Goliath Miner

[cooler-persistence]

Interesting, but more clarity on the offering and diagrams on what a rack looks like would help.

[1715363493]

1715363493

[1715363493]

1715363493

[1715363493]

1715363493

[1715363493]

1715363493

[1715363493]

1715363493

[spiccioli]

By the way a power consumption estimation would be usefull as well, in particular given the price tag.

I'm talking about the unit without Avalon chips or the CM4 if this is its name. 

spiccioli

[yohan]

So no chance of a 2-4 blade install? It would be awesome if your blade interface is ASIC agnostic and we could start with a couple AVALON blades, add some BitFury blades, and finish off with some KNC blades.

We may do smaller versions but the real benefits of this is that it is designed for size. There are so many offerings in the small and middle size already we didn't want to really to drop in there in the early rigs. There is also the issue of managing builds and with the Avalon chip supply coming potentially from customers we simply need to cut down the number of people we are working with in this early phase of production. As with everything we have done so far in the bitcoin world we are aiming to maintain our indicated timelines.

Our vision for this system is that it might have different processing elements and it is kind of modular albeit on a large scale. So to be crystal clear on that we will work with other vendor silicon as much as our own offerings FPGA or ASIC. There is merit in this model as some types of board many not be available to all markets due to export restrictions. CM4 is very likely to be in the export restricted bracket and we are taking advice on that. CM3 with a very fixed function is less likely to be an issue export wise. Beyond CM3/CM4 we have other technology options in progress and being evaluated. No timeline for these before you ask but certainly not soon. It is not a secret that we have been very busy with non-bitcoin side of our business and that is expected to be the case for some months to come yet.

We have been asked what it will look like and basically the answer at the moment is a 19" rack. So not pretty but functional. We have some plans for exterior casings that will allow the unit to go into places that it could be used for water or home heating but those are far from finalised as yet and those are a secondary task. The inital units will be traditional fan driven air cooling.

Control wise some of you may have seen the dimm socket holes on the CM3 CAD picture. That is where our board/rack controllers are going to sit. Initially this will be a combo of a small FPGA and standard processor module that will allow us to run a Linux + MPBM combination but we have other options planned as well. There is an Ethernet and USB interface routed from the socket so each board potentially could run stand alone but we have also made provision to run up to 8 boards from one controller module so a master/slave type operation is possible. This approach gives some advantages in doing other technology options as we get to reuse the same controllers for new technologies.

Power wise we are aiming for a maximum of 6KW with a CM4 solution but we are hoping to get 500GH/s at that. There is still more work to be done on this to confirm that so that number may be a little off. A CM3 solution is likely to be somewhat better at maybe 3KW at 300MH/s based on published figures. For some customer/countries the 6KW may be an issue and we may alter the unit spec a little to work in with what customer sites can support. In the UK many domestic ring mains are 30A at a nominal 230V so you can see why we are aiming at the 6KW. As most houses here only have mains feeds of 60-100A it is also something of a practical rig limit in taking half or one third of an available supply. Obviously if we are looking at industrial units or data centre operation that is maybe a different situation.

CM4 does not use Avalon chips. Only CM3 uses Avalon chips.

[KS]

Power wise we are aiming for a maximum of 6KW with a CM4 solution but we are hoping to get 500GH/s at that. There is still more work to be done on this to confirm that so that number may be a little off. A CM3 solution is likely to be somewhat better at maybe 3KW at 300MH/s based on published figures. For some customer/countries the 6KW may be an issue and we may alter the unit spec a little to work in with what customer sites can support. In the UK many domestic ring mains are 30A at a nominal 230V so you can see why we are aiming at the 6KW. As most houses here only have mains feeds of 60-100A it is also something of a practical rig limit in taking half or one third of an available supply. Obviously if we are looking at industrial units or data centre operation that is maybe a different situation.

I'm not sure where your focus is at. You are building 19" racks for the home??

