Bitcoin Forum
September 20, 2020, 02:20:05 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.20.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  

Warning: Moderators do not remove likely scams. You must use your own brain: caveat emptor. Watch out for Ponzi schemes. Do not invest more than you can afford to lose.

Pages: « 1 ... 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 [650] 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 ... 914 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [LABCOIN] IPO [BTCT.CO] - Details/FAQ and Discussion (ASIC dev/sales/mining)  (Read 1079584 times)
redbeans2012
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 887
Merit: 1000


View Profile
September 21, 2013, 04:47:37 PM
 #12981

The lab was located in Hong Kong right?
Than don't be alarmed if they turn silent in the next coming days
http://www.weather.com/news/weather-hurricanes/typhoon-usagi-threatens-taiwan-hong-kong-20130919

No, typhoon will not affect the Internet. Moreover, there's no lab, but just one manager and a couple of part time engineers having their own day jobs.

Not sure how typhoons effect life there but I've been in my fair share of hurricanes and the power almost always goes out
1600568405
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1600568405

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1600568405
Reply with quote  #2

1600568405
Report to moderator
1600568405
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1600568405

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1600568405
Reply with quote  #2

1600568405
Report to moderator
1600568405
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1600568405

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1600568405
Reply with quote  #2

1600568405
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1600568405
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1600568405

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1600568405
Reply with quote  #2

1600568405
Report to moderator
redbeans2012
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 887
Merit: 1000


View Profile
September 21, 2013, 05:02:46 PM
 #12982

Been a while since the last deposit. No sign of the promised update.  Undecided

It just came in.  1.7BTC over 3 hours, 30 minutes.

Looks like you have a decimal point off
utens
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 163
Merit: 100


View Profile
September 21, 2013, 05:05:48 PM
 #12983

Been a while since the last deposit. No sign of the promised update.  Undecided

It just came in.  1.7BTC over 3 hours, 30 minutes.

Looks like you have a decimal point off

17 btc!
NineLives
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252
Merit: 250



View Profile WWW
September 21, 2013, 05:11:57 PM
 #12984

Been a while since the last deposit. No sign of the promised update.  Undecided

It just came in.  1.7BTC over 3 hours, 30 minutes.

Looks like you have a decimal point off

17 btc!

I've not been keeping up..

17BTC in 24hrs?

What address are you looking at?  And is this Labcoin's address?

Bitcoin Mining Hardware:   www.mininghardware.co.uk
damiano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246
Merit: 1000


103 days, 21 hours and 10 minutes.


View Profile
September 21, 2013, 05:13:37 PM
 #12985

it was

.17430599 BTC

If it was 17BTC the price would of soared by now
Ytterbium
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 100



View Profile WWW
September 21, 2013, 05:14:09 PM
 #12986

But there doesn't seem to be much basis for saying that the process node needs to be fixed 9 months before chips finish.

All the evidence points in that direction, that especially for a small team it does take that much time.
Need one more ? Asicminer started their design in june  2012, selected the process and published preliminary specs in July,  taped out end of september, started hashing in February.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=91173.msg1003326#msg1003326

Friedcat is no idiot, wasnt underfunded, used an old "simple" process node,  but it took  8 months between selecting their process node and hashing. What basis do you have to assume labcoin could go so much faster?

You keep talking as if the feature size for all of these chips was set in stone as soon as they started design work.  In fact if you read that post it doesn't even sound like they had picked whether they were going to do 130 or 65 nm:

Quote
It is widely believed that the NRE cost of ASIC is very high, while the margin cost of mass ASIC production is very low. However, we happen to be in China, where the NRE cost is much more reasonable (~150k$ for 130nm, ~500k$ for 65nm, furthermore much less if you do a 1/N mask) than most people thought. And we are going to take well advantage of that.

It may also be possible to design a chip with die-size flexibility in mind.

You keep arguing this over and over again, claiming it takes a long time to design a chip.  No one is arguing with that. But you are presenting no evidence, and no real arguments for why it would be the case that feature size would need to be finalized early on in the design process.

All this despite the fact you've never actually designed and IC, or been involved in the process.  You're just pointing to various bitcoin chips you know about - except you don't know anything about when the feature size had to be finalized on those chips.

The evidence you're presenting is totally irrelevant to the actual claim you made.

utens
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 163
Merit: 100


View Profile
September 21, 2013, 05:14:16 PM
 #12987

Been a while since the last deposit. No sign of the promised update.  Undecided

It just came in.  1.7BTC over 3 hours, 30 minutes.

Looks like you have a decimal point off

17 btc!

I've not been keeping up..

17BTC in 24hrs?

