Bitcoin Forum
December 13, 2017, 09:04:10 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 [191] 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 ... 586 »
  Print  
Author Topic: HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s  (Read 875464 times)
ImI
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1722



View Profile
December 09, 2013, 11:36:42 PM
 #3801

http://bitcoin.sipa.be/speed-lin.png
The tree days estimate has something to say.
Are you suggesting they're testing the chips right now?
no, it comes from KnC Nov batch.
source?
source???
KNC just ship about 2 petahash of jupiters and saturns and people have been posting for the last 10 days as they have received them.  

hey, this 570 devices with 400 GH/s are just 228 TH/s. this is nothing compared to KnC.
my guess is they have serious issues because the CEO is a marketing guy. all good news would go instantly public.

or they are tweaking and want to communicate the best possible result
with a deadline of three weeks left? they must have ball of steels!  Wink

maybe they have Wink
1513199050
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513199050

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513199050
Reply with quote  #2

1513199050
Report to moderator
1513199050
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513199050

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513199050
Reply with quote  #2

1513199050
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1513199050
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513199050

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513199050
Reply with quote  #2

1513199050
Report to moderator
1513199050
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513199050

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513199050
Reply with quote  #2

1513199050
Report to moderator
1513199050
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513199050

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513199050
Reply with quote  #2

1513199050
Report to moderator
Gyrsur
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834


#BEL+++


View Profile WWW
December 09, 2013, 11:39:57 PM
 #3802

http://bitcoin.sipa.be/speed-lin.png
The tree days estimate has something to say.
Are you suggesting they're testing the chips right now?
no, it comes from KnC Nov batch.
source?
source???
KNC just ship about 2 petahash of jupiters and saturns and people have been posting for the last 10 days as they have received them.  

hey, this 570 devices with 400 GH/s are just 228 TH/s. this is nothing compared to KnC.
my guess is they have serious issues because the CEO is a marketing guy. all good news would go instantly public.

or they are tweaking and want to communicate the best possible result
with a deadline of three weeks left? they must have ball of steels!  Wink

maybe they have Wink
who knows? CEO looks like such a lucky one! Barber looks more like a phlegmatic one.
itod
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106


^ will code for bitcoins


View Profile
December 10, 2013, 12:12:14 AM
 #3803

I can't believe the nonsense about the refunds in BTC I've read in this thread. It's been clarified by official statement several times by HF, I don't have a nerves to search two HF threads, but it's there somewhere:
All refunds will be in the currency payed by customer. If you paid in US$, they would refund the exact same amount in US$. If you paid in BTC, refund will be in BTC, but all the payments are calculated to be in the US$ on the day of the payment. That's important: day of the payment. Go check the BTC/US$ historic value on the day you paid, divide BTC paid with it, and expect BTC value of that US$ amount on the day of the refund. Hashfast never considered refunding BTC payments in US$, but they've made it clear that accounting value is in the US$ currency. I'm burned also by this policy, but consider these facts before you officially request a refund not to be burned with the consequences when you receive the fraction of the BTC paid as full refund. You can always prepare yourself for a legal action against HF if you don't like this, but this have been confirmed and other claims are just wishful thinking.

Just-Dice                 ██             
          ██████████         
      ██████████████████     
  ██████████████████████████ 
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
    ██████████████████████   
        ██████████████       
            ██████           
   Play or Invest                 ██             
          ██████████         
      ██████████████████     
  ██████████████████████████ 
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
    ██████████████████████   
        ██████████████       
            ██████           
   1% House Edge
Kouye
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336


Cuddling, censored, unicorn-shaped troll.


View Profile
December 10, 2013, 12:18:12 AM
 #3804

I can't believe the nonsense about the refunds in BTC I've read in this thread. It's been clarified by official statement several times by HF, I don't have a nerves to search two HF threads, but it's there somewhere:
All refunds will be in the currency payed by customer. If you paid in US$, they would refund the exact same amount in US$. If you paid in BTC, refund will be in BTC, but all the payments are calculated to be in the US$ on the day of the payment. That's important: day of the payment. Go check the BTC/US$ historic value on the day you paid, divide BTC paid with it, and expect BTC value of that US$ amount on the day of the refund. Hashfast never considered refunding BTC payments in US$, but they've made it clear that accounting value is in the US$ currency. I'm burned also by this policy, but consider these facts before you officially request a refund not to be burned with the consequences when you receive the fraction of the BTC paid as full refund. You can always prepare yourself for a legal action against HF if you don't like this, but this have been confirmed and other claims are just wishful thinking.

