Avalon Batch#4 Supporting Evidence

[greaterninja]

So I want to update this thread, there will be a batch#4 Avalon.   SMT machines and I already see batch#4 on at least one of the Avalon websites.  I am not going to release my evidence yet but it really looks like batch 4 will be a reality.   For those interested in a batch#4 group buy, please PM me.  I can also do hosting.

no such thing.

Care to bet  me BTC or 3  more Avalons on top of the ones I am due?  I have supporting evidence there will be a batch #4 avalon from domains you guys own / use.

It may not be one of my domains you know, we do not have avalon batch #4 on any of the sites, I would know, since I didn't put them there, but I'm just warning others not to get into your group by for something that doesn't exist.

I found supporting evidence of batch#4 units on a Avalon owned sub-domain.   I whited out my name and account for security reasons as well.  SMT machines also tell me there will be far more than 3 batches.  It does not make sense to have a SMT setup for only 3 batches.  Batch #1 was pretty much complete before the machines were setup as well.

I have nothing against Avalon and in fact I wish to continue to support their team. Thanks guys for your hard work
http://support.avalon-asic.com/support/tickets/new


http://support.avalon-asic.com/support/tickets/new


They should put other in the drop down.  The survey, Yifu's survey response, SMT machines, and this screenshot of them leaving the drop down selection of "Fourth Batch" on the helpdesk site tells me they plan to have a batch#4 and possibly much more than that.

To clarify...am I saying Avalon will release a batch#4?   No, but I am saying its highly probable based on the evidence.

[1715664923]

1715664923

[1715664923]

1715664923

[1715664923]

1715664923

[1715664923]

1715664923

[titomane]

If the sell Batch 4 thinks this

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=238391.msg2527884#msg2527884

[monkee]

what better way to filter out the spam support requests like "Are you guys making batch 4?"

makes sense to me

[BitSyncom]

what better way to filter out the spam support requests like "Are you guys making batch 4?"

makes sense to me

LOL you can read my mind?!

[Xialla]

what better way to filter out the spam support requests like "Are you guys making batch 4?"

makes sense to me

LOL you can read my mind?!

) loool

[titomane]

Not if ninja read minds.

But your website gives the reason. It may be an error in the web, but ninja had reason to write. You are manufacturers. But isn't the first time the leak sites new product information. (Apple, intel Nvidia etc...)

[PuertoLibre]

what better way to filter out the spam support requests like "Are you guys making batch 4?"

makes sense to me

LOL you can read my mind?!

I just read your mind....

And besides lots of pounding on aluminum because some Avalon machines won't work right, I saw blueprints for the new Avalon design. Between 180 and 240Gh/s.

With an optional cabled connections for 800Gh/s to 1440Gh/s. (16 to 24 modules configuration  )

Just tell me I am right about "something" so Inaba can soil his pants everyday and barely get any sleep for the rest of the year.

Or tell me I am wrong, so that BFL employees can sleep well at night, unbeknownst to them that Yifu is a master of deception....until the last second....  

[archetyp]

And besides lots of pounding on aluminum because some Avalon machines won't work right, I saw blueprints for the new Avalon design. Between 180 and 240Gh/s.

With an optional cabled connections for 800Gh/s to 1440Gh/s. (16 to 24 modules configuration  )

wow, I am excited.
I guess they will announce it after selling the remaining chips.

[peetah]

Why would you buy new facilities for an outdated technology? Supporting evidence indeed. Evidence for batch 1, not 4.

[Bitcoinorama]

Yo, this proves nothing, but BitSyncom, had the intention they've already stated, which was to gauge interest a month back.

Admittedly they have the kit and in all likelihood probably will, but I wouldn't go stepping on the tail of the cat that has the means to do so once he's asked not to be pestered about it. That won't do you any favours in getting a fourth batch, be it the same or any other configuration, it'll just p*ss him off further.

He's well aware the demand is there...as is the unbelievable amount of stress you offload onto him! Sheesh, guy probably wants a long-ass holiday some where far, far, away by now!!

[TheSwede75]

Only thing that really makes sense is for bitsyncom to license the Bitfury multi core chip and reference design at this point. 0.39W/gh is hard to beat (if tests are conclusive) and since they provenly can build and deliver PCB etc. and have the (still somewhat) reputable Avalon name, they could make a killing selling basically Bitfury clones.

[RoadStress]

Only thing that really makes sense is for bitsyncom to license the Bitfury multi core chip and reference design at this point. 0.39W/gh is hard to beat (if tests are conclusive) and since they provenly can build and deliver PCB etc. and have the (still somewhat) reputable Avalon name, they could make a killing selling basically Bitfury clones.

But does that makes it less decentralized and less 51% attack-proof?

