[ActiveMining] The Official Active Mining Discussion Thread

[EskimoBob]

...

Selling 28nm chips onto the market and mining with them will be profitable for many months to come, even when the network hash rate is 10PH/S.
At this share price, we only need to hold 1% of the network to have 100% annual return from mining alone.  Obviously there won't actually be 100% annual return because of rising difficulty, but we can use these "annual return snapshots" for share price valuation. For example, asicminer seems to fluctuate between 20%-50% ("annual snapshot").. if it goes higher than that then investors buy up more shares.  I can share my excel spreadsheet calculations if you wish.

Remember, difficulty setting does not "know" who our competitors are and is not biased towards anyone.  It's a simple number, and our chips will still be profitable under those conitions.

Lets say, Actm starts to mine at 450,000 Gh is November (probably not going to happen).
To set this up, it will cost what? Lets say 900,000
Lets say, they pay 0.15 $/kWh

This will generate Cumulative Return (starting Nov):
$1,520,000
$2,820,000
$3,500,000
$3,830,000
$3,970,000
$4,000,000
$3,970,000 <-- May, game over
$3,910,000


Monthly Profit
$2,420,000
$1,300,000
$676,000
$330,000
$138,000
$31,000
$-28400 <-- May. Game over
$-61400

It becomes unprofitable in May.

Difficulty for the same timeframe
Difficulty (MM)
365
657
1182
2128
3831
6895
12412
22341

Numbers are form:  http://mining.thegenesisblock.com/

[1714744078]

1714744078

[1714744078]

1714744078

[1714744078]

1714744078

[aquarius]

Did you guys know about these guys yet? It looks like you have another 28nm competitor.  Their chips are around the same speed as ActM (rather then being giant 400-500Gh/s monsters like hashfast/cointerra)

From what I can tell, 24.756Th/s worth of vmc Fast-Hash-ONE chips costs $120,000 or $5/gh/s. For $147,000 you get 1500 of these chips, which comes out to $4.9/Gh/s.

However, the chips are supposed to have a less energy efficient "turbo mode" that will actually double the hashrate and quadruple the chip's power draw. So, if you were to run the chips in "Turbo mode" (which I'm sure everyone will until the difficulty goes insane) then the cost for raw chips is just is just $2.45/Gh/s. Less then half the cost of VMC's chips.

No shipping date that I can see. Looks like mass production starts last week of November. Depending on how long that takes these could easily be hitting market late December early January. Interesting idea, though, having a turbo mode. Ill be interested to see the hard specs on these.

GlobalFoundries are the same that BFL uses, right?

I tend to be very satisfied with eASIC in this case.

[Vycid]

Did you guys know about these guys yet? It looks like you have another 28nm competitor.  Their chips are around the same speed as ActM (rather then being giant 400-500Gh/s monsters like hashfast/cointerra)

From what I can tell, 24.756Th/s worth of vmc Fast-Hash-ONE chips costs $120,000 or $5/gh/s. For $147,000 you get 1500 of these chips, which comes out to $4.9/Gh/s.

However, the chips are supposed to have a less energy efficient "turbo mode" that will actually double the hashrate and quadruple the chip's power draw. So, if you were to run the chips in "Turbo mode" (which I'm sure everyone will until the difficulty goes insane) then the cost for raw chips is just is just $2.45/Gh/s. Less then half the cost of VMC's chips.

No shipping date that I can see. Looks like mass production starts last week of November. Depending on how long that takes these could easily be hitting market late December early January. Interesting idea, though, having a turbo mode. Ill be interested to see the hard specs on these.

GlobalFoundries are the same that BFL uses, right?

I tend to be very satisfied with eASIC in this case.

GloFo is very responsive and flexible compared to TSMC.

BFL's failure to deliver is nobody's fault but BFL's.

