Bitcoin Forum
November 22, 2017, 07:48:13 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: CoinTerra Demonstrates Working FPGA. Releases Additional ASIC Chip Details.  (Read 6522 times)
Puppet
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 966


View Profile
September 25, 2013, 07:12:29 AM
 #21

3 (square) dies in a package seems a strange choice. Are you putting in 4 and having one for redundancy?  Or was the number chosen to keep cooling manageable?
1511336893
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511336893

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511336893
Reply with quote  #2

1511336893
Report to moderator
1511336893
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511336893

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511336893
Reply with quote  #2

1511336893
Report to moderator
1511336893
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511336893

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511336893
Reply with quote  #2

1511336893
Report to moderator
Join ICO Now A blockchain platform for effective freelancing
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1511336893
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511336893

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511336893
Reply with quote  #2

1511336893
Report to moderator
1511336893
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511336893

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511336893
Reply with quote  #2

1511336893
Report to moderator
1511336893
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511336893

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511336893
Reply with quote  #2

1511336893
Report to moderator
blackarrow
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


View Profile WWW
September 25, 2013, 09:22:27 AM
 #22

We have recently released a new video demonstrating a working FGPA, as well as additional GoldStrike1 ASIC chip details.

Tape-out due: 1st week of October


If you just got the FPGA to work, how can you complete the back-end trial-run, back-end final-run and functional verification in 1 week?

We manufacture Bitcoin ASICs and Bitcoin mining equipment.
http://www.blackarrowsoftware.com
thanke
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 104


View Profile
September 25, 2013, 10:49:45 AM
 #23

We have recently released a new video demonstrating a working FGPA, as well as additional GoldStrike1 ASIC chip details.

To watch the video and read the full release, please head to http://cointerra.com/cointerra-demonstrates-working-fpga-releases-additional-chip-details/ .

The screenshot in the video shows solo-mining on the testnet. The first block created there was block #106507 at Thu, 19 Sep 2013 14:52:32 GMT. We also mined on eligius (statistics at http://eligius.st/~wizkid057/newstats/userstats.php/1P17UueqcMDw2P8FWv8Ny4ryGopicQmJPN).

Timo
cointerra
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 113



View Profile WWW
September 25, 2013, 03:27:27 PM
 #24

We have recently released a new video demonstrating a working FGPA, as well as additional GoldStrike1 ASIC chip details.

Tape-out due: 1st week of October


If you just got the FPGA to work, how can you complete the back-end trial-run, back-end final-run and functional verification in 1 week?


The Backend process has been going on for weeks. Functional verification is long done.
It is not a serial process. We are taping out 1st week of Oct.

www.cointerra.com - Professional grade Bitcoin mining equipment.
If you have any questions for us, we're happy to help at info (at) cointerra (dot) com
g0dbra1n
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 13


View Profile
September 25, 2013, 08:17:16 PM
 #25

We have recently released a new video demonstrating a working FGPA, as well as additional GoldStrike1 ASIC chip details.

To watch the video and read the full release, please head to http://cointerra.com/cointerra-demonstrates-working-fpga-releases-additional-chip-details/ .

The screenshot in the video shows solo-mining on the testnet. The first block created there was block #106507 at Thu, 19 Sep 2013 14:52:32 GMT. We also mined on eligius (statistics at http://eligius.st/~wizkid057/newstats/userstats.php/1P17UueqcMDw2P8FWv8Ny4ryGopicQmJPN).

Timo

Thanks for the link! Grin
dogie
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1442


dogiecoin.com


View Profile WWW
September 26, 2013, 02:38:23 AM
 #26

System box was recently upgraded from 2u to 4u to allow for larger fans and radiator to provide significant increase in cooling capacity and reduced fan noise  - 12cm fans are much quieter than 9cm fans.
Did no one actually read this? The chips don't even exist yet and the spec rollbacks are already happening. Now takes 2x the space.

creativex
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 434



View Profile
September 26, 2013, 03:07:21 AM
 #27

Yeah the case size increase isn't pretty. Hashfast is sticking with their 2U case size story for sierra(1.2Th).

bobsag3
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 546

Owner, Minersource.net


View Profile
September 26, 2013, 04:47:04 AM
 #28

Awesome news, I look forward to having some of these hosted at my facility.
As A native texan , are you guys ok with organized ahead of time visits?
Yes, you are always welcome to visit us in Austin! Smiley
Shot yall a PM Smiley
Still no response.
aerobatic
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 702


View Profile
September 26, 2013, 05:04:24 AM
 #29

System box was recently upgraded from 2u to 4u to allow for larger fans and radiator to provide significant increase in cooling capacity and reduced fan noise  - 12cm fans are much quieter than 9cm fans.
Did no one actually read this? The chips don't even exist yet and the spec rollbacks are already happening. Now takes 2x the space.