[titomane]

Only thing that really makes sense is for bitsyncom to license the Bitfury multi core chip and reference design at this point. 0.39W/gh is hard to beat (if tests are conclusive) and since they provenly can build and deliver PCB etc. and have the (still somewhat) reputable Avalon name, they could make a killing selling basically Bitfury clones.

Metabank say 0.7w per Ghs
https://metabank.ru/asic

Where has seen 0.39w/ghs?

Thanks

[davecoin]

Only thing that really makes sense is for bitsyncom to license the Bitfury multi core chip and reference design at this point. 0.39W/gh is hard to beat (if tests are conclusive) and since they provenly can build and deliver PCB etc. and have the (still somewhat) reputable Avalon name, they could make a killing selling basically Bitfury clones.

Metabank say 0.7w per Ghs
https://metabank.ru/asic

Where has seen 0.39w/ghs?

Thanks

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=228677.msg2515472#msg2515472

[titomane]

Only thing that really makes sense is for bitsyncom to license the Bitfury multi core chip and reference design at this point. 0.39W/gh is hard to beat (if tests are conclusive) and since they provenly can build and deliver PCB etc. and have the (still somewhat) reputable Avalon name, they could make a killing selling basically Bitfury clones.

Metabank say 0.7w per Ghs
https://metabank.ru/asic

Where has seen 0.39w/ghs?

Thanks

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=228677.msg2515472#msg2515472

This is absurd.

Produces a chip that can operate at 5Ghs, manufacturing a device with 24chips and 120GHs.
But for the device consumes less you get a device with 24Ghs.
It's like buy a Ferrari and driving without gaining 3000rpm, consume less. But it is a waste.
Do you hashrate highly stable? or lower power consumption?

You should know that to have a 120Ghs device. Have 0.39w/ghs performance requires a device with 120 chips. This product more expensive above $ 18 / Ghs to over $ 60 / Ghs that if you consume only 50W.

[greaterninja]

Only thing that really makes sense is for bitsyncom to license the Bitfury multi core chip and reference design at this point. 0.39W/gh is hard to beat (if tests are conclusive) and since they provenly can build and deliver PCB etc. and have the (still somewhat) reputable Avalon name, they could make a killing selling basically Bitfury clones.

Metabank say 0.7w per Ghs
https://metabank.ru/asic

Where has seen 0.39w/ghs?

Thanks

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=228677.msg2515472#msg2515472

This is absurd.

Produces a chip that can operate at 5Ghs, manufacturing a device with 24chips and 120GHs.
But for the device consumes less you get a device with 24Ghs.
It's like buy a Ferrari and driving without gaining 3000rpm, consume less. But it is a waste.
Do you hashrate highly stable? or lower power consumption?

You should know that to have a 120Ghs device. Have 0.39w/ghs performance requires a device with 120 chips. This product more expensive above $ 18 / Ghs to over $ 60 / Ghs that if you consume only 50W.

actually if they reduce the package size, the asic chips can hash more and use less power.   Avalon has a 135nm package size and it does 280-400mh/s    .  I believe BFL has a 65nm package size and it does 5.9 GH/s per chip (I could be wrong).     KNCminer is working on a 28nm ASIC which may very well do ~60 - 100 gigahash/second per chip.

[titomane]

Only thing that really makes sense is for bitsyncom to license the Bitfury multi core chip and reference design at this point. 0.39W/gh is hard to beat (if tests are conclusive) and since they provenly can build and deliver PCB etc. and have the (still somewhat) reputable Avalon name, they could make a killing selling basically Bitfury clones.

Metabank say 0.7w per Ghs
https://metabank.ru/asic

Where has seen 0.39w/ghs?

Thanks

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=228677.msg2515472#msg2515472

This is absurd.

Produces a chip that can operate at 5Ghs, manufacturing a device with 24chips and 120GHs.
But for the device consumes less you get a device with 24Ghs.
It's like buy a Ferrari and driving without gaining 3000rpm, consume less. But it is a waste.
Do you hashrate highly stable? or lower power consumption?

You should know that to have a 120Ghs device. Have 0.39w/ghs performance requires a device with 120 chips. This product more expensive above $ 18 / Ghs to over $ 60 / Ghs that if you consume only 50W.

actually if they reduce the package size, the asic chips can hash more and use less power.   Avalon has a 135nm package size and it does 280-400mh/s    .  I believe BFL has a 65nm package size and it does 5.9 GH/s per chip (I could be wrong).     KNCminer is working on a 28nm ASIC which may very well do ~60 - 100 gigahash/second per chip.

We were talking bitfury chip(65nm) and power consumption.
Time will give or take away reason. But I doubt 60Ghs KNC chip. I bet not more than 20Ghs.