Why are you talking about refunds? HF still has 22 full days until every single batch one customer gets what he paid for.
That's plenty of time.

[OVER] RIDDLES 2nd edition --- this was claimed. Look out for 3rd edition!
I won't ever ask for a loan nor offer any escrow service. If I do, please consider my account as hacked.
itod
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106


^ will code for bitcoins


View Profile
December 10, 2013, 12:26:41 AM
 #3805

I can't believe the nonsense about the refunds in BTC I've read in this thread. It's been clarified by official statement several times by HF, I don't have a nerves to search two HF threads, but it's there somewhere:
All refunds will be in the currency payed by customer. If you paid in US$, they would refund the exact same amount in US$. If you paid in BTC, refund will be in BTC, but all the payments are calculated to be in the US$ on the day of the payment. That's important: day of the payment. Go check the BTC/US$ historic value on the day you paid, divide BTC paid with it, and expect BTC value of that US$ amount on the day of the refund. Hashfast never considered refunding BTC payments in US$, but they've made it clear that accounting value is in the US$ currency. I'm burned also by this policy, but consider these facts before you officially request a refund not to be burned with the consequences when you receive the fraction of the BTC paid as full refund. You can always prepare yourself for a legal action against HF if you don't like this, but this have been confirmed and other claims are just wishful thinking.

Why are you talking about refunds? HF still has 22 full days until every single batch one customer gets what he paid for.
That's plenty of time.

I'm talking about this because enormous amount of posts on this thread are spreading wishful thinking and misinformation in vain hope that many times repeated nonsense will somehow become a fact. Like the people having a need for somebody to hold their hand and tell them everything is gonna be OK. Well it will not. Whoever got in this HF mess (including myself) will gonna get financially hurt whichever of the many outcomes come to the light of day, and there's nothing anyone can do about it.

There's a real need for everyone to inform himself on facts and of possible outcomes, and prepare for the decision weather to request a refund or not. The HF is obviously in disarray, KnC made working miner on the very day they've laid their hands on chips. HF obviously can't get their act together, and 22 days look to me as just not enough time to do everything right from this moment on.

Just-Dice                 ██             
          ██████████         
      ██████████████████     
  ██████████████████████████ 
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
    ██████████████████████   
        ██████████████       
            ██████           
   Play or Invest                 ██             
          ██████████         
      ██████████████████     
  ██████████████████████████ 
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
    ██████████████████████   
        ██████████████       
            ██████           
   1% House Edge
amer
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168


View Profile
December 10, 2013, 12:33:23 AM
 #3806

http://bitcoin.sipa.be/speed-lin.png
The tree days estimate has something to say.
Are you suggesting they're testing the chips right now?
no, it comes from KnC Nov batch.
source?
source???
KNC just ship about 2 petahash of jupiters and saturns and people have been posting for the last 10 days as they have received them.  

hey, this 570 devices with 400 GH/s are just 228 TH/s. this is nothing compared to KnC.
my guess is they have serious issues because the CEO is a marketing guy. all good news would go instantly public.

Surprisingly, most of the information we have has come from the tech guy (Barber) via Twitter.

tips: 1amerApYUVjsKSuVUtfjxaoi7QXG7Zwao
Jutarul
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 994



View Profile
December 10, 2013, 01:08:42 AM
 #3807

Why are you talking about refunds?

I'm talking about this because enormous amount of posts on this thread are spreading wishful thinking and misinformation in vain hope that many times repeated nonsense will somehow become a fact....
There's a real need for everyone to inform himself on facts and of possible outcomes, and prepare for the decision weather to request a refund or not.
The first wave of refund requests was already denied by Hashfast. Probably because of the inherent injustice when refunding a barter type transaction for a highly volatile item like bitcoin. I assume it was decided that playing on time and delivering the product is better than to get into a refund mess at this stage.

