miaviator
Donator
Hero Member
 Offline
Activity: 686
Merit: 519
It's for the children!
|
 |
December 28, 2013, 05:45:55 AM |
|
This is quite a popular thread.
Anyone want to buy my baby jet?
|
|
|
|
klondike_bar
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2128
Merit: 1005
ASIC Wannabe
|
|
December 28, 2013, 05:48:10 AM |
|
Our initial modules (Rev 0) had reliability issues due to the PCB layout (Printed Circuit Boards). We received Rev 2 PCBs this morning and they are currently being assembled.
Do you reckon they had the good sense to equip the PCBs with 4 PCIe power connectors this time around? They'll likely be pushing about 600W into these boards... I hope to god they learned their lesson from the likes of Bitfury. I also hope it's not 600 per board cause that would be stupidly ridiculous. I am expecting 300W per board though. If you look at this picture you'll notice two 8pin PCIE connectors - one on each side of the board. https://hashfast.com/hashfast-announces-fastest-bitcoin-mining-chip-in-the-world/ click the first image and enlarge it to "full screen" There was an update from them a while back saying that they "reopened the BJ (and Sierra?) cases installed upgraded power supplies", I don't see why they would have to do that if the power draw issue was resolved... or did they do that (and likely cost them more to open, replace and repack) so we could all put another upgrade board and not need to swap PSUs? So does that mean that they are kind enough to save us the money that we would have to spend to power 2 boards? Humm.... 2x6pin PCIe connectors are sufficient for 600W as long as they are on seperate sets of PSU leads. The problems experienced by [very few] bitfury users were almost exclusively caused by using a single lead with 2 plugs on it. The config allows for 6+ and 6- wires. This is sufficient because in comparison, I have antminer systems running happily using only 4+ and 4- wires from the ATX leads and that is around 500W |
|
|
|
|
DPoS
|
|
December 28, 2013, 06:02:00 AM |
|
new postings for 15 days ago?? still open? https://angel.co/jobs?slug=friends-family-and-founders&startup_id=271640JOBS Senior Software Wizard $120k - $160k · 0.25 - 0.5% Full Time · San Francisco · Software Engineer · Embedded Systems · C EE Power supply designer, PCB design $100k - $140k · 0.25 - 0.5% Full Time · San Francisco · Hardware Engineer · Electrical Engineering Supply Chain Management $60k - $130k · 0.15 - 0.5% Full Time · San Francisco · Operations · Supply Chain Management Active 15 days ago Refer a friend · Report this company |
|
|
|
|
|
|
jimmothy
|
|
December 28, 2013, 06:13:02 AM |
|
800gh/s per baby jet? Maybe everyone doesn't have to bring out the pitchforks after all? |
|
|
|
|
|
jspielberg
|
|
December 28, 2013, 06:31:13 AM |
|
800gh/s per baby jet? Maybe everyone doesn't have to bring out the pitchforks after all? Hashrate looks a little unstable at 800GH, and we don't know the power numbers at that rate, but I agree. 800GH/s with an MPP in early February brings the limetime loss to 16BTC/BJ rather than the eye watering 27BTC/BJ. While a 75% ROI is less than break-even, it is better than 48% we were looking at earlier. |
|
|
|
|
|
aerobatic
|
|
December 28, 2013, 06:35:06 AM
Last edit: December 28, 2013, 08:11:44 AM by aerobatic |
|
800gh/s per baby jet? Maybe everyone doesn't have to bring out the pitchforks after all? Hashrate looks a little unstable at 800GH, and we don't know the power numbers at that rate, but I agree. 800GH/s with an MPP in early February brings the limetime loss to 16BTC/BJ rather than the eye watering 27BTC/BJ. While a 75% ROI is less than break-even, it is better than 48% we were looking at earlier. hey guys.. don't assume the 800 GH average rate is for ONE module... there's really little chance that a chip designed for 400 GH could be over clocked to 800 GH, so assume this is actually two GN modules hashing at 400 GH each... (edit: they're laying claim to 700+ GH on their tweets so I'm happy to admit i was worrying unnecessarily and they may well have achieved a significant over clock performance) |
|
|
|
|
|
ineededausername
|
|
December 28, 2013, 06:36:06 AM |
|
800gh/s per baby jet? Maybe everyone doesn't have to bring out the pitchforks after all? Hashrate looks a little unstable at 800GH, and we don't know the power numbers at that rate, but I agree. 800GH/s with an MPP in early February brings the limetime loss to 16BTC/BJ rather than the eye watering 27BTC/BJ. While a 75% ROI is less than break-even, it is better than 48% we were looking at earlier. hey guys.. don't assume the 800 GH average rate is for ONE module... there's really little chance that a chip designed for 400 GH could be over clocked to 800 GH, so assume this is actually two GN modules hashing at 400 GH each... But it was hashing at 600 GH/s earlier....  |
(BFL)^2 < 0
|
|
|
dhenson
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 994
Merit: 1000
|
|
December 28, 2013, 06:37:35 AM |
|
800gh/s per baby jet? Maybe everyone doesn't have to bring out the pitchforks after all? That remains to be seen. They've just posted the update to Twitter and nothing is currently hashing to that address on Eligius. Cautiously optimistic. Considering they were apparently having power issues with the old board, it wouldn't make sense that a single BJ would have been hashing at ~650 up until yesterday. We very well might be looking at the history of multiple rigs. |
|
|
|
|
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
|
|
December 28, 2013, 06:58:40 AM |
|
800gh/s per baby jet? Maybe everyone doesn't have to bring out the pitchforks after all? Hashrate looks a little unstable at 800GH, and we don't know the power numbers at that rate, but I agree. 800GH/s with an MPP in early February brings the limetime loss to 16BTC/BJ rather than the eye watering 27BTC/BJ. While a 75% ROI is less than break-even, it is better than 48% we were looking at earlier. hey guys.. don't assume the 800 GH average rate is for ONE module... there's really little chance that a chip designed for 400 GH could be over clocked to 800 GH, so assume this is actually two GN modules hashing at 400 GH each... It may be two modules but saying there is little chance of a 100% boost over design spec is well silly since we have a prior competitor doing exactly that. KNC design spec was 300 GH/s my Nov Jupiter runs not at 500 GH/s, not at 600 GH/s but 672 GH/s. Is that also impossible? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jspielberg
|
|
December 28, 2013, 07:08:33 AM |
|
Their last tweet says: Happy about the Eligius Baby Jet performance at 600+GH/s on December 24, 25, 26. Check it out at http://ow.ly/s6MqPInteresting that they didn't mention the 700+ on the 27th? 2 modules or just 1? |
|
|
|
|
|
aerobatic
|
|
December 28, 2013, 07:13:45 AM
Last edit: December 28, 2013, 07:36:17 AM by aerobatic |
|
It may be two modules but saying there is little chance of a 100% boost over design spec is well silly since we have a prior competitor doing exactly that.