[Gomeler]

Only thing that really makes sense is for bitsyncom to license the Bitfury multi core chip and reference design at this point. 0.39W/gh is hard to beat (if tests are conclusive) and since they provenly can build and deliver PCB etc. and have the (still somewhat) reputable Avalon name, they could make a killing selling basically Bitfury clones.

Metabank say 0.7w per Ghs
https://metabank.ru/asic

Where has seen 0.39w/ghs?

Thanks

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=228677.msg2515472#msg2515472

This is absurd.

Produces a chip that can operate at 5Ghs, manufacturing a device with 24chips and 120GHs.
But for the device consumes less you get a device with 24Ghs.
It's like buy a Ferrari and driving without gaining 3000rpm, consume less. But it is a waste.
Do you hashrate highly stable? or lower power consumption?

You should know that to have a 120Ghs device. Have 0.39w/ghs performance requires a device with 120 chips. This product more expensive above $ 18 / Ghs to over $ 60 / Ghs that if you consume only 50W.

actually if they reduce the package size, the asic chips can hash more and use less power.   Avalon has a 135nm package size and it does 280-400mh/s    .  I believe BFL has a 65nm package size and it does 5.9 GH/s per chip (I could be wrong).     KNCminer is working on a 28nm ASIC which may very well do ~60 - 100 gigahash/second per chip.

There is no reason to make gigantic chips that perform dozens/hundreds of GH/s per chip. BTC ASICs are not like GPUs/CPUs that require a large die size to contain all the logic on a single die. I personally would prefer to keep the die size small to limit the affects of manufacturing defects. Who knows though, KNC might decide to make a gigantic chip. I doubt it though, I can't think of a benefit for a gigantic chip right now.

[Vycid]

Only thing that really makes sense is for bitsyncom to license the Bitfury multi core chip and reference design at this point. 0.39W/gh is hard to beat (if tests are conclusive) and since they provenly can build and deliver PCB etc. and have the (still somewhat) reputable Avalon name, they could make a killing selling basically Bitfury clones.

Metabank say 0.7w per Ghs
https://metabank.ru/asic

Where has seen 0.39w/ghs?

Thanks

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=228677.msg2515472#msg2515472

This is absurd.

Produces a chip that can operate at 5Ghs, manufacturing a device with 24chips and 120GHs.
But for the device consumes less you get a device with 24Ghs.
It's like buy a Ferrari and driving without gaining 3000rpm, consume less. But it is a waste.
Do you hashrate highly stable? or lower power consumption?

You should know that to have a 120Ghs device. Have 0.39w/ghs performance requires a device with 120 chips. This product more expensive above $ 18 / Ghs to over $ 60 / Ghs that if you consume only 50W.

actually if they reduce the package size, the asic chips can hash more and use less power.   Avalon has a 135nm package size and it does 280-400mh/s    .  I believe BFL has a 65nm package size and it does 5.9 GH/s per chip (I could be wrong).     KNCminer is working on a 28nm ASIC which may very well do ~60 - 100 gigahash/second per chip.

135nm is the feature size, not the package size, doofus. You'd need a scanning electron microscope to find a 135nm chip.

(actually, their feature size is 110nm, but nevermind...)

[titomane]

Only thing that really makes sense is for bitsyncom to license the Bitfury multi core chip and reference design at this point. 0.39W/gh is hard to beat (if tests are conclusive) and since they provenly can build and deliver PCB etc. and have the (still somewhat) reputable Avalon name, they could make a killing selling basically Bitfury clones.

Metabank say 0.7w per Ghs
https://metabank.ru/asic

Where has seen 0.39w/ghs?

Thanks

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=228677.msg2515472#msg2515472

This is absurd.

Produces a chip that can operate at 5Ghs, manufacturing a device with 24chips and 120GHs.
But for the device consumes less you get a device with 24Ghs.
It's like buy a Ferrari and driving without gaining 3000rpm, consume less. But it is a waste.
Do you hashrate highly stable? or lower power consumption?

You should know that to have a 120Ghs device. Have 0.39w/ghs performance requires a device with 120 chips. This product more expensive above $ 18 / Ghs to over $ 60 / Ghs that if you consume only 50W.

actually if they reduce the package size, the asic chips can hash more and use less power.   Avalon has a 135nm package size and it does 280-400mh/s    .  I believe BFL has a 65nm package size and it does 5.9 GH/s per chip (I could be wrong).     KNCminer is working on a 28nm ASIC which may very well do ~60 - 100 gigahash/second per chip.

135nm is the feature size, not the package size, doofus. You'd need a scanning electron microscope to find a 135nm chip.

(actually, their feature size is 110nm, but nevermind...)

110nm isn't the size of the chip is the size of transistor.