Bitcoin Forum
October 22, 2017, 12:09:27 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.0.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 [559] 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 »
  Print  
Author Topic: HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s  (Read 865354 times)
starsoccer9
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1617



View Profile WWW
November 23, 2014, 03:12:59 PM
 #11161

Yes small cooler chips are more efficient for sure, but bigger chips that get alot more power per chip are cheaper.

You're confusing size with density. "GH per chip" is size. "GH per mm^2" is density. Density means you get more hashrate per wafer. Size of the chip is meaningless.

The amount of GH per Wafer has a direct affect on the GH per chip which goes into the price of a chip and eventually into the price of a unit.

If you have 1 wafer that can make 100 chips and each chip is 10gh or 1 wafer for 100 chips and each chip at lets say 50gh, the second chip you have a better shot at turning a profit on.

Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1508674167
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508674167

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508674167
Reply with quote  #2

1508674167
Report to moderator
1508674167
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508674167

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508674167
Reply with quote  #2

1508674167
Report to moderator
1508674167
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508674167

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508674167
Reply with quote  #2

1508674167
Report to moderator
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1806


Crypto Rules Everything Around Me


View Profile WWW
November 23, 2014, 05:12:25 PM
 #11162

Yes small cooler chips are more efficient for sure, but bigger chips that get alot more power per chip are cheaper.

You're confusing size with density. "GH per chip" is size. "GH per mm^2" is density. Density means you get more hashrate per wafer. Size of the chip is meaningless.

The amount of GH per Wafer has a direct affect on the GH per chip which goes into the price of a chip and eventually into the price of a unit.

If you have 1 wafer that can make 100 chips and each chip is 10gh or 1 wafer for 100 chips and each chip at lets say 50gh, the second chip you have a better shot at turning a profit on.

It's no use trying to explain things to Syke rationally.  He is in an emotional snit, suffering great butthurt, and in no mood to concede one nm to your mean old facts and logic.

Let's hope HF's market-leading GH per wafer IP fetches a great price at the auction, so Skye will get his refund and stop being so grumpy and obtuse.   Cool


██████████
█████████████████
██████████████████████
█████████████████████████
████████████████████████████
████
████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
███████████████████████████
██████
██████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
█████████████
██████████████
████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
██████████████████████
█████████████████
██████████

Monero
"The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine
whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy." 
David Chaum 1996
"Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect."  Adam Back 2014
Buy and sell XMR near you
P2P Exchange Network
Buy XMR with fiat
jimmothy
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 770



View Profile
November 23, 2014, 05:26:18 PM
 #11163

Yes small cooler chips are more efficient for sure, but bigger chips that get alot more power per chip are cheaper.

You're confusing size with density. "GH per chip" is size. "GH per mm^2" is density. Density means you get more hashrate per wafer. Size of the chip is meaningless.

The amount of GH per Wafer has a direct affect on the GH per chip which goes into the price of a chip and eventually into the price of a unit.

If you have 1 wafer that can make 100 chips and each chip is 10gh or 1 wafer for 100 chips and each chip at lets say 50gh, the second chip you have a better shot at turning a profit on.

In your comparison all that matters is that one wafer has 1000 gh/s and one has 5000 gh/s.

Using large/high powered chips is only detrimental because it requires $150 worth of watercooling for each chip compared to small chips which require ~$20 worth of extruded aluminum per KW for cooling.
Syke
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2408


View Profile
November 23, 2014, 05:28:40 PM
 #11164

Let's hope HF's market-leading GH per wafer IP fetches a great price at the auction

I hope you have facts to back up that claim.

Buy & Hold
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1806


Crypto Rules Everything Around Me


View Profile WWW
November 23, 2014, 05:33:36 PM
 #11165

Yes small cooler chips are more efficient for sure, but bigger chips that get alot more power per chip are cheaper.

You're confusing size with density. "GH per chip" is size. "GH per mm^2" is density. Density means you get more hashrate per wafer. Size of the chip is meaningless.