KNC design spec was 300 GH/s my Nov Jupiter runs not at 500 GH/s, not at 600 GH/s but 672 GH/s. Is that also impossible?
there's a difference. KnC didn't have a 300 GH system (chip was 100 GH) hashing at 600 GH. They had deliberately under quoted its intended performance so that when they knew the final performance everyone would be happy. i.e.: they under promised and over delivered... just like they intended. knC always knew it would perform faster than their quoted original performance... I could be wrong.. but i honestly don't think that something designed for 400 GH (at the extremes of performance and heat dissipation) will over clock to 800 GH. I think the previously announced 500 GH is much closer to the mark.. with a max of, say, 550-575 GH. (edit: hashfast seems to be saying that 600 GH is achievable) |
|
|
|
|
Minor Miner
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2478
Merit: 1020
Be A Digital Miner
|
|
December 28, 2013, 07:18:23 AM |
|
800gh/s per baby jet? Maybe everyone doesn't have to bring out the pitchforks after all? Hashrate looks a little unstable at 800GH, and we don't know the power numbers at that rate, but I agree. 800GH/s with an MPP in early February brings the limetime loss to 16BTC/BJ rather than the eye watering 27BTC/BJ. While a 75% ROI is less than break-even, it is better than 48% we were looking at earlier. hey guys.. don't assume the 800 GH average rate is for ONE module... there's really little chance that a chip designed for 400 GH could be over clocked to 800 GH, so assume this is actually two GN modules hashing at 400 GH each... But it was hashing at 600 GH/s earlier.... Dude, but with how much power? you have to get the watts to those boards but can anyone find that many amps also? |
|
|
|
|
|
cedivad
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
|
|
December 28, 2013, 07:20:07 AM |
|
They are most probably trying to use the smoke machine. Even if it does at 800GH stably (and i don't see that happen in this world), they will delay to death the MPP. If they want me to consider not to start the process that will end on a litigation on the first of Jan i want the MPP to have a guaranteed delivery date, and i want that NOW.
I don't like people on this thread telling me what to do. I will go after a full BTC refund, i will sue them to death, i don't care. It's just the right thing to do. I will lose everything in the meanwhile? I'm prepared for that.
|
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 |
|
|
Minor Miner
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2478
Merit: 1020
Be A Digital Miner
|
|
December 28, 2013, 07:21:50 AM |
|
They are most probably trying to use the smoke machine. Even if it does at 800GH stably (and i don't see that happen in this world), they will delay to death the MPP. If they want me to consider not to start the process that will end on a litigation on the first of Jan i want the MPP to have a guaranteed delivery date, and i want that NOW.
MPP?  ? If the chip is performing at that rate your MPP complaints are moot. You are already getting more than you ever dreamed of |
|
|
|
|
jddebug
|
|
December 28, 2013, 07:23:01 AM |
|
Eligius has just recovered from some downtime and could be displaying incorrect stats.
|
|
|
|
|
cedivad
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
|
|
December 28, 2013, 07:24:15 AM |
|
You are already getting more than you ever dreamed of Strange, i think to have dreamed of 400GH mining for me at the first of November. Oh, yes, and i forgot, i want the MPP not to be at the __advertised__ speed of a BJ, but at the __advertised twitter speed__. |
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
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
|
|
December 28, 2013, 07:24:59 AM |
|
They are most probably trying to use the smoke machine. Even if it does at 800GH stably (and i don't see that happen in this world), they will delay to death the MPP. If they want me to consider not to start the process that will end on a litigation on the first of Jan i want the MPP to have a guaranteed delivery date, and i want that NOW.
MPP? ? If the chip is performing at that rate your MPP complaints are moot. You are already getting more than you ever dreamed of Even if it is 800 GH/s (which nothing is confirmed that it is) it isn't more than we were dreaming about. Due to dificulty increases 400 GH/s on Oct 20 is the equivelent of not 800 GH/s but 1,532 GH/s on Jan 1. That's right if HF delivered 1,532 GH/s per BabyJet on Jan 1 miners would be no better off than getting what they promised (400 GH/s) when they promised (20 OCT). So still think complaints about MPP are moot? Even 800 GH/s will be a 80%+ loss IF delivered on 1 January AND difficulty only rises 25% per adjustment. Of course all this is academic but it likely is NOT going to be 800 GH/s delivered and it seems very likely it will be even later too. |
|
|
|
|
|