I would be interested in a solution that can be integrated in a DC. Right now that means no more than 10A @ 230V usual and 16A peak per half rack. Double for full 42U rack. So, rack space is not an issue but power usage is (meaning 3KW or 6KW are problematic values).

[derr777]

Is my math off or is this a 2+ year potential return in a volatile diff. and currency exchange environment?

Everything depends on your diff estimates, but i'd estimate delivery at 80MM diff.  My guess is you need to take on the risk of having it in stock to sell at these price points, or at least take on the financial risk of buying everything yourself.

What do I know though.. Good luck.

[yohan]

Power wise we are aiming for a maximum of 6KW with a CM4 solution but we are hoping to get 500GH/s at that. There is still more work to be done on this to confirm that so that number may be a little off. A CM3 solution is likely to be somewhat better at maybe 3KW at 300MH/s based on published figures. For some customer/countries the 6KW may be an issue and we may alter the unit spec a little to work in with what customer sites can support. In the UK many domestic ring mains are 30A at a nominal 230V so you can see why we are aiming at the 6KW. As most houses here only have mains feeds of 60-100A it is also something of a practical rig limit in taking half or one third of an available supply. Obviously if we are looking at industrial units or data centre operation that is maybe a different situation.

I'm not sure where your focus is at. You are building 19" racks for the home??

I would be interested in a solution that can be integrated in a DC. Right now that means no more than 10A @ 230V usual and 16A peak per half rack. Double for full 42U rack. So, rack space is not an issue but power usage is (meaning 3KW or 6KW are problematic values).

We are using the 19" rack as a convenient and cost effective building block and to keep our mechanical design effort down. At least for the moment a big percentage of Bitcoiners operate their rigs at home and that is what we are thinking of in the design. It may be that the comms side of Bitcoin mining will eventually force everyone into data centres but that may be countered by better broadband rollout. Many miners won't want to pay for a data centre.

The full rack with CM4 will give you an issue in your data center if all you get is 20A for a full rack. A single full CM3 based rack should be ok if you have 20A. Beyond what we are doing initially there may a couple of things that may. First is the use of a different technology may bring down the power. Secondly we have a project still for our own custom data center and that is on-going. It won't be restricted by power feed as you are.

The finished CM3/4 rack is expected be 12-18U high once we have all the cooling and power supplies in site. As that mechanical design is not finalised I may be a little off and it might grow to 24U high but I doubt any more than that. When we get to the water coooled version we may also be able to increase density as well.

[yohan]

Is my math off or is this a 2+ year potential return in a volatile diff. and currency exchange environment?

Everything depends on your diff estimates, but i'd estimate delivery at 80MM diff.  My guess is you need to take on the risk of having it in stock to sell at these price points, or at least take on the financial risk of buying everything yourself.

What do I know though.. Good luck.

I would not argue with any financial analysis but on my calculations I would expect a lot faster than that. At best any ROI calculation is a very big guess. I remember a year ago a lot of people saying our CM1 would not make money and we are still making money off our own CM1 rig that we have been using as a development platform. I still expect to make money there for 1 or 2 years in Bitcoin and longer if we make the Litecoin jump. So far at least my guesses have not been too far off over the last year.

If I was to say anything having a rig sooner than later is going to be more important than the actual cost in any ROI calculation or actual profit returned. Remember we are delivering in August for CM4 and sooner for CM3 if chips appear on time.

[pitan]

Interesting will email you my question later

[ocminer]

I cannot recommend Enterpoint products as their support is really bad.. pretty much non-existent..

[ranlo]

Is my math off or is this a 2+ year potential return in a volatile diff. and currency exchange environment?

Everything depends on your diff estimates, but i'd estimate delivery at 80MM diff.  My guess is you need to take on the risk of having it in stock to sell at these price points, or at least take on the financial risk of buying everything yourself.

What do I know though.. Good luck.