What address are you looking at?  And is this Labcoin's address?
The decimal point off was in the other direction! Wink     this adress? 17psAW21J4twanAFWmbcd5WdX2pKeX3trm
Ytterbium
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 100



View Profile WWW
September 21, 2013, 05:14:45 PM
 #12988

Been a while since the last deposit. No sign of the promised update.  Undecided

It just came in.  1.7BTC over 3 hours, 30 minutes.

Looks like you have a decimal point off

Lol, wishful thinking I guess. Obviously I meant .17 Grin 

damiano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246
Merit: 1000


103 days, 21 hours and 10 minutes.


View Profile
September 21, 2013, 05:15:39 PM
 #12989

Once again, here is Labcoin's address

Bookmark it

https://blockchain.info/address/17psAW21J4twanAFWmbcd5WdX2pKeX3trm
radiumsoup
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 356
Merit: 255


View Profile
September 21, 2013, 05:31:54 PM
Last edit: September 21, 2013, 05:52:17 PM by radiumsoup
 #12990

TheSeven just clarifyied something via irc from the last chat, which was already pasted here
(timestamp below is US/Central)

Quote
[09-21 12:27:20] <TheSeven> let me quote sam (or whoever was using the skype account at that time): "they do but they will stop hashing after a few cycles and restart back" and "never showing the full hashing speed we have at any moment, i could show some mining address but that would not stop the FUD because of this"
[09-21 12:27:45] <TheSeven> and I haven't talked to them since a week, they're somewhat hard to reach. so I'm not involved with rev1 yet.
[09-21 12:28:20] <bobbabad> ok..
[09-21 12:28:21] <TheSeven> note that these quotes are also a week old, they might have made a lot of progress since then
...
[09-21 12:50:53] <TheSeven> sam explicitly confirmed that they were only restarting after several billion hashes
[09-21 12:50:59] <yttr> okay
[09-21 12:51:05] <yttr> several as in more then four?
[09-21 12:51:10] <TheSeven> yes
[09-21 12:51:12] <yttr> so more then a whole diff1 share
[09-21 12:51:21] <TheSeven> he basically said "every couple of diff1 shares"

PGP fingerprint:   0x85beeabd110803b93d408b502d39b8875b282f86
superduh
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 602
Merit: 500


View Profile
September 21, 2013, 05:33:13 PM
 #12991

keep the donations coming guys they'll be the dividends people will be receiving this upcoming week

ok
richard_dein
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 63
Merit: 10


View Profile
September 21, 2013, 05:53:57 PM
 #12992

TheSeven just clarifyied something via irc from the last chat, which was already pasted here
(timestamp below is US/Central)

Quote
[09-21 12:27:20] <TheSeven> let me quote sam (or whoever was using the skype account at that time): "they do but they will stop hashing after a few cycles and restart back" and "never showing the full hashing speed we have at any moment, i could show some mining address but that would not stop the FUD because of this"
[09-21 12:27:45] <TheSeven> and I haven't talked to them since a week, they're somewhat hard to reach. so I'm not involved with rev1 yet.
[09-21 12:28:20] <bobbabad> ok..
[09-21 12:28:21] <TheSeven> note that these quotes are also a week old, they might have made a lot of progress since then

I hope it it's just a software glitch, not the exposed heat pad issues catching them...
perhaps they can try to under-clock the chips and learn a lesson for their 65nm version.
Puppet
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980
Merit: 1008


View Profile
September 21, 2013, 06:02:22 PM
 #12993

You keep talking as if the feature size for all of these chips was set in stone as soon as they started design work.  In fact if you read that post it doesn't even sound like they had picked whether they were going to do 130 or 65 nm:

Tthey signed an NDA with the fab and received the cell libraries in July. Its set in stone then. Still took >2 months to tape out and until february to hash. Note that these libraries are not only specific to a node size, but to a specific process at a specific fab. What friedcat did before that would have been process agnostic, but most likely with a process node size in mind. And yes you could pick one smaller of bigger at that point, that isnt the point. The point is the 2 months it took to implement the design for their chosen process and the 7-8 months it took after tape out. But you think its ludicrous to claim that this would likely take 6-9 months.  You tell Friedcat that. And Bitfury. And BFL. IOW, everyone who so far has brought a bitcoin asic to market and even most of the one's that havent done yet but already  believe they cant do it much faster, like black arrow and cointerra.

And yes it is possible to go faster, by implementing something like altera hardcopy,  easic's nextreme, etc which is really inbetween an FPGA and a custom cell based asic. Thats the route KnC most likely took and ActiveMining definitely took. Doing that makes the development cycle substantially shorter, and has a lower NRE, but you pay for that in higher unit prices, worse performance and worse power efficiency. On 28nm thats a good tradeoff right now. But not something you can afford on a 65nm process that wont arrive until next year.

