Break even difficulty by hardware efficiency (power cost = value of BTC)

[sickpig]

Thanks for the datapoints.  It is strange the reported DC/DC output doesn't change.

~430W out regardless however the input wattage changes significantly.

Need to make some assumptions but lets say the 6 fans use 6W ea (someone can look at the fan sticker) and the host uses another 5W.   So balance of system is ~40W @ 12VDC.  Lets also assume your PSU is 90% efficient at

v0.90 = 1650W @ 220VAC ~= 1485W DC @ 12VDC  (1485 - 40)/2 =  722W.
v0.95 =  946W @ 220VAC ~= 850W DC @ 12VDC  (850-40)/2 = 405W.

v0.90 VRM In: 722W Out: 433W Efficiency: 60% OUCH
v0.95 VRM In: 405W Out: 438W Efficiency: IMPOSSIBLE.  

So either your numbers or incorect or the output reported by the VRM is incorrect.   It is possible the PSU efficiency in the second case was slighly higher (say 92%) and the host power usage is less but those numbers don't change things significantly.  Looking at it the other way the VRM is at most 90% efficient.  438W out = 486W in (@ 90 efficiency) or 962W @ 12VDC for both.  Even with no fans or host wattage the AC wattage doesn't match the reported VRM output wattage even under ideal conditions (90% efficiency @ VRM, 92% efficiency @ PSU).    

sorry but I think I didn't explain the situation properly (I'm not a native english speaker, plus my eng is a little bit rusty).

I own 2 jupiters and all the ampere measurments reported take into account both of them.  

With 0.90 together the 2 jups drain 7.5 ampere @ 220V. For each of them at the wall I get more or less 825 Watts .

Unfortunately I didn't get a chance to use bertmod while using 0.90 (It didn't even exist maybe).

With 0.95  together the 2 jups  drain  4.4 Ampere @ 220 V.  circa 473 Watts each.

The ouput I get from bertmod reported in the prev post is related to the jupiters while running fw 0.95 (jup 1 = 438 , jup 2 = 433)


 
edit: fix a few typos

[ralree]

Can we update to $200/BTC now?

[sickpig]

That would put the reported DC output of the module higher (430W ) than the computing DC input (385W).  Something isn't correct.   So either your wall wattage numbers or the output reported by the VRM is incorrect, they both can't be right.  Under ideal conditions (no cooling or host power consumption), 90% DC efficiency, 93% ATX PSU efficiency.  430W output would mean (430/(0.9*0.93) = 513W) >500W at the wall.

next time I'll go to the colo I will measure at the wall wattage again.

Power Supply model.

I don't remember if I've already said mine is a cooler master v850.

[canth]

That would put the reported DC output of the module higher (430W ) than the computing DC input (385W).  Something isn't correct.   So either your wall wattage numbers or the output reported by the VRM is incorrect, they both can't be right.  Under ideal conditions (no cooling or host power consumption), 90% DC efficiency, 93% ATX PSU efficiency.  430W output would mean (430/(0.9*0.93) = 513W) >500W at the wall.

next time I'll go to the colo I will measure at the wall wattage again.

Power Supply model.

I don't remember if I've already said mine is a cooler master v850.

Has anyone run firmware 0.97 with the bertmod files? If so, I'll run this and give you guys watts at the wall vs watts output at the VRM.

[billywilly]

That would put the reported DC output of the module higher (430W ) than the computing DC input (385W).  Something isn't correct.   So either your wall wattage numbers or the output reported by the VRM is incorrect, they both can't be right.  Under ideal conditions (no cooling or host power consumption), 90% DC efficiency, 93% ATX PSU efficiency.  430W output would mean (430/(0.9*0.93) = 513W) >500W at the wall.

next time I'll go to the colo I will measure at the wall wattage again.

Power Supply model.

I don't remember if I've already said mine is a cooler master v850.

Has anyone run firmware 0.97 with the bertmod files? If so, I'll run this and give you guys watts at the wall vs watts output at the VRM.

http://forum.kncminer.com/forum/main-category/main-forum/6183-bertmod-0-2-unofficial-firmware-mod-feedback-thread?p=9442#post9442

It works.

[btcusr]

At 0.9 Joules / GHash, 10 PHash server farm requires, 2.5 kWh?!

I must be wrong somewhere.

Is it 0.9 joules / second / GHash?

In that case, it would be 9000 kWh.

[DeathAndTaxes]

At 0.9 Joules / GHash, 10 PHash server farm requires, 2.5 kWh?!

I must be wrong somewhere.

Is it 0.9 joules / second / GHash?

In that case, it would be 9000 kWh.

kWh is a measure of energy (power over time).
kW is a measure of power.

1 kW for 1 hour = 1 kWh


10 PH/s farm
0.9 J/GH * 10,000,000 GH/s = 9,000,000 J/s = 9,000,000 W = 9,000 kW

So yes 9,000 but it is kW not kWh.  Now if you ran your 9,000 kW farm for 1 hour it would use 9,000 kWh of energy.  
In a year that 9,000 kW farm would use 9,000 * 24 * 365 = 788 million kWh.  At $0.10 per kWh that would be $78.8 million in energy cost.