I would not argue with any financial analysis but on my calculations I would expect a lot faster than that. At best any ROI calculation is a very big guess. I remember a year ago a lot of people saying our CM1 would not make money and we are still making money off our own CM1 rig that we have been using as a development platform. I still expect to make money there for 1 or 2 years in Bitcoin and longer if we make the Litecoin jump. So far at least my guesses have not been too far off over the last year.

If I was to say anything having a rig sooner than later is going to be more important than the actual cost in any ROI calculation or actual profit returned. Remember we are delivering in August for CM4 and sooner for CM3 if chips appear on time.

As odd as it is, I've been loving your replies so far! What is the current status of the project, though, right now, and how close to release will you be taking orders? I think this could be a great thing if Scrypt mining ends up being proven as an option, rather than a theory.

[KS]

Power wise we are aiming for a maximum of 6KW with a CM4 solution but we are hoping to get 500GH/s at that. There is still more work to be done on this to confirm that so that number may be a little off. A CM3 solution is likely to be somewhat better at maybe 3KW at 300MH/s based on published figures. For some customer/countries the 6KW may be an issue and we may alter the unit spec a little to work in with what customer sites can support. In the UK many domestic ring mains are 30A at a nominal 230V so you can see why we are aiming at the 6KW. As most houses here only have mains feeds of 60-100A it is also something of a practical rig limit in taking half or one third of an available supply. Obviously if we are looking at industrial units or data centre operation that is maybe a different situation.

I'm not sure where your focus is at. You are building 19" racks for the home??

I would be interested in a solution that can be integrated in a DC. Right now that means no more than 10A @ 230V usual and 16A peak per half rack. Double for full 42U rack. So, rack space is not an issue but power usage is (meaning 3KW or 6KW are problematic values).

We are using the 19" rack as a convenient and cost effective building block and to keep our mechanical design effort down. At least for the moment a big percentage of Bitcoiners operate their rigs at home and that is what we are thinking of in the design. It may be that the comms side of Bitcoin mining will eventually force everyone into data centres but that may be countered by better broadband rollout. Many miners won't want to pay for a data centre.

The full rack with CM4 will give you an issue in your data center if all you get is 20A for a full rack. A single full CM3 based rack should be ok if you have 20A. Beyond what we are doing initially there may a couple of things that may. First is the use of a different technology may bring down the power. Secondly we have a project still for our own custom data center and that is on-going. It won't be restricted by power feed as you are.

The finished CM3/4 rack is expected be 12-18U high once we have all the cooling and power supplies in site. As that mechanical design is not finalised I may be a little off and it might grow to 24U high but I doubt any more than that. When we get to the water coooled version we may also be able to increase density as well.

OK. So it's a very expensive home system, not DC oriented equipment.

[yohan]

Power wise we are aiming for a maximum of 6KW with a CM4 solution but we are hoping to get 500GH/s at that. There is still more work to be done on this to confirm that so that number may be a little off. A CM3 solution is likely to be somewhat better at maybe 3KW at 300MH/s based on published figures. For some customer/countries the 6KW may be an issue and we may alter the unit spec a little to work in with what customer sites can support. In the UK many domestic ring mains are 30A at a nominal 230V so you can see why we are aiming at the 6KW. As most houses here only have mains feeds of 60-100A it is also something of a practical rig limit in taking half or one third of an available supply. Obviously if we are looking at industrial units or data centre operation that is maybe a different situation.

I'm not sure where your focus is at. You are building 19" racks for the home??

I would be interested in a solution that can be integrated in a DC. Right now that means no more than 10A @ 230V usual and 16A peak per half rack. Double for full 42U rack. So, rack space is not an issue but power usage is (meaning 3KW or 6KW are problematic values).

We are using the 19" rack as a convenient and cost effective building block and to keep our mechanical design effort down. At least for the moment a big percentage of Bitcoiners operate their rigs at home and that is what we are thinking of in the design. It may be that the comms side of Bitcoin mining will eventually force everyone into data centres but that may be countered by better broadband rollout. Many miners won't want to pay for a data centre.