Quote
The evidence you're presenting is totally irrelevant to the actual claim you made.

The evidence covers 100% of all other bitcoin asics. Whats your evidence it can be done substantially faster?
Bitcycle
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420
Merit: 250


View Profile
September 21, 2013, 06:24:14 PM
 #12994


Another payment in.

At this point, I'm willing to assume it's really Labcoin hashing, but at a very low rate.
VolanicEruptor
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 21, 2013, 06:27:01 PM
 #12995


Another payment in.

At this point, I'm willing to assume it's really Labcoin hashing, but at a very low rate.

It's insignificant and shouldn't even be talked about.

abuelau
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 750
Merit: 500


www.coinschedule.com


View Profile
September 21, 2013, 06:28:09 PM
 #12996

Given the last 24 hours, the hash rate is about 300Gh/s at the mo.

Know what's happening in cryptoworld: www.coinschedule.com
cix888
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 54
Merit: 0



View Profile
September 21, 2013, 06:28:47 PM
 #12997


Another payment in.

At this point, I'm willing to assume it's really Labcoin hashing, but at a very low rate.

maybe that's only one address... If you trying to hash from 2TH to 500TH its probable that you mine with a few pools from the start and don't hold all your BTC in one place...
Puppet
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980
Merit: 1008


View Profile
September 21, 2013, 06:32:54 PM
 #12998

And yes it is possible to go faster, by implementing something like altera hardcopy,  easic's nextreme, etc which is really inbetween an FPGA and a custom cell based asic. Thats the route KnC most likely took and ActiveMining definitely took.

KnC's chip is done by orsoc. I just checked their website:

"Retargeting of complex FPGA design from Xilinx Virtex5 into an Altera Hard Copy"

Bingo. Im willing to bet that is why KnC is moving so fast (and performing so poorly on GH/W). Its not a cell based custom asic, its an altera hardcopy V. Also explains why they dont feel a need to do wafer probe testing or even final package tests.
VolanicEruptor
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 21, 2013, 06:46:47 PM
 #12999

Given the last 24 hours, the hash rate is about 300Gh/s at the mo.

It's insignificant and shouldn't be talked about.  That's what we refer to as "satoshi dust" after dividing it by 10,000,000 shares

Ytterbium
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 100



View Profile WWW
September 21, 2013, 07:09:48 PM
 #13000

You keep talking as if the feature size for all of these chips was set in stone as soon as they started design work.  In fact if you read that post it doesn't even sound like they had picked whether they were going to do 130 or 65 nm:

Tthey signed an NDA with the fab and received the cell libraries in July. Its set in stone then. Still took >2 months to tape out and until february to hash. Note that these libraries are not only specific to a node size, but to a specific process at a specific fab.

Just out of curiosity, do you have any idea what people actually do with these cell libraries?  I don't mean "design the chip" but actually how they physically use them?  Because it doesn't sound like you actually have any idea.

Quote
Quote
The evidence you're presenting is totally irrelevant to the actual claim you made.

The evidence covers 100% of all other bitcoin asics. Whats your evidence it can be done substantially faster?

Again, all your claims are about how long it takes to go from the start of a design to finished silicon.  None of them have to do with how late in that process they could have finalized the hardware size.  The initial choices were likely made for financial reasons, and stuck with for the same reasons.

I don't know why you're hammering this point.  You said you didn't know what you're talking about, and obviously you haven't learned anything new in the past hour.

I also asked TheSeven about this in IRC:

Quote
[12:41] <TheSeven> HDL is fairly highlevel and doesn't care much about the node
...
[12:41] <TheSeven> however the synthesis, optimization and test of course isn't
...
[12:43] <TheSeven> the time from deciding on a process node and receiving chips in quantity highly depends on: the fab, the process node, how much you're willing to pay, and how much effort you want to put into optimization
...
[12:44] <TheSeven> if you have a deal with a university fab that gives you some spare space bi-weekly wafer runs, that will move a lot quicker than if you're a low priority customer on a shared wafer run of some fab
...
[12:44] <TheSeven> synthesis is automated, but you typically need to do it a few times if you want to reach high performance, tweaking some parameters

See that? synthesis is automated. The part that takes HDL describing the logic and generates a GDSII file containing the layers is done by computer.  If you want to generate at multiple node sizes, you can.  All you would need to do is get multiple cell libraries for different technologies, and synthesize in parallel.  It would mean less overall optimization, but you could maintain feature size flexibility up until tapeout, depending on your financial situation, since smaller nodes cost more.

This is how you actually figure things out, but the way.  If you don't know something you do research and find out.  You don't just randomly guess based on "common sense" and then argue that your random guess is correct without any evidence.

Pages: « 1 ... 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 [650] 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 ... 914 »
  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!