Right now the best chance to resolve the issue is to deliver a product and compensate for the shortfalls by over delivering on the remaining promises. As a company they are very high up in the food chain - so there's enough love to spread around.

That said - the refund question will probably end up in court.

The ASICMINER Project https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=99497.0
"The way you solve things is by making it politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing.", Milton Friedman
defcon23
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1120


View Profile
December 10, 2013, 08:04:31 AM
 #3808

Hashfast: in October for gain  customers, you promised a delivery  for 15/30 october . Today, we know a little more about you, and you know more on your produtcs .. '(wtf)........ then today: what is the real hashrate of the chips? and when are you finaly deliver babyjets batch one? And please : try  Honestly this time . Thanx.
pmorici
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 471


View Profile WWW
December 10, 2013, 11:58:38 AM
 #3809

The first wave of refund requests was already denied by Hashfast. Probably because of the inherent injustice when refunding a barter type transaction for a highly volatile item like bitcoin. I assume it was decided that playing on time and delivering the product is better than to get into a refund mess at this stage.

Right now the best chance to resolve the issue is to deliver a product and compensate for the shortfalls by over delivering on the remaining promises. As a company they are very high up in the food chain - so there's enough love to spread around.

That said - the refund question will probably end up in court.

Where any of them actually denied?  I was under the impression the requests were largely ignored.  The inherent injustice here is advertising shipment dates that couldn't be met for a product who's value is almost entirely predicated on it's delivery date.  Hashfast themselves implicitly acknowledged this by pricing their batch two product 50% less than their batch one.

Gigampz: Adapter Boards for Server Power Supplies 50% cheaper than ATX power supplies.  DPS-800GBA, DPS-1200FBA, Common Slot, CRPS, DPS-1200TBA, DPS-2000bb, Dell z750p
cedivad
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1134



View Profile
December 10, 2013, 12:08:22 PM
 #3810

There are some reports of denied refunds after weeks of waiting for answers.

My anger against what is wrong in the Bitcoin community is productive:
Bitcointa.lk - Replace "Bitcointalk.org" with "Bitcointa.lk" in this url to see how this page looks like on a proper forum (Announcement Thread)
Hashfast.org - Wiki for screwed customers
Jutarul
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 994



View Profile
December 10, 2013, 12:28:38 PM
 #3811

The first wave of refund requests was already denied by Hashfast. Probably because of the inherent injustice when refunding a barter type transaction for a highly volatile item like bitcoin. I assume it was decided that playing on time and delivering the product is better than to get into a refund mess at this stage.

Right now the best chance to resolve the issue is to deliver a product and compensate for the shortfalls by over delivering on the remaining promises. As a company they are very high up in the food chain - so there's enough love to spread around.

That said - the refund question will probably end up in court.

Where any of them actually denied?  I was under the impression the requests were largely ignored.  The inherent injustice here is advertising shipment dates that couldn't be met for a product who's value is almost entirely predicated on it's delivery date.  Hashfast themselves implicitly acknowledged this by pricing their batch two product 50% less than their batch one.
Yes - everybody here is aware of this - but it will take a good lawyer to educate the judge on these issues. You don't want to go cheap on that one.

However, the injustice I was referring to is not the failure to deliver - it's the calamity which results from fixing the failure with a refund policy which is not tuned to the shortcoming of failing to deliver. E.g. they accepted both USD and bitcoin payments for a device which generates bitcoins which set them up for such a dilemma. Thus I can see why they would not want to refund if they are confident that they have a competitive product.

Any prudent compensation scheme would estimate the amount of bitcoins which where lost due to failure to deliver. In fact that's basically what the MPP provides - it's not exactly a bitcoin payout - but once the hardware is in the hands of customers they can sell them at market prices for bitcoins or mine themselves. Since the MPP delivered hardware itself is sensitive to time of delivery, a failure of delivering the MPP in time would make them liable for another round of compensation. That compensation scheme can drag on for a long time, but given the profit margins of the mining companies, I expect that it's in their power to eventually get rid of this liability.