[aquarius]

Did you guys know about these guys yet? It looks like you have another 28nm competitor.  Their chips are around the same speed as ActM (rather then being giant 400-500Gh/s monsters like hashfast/cointerra)

From what I can tell, 24.756Th/s worth of vmc Fast-Hash-ONE chips costs $120,000 or $5/gh/s. For $147,000 you get 1500 of these chips, which comes out to $4.9/Gh/s.

However, the chips are supposed to have a less energy efficient "turbo mode" that will actually double the hashrate and quadruple the chip's power draw. So, if you were to run the chips in "Turbo mode" (which I'm sure everyone will until the difficulty goes insane) then the cost for raw chips is just is just $2.45/Gh/s. Less then half the cost of VMC's chips.

No shipping date that I can see. Looks like mass production starts last week of November. Depending on how long that takes these could easily be hitting market late December early January. Interesting idea, though, having a turbo mode. Ill be interested to see the hard specs on these.

GlobalFoundries are the same that BFL uses, right?

I tend to be very satisfied with eASIC in this case.

GloFo is very responsive and flexible compared to TSMC.

BFL's failure to deliver is nobody's fault but BFL's.

how do you know they kept their delivery dates to BFL?

[kleeck]

...

Selling 28nm chips onto the market and mining with them will be profitable for many months to come, even when the network hash rate is 10PH/S.
At this share price, we only need to hold 1% of the network to have 100% annual return from mining alone.  Obviously there won't actually be 100% annual return because of rising difficulty, but we can use these "annual return snapshots" for share price valuation. For example, asicminer seems to fluctuate between 20%-50% ("annual snapshot").. if it goes higher than that then investors buy up more shares.  I can share my excel spreadsheet calculations if you wish.

Remember, difficulty setting does not "know" who our competitors are and is not biased towards anyone.  It's a simple number, and our chips will still be profitable under those conitions.

Lets say, Actm starts to mine at 450,000 Gh is November (probably not going to happen).
To set this up, it will cost what? Lets say 900,000
Lets say, they pay 0.15 $/kWh

This will generate Cumulative Return (starting Nov):
$1,520,000
$2,820,000
$3,500,000
$3,830,000
$3,970,000
$4,000,000
$3,970,000 <-- May, game over
$3,910,000


Monthly Profit
$2,420,000
$1,300,000
$676,000
$330,000
$138,000
$31,000
$-28400 <-- May. Game over
$-61400

It becomes unprofitable in May.

Difficulty for the same timeframe
Difficulty (MM)
365
657
1182
2128
3831
6895
12412
22341

Numbers are form:  http://mining.thegenesisblock.com/

This calculation is pretty much worthless. You pull a random number and then assume it will be a static value for the coming six months. That is just not useful. No mining operation is going to maintain a static hashrate for six months. Everyone, including Ken, knows that if you want to maintain your TNH% you have to increase your hashrate. This is Bitcoin Mining 101.

Assuming your hypothetical November rate, calculate what ActM would have to increase by, on a monthly basis, to ensure a positive return. That might be interesting to some.

[N_S]

Assuming your hypothetical November rate, calculate what ActM would have to increase by, on a monthly basis, to ensure a positive return. That might be interesting to some.

Indeed it would.

[somestranger]

Lets say, Actm starts to mine at 450,000 Gh is November (probably not going to happen).
To set this up, it will cost what? Lets say 900,000
Lets say, they pay 0.15 $/kWh

I doubt the power cost will be that great since we will be paying data center rates at Springfield Underground which probably pays 'industrial' rates that I speculate would be around $0.05-0.10/kWh. There also shouldn't be need for air conditioning because the data center is naturally cold year-round.

Also there is no way that difficulty will continue increasing 30% every increase through May. I think it will slow down considerably somewhere in the range of 1000-5000 Million (10-50x current difficulty). Bitcoin prices are also likely to go up which would drastically decrease the impact of fixed costs.

[N_S]

I doubt the power cost will be that great since we will be paying data center rates at Springfield Underground which probably pays 'industrial' rates that I speculate would be around $0.05-0.10/kWh. There also shouldn't be need for air conditioning because the data center is naturally cold year-round.