The full rack with CM4 will give you an issue in your data center if all you get is 20A for a full rack. A single full CM3 based rack should be ok if you have 20A. Beyond what we are doing initially there may a couple of things that may. First is the use of a different technology may bring down the power. Secondly we have a project still for our own custom data center and that is on-going. It won't be restricted by power feed as you are.

The finished CM3/4 rack is expected be 12-18U high once we have all the cooling and power supplies in site. As that mechanical design is not finalised I may be a little off and it might grow to 24U high but I doubt any more than that. When we get to the water coooled version we may also be able to increase density as well.

OK. So it's a very expensive home system, not DC oriented equipment.

One thing we can do with this is use multiple power feeds. A CM3 based system will use 2-4 power supplies and a CM4 based one 4-6 PSUs. So if you can get enough feeds that may be a way around your issue. Until lower power options exist then you will always have an issue in your data centre whatever kit you use.

[KS]

Power wise we are aiming for a maximum of 6KW with a CM4 solution but we are hoping to get 500GH/s at that. There is still more work to be done on this to confirm that so that number may be a little off. A CM3 solution is likely to be somewhat better at maybe 3KW at 300MH/s based on published figures. For some customer/countries the 6KW may be an issue and we may alter the unit spec a little to work in with what customer sites can support. In the UK many domestic ring mains are 30A at a nominal 230V so you can see why we are aiming at the 6KW. As most houses here only have mains feeds of 60-100A it is also something of a practical rig limit in taking half or one third of an available supply. Obviously if we are looking at industrial units or data centre operation that is maybe a different situation.

I'm not sure where your focus is at. You are building 19" racks for the home??

I would be interested in a solution that can be integrated in a DC. Right now that means no more than 10A @ 230V usual and 16A peak per half rack. Double for full 42U rack. So, rack space is not an issue but power usage is (meaning 3KW or 6KW are problematic values).

We are using the 19" rack as a convenient and cost effective building block and to keep our mechanical design effort down. At least for the moment a big percentage of Bitcoiners operate their rigs at home and that is what we are thinking of in the design. It may be that the comms side of Bitcoin mining will eventually force everyone into data centres but that may be countered by better broadband rollout. Many miners won't want to pay for a data centre.

The full rack with CM4 will give you an issue in your data center if all you get is 20A for a full rack. A single full CM3 based rack should be ok if you have 20A. Beyond what we are doing initially there may a couple of things that may. First is the use of a different technology may bring down the power. Secondly we have a project still for our own custom data center and that is on-going. It won't be restricted by power feed as you are.

The finished CM3/4 rack is expected be 12-18U high once we have all the cooling and power supplies in site. As that mechanical design is not finalised I may be a little off and it might grow to 24U high but I doubt any more than that. When we get to the water coooled version we may also be able to increase density as well.

OK. So it's a very expensive home system, not DC oriented equipment.

One thing we can do with this is use multiple power feeds. A CM3 based system will use 2-4 power supplies and a CM4 based one 4-6 PSUs. So if you can get enough feeds that may be a way around your issue. Until lower power options exist then you will always have an issue in your data centre whatever kit you use.

Isn't there a way to spread the various "modules" to one or more (adjacent) rack(s) to allow for correct power distribution and cooling?

[yohan]

Power wise we are aiming for a maximum of 6KW with a CM4 solution but we are hoping to get 500GH/s at that. There is still more work to be done on this to confirm that so that number may be a little off. A CM3 solution is likely to be somewhat better at maybe 3KW at 300MH/s based on published figures. For some customer/countries the 6KW may be an issue and we may alter the unit spec a little to work in with what customer sites can support. In the UK many domestic ring mains are 30A at a nominal 230V so you can see why we are aiming at the 6KW. As most houses here only have mains feeds of 60-100A it is also something of a practical rig limit in taking half or one third of an available supply. Obviously if we are looking at industrial units or data centre operation that is maybe a different situation.

I'm not sure where your focus is at. You are building 19" racks for the home??