I would prefer better cooling to a smaller case if given a choice.

How is that a spec rollback?
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
September 26, 2013, 05:12:38 AM
 #30

System box was recently upgraded from 2u to 4u to allow for larger fans and radiator to provide significant increase in cooling capacity and reduced fan noise  - 12cm fans are much quieter than 9cm fans.
Did no one actually read this? The chips don't even exist yet and the spec rollbacks are already happening. Now takes 2x the space.

I would prefer better cooling to a smaller case if given a choice.

How is that a spec rollback?


If someone was looking to rent an entire datacenter rack.  They would get 25.2 TH per rack using HF and "only" 20 TH per rack using Cointerra.  The older spec would have been 42 TH per rack.
URSAY
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1918



View Profile
September 26, 2013, 05:20:36 AM
 #31

Awesome news, I look forward to having some of these hosted at my facility.
As A native texan , are you guys ok with organized ahead of time visits?
Yes, you are always welcome to visit us in Austin! Smiley
Shot yall a PM Smiley
Still no response.

It hasn't even been 24 hours.

Eaaaaaassssssssyyyyyyyy.  Smiley
aerobatic
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 702


View Profile
September 26, 2013, 02:42:05 PM
 #32

System box was recently upgraded from 2u to 4u to allow for larger fans and radiator to provide significant increase in cooling capacity and reduced fan noise  - 12cm fans are much quieter than 9cm fans.
Did no one actually read this? The chips don't even exist yet and the spec rollbacks are already happening. Now takes 2x the space.

I would prefer better cooling to a smaller case if given a choice.

How is that a spec rollback?


If someone was looking to rent an entire datacenter rack.  They would get 25.2 TH per rack using HF and "only" 20 TH per rack using Cointerra.  The older spec would have been 42 TH per rack.

Generally hosting is charged by the KW and not by the space it consumes so ther would be no difference in cost for requiring more rack space

Also the more important Criteria is cooling. Generally there is a limit of 8-10 kW per rack and usually it's less than 10 KW per rack. Few data centers allow more. Thus you will be sparsely populating these Bitcoin mining equipment on the racks with plenty of air in between regardless of 2U or 4U box size so in practice it would take the same amount of rack apace regardless of box size. And cooling these power hungry chips is very important cos they're temperature sensitive and run faster when they're cooler.

dogie
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1442


dogiecoin.com


View Profile WWW
September 26, 2013, 07:09:29 PM
 #33

System box was recently upgraded from 2u to 4u to allow for larger fans and radiator to provide significant increase in cooling capacity and reduced fan noise  - 12cm fans are much quieter than 9cm fans.
Did no one actually read this? The chips don't even exist yet and the spec rollbacks are already happening. Now takes 2x the space.

I would prefer better cooling to a smaller case if given a choice.

How is that a spec rollback?


If someone was looking to rent an entire datacenter rack.  They would get 25.2 TH per rack using HF and "only" 20 TH per rack using Cointerra.  The older spec would have been 42 TH per rack.

Generally hosting is charged by the KW and not by the space it consumes so ther would be no difference in cost for requiring more rack space

Also the more important Criteria is cooling. Generally there is a limit of 8-10 kW per rack and usually it's less than 10 KW per rack. Few data centers allow more. Thus you will be sparsely populating these Bitcoin mining equipment on the racks with plenty of air in between regardless of 2U or 4U box size so in practice it would take the same amount of rack apace regardless of box size. And cooling these power hungry chips is very important cos they're temperature sensitive and run faster when they're cooler.


Then why didn't they think of that in the first place?

Its like promising a 4x4 then deciding you dont need rear wheel drive and just saying "here is your 2x4, its better I promise".

DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
September 26, 2013, 08:03:06 PM
 #34

Generally hosting is charged by the KW and not by the space it consumes so ther would be no difference in cost for requiring more rack space

Well generally it is charged by both. 

Quote
Also the more important Criteria is cooling. Generally there is a limit of 8-10 kW per rack and usually it's less than 10 KW per rack. Few data centers allow more.

Many do if you are using a private cage.  Depending on the provider you can get up to ~25 KW (two 60A 208 drops).  Beyond that is probably going to require three phase.

Quote
Thus you will be sparsely populating these Bitcoin mining equipment on the racks with plenty of air in between regardless of 2U or 4U box size so in practice it would take the same amount of rack apace regardless of box size. And cooling these power hungry chips is very important cos they're temperature sensitive and run faster when they're cooler.

If you are putting 1 U space between units then it is 3U vs 5U still means less units per rack.   At 5U (4U unit plus 1U space).  You are looking at only 8 units per rack.  If it is 2 TH/s and pulls 0.8 J/GH (at the wall) it is "only" 12 KW per rack.  Granted it isn't the end of the world and for most users it probably makes no difference but it does mean less density.  I though 1 TH/U was pretty aggressive.
Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  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!