The amount of GH per Wafer has a direct affect on the GH per chip which goes into the price of a chip and eventually into the price of a unit.

If you have 1 wafer that can make 100 chips and each chip is 10gh or 1 wafer for 100 chips and each chip at lets say 50gh, the second chip you have a better shot at turning a profit on.

In your comparison all that matters is that one wafer has 1000 gh/s and one has 5000 gh/s.

Using big chips is only detrimental because it requires $150 worth of watercooling for each chip compared to small chips which require ~$20 worth of extruded aluminum per KW for cooling.

You don't need watercooling if you are using AM's immersion cooling.  Big hot chips like HF's are perfect for Novec.

Many small chips require many more components, raising the total device cost and chance of failure.

If AM doesn't buy HF's 16nm design and stick 100,000 of them in datatanks ASAP, they will be crushed by KnC, BitFury, and Cointerra before the next block reward halving.


██████████
█████████████████
██████████████████████
█████████████████████████
████████████████████████████
████
████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
███████████████████████████
██████
██████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
█████████████
██████████████
████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
██████████████████████
█████████████████
██████████

Monero
"The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine
whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy." 
David Chaum 1996
"Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect."  Adam Back 2014
Buy and sell XMR near you
P2P Exchange Network
Buy XMR with fiat
raskul
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 434



View Profile
November 23, 2014, 05:39:55 PM
 #11166

Yes small cooler chips are more efficient for sure, but bigger chips that get alot more power per chip are cheaper.

You're confusing size with density. "GH per chip" is size. "GH per mm^2" is density. Density means you get more hashrate per wafer. Size of the chip is meaningless.

The amount of GH per Wafer has a direct affect on the GH per chip which goes into the price of a chip and eventually into the price of a unit.

If you have 1 wafer that can make 100 chips and each chip is 10gh or 1 wafer for 100 chips and each chip at lets say 50gh, the second chip you have a better shot at turning a profit on.

In your comparison all that matters is that one wafer has 1000 gh/s and one has 5000 gh/s.

Using big chips is only detrimental because it requires $150 worth of watercooling for each chip compared to small chips which require ~$20 worth of extruded aluminum per KW for cooling.

You don't need watercooling if you are using AM's immersion cooling.  Big hot chips like HF's are perfect for Novec.

Many small chips require many more components, raising the total device cost and chance of failure.

If AM doesn't buy HF's 16nm design and stick 100,000 of them in datatanks ASAP, they will be crushed by KnC, BitFury, and Cointerra before the next block reward halving.

i think a helluva lot of due diligence is going to have to be done regarding those chips.
I doubt it's as clear cut as you think it might be. interesting to know who does finally buy the rights tho... interesting times indeed.

tips    1APp826DqjJBdsAeqpEstx6Q8hD4urac8a
starsoccer9
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1617



View Profile WWW
November 23, 2014, 07:11:56 PM
 #11167

Yes small cooler chips are more efficient for sure, but bigger chips that get alot more power per chip are cheaper.

You're confusing size with density. "GH per chip" is size. "GH per mm^2" is density. Density means you get more hashrate per wafer. Size of the chip is meaningless.

The amount of GH per Wafer has a direct affect on the GH per chip which goes into the price of a chip and eventually into the price of a unit.

If you have 1 wafer that can make 100 chips and each chip is 10gh or 1 wafer for 100 chips and each chip at lets say 50gh, the second chip you have a better shot at turning a profit on.

In your comparison all that matters is that one wafer has 1000 gh/s and one has 5000 gh/s.

Using big chips is only detrimental because it requires $150 worth of watercooling for each chip compared to small chips which require ~$20 worth of extruded aluminum per KW for cooling.

You don't need watercooling if you are using AM's immersion cooling.  Big hot chips like HF's are perfect for Novec.

Many small chips require many more components, raising the total device cost and chance of failure.

If AM doesn't buy HF's 16nm design and stick 100,000 of them in datatanks ASAP, they will be crushed by KnC, BitFury, and Cointerra before the next block reward halving.