I would be interested in a solution that can be integrated in a DC. Right now that means no more than 10A @ 230V usual and 16A peak per half rack. Double for full 42U rack. So, rack space is not an issue but power usage is (meaning 3KW or 6KW are problematic values).

We are using the 19" rack as a convenient and cost effective building block and to keep our mechanical design effort down. At least for the moment a big percentage of Bitcoiners operate their rigs at home and that is what we are thinking of in the design. It may be that the comms side of Bitcoin mining will eventually force everyone into data centres but that may be countered by better broadband rollout. Many miners won't want to pay for a data centre.

The full rack with CM4 will give you an issue in your data center if all you get is 20A for a full rack. A single full CM3 based rack should be ok if you have 20A. Beyond what we are doing initially there may a couple of things that may. First is the use of a different technology may bring down the power. Secondly we have a project still for our own custom data center and that is on-going. It won't be restricted by power feed as you are.

The finished CM3/4 rack is expected be 12-18U high once we have all the cooling and power supplies in site. As that mechanical design is not finalised I may be a little off and it might grow to 24U high but I doubt any more than that. When we get to the water coooled version we may also be able to increase density as well.

OK. So it's a very expensive home system, not DC oriented equipment.

One thing we can do with this is use multiple power feeds. A CM3 based system will use 2-4 power supplies and a CM4 based one 4-6 PSUs. So if you can get enough feeds that may be a way around your issue. Until lower power options exist then you will always have an issue in your data centre whatever kit you use.

Isn't there a way to spread the various "modules" to one or more (adjacent) rack(s) to allow for correct power distribution and cooling?

Technically that would be possible but makes a bit of a mess of the concept. I would probably think you need a better specified data centre than trying to do all of that. The CM3/4 boards could be run totally independently for the cost of a controller per board and these smaller type systems will get looked at later. That is all part of our modular concept in these Goliath Miners. We are trying to keep the initial build simple and not be unachieveably ambitious like certain unmentioned companies. Our aim as always is to do what we have said that we will do. As part of that we don't want too many variations to handle until we get it all bedded down as a system.

[ranlo]

Power wise we are aiming for a maximum of 6KW with a CM4 solution but we are hoping to get 500GH/s at that. There is still more work to be done on this to confirm that so that number may be a little off. A CM3 solution is likely to be somewhat better at maybe 3KW at 300MH/s based on published figures. For some customer/countries the 6KW may be an issue and we may alter the unit spec a little to work in with what customer sites can support. In the UK many domestic ring mains are 30A at a nominal 230V so you can see why we are aiming at the 6KW. As most houses here only have mains feeds of 60-100A it is also something of a practical rig limit in taking half or one third of an available supply. Obviously if we are looking at industrial units or data centre operation that is maybe a different situation.

I'm not sure where your focus is at. You are building 19" racks for the home??

I would be interested in a solution that can be integrated in a DC. Right now that means no more than 10A @ 230V usual and 16A peak per half rack. Double for full 42U rack. So, rack space is not an issue but power usage is (meaning 3KW or 6KW are problematic values).

We are using the 19" rack as a convenient and cost effective building block and to keep our mechanical design effort down. At least for the moment a big percentage of Bitcoiners operate their rigs at home and that is what we are thinking of in the design. It may be that the comms side of Bitcoin mining will eventually force everyone into data centres but that may be countered by better broadband rollout. Many miners won't want to pay for a data centre.

The full rack with CM4 will give you an issue in your data center if all you get is 20A for a full rack. A single full CM3 based rack should be ok if you have 20A. Beyond what we are doing initially there may a couple of things that may. First is the use of a different technology may bring down the power. Secondly we have a project still for our own custom data center and that is on-going. It won't be restricted by power feed as you are.

The finished CM3/4 rack is expected be 12-18U high once we have all the cooling and power supplies in site. As that mechanical design is not finalised I may be a little off and it might grow to 24U high but I doubt any more than that. When we get to the water coooled version we may also be able to increase density as well.