The upshot is this: As long as they keep compensating early customers for any shortcomings nobody has an economic incentive to drag this out in front of a court, even if their approach may be appalling.

The ASICMINER Project https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=99497.0
"The way you solve things is by making it politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing.", Milton Friedman
Flashman
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518


Hodl!


View Profile
December 10, 2013, 01:57:08 PM
 #3812

do they have serious issues?

What I am imagining is happening right now, is that they are finding that the dies do 800Mhz at 0.5W/Gh, 900Mhz at 0.7W /gh, 1000Mhz at 0.9W/Gh and 1100Mhz at 1.2W/Gh ... and are thinking something similar to "Holy fuck, now what? The boards are only designed for 350W max." (1 hash per clock, 95 engines per die, 4 dies per package, SHOULD equal 400GH... ergo needing to run at about 1100Mhz )

I think whats fair is for them to ship every baby jet with 2 modules and a 3 module sierra. Or, 2 sierras with 5 modules in total (preferred).

So that might very well be an option, shipping extra modules per unit. Or beef up the onboard power conversion, and ship single unit BJs that suck 600W at the wall... (add "2 weeks" for scramble board redesign, add "2 weeks" for PSU resourcing...)


This is all purely speculative of course.

TL;DR See Spot run. Run Spot run. .... .... Freelance interweb comedian, for teh lulz >>> 1MqAAR4XkJWfDt367hVTv5SstPZ54Fwse6

Bitcoin Custodian: Keeping BTC away from weak heads since Feb '13, adopter of homeless bitcoins.
mgio
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 546


View Profile
December 10, 2013, 02:22:46 PM
 #3813

do they have serious issues?

What I am imagining is happening right now, is that they are finding that the dies do 800Mhz at 0.5W/Gh, 900Mhz at 0.7W /gh, 1000Mhz at 0.9W/Gh and 1100Mhz at 1.2W/Gh ... and are thinking something similar to "Holy fuck, now what? The boards are only designed for 350W max." (1 hash per clock, 95 engines per die, 4 dies per package, SHOULD equal 400GH... ergo needing to run at about 1100Mhz )

I think whats fair is for them to ship every baby jet with 2 modules and a 3 module sierra. Or, 2 sierras with 5 modules in total (preferred).

So that might very well be an option, shipping extra modules per unit. Or beef up the onboard power conversion, and ship single unit BJs that suck 600W at the wall... (add "2 weeks" for scramble board redesign, add "2 weeks" for PSU resourcing...)


This is all purely speculative of course.

This is exactly my fear too, although I've been too scared to say it.

I've been obsessively watching twitter, waiting for some news.
jspielberg
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406


View Profile
December 10, 2013, 03:05:46 PM
 #3814

No news definitely isn't good news.

I think we are all looking for the twitter feed to send up the "Houston, we have a problem" message.
So far radio silence kind of feels like the capsule actually blew up rather than leaking oxygen.

It would be natural to assume that the bad news is that the chip performance results is incompatible with the PCB as designed.  How long does it take to redesign the PCB?

cedivad
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1134



View Profile
December 10, 2013, 03:16:59 PM
 #3815

So far radio silence kind of feels like the capsule actually blew up rather than leaking oxygen.
Apollo 1. This is us before burning alive in that capsule: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/49/Apollo_1_crew_during_water_egress_training%2C_June_1966.jpg

Don't worry guys, they are just shipping everything to Canada where on the 13th they will start shipping, as promised.

USD refunds for everyone! Enjoy!

My anger against what is wrong in the Bitcoin community is productive:
Bitcointa.lk - Replace "Bitcointalk.org" with "Bitcointa.lk" in this url to see how this page looks like on a proper forum (Announcement Thread)
Hashfast.org - Wiki for screwed customers
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
December 10, 2013, 03:18:42 PM
 #3816

do they have serious issues?

What I am imagining is happening right now, is that they are finding that the dies do 800Mhz at 0.5W/Gh, 900Mhz at 0.7W /gh, 1000Mhz at 0.9W/Gh and 1100Mhz at 1.2W/Gh ... and are thinking something similar to "Holy fuck, now what? The boards are only designed for 350W max." (1 hash per clock, 95 engines per die, 4 dies per package, SHOULD equal 400GH... ergo needing to run at about 1100Mhz )

I think whats fair is for them to ship every baby jet with 2 modules and a 3 module sierra. Or, 2 sierras with 5 modules in total (preferred).