Also there is no way that difficulty will continue increasing 30% every increase through May. I think it will slow down considerably somewhere in the range of 1000-5000 Million (10-50x current difficulty). Bitcoin prices are also likely to go up which would drastically decrease the impact of fixed costs.

Bingo.

[Ytterbium]

Hmmm....someone seems to be mining at bitminter under the name "fast hash" 1.128 TH

could this be test chips or is this just wishful thinking??

https://bitminter.com/livestats/big

I would be beyond shocked if that was anything other than someone trying to troll.

That's a hell of a lot of hash power to throw into trolling.  About $20k worth of bitfury chips, IIRC.

[EskimoBob]

I doubt the power cost will be that great since we will be paying data center rates at Springfield Underground which probably pays 'industrial' rates that I speculate would be around $0.05-0.10/kWh. There also shouldn't be need for air conditioning because the data center is naturally cold year-round.

Also there is no way that difficulty will continue increasing 30% every increase through May. I think it will slow down considerably somewhere in the range of 1000-5000 Million (10-50x current difficulty). Bitcoin prices are also likely to go up which would drastically decrease the impact of fixed costs.

Bingo.

Then why don't you make a educated guess (with calculations), how many Gh is sold by Actm and competition and see, how it affects the difficulty.
Pulling in 4,000,000 USD in less than six months as profit is awesome result. Not sure, wtf is this kleeck character whining about.

kleeck, are you saying that if difficulty continues to rise at same the rate (thanks to all the new hardware out there, btw), adding new mining rigs in February 2014, based on the same technology, will make your profit margin to go up per Gh? Are you sure about that?

Most of the BTC out there (70%) is mined for close to nothing. Expecting BTC:fiat to dramatically increase will be nice, but in this case, we need some serious new money finding it's way to BTC world. I hope I am wrong and too pessimistic and we will see better rates than today 

Historical Difficulty Increase
30 Day    122 %
60 Day    330 %
90 Day    486 %

Can you say the same for BTC:FIAT? No, you can not, unless you start pulling numbers out of your ass

[zumzero]

We hear you eBoab, the difficulty is rising. Thanks.

[deizel]

Did you guys know about these guys yet? It looks like you have another 28nm competitor.  Their chips are around the same speed as ActM (rather then being giant 400-500Gh/s monsters like hashfast/cointerra)

From what I can tell, 24.756Th/s worth of vmc Fast-Hash-ONE chips costs $120,000 or $5/gh/s. For $147,000 you get 1500 of these chips, which comes out to $4.9/Gh/s.

However, the chips are supposed to have a less energy efficient "turbo mode" that will actually double the hashrate and quadruple the chip's power draw. So, if you were to run the chips in "Turbo mode" (which I'm sure everyone will until the difficulty goes insane) then the cost for raw chips is just is just $2.45/Gh/s. Less then half the cost of VMC's chips.

No shipping date that I can see. Looks like mass production starts last week of November. Depending on how long that takes these could easily be hitting market late December early January. Interesting idea, though, having a turbo mode. Ill be interested to see the hard specs on these.

GlobalFoundries are the same that BFL uses, right?

I tend to be very satisfied with eASIC in this case.

GloFo is very responsive and flexible compared to TSMC.

BFL's failure to deliver is nobody's fault but BFL's.

Emphasis mine:

eASIC® is a fabless semiconductor company offering breakthrough NEW ASIC devices that significantly reduce the overall cost of ownership and time to production of customized silicon devices. Through employing a unique combination of FPGA like logic (look up tables) and a single via for routing, eASIC enables customers to develop NEW ASICs with low up-front costs, and deliver of tested prototypes in only 5 weeks from tape out.