OK. So it's a very expensive home system, not DC oriented equipment.

One thing we can do with this is use multiple power feeds. A CM3 based system will use 2-4 power supplies and a CM4 based one 4-6 PSUs. So if you can get enough feeds that may be a way around your issue. Until lower power options exist then you will always have an issue in your data centre whatever kit you use.

Isn't there a way to spread the various "modules" to one or more (adjacent) rack(s) to allow for correct power distribution and cooling?

Technically that would be possible but makes a bit of a mess of the concept. I would probably think you need a better specified data centre than trying to do all of that. The CM3/4 boards could be run totally independently for the cost of a controller per board and these smaller type systems will get looked at later. That is all part of our modular concept in these Goliath Miners. We are trying to keep the initial build simple and not be unachieveably ambitious like certain unmentioned companies. Our aim as always is to do what we have said that we will do. As part of that we don't want too many variations to handle until we get it all bedded down as a system.

Assuming you stick with this principle, that's a huge step forward from where other companies have been!

[spiccioli]

So, to sum it up, a CM4 unit:

- costs 24 thousand € / 350 BTCs
- uses 6kW of power
- can do 500 GH/s

Is it right?

If so, at a difficulty of 75 millions, such a unit would produce 3.5 BTCs/day for a ROI of three months more or less.

6kW of power, though, is a lot of power and puts it in the same league of the Avalon where ten units use that much and are capable of 700 GH/s.


spiccioli

[KS]

Power wise we are aiming for a maximum of 6KW with a CM4 solution but we are hoping to get 500GH/s at that. There is still more work to be done on this to confirm that so that number may be a little off. A CM3 solution is likely to be somewhat better at maybe 3KW at 300MH/s based on published figures. For some customer/countries the 6KW may be an issue and we may alter the unit spec a little to work in with what customer sites can support. In the UK many domestic ring mains are 30A at a nominal 230V so you can see why we are aiming at the 6KW. As most houses here only have mains feeds of 60-100A it is also something of a practical rig limit in taking half or one third of an available supply. Obviously if we are looking at industrial units or data centre operation that is maybe a different situation.

I'm not sure where your focus is at. You are building 19" racks for the home??

I would be interested in a solution that can be integrated in a DC. Right now that means no more than 10A @ 230V usual and 16A peak per half rack. Double for full 42U rack. So, rack space is not an issue but power usage is (meaning 3KW or 6KW are problematic values).

We are using the 19" rack as a convenient and cost effective building block and to keep our mechanical design effort down. At least for the moment a big percentage of Bitcoiners operate their rigs at home and that is what we are thinking of in the design. It may be that the comms side of Bitcoin mining will eventually force everyone into data centres but that may be countered by better broadband rollout. Many miners won't want to pay for a data centre.

The full rack with CM4 will give you an issue in your data center if all you get is 20A for a full rack. A single full CM3 based rack should be ok if you have 20A. Beyond what we are doing initially there may a couple of things that may. First is the use of a different technology may bring down the power. Secondly we have a project still for our own custom data center and that is on-going. It won't be restricted by power feed as you are.

The finished CM3/4 rack is expected be 12-18U high once we have all the cooling and power supplies in site. As that mechanical design is not finalised I may be a little off and it might grow to 24U high but I doubt any more than that. When we get to the water coooled version we may also be able to increase density as well.

OK. So it's a very expensive home system, not DC oriented equipment.

One thing we can do with this is use multiple power feeds. A CM3 based system will use 2-4 power supplies and a CM4 based one 4-6 PSUs. So if you can get enough feeds that may be a way around your issue. Until lower power options exist then you will always have an issue in your data centre whatever kit you use.

Isn't there a way to spread the various "modules" to one or more (adjacent) rack(s) to allow for correct power distribution and cooling?

