Official Thread: AMT

[FrictionlessCoin]

Did you have to run additional circuitry to have them run in the garage?
I plan on upgrading my garage since my basement doesn't have the required wiring.

lol, edited that missing info above, but to reply directly...

Yes, I had three breakers at 40a, and had to add another 5 breakers at 20a. The 40a was for power-tools with intermittent high-amp use. The 20a was for each computer, to sustain the constant amp use. Gave me room to play, but I used standard wiring... Should have upgraded the wires... Now I may have to.

I used the pool-pump breaker for my porch-units. The pool is now a pond with Koi, and no running pump.

Did you do it yourself or did you have someone do it for your?

Did you have to take out dry wall to install the wiring or you just have them exposed?

[1714908900]

1714908900

[1714908900]

1714908900

[1714908900]

1714908900

[MrTeal]

I'll toss in a bet here as well similar to Ioshia, if anyone wants to take it on.
3:1, my 3 vs your 1.
AMT will not meet their max power specs within 10%. IE, they will not ship production units that hit 1.2TH/s at 990W with 120V AC input, as measured by a KillAWatt or similar power meter. The test must be run for 30 minutes to allow the unit to thermally stabilize. The average hashrate must be 1.2GH/s or higher.
The measurement must be made by two paying customers, who are not involved with the bet.

The bet will be escrowed, preferably through casascius' excellent escrow tool.

Anyone interested? ISAWHIM, AMT_Miners?

The offer is good until noon GMT on Feb 14th.

[ISAWHIM]

The breakers were installed in the existing breaker-box, the wires were run in conduit, by an electrician friend. (outside the walls) The outlets, that tie to the raw lines, were done by me. Anything at the "outlet-box", is allowed to be done by the home-owner, here in Florida. The rest, for insurance purposes, had to be done and also inspected by a certified electrician.

Only cost about $350 for everything to be done. Friends work for beer.

(As for the bet above... change that to peak, and not average, and it would be a reasonable bet. But not one I would be willing to submit to, as "shit happens". Since "out of the box", is also not specified, and "optimization" isn't specified.. I would take you up on that offer, if you allowed it to be "judged" after a suitable "optimization period". Also, once AMT says how many chips will be in my unit. Without that, it is a blind bet. You have a contradiction too... you say "hit 1.2THs", then say "average 1.2THs"... that is a big contradiction... "Hit 200MPH", and "Stay running at 200MPH average", is not the same. Do you even lift bro?)

Also note: I think I am getting screwed by the power company though... we put all lines on one half/leg of the power... So it seems like I am drawing twice the amps at the meter. If you do setup new breakers, have them balance them to the two separate legs. If you draw 100a on one leg, the meter here seems to see 200a because it seems to measure the greatest draw across both legs, as amps, but charges for watts. It seems to assume if 100a is drawn on one, that 100a is also being drawn on the other. If I had that balanced, it would be 50a and 50a on each leg, and the meter would read 100a total, not 200a total. That is my next thing to fix. (That, or I need a PF-correction unit.) Electric meters are such horrible technology. (Again, this is what seems to be happening, when I measure the timing outside. It does not match my actual draw of the units. Measured directly. Chime-in if you know the solution to that one. That solution was told to me by the guy who installed the breakers. He didn't think it would be that dramatic of an offset.)

Yes, I had the power company come to reset the meter and "test it", they said it was working fine. Sure... it only charges me double, it is supposed to do that! lol. So much for paying half price. (It isn't quite double, but it is more than measured draw.)

[Puppet]

Ah, the swiss posted their video..  came in at 1060W on 40 chips - TO THE WALL!

AHH!! 1W/Ghs!!!

Unbelievable. You have been selling 0.25-0.5W/GH at the wall. When pointed out how ludicrous that claim was, you never replied, but at some point quietly updated the website to show a slightly less absurd but still completely unrealistic 0.5-0.75W/GH. Now that your supplier show its ability to deliver a hair above 1W/GH, you are over the moon ?

[ISAWHIM]

AHH!! 1W/Ghs!!!

Unbelievable. You have been selling 0.25-0.5W/GH at the wall. When pointed out how ludicrous that claim was, you never replied, but at some point quietly updated the website to show a slightly less absurd but still completely unrealistic 0.5-0.75W/GH. Now that your supplier show its ability to deliver a hair above 1W/GH, you are over the moon ?

From coincraft website and specs...
"Power usage of 0.35 W/GH in low power, 0.6 W/GH in nominal and 1 W/GH in Turbo mode"

Yes, 1W/GHs is one of the specs... for the CHIPS, not the whole UNIT/miner.

0.6W/GHs Obviously requires about 0.4W/GHs from the rest of the unit, to operate. Which includes inefficiencies. PSU, fans, daughter-boards, driving components, network-card...