OEMs enjoy complete peace of mind knowing that when transitioning from an eASIC Nextreme or Nextreme-2 NEW ASIC design to a cell-based, easicopy™ ASIC design that they do not have to completely validate a new supplier ecosystem. eASIC leverages the same proven ecosystem that includes fab partners such as GLOBAL FOUNDRIES and Fujitsu and best-in-class packaging partners such as Amkor.

[kleeck]

I doubt the power cost will be that great since we will be paying data center rates at Springfield Underground which probably pays 'industrial' rates that I speculate would be around $0.05-0.10/kWh. There also shouldn't be need for air conditioning because the data center is naturally cold year-round.

Also there is no way that difficulty will continue increasing 30% every increase through May. I think it will slow down considerably somewhere in the range of 1000-5000 Million (10-50x current difficulty). Bitcoin prices are also likely to go up which would drastically decrease the impact of fixed costs.

Bingo.

Then why don't you make a educated guess (with calculations), how many Gh is sold by Actm and competition and see, how it affects the difficulty.
Pulling in 4,000,000 USD in less than six months as profit is awesome result. Not sure, wtf is this kleeck character whining about.

kleeck, are you saying that if difficulty continues to rise at same the rate (thanks to all the new hardware out there, btw), adding new mining rigs in February 2014, based on the same technology, will make your profit margin to go up per Gh? Are you sure about that?

Most of the BTC out there (70%) is mined for close to nothing. Expecting BTC:fiat to dramatically increase will be nice, but in this case, we need some serious new money finding it's way to BTC world. I hope I am wrong and too pessimistic and we will see better rates than today 

Historical Difficulty Increase
30 Day    122 %
60 Day    330 %
90 Day    486 %

Can you say the same for BTC:FIAT? No, you can not, unless you start pulling numbers out of your ass

My point was simple. Your calculation is based off of a static total hashing value for ActM. That value will not be static for any mining operation. It will grow with the TNH to maintain the target percentage. Because you assumed a static hashing value for ActM your whole calculation, while already being hypothetical, is even further off.

[zefyr0s]

GloFo is very responsive and flexible compared to TSMC.

BFL's failure to deliver is nobody's fault but BFL's.

Apparently if you haven't dealt with them before, it is somewhat difficult to get in time with Global Foundries if you don't use a sort of middle-man. This was one of the problems Butterfly Labs had early on, but since has helped them.

ActM of course shouldn't have this problem as (I could be wrong here) I'm pretty sure eAsic has had dealings with them previously.

[EskimoBob]

....
My point was simple. Your calculation is based off of a static total hashing value for ActM. That value will not be static for any mining operation. It will grow with the TNH to maintain the target percentage. Because you assumed a static hashing value for ActM your whole calculation, while already being hypothetical, is even further off.

You are whining over an unimportant detail. Complicating estimate calculations will not make it more correct and is usually total waste of time. BTW, maybe you should look up what word "random" means.
Having a goal to maintain a percentage form TNH on it's own, is flat out stupid. Problem is, at some point it makes no sense to add new hardware at cost X, because this hardware will not earn back the investment made. This is like buying GPU cards or outdated FPGA's today and getting all exited about your rigs total hash rate, while you can never earn back your additional investment - total waste of money, time and energy.

How fast can Actm add new hardware to it's mining operations makes sense only to certain point in time and difficulty. After that point, it is useless to add new hardware, unless it's more efficient than chips Actm going to gave in November.
What ever they paid per chips, assembly and maintenance of running rigs, has to be calculated in and it becomes permanent part of the cost X.
Selling portion of your inventory will not lower the cost X.

I hope Ken understands this and sells as many rigs as he can. Those first lucky smart buyers will make assload of money with this equipment. Ones who wait, till it's too late, will be left holding their dicks. Sure, they can move over to PPC or similar alternatives. (Hmm... can PPC be mined with ASIC's?)

[drawingthesun]

....
My point was simple. Your calculation is based off of a static total hashing value for ActM. That value will not be static for any mining operation. It will grow with the TNH to maintain the target percentage. Because you assumed a static hashing value for ActM your whole calculation, while already being hypothetical, is even further off.