So that might very well be an option, shipping extra modules per unit. Or beef up the onboard power conversion, and ship single unit BJs that suck 600W at the wall... (add "2 weeks" for scramble board redesign, add "2 weeks" for PSU resourcing...)


This is all purely speculative of course.

It is 2 hahes per core per clock.  Each core is actually a "dual core" capable of 2 nonces per clock.  Why 96 cores capable of two nonces per clock instead of 192 independent cores?  No idea but per the spec each chip is capable of 768 nonces per clock so the clocksped requirements are half (minus yield losses) of what you posted.

96 engines * 2 * 4 = 768 nonces per clock.   400 GH/s = 400,000 MH/s / 768 = 520 Mhz.  Now that assumes 100% yield which is never going to be the case but say 550 Mhz with 90% core yield would still achieve ~ 400 GH/s.  650 Mhz with 95% output would be 474 GH/s.

Now the radio silence is bad news, what bad news not sure but the chips as designed/specced should be ~500 Mhz and 768 nonces per clock (minus yield losses).
jspielberg
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406


View Profile
December 10, 2013, 03:41:31 PM
 #3817

There is one other possibility... which I have only just now considered.

Since the CEO is a marketing guy, and HashFast is going to be at "Inside Bitcoin" in Vegas today, maybe they want to make a big splash by announcing their stats/specs, demo box there.

Would be inline with normal marketing strategies if they weren't already so late... (blah blah.. they are not late until Jan.1st, but we all were expecting at least a start by Dec.1).

Regardless, if that is not the case, then I imagine there will be a mob of people waiting to pummel them with questions.  So I think either way today we will get some updates.

cedivad
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1134



View Profile
December 10, 2013, 03:45:32 PM
 #3818

Regardless, if that is not the case, then I imagine there will be a mob of people waiting to pummel them with questions.  So I think either way today we will get some updates.
Nice tough, thanks for sharing.

BFL's Josh talk is at 1:30PM and there doesn't appear to be anyone from HF on that list, tough:
http://www.mediabistro.com/insidebitcoins/agenda.asp

However, they are a sponsor: http://www.mediabistro.com/insidebitcoins/sponsors.asp (along with BFL and Cloud Hashing)

My anger against what is wrong in the Bitcoin community is productive:
Bitcointa.lk - Replace "Bitcointalk.org" with "Bitcointa.lk" in this url to see how this page looks like on a proper forum (Announcement Thread)
Hashfast.org - Wiki for screwed customers
Flashman
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518


Hodl!


View Profile
December 10, 2013, 03:50:04 PM
 #3819

It is 2 hahes per clock.  Each core is actually a "dual core" capable of 2 nonces per clock.  So cut your speed requirement in half.

96 engines * 2 * 4 = 768 nonces per clock.   400 GH/s = 400,000 MH/s / 768 = 520 Mhz.  Now that assumes 100% yield which is never going to be the case but say 550% with 90% core yield would achieve ~ 400 GH/s.  

Now the radio silence is bad news, what bad news not sure but The chips as designed were designed to operate around 500 Mhz not 1.1 Ghz and processed 2 nonces per core.

I must have missed that.... if they only need to run 500Mhz though, what's all the fuss with the substrate?


Edit: Oh by the way, this IS two SHA2 operations per clock right? Not two SHA operations per clock, which is the norm for SHA2, just wanna be clear.

TL;DR See Spot run. Run Spot run. .... .... Freelance interweb comedian, for teh lulz >>> 1MqAAR4XkJWfDt367hVTv5SstPZ54Fwse6

Bitcoin Custodian: Keeping BTC away from weak heads since Feb '13, adopter of homeless bitcoins.
ImI
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1722



View Profile
December 10, 2013, 03:51:13 PM
 #3820


I didnt know they are in Vegas.

That is indeed good news.



Pages: « 1 ... 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 [191] 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 ... 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!