Not to mention that demo was not optimized, in code, I am sure... Can't be optimized/tuned until it is up and running. Also, that is NOT what AMT is selling. They are obviously not the same units. You saw it run from a cold-start, for barely a few minutes. Slight premature response to claim "victory" so soon to "estimates" of a similar "pre-order".

[Puppet]

blah blah blah

Lets refresh readers memory:

Yes, I do believe the unit will produce up to 1.2THs, running around 600Watts.

...

Worst case scenerio, as per specs... I can see the "boards" consuming 600Watts, with the rest consuming about 20Watts for the controller and fans, prior to the PSU. With a horrid 80% efficiency, that would put it at a 750Watts at the wall, roughly.

[sirminesalot]

they are either:

1> a scam

or

2> completely incompetent


Let's hope for #2

You have not answered the question.  Are you an AMT customer?

Yes, i'm a customer. I have 1 machine on order and my close friend has 2 ordered. We went in on this together.

I'm not posting my personal information or order # due to the treatment I've received from the community in this thread, and especially AMT_Miners.

Yes, I have money tied up in this. Whether you want to believe it or not is up to you, either way I don't really care.

I'm not some troll trying to put down AMT - they are doing a great job of that themselves. I'm just looking for some decent updates on manufacturing and shipping progress. Thus far I am still disappointed with the lack of information provided in these updates.

Just going to wait this out and see what happens next week. I've given up on demanding anything from AMT_Miners; he's simply skimming over the questions and cherry picking what they want to answer.

[YourPalToots]

they are either:

1> a scam

or

2> completely incompetent


Let's hope for #2

You have not answered the question.  Are you an AMT customer?

Yes, i'm a customer. I have 1 machine on order and my close friend has 2 ordered. We went in on this together.

I'm not posting my personal information or order # due to the treatment I've received from the community in this thread, and especially AMT_Miners.

Yes, I have money tied up in this. Whether you want to believe it or not is up to you, either way I don't really care.

I'm not some troll trying to put down AMT - they are doing a great job of that themselves. I'm just looking for some decent updates on manufacturing and shipping progress. Thus far I am still disappointed with the lack of information provided in these updates.

Just going to wait this out and see what happens next week. I've given up on demanding anything from AMT_Miners; he's simply skimming over the questions and cherry picking what they want to answer.

ahhhh. so you had dollar signs in your eyes and cashed out the savings account. Now the rent is due and the wife is wondering what is going on with the big scheme you had cooking.

[sirminesalot]

they are either:

1> a scam

or

2> completely incompetent


Let's hope for #2

You have not answered the question.  Are you an AMT customer?

Yes, i'm a customer. I have 1 machine on order and my close friend has 2 ordered. We went in on this together.

I'm not posting my personal information or order # due to the treatment I've received from the community in this thread, and especially AMT_Miners.

Yes, I have money tied up in this. Whether you want to believe it or not is up to you, either way I don't really care.

I'm not some troll trying to put down AMT - they are doing a great job of that themselves. I'm just looking for some decent updates on manufacturing and shipping progress. Thus far I am still disappointed with the lack of information provided in these updates.

Just going to wait this out and see what happens next week. I've given up on demanding anything from AMT_Miners; he's simply skimming over the questions and cherry picking what they want to answer.

ahhhh. so you had dollar signs in your eyes and cashed out the savings account. Now the rent is due and the wife is wondering what is going on with the big scheme you had cooking.

Negative. If that were the case I would of already pursued a refund from AMT.

I simply want some professionalism (as well as my Miner) from AMT.

I guess i'm asking for the impossible.

Frictionlesscoin: No offense, but your theory about AMT not being interested in retail - and wanting to distribute these miners on a larger scale, is pure speculation. If it is true, they've gone about it in the complete worst way possible.

[Syke]

Also, that is NOT what AMT is selling. They are obviously not the same units.

You're right, the are actually selling 1.2 TH @ 600-900 watts. How much are you willing to bet they deliver that?

[FrictionlessCoin]

Negative. If that were the case I would of already pursued a refund from AMT.

I simply want some professionalism (as well as my Miner) from AMT.

I guess i'm asking for the impossible.

Frictionlesscoin: No offense, but your theory about AMT not being interested in retail - and wanting to distribute these miners on a larger scale, is pure speculation. If it is true, they've gone about it in the complete worst way possible.

Agree,  it is pure speculation.  However, AMT did not deny this. They however denied that they were working on a farm.

AMT hates dealing with customers,  so going wholesale is in their best interests.

Why deal with hundreds of unsatisfied customers like you? 

[sirminesalot]

Negative. If that were the case I would of already pursued a refund from AMT.

I simply want some professionalism (as well as my Miner) from AMT.