You are whining over an unimportant detail. Complicating estimate calculations will not make it more correct and is usually total waste of time. BTW, maybe you should look up what word "random" means.
Having a goal to maintain a percentage form TNH on it's own, is flat out stupid. Problem is, at some point it makes no sense to add new hardware at cost X, because this hardware will not earn back the investment made. This is like buying GPU cards or outdated FPGA's today and getting all exited about your rigs total hash rate, while you can never earn back your additional investment - total waste of money, time and energy.

How fast can Actm add new hardware to it's mining operations makes sense only to certain point in time and difficulty. After that point, it is useless to add new hardware, unless it's more efficient than chips Actm going to gave in November.
What ever they paid per chips, assembly and maintenance of running rigs, has to be calculated in and it becomes permanent part of the cost X.
Selling portion of your inventory will not lower the cost X.

I hope Ken understands this and sells as many rigs as he can. Those first lucky smart buyers will make assload of money with this equipment. Ones who wait, till it's too late, will be left holding their dicks. Sure, they can move over to PPC or similar alternatives. (Hmm... can PPC be mined with ASIC's?)

Yes PPC can be mined with an ASIC.

Ken needs to not just keep buying chips but put some profits back into R&D to have better chips built.

[zumzero]

....
My point was simple. Your calculation is based off of a static total hashing value for ActM. That value will not be static for any mining operation. It will grow with the TNH to maintain the target percentage. Because you assumed a static hashing value for ActM your whole calculation, while already being hypothetical, is even further off.

You are whining over an unimportant detail. Complicating estimate calculations will not make it more correct and is usually total waste of time. BTW, maybe you should look up what word "random" means.
Having a goal to maintain a percentage form TNH on it's own, is flat out stupid. Problem is, at some point it makes no sense to add new hardware at cost X, because this hardware will not earn back the investment made. This is like buying GPU cards or outdated FPGA's today and getting all exited about your rigs total hash rate, while you can never earn back your additional investment - total waste of money, time and energy.

How fast can Actm add new hardware to it's mining operations makes sense only to certain point in time and difficulty. After that point, it is useless to add new hardware, unless it's more efficient than chips Actm going to gave in November.
What ever they paid per chips, assembly and maintenance of running rigs, has to be calculated in and it becomes permanent part of the cost X.
Selling portion of your inventory will not lower the cost X.

I hope Ken understands this and sells as many rigs as he can. Those first lucky smart buyers will make assload of money with this equipment. Ones who wait, till it's too late, will be left holding their dicks. Sure, they can move over to PPC or similar alternatives. (Hmm... can PPC be mined with ASIC's?)

Kleeck wasn't whining eBoab, he calmly made his point and had to do so twice because of your lack of understanding.  It's clear you still don't get it.

You are deplorable and your attitude dilutes any otherwise positive arguments you make.

[deizel]

Let's try using some real numbers:

The network will mine BTC1,314,000/year (1 block solved every 10 minutes with a reward of BTC25) until the reward halves in 2016 (also a leap year).

To make annual return with dividends alone, the public investor's protection plan should succeed within one year (see page 1):

= 10,000,000 shares × BTC0.0025/share = BTC25,000 in dividends

From a yearly perspective, meeting just one of these goals would achieve this:

- average 1.9% of the network for a year (by mining BTC25,000 out of the available BTC1,314,000)
- average $250,000/month in hardware sales profit (BTC25,000 × $120 ∕ 12 months)

ActM has incentive to quickly meet a combined version of the above goals if they are to share in profits.

[crumbs]

10:36 (S) 593 @ 0.00255300 ACTIVEMINING
Bitfunder: Below .002, nobody cares
Who'da thunked!

[minerpart]

Shares on Bitfunder seems to be around 20% overpriced right now. The usual 30-40% gap we see between the price on BF and btc.co is just not there today. What's happened, some news been released?