I would have to agree, water cooling does cost alot more then air cooling but I am sure it is possible to aircool a hashfast chip. It might only run at 200gh but it might be possible.

Relating to immersion cooling,  I am not sure what the price of setting it up is, but I am sure it is more efficient then water cooling. If anyone gets bored and wants to try immersion cooling a hashfast board id gladly tip you a bit to get details on what happened.

Syke
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2408


View Profile
November 23, 2014, 07:45:18 PM
 #11168

Many small chips require many more components, raising the total device cost and chance of failure.

Again you're completely wrong. Let's look at the number of components on a HF board.



That's a hell of a lot of components (many of them very expensive).

Compared to something like an Antminer:



Very few components (all inexpensive).

Buy & Hold
starsoccer9
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1617



View Profile WWW
November 23, 2014, 07:50:41 PM
 #11169

Many small chips require many more components, raising the total device cost and chance of failure.

Again you're completely wrong. Let's look at the number of components on a HF board.



That's a hell of a lot of components (many of them very expensive).

Compared to something like an Antminer:



Very few components (all inexpensive).

personally I think that has to do with hashfast not designing the board correctly. I am sure a cheaper board could be produced.

Syke
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2408


View Profile
November 23, 2014, 10:22:52 PM
 #11170

personally I think that has to do with hashfast not designing the board correctly. I am sure a cheaper board could be produced.

No, but now you're seeing the fatal design flaw with designing big fat hot chips. It's extremely hard and expensive to provide adequate power and cooling to big fat hot chips.

"Fastest bitcoin chip" is like having the "biggest gas guzzler". It's not a good thing.

Buy & Hold
notabtcnuub
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 20


View Profile
November 24, 2014, 04:28:55 PM
 #11171

I think there are two key factors to consider when comparing mining systems/chips.  1) system dollars per GH.  This is where big hot chips like Hashfast run into trouble.  The cost (expensive board, big power supply, water cooling) makes scaling a mine too expensive.  2) system power (at the wall) per GH is also a factor as we all pay for power.  The lowest I have heard HF do is about 0.90w/GH at a low hashrate 320 GH/s.  There are lots of small chip systems that beat the crap out of this system power per GH.  So small chips is the way to go for both cost and power.
MrTeal
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1274


View Profile
November 24, 2014, 04:34:47 PM
 #11172

I think there are two key factors to consider when comparing mining systems/chips.  1) system dollars per GH.  This is where big hot chips like Hashfast run into trouble.  The cost (expensive board, big power supply, water cooling) makes scaling a mine too expensive.  2) system power (at the wall) per GH is also a factor as we all pay for power.  The lowest I have heard HF do is about 0.90w/GH at a low hashrate 320 GH/s.  There are lots of small chip systems that beat the crap out of this system power per GH.  So small chips is the way to go for both cost and power.
The power numbers are wrong there. It's a Habanero as opposed to a Hashfast board, but it's running 405GH/s poolside on a 60 minute average (not what cgminer is reporting) and it's pulling 341W from the wall (including cooling) using a $40 850W HEC silver rated PSU.
RoadStress
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1610


View Profile
November 24, 2014, 08:26:25 PM
 #11173

Yes small cooler chips are more efficient for sure, but bigger chips that get alot more power per chip are cheaper.

You're confusing size with density. "GH per chip" is size. "GH per mm^2" is density. Density means you get more hashrate per wafer. Size of the chip is meaningless.

The amount of GH per Wafer has a direct affect on the GH per chip which goes into the price of a chip and eventually into the price of a unit.

If you have 1 wafer that can make 100 chips and each chip is 10gh or 1 wafer for 100 chips and each chip at lets say 50gh, the second chip you have a better shot at turning a profit on.

It's no use trying to explain things to Syke rationally.  He is in an emotional snit, suffering great butthurt, and in no mood to concede one nm to your mean old facts and logic.