I guess i'm asking for the impossible.

Frictionlesscoin: No offense, but your theory about AMT not being interested in retail - and wanting to distribute these miners on a larger scale, is pure speculation. If it is true, they've gone about it in the complete worst way possible.

Agree,  it is pure speculation.  However, AMT did not deny this. They however denied that they were working on a farm.

AMT hates dealing with customers,  so going wholesale is in their best interests.

Why deal with hundreds of unsatisfied customers like you?  

AMT is far from what a business should operate like. You think they won't have to answer to someone with millions of dollars invested in them? Please.

Don't forget, it's OUR money that is bank rolling their start-up. They should treat their current (and prospective) clients with respect and professionalism.

I don't see who in their right mind is going to 'wire transfer' tons of cash over to AMT with their shoddy website, shitty PR, and general disdain towards those with questions about production schedules and shipping timelines.

I am done preaching to you guys. Many of you have blinders on and are simply hoping for the best. Let's see if it goes that way.

[YourPalToots]

I don't see who in their right mind is going to 'wire transfer' tons of cash over to AMT with their shoddy website, shitty PR, and general disdain towards those with questions about production schedules and shipping timelines.

The answer is YOU DID.

[sirminesalot]

I don't see who in their right mind is going to 'wire transfer' tons of cash over to AMT with their shoddy website, shitty PR, and general disdain towards those with questions about production schedules and shipping timelines.

The answer is YOU DID.

True, i'll give you that. But I pre-ordered very early in the process. I didn't expect this pathetic customer service, lack of updates and general incompetence. A bit late now to be kicking myself for it.

But thanks for pointing that out.

[MrTeal]

(As for the bet above... change that to peak, and not average, and it would be a reasonable bet. But not one I would be willing to submit to, as "shit happens". Since "out of the box", is also not specified, and "optimization" isn't specified.. I would take you up on that offer, if you allowed it to be "judged" after a suitable "optimization period". Also, once AMT says how many chips will be in my unit. Without that, it is a blind bet. You have a contradiction too... you say "hit 1.2THs", then say "average 1.2THs"... that is a big contradiction... "Hit 200MPH", and "Stay running at 200MPH average", is not the same. Do you even lift bro?)

The 5 second average in cgminer is meaningless, as it can very greatly in a short period of time due to the way its calculated. The only thing that matters is average speed over a reasonable period of time. I am proposing a 30 minute run.
I would allow an optimization period of one week after the first units begin arriving in customers hands. However, it must be software optimization. The hardware must remain unchanged over that period. For example, the customer adding a couple extra modules and underclocking/volting them to reach 1.2TH/s would not be acceptable.
I won't wait past my deadline. Of course it is a blind bet, equally so for both parties. If we waited for it to be resolved it's hardly a bet.
As for your strange objection to "hit" vs "average", I am contesting that over a minimum 30 minute run, the average hashrate must be at least 1.2TH/s. If at some point in that 30 minutes the 5s number hits 1.2TH/s but the average over the full run is 1.1TH/s, that is not sufficient.

And no I don't lift. What a silly question.

It should be a fairly easy choice for you. Less than two months ago you seemed certain a worst case scenario would be 750W for 1.2TH/s. I'm giving you a margin of 32% over that, AND offering 3:1 odds.

[ISAWHIM]

blah blah blah

Lets refresh readers memory:

Yes, I do believe the unit will produce up to 1.2THs, running around 600Watts.
...
Worst case scenario, as per specs... I can see the "boards" consuming 600Watts, with the rest consuming about 20Watts for the controller and fans, prior to the PSU. With a horrid 80% efficiency, that would put it at a 750Watts at the wall, roughly.

And.. what chip-count was that quoted with? The "..." missing context is the important other half of that whole conversation... I believe the chip count was up near the 60's for that to be delivered, now it is down to the 50's, with the updated specs, which is still "near 600w" possibility. (I still agree that 900w is more realistic, for 120v systems.)

However, it is the "new miners" being quoted at those specs... I still "psychologically", hold some claim to the unit specs I purchased, at the price and time I made the purchase. (Which was around 600w. ) But, given the nature of the order and business and market, I would accept the current adjusted realistic 900W +/-10% as "acceptable".

When my order gets here, that will be taken into consideration too. Just like BFL had to double-up on chips, to get the specs within estimated projections. (Though BFL fell short on power by 5x loss. AMT would actually gain power by adding chips, running below nominal voltages. BFL was just a power-hungry chip with little room for adjustment.)

I would hope that they attempt to adjust for that claim. I'll dig-up that dead post when the time comes.

[Biomech]

The breakers were installed in the existing breaker-box, the wires were run in conduit, by an electrician friend. (outside the walls) The outlets, that tie to the raw lines, were done by me. Anything at the "outlet-box", is allowed to be done by the home-owner, here in Florida. The rest, for insurance purposes, had to be done and also inspected by a certified electrician.

