
These projects always interest me. Anyone direct me on material to read to learn to design PCBs for FPGA miners?
|
|
|
|
seleme
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2772
Merit: 1028
Duelbits.com
|
|
April 20, 2013, 11:18:15 PM |
|
People are idiots or they're pumping asicminer share prices for their own good. My bet would be on 2nd as asicminer share pumpers are pretty hardworking and religiously devoted group, doubt anyone is idiot to pay that price for hashing power that mines 0.6 btc at this difficulty and as such needs more than 4 months to meet ROI without difficulty rise. |
|
|
|
gingernuts
Member
Offline
Activity: 89
Merit: 10
|
|
April 30, 2013, 11:31:39 PM |
|
I think Artix-7 would be the best one/most cost efficient to mine BTC on, Virtex is a bit of overkill, and a lot more expensive.
Zynq would probably be amazing as well though (I think)
It seems to be a lot harder to get bitcoin miners to place and route successfully on Artix-7 than on Kintex-7. Do you know, is that just because the Artix devices are smaller, or have Xilinx 'cost-optimised' the routing resources in Artix? |
|
|
|
|
|
Inspector 2211
|
|
May 01, 2013, 02:09:29 AM |
|
I think Artix-7 would be the best one/most cost efficient to mine BTC on, Virtex is a bit of overkill, and a lot more expensive.
Zynq would probably be amazing as well though (I think)
It seems to be a lot harder to get bitcoin miners to place and route successfully on Artix-7 than on Kintex-7. Do you know, is that just because the Artix devices are smaller, or have Xilinx 'cost-optimised' the routing resources in Artix? The usable chip area of the Artix-7-200T looks like a giant 'H', think of a building signage 'H' as in 'HOSPITAL', with two unusable 'parks' thrown in for good measure, a 'Central Park' and a 'Golden Gate Park'. As far as I have been told, the usable chip area of the Kintex-7 is a huge rectangle. Get it? |
|
|
|
gingernuts
Member
Offline
Activity: 89
Merit: 10
|
|
May 01, 2013, 08:06:32 AM |
|
I think Artix-7 would be the best one/most cost efficient to mine BTC on, Virtex is a bit of overkill, and a lot more expensive.
Zynq would probably be amazing as well though (I think)
It seems to be a lot harder to get bitcoin miners to place and route successfully on Artix-7 than on Kintex-7. Do you know, is that just because the Artix devices are smaller, or have Xilinx 'cost-optimised' the routing resources in Artix? The usable chip area of the Artix-7-200T looks like a giant 'H', think of a building signage 'H' as in 'HOSPITAL', with two unusable 'parks' thrown in for good measure, a 'Central Park' and a 'Golden Gate Park'. As far as I have been told, the usable chip area of the Kintex-7 is a huge rectangle. Get it? Thanks - the Zynq seems to have the same hole in the middle issue as Artix  |
|
|
|
|
|