If the Joule conversion confuses you 0.9 J/GH = 0.9 W/GH/s but that looks ugly.

[btcusr]

By taking $$$ out of equation, your calculations are based on, 1 mBTC/kWh ($0.1 per kWh, at $100 per BTC), or 500 uBTC/kWh ($0.1 per kWh, at $200).

If some solar / wind (or horse-powered) power companies jump into Bitcoin mining and offer electricity priced in BTC, then Bitcoin mining would look entirely different.

These companies can list their kW shares in an exchange for trading, like cex.io GHS.

I am so looking forward to see this happen.. my prediction / guesstimate; this is going to happen in 2014-Q4.

May be 22nm / 20nm ASICs could slow this down for another quarter, or two.

[bitjet]

According to thegenesisblock.com none of the current machines will pay for themselves.... What do you say about that?

[btcusr]

According to thegenesisblock.com none of the current machines will pay for themselves.... What do you say about that?

May be fiat-in can be paid out as fiat-out. $5k miner + $1k electricity in >> $6k out. I'm sure no one is getting their BTC out; means 100 btc in >> 50 btc. You should consider yourself lucky if exchange rate was doubled.

Now, hoarding becomes a better investment than investing in miners..

[btcusr]

1 HP ≈ 746 watts

1 HP ≈ Burning 641 calories an hour

300 calories = 75kg person, cycling at <10 mph, for an hour = (746/641) * 300 watts = 349.14 watts = 349.14 Joules/second = 384 GHash ≈ 2 bitcents @ 3 PHash ≈ $4 @ $200 per BTC

So, with an appropriate exercise machine attached to a miner, your 1 hour workout would also give you some Bitcoin rewards.

[CryptoCluster]

1 HP ≈ 746 watts

1 HP ≈ Burning 641 calories an hour

300 calories = 75kg person, cycling at <10 mph, for an hour = (746/641) * 300 watts = 349.14 watts = 349.14 Joules/second = 384 GHash ≈ 2 bitcents @ 3 PHash ≈ $4 @ $200 per BTC

So, with an appropriate exercise machine attached to a miner, your 1 hour workout would also give you some Bitcoin rewards.

Then you would have to order pizza for BTC to replenish calories lost on mining. Just like an ordinary coal miner :-)

[canth]

1 HP ≈ 746 watts

1 HP ≈ Burning 641 calories an hour

300 calories = 75kg person, cycling at <10 mph, for an hour = (746/641) * 300 watts = 349.14 watts = 349.14 Joules/second = 384 GHash ≈ 2 bitcents @ 3 PHash ≈ $4 @ $200 per BTC

So, with an appropriate exercise machine attached to a miner, your 1 hour workout would also give you some Bitcoin rewards.

I can see armies of prisoners in china being forced to pedal bikes attached to PCs with massive piles of discarded block erupters right now.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2011/06/02/chinese-prisoners-forced-to-farm-world-of-warcraft-gold/

[btcusr]

So, now $1000 /BTC, the most efficient miner exists today, can profitably hash till the network reaches, 1668 PHash. Awesome.

I don't think we're going cross this limit anytime in 2014.

[ScaryHash]

So, now $1000 /BTC, the most efficient miner exists today, can profitably hash till the network reaches, 1668 PHash. Awesome.

I don't think we're going cross this limit anytime in 2014.

I'm excited.

[Gator-hex]

I have to wonder..

KNC              28nm        1.1 [3]      18,250            130.6   <-- if this is a 28nm FPGA HardCopy not a true 28nm ASIC?
Bitfury          55nm         0.9           23,300            166.8  

http://www.altera.co.uk/devices/asic/hardcopy-asics/hardcopy-v/hcv-index.jsp

[puffer]

[Gator-hex]

Yeah saw that but if the 20nm is a FPGA HardCopy ASIC it will be no faster or efficient than a genuine 28nm ASIC.

I wonder when we will see Bitfury Strikes Again?!

[btcusr]

With new 10MW DataCenter KNC can add another 10-15 PHash to network.

[Gator-hex]

Work in kWh (1000 watts per hour), that's what you pay your power company in, not J.

My 6x Bitfury Hex16B mine 270GH using 415W @ 11p per kWh

The math is simple...

0.415kWh x 11p x 24hrs = 109.56p (£1.10) power cost per day.

The exchange rate is pretty bad today* 436.6 GBP (713.1 USD) per BTC and they mine about 0.06BTC per day...

0.06 x £436.60 = £26.20 mining revenue per day.

So now you take one away from the other

£26.20 - £1.10 = £25.10 mining profit per day (excluding equipment costs)

The miners cost 6x £415 = £2490 / £25.10 mining profit per day = 99 days to break even if you bought it today.

Keep all your receipts in your local currency not BTC, in case you ever need to explain to the tax man where your income is coming from!  

*Seems to be a problem at MtGox http://www.marketwatch.com/story/bitcoin-drops-sharply-as-mt-gox-halts-withdrawals-2014-02-07?dist=beforebell