Technically that would be possible but makes a bit of a mess of the concept. I would probably think you need a better specified data centre than trying to do all of that. The CM3/4 boards could be run totally independently for the cost of a controller per board and these smaller type systems will get looked at later. That is all part of our modular concept in these Goliath Miners. We are trying to keep the initial build simple and not be unachieveably ambitious like certain unmentioned companies. Our aim as always is to do what we have said that we will do. As part of that we don't want too many variations to handle until we get it all bedded down as a system.

I'm in a TierIII+ DC which is just short of top of the line, so I'm not going to start looking for room in one of the 8 TierIV. 20/32A is what you get, the racks are simply not designed for more heat dissipation.

That said, given the racks are next to one another, it's not difficult to get a USB/RJ45 cable from one to the next. At worst, one can always use the DC's patch panel/MeetMe room to interconnect the racks. You said Eth/USB was an option, how do you currently interconnect the boards? (max cable length?)

[crazyearner]

So, to sum it up, a CM4 unit:

- costs 24 thousand € / 350 BTCs
- uses 6kW of power
- can do 500 GH/s

Is it right?

If so, at a difficulty of 75 millions, such a unit would produce 3.5 BTCs/day for a ROI of three months more or less.

6kW of power, though, is a lot of power and puts it in the same league of the Avalon where ten units use that much and are capable of 700 GH/s.


spiccioli

Think you have figures incorrect their my friend 500GH per day will give 16.1 on current difficulty of 15605632 and with 75,605,633 will make 3.3BTC per day

75mill tho is a fair bit off tho to get to that will need a big amount of hash power upped. And if their going to be doing bu AUG sill 1 month turn around and you got your money back depending on market.


F.A.O Yohan  Please can you tell me when you are looking to take orders in for units as am interested and also emailed too

[ranlo]

So, to sum it up, a CM4 unit:

- costs 24 thousand € / 350 BTCs
- uses 6kW of power
- can do 500 GH/s

Is it right?

If so, at a difficulty of 75 millions, such a unit would produce 3.5 BTCs/day for a ROI of three months more or less.

6kW of power, though, is a lot of power and puts it in the same league of the Avalon where ten units use that much and are capable of 700 GH/s.


spiccioli

Think you have figures incorrect their my friend 500GH per day will give 16.1 on current difficulty of 15605632 and with 75,605,633 will make 3.3BTC per day

75mill tho is a fair bit off tho to get to that will need a big amount of hash power upped. And if their going to be doing bu AUG sill 1 month turn around and you got your money back depending on market.


F.A.O Yohan  Please can you tell me when you are looking to take orders in for units as am interested and also emailed too

Keep in mind that if they sell, say 10 of these, at 500 GH/s, that's another 5 TH/s out to increase difficulty as well. While the difficulty may be rising slowly right now, as the more high powered systems go out there it's going to increase fast.

[crazyearner]

So, to sum it up, a CM4 unit:

- costs 24 thousand € / 350 BTCs
- uses 6kW of power
- can do 500 GH/s

Is it right?

If so, at a difficulty of 75 millions, such a unit would produce 3.5 BTCs/day for a ROI of three months more or less.

6kW of power, though, is a lot of power and puts it in the same league of the Avalon where ten units use that much and are capable of 700 GH/s.


spiccioli

Think you have figures incorrect their my friend 500GH per day will give 16.1 on current difficulty of 15605632 and with 75,605,633 will make 3.3BTC per day

75mill tho is a fair bit off tho to get to that will need a big amount of hash power upped. And if their going to be doing bu AUG sill 1 month turn around and you got your money back depending on market.


F.A.O Yohan  Please can you tell me when you are looking to take orders in for units as am interested and also emailed too

Keep in mind that if they sell, say 10 of these, at 500 GH/s, that's another 5 TH/s out to increase difficulty as well. While the difficulty may be rising slowly right now, as the more high powered systems go out there it's going to increase fast.

Stil ltho not many people with this type of hash power are actually mining all Bitcoin their mining other sha256d coins and myself would too but bitcoin to begin and so on.