Let's hope HF's market-leading GH per wafer IP fetches a great price at the auction, so Skye will get his refund and stop being so grumpy and obtuse.   Cool

Yes! Personal attacks are always better than reasonable and on subject replies. Here are some other generic replies which you can use in the future: "You have a small dick", "You are stupid" etc.

Good point Syke. Bigger isn't always better.

iCEBREAKER is a troll! He and cypherdoc helped HashFast scam 50 Million $ from its customers !
H/w Hosting Directory & Reputation - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=622998.0
starsoccer9
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1617



View Profile WWW
November 24, 2014, 08:26:51 PM
 #11174

I think there are two key factors to consider when comparing mining systems/chips.  1) system dollars per GH.  This is where big hot chips like Hashfast run into trouble.  The cost (expensive board, big power supply, water cooling) makes scaling a mine too expensive.  2) system power (at the wall) per GH is also a factor as we all pay for power.  The lowest I have heard HF do is about 0.90w/GH at a low hashrate 320 GH/s.  There are lots of small chip systems that beat the crap out of this system power per GH.  So small chips is the way to go for both cost and power.
The power numbers are wrong there. It's a Habanero as opposed to a Hashfast board, but it's running 405GH/s poolside on a 60 minute average (not what cgminer is reporting) and it's pulling 341W from the wall (including cooling) using a $40 850W HEC silver rated PSU.

Any idea how much the cooling is using?

I know that hashfast babyjet boards are not that efficient. I measured mine originally with the water cooling and got about 450watts.

MrTeal
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1274


View Profile
November 25, 2014, 03:45:44 AM
 #11175

Any idea how much the cooling is using?

I know that hashfast babyjet boards are not that efficient. I measured mine originally with the water cooling and got about 450watts.
The same model of cooler (though a physically different one) pulls 0.725A at 12.1V, so 8.77W. At the wall, probably pretty close to 10W of that is cooling.
digitalbrass
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 28


View Profile
November 25, 2014, 11:56:57 AM
 #11176

I have no intrest in mining anything anymore, where is our refunds.
defcon23
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1120


View Profile
November 25, 2014, 02:27:11 PM
 #11177

I have no intrest in mining anything anymore, where is our refunds.
what refund ? what did you expect ? lol  Grin  mpp's ?  Cheesy
Legend21
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 448



View Profile
November 28, 2014, 12:57:25 PM
 #11178

So guys tell me honestly, how much % we will get back minimum from our refund, in my mind i already know it would be fcking 0- 10%. But tell me your opiniuns.

Also is 4 december 2014 the only date when teh assets of hashfast will be sold? And will all the assets be sold and liquidated? Or is there a continue date for next auctions if the assets will not be sold?

Is it after 4 december 2014 finally done?


       █████████████████████████

   █████████████████████████

█████████████████████████

       █████████████████████████

   █████████████████████████

█████████████████████████
.ZONTO.
is the single app
for interacting with the world
|.

██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████

BETA | Presentation

██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
|.
  DOWNLOAD WHITEPAPER   
  slack | facebook | twitter | telegram
|  ICO DATE 
  12 / 09 / 2017
|
raskul
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 434



View Profile
November 28, 2014, 04:36:44 PM
 #11179

i very much doubt we will get ANY % of our money back. i've resigned it to history a long while ago.

tips    1APp826DqjJBdsAeqpEstx6Q8hD4urac8a
SolarSilver
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1117


View Profile
November 29, 2014, 12:23:50 AM
 #11180

So guys tell me honestly, how much % we will get back minimum from our refund, in my mind i already know it would be fcking 0- 10%. But tell me your opiniuns.

In the list of priorities, the customers of Hashfast will be the last in line

First to take most of the available money are going to be the lawyers involved, the liquidator, the temp CEO, etc...

Then the people employed full time at an increased salary at Hashfast

Then the government, social security, ...

Then the banks

And then the customers

If you have a missing order, you might get something
If you are waiting for MPP, you'll get laughed at.

Any more questions? :-)
Pages: « 1 ... 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 [559] 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!