Only cost about $350 for everything to be done. Friends work for beer.

(As for the bet above... change that to peak, and not average, and it would be a reasonable bet. But not one I would be willing to submit to, as "shit happens". Since "out of the box", is also not specified, and "optimization" isn't specified.. I would take you up on that offer, if you allowed it to be "judged" after a suitable "optimization period". Also, once AMT says how many chips will be in my unit. Without that, it is a blind bet. You have a contradiction too... you say "hit 1.2THs", then say "average 1.2THs"... that is a big contradiction... "Hit 200MPH", and "Stay running at 200MPH average", is not the same. Do you even lift bro?)

Also note: I think I am getting screwed by the power company though... we put all lines on one half/leg of the power... So it seems like I am drawing twice the amps at the meter. If you do setup new breakers, have them balance them to the two separate legs. If you draw 100a on one leg, the meter here seems to see 200a because it seems to measure the greatest draw across both legs, as amps, but charges for watts. It seems to assume if 100a is drawn on one, that 100a is also being drawn on the other. If I had that balanced, it would be 50a and 50a on each leg, and the meter would read 100a total, not 200a total. That is my next thing to fix. (That, or I need a PF-correction unit.) Electric meters are such horrible technology. (Again, this is what seems to be happening, when I measure the timing outside. It does not match my actual draw of the units. Measured directly. Chime-in if you know the solution to that one. That solution was told to me by the guy who installed the breakers. He didn't think it would be that dramatic of an offset.)

Yes, I had the power company come to reset the meter and "test it", they said it was working fine. Sure... it only charges me double, it is supposed to do that! lol. So much for paying half price. (It isn't quite double, but it is more than measured draw.)

Balance your breakers. You should have two busses, and one neutral bus (usually physically two since it's also the ground, but they're tied together). Make sure you stagger the breakers so that if you have an even number, they are 1:1 on the two busses. Meters are actually fairly accurate, but they do count parasitic losses and unbalanced loads. The meter would have to be a much more complex and expensive device to do as you suggest, whereas balancing the load across the two busses is easy. Just make sure the main is off and/or you have high rated insulated gloves

[Syke]

But, given the nature of the order and business and market, I would accept the current adjusted realistic 900W +/-10% as "acceptable".

Keep fudging the numbers. Eventually you'll be right.

+/- 10% hashrate and +/- 10% power draw is not what they are selling. They are selling 1.2 TH/s at 600-900 watts. If they do not meet or exceed both specs, then they have failed to deliver what was ordered.

Edit: Now I see the "+/- 10% variance" fine print. At the very extreme 1080 GH/s and 990 watts is still going to be quite a stretch. Including the "600" watt quote is very deceptive.

[ISAWHIM]

The 5 second average in cgminer is meaningless, as it can very greatly in a short period of time due to the way its calculated. The only thing that matters is average speed over a reasonable period of time. I am proposing a 30 minute run.
I would allow an optimization period of one week after the first units begin arriving in customers hands. However, it must be software optimization. The hardware must remain unchanged over that period. For example, the customer adding a couple extra modules and underclocking/volting them to reach 1.2TH/s would not be acceptable.
I won't wait past my deadline. Of course it is a blind bet, equally so for both parties. If we waited for it to be resolved it's hardly a bet.
As for your strange objection to "hit" vs "average", I am contesting that over a minimum 30 minute run, the average hashrate must be at least 1.2TH/s. If at some point in that 30 minutes the 5s number hits 1.2TH/s but the average over the full run is 1.1TH/s, that is not sufficient.

And no I don't lift. What a silly question.

It should be a fairly easy choice for you. Less than two months ago you seemed certain a worst case scenario would be 750W for 1.2TH/s. I'm giving you a margin of 32% over that, AND offering 3:1 odds.

Adjusting voltage is part of "tuning", and also part of the "max speed"... so that is unreasonable to say it would not be an option for consideration. Since 1.2THs is implied as a "potential" with the stated wattage. If it normally operates at 1.0THs, with a modest voltage, for stability or warranty, but peak is 1.2THs, running at the max-wattage the unit is designed for... then that has met the estimation criteria for "reaches speeds of", or "up to", or "peak"... also if it requires additional cooling, or "ideal conditions". Because running this in summer-time, near the equator would not be fair to judge against a guy in Siberia, in winter running it out in the snow. One will obviously hit the mark, while the other obviously will not. (I live in Florida, it is already getting to temps of 80F here. So I NEED to make provisions to "get ideal operating conditions". Like someone might have, running it in an air-conditioned shop or house.) Also demanding that the average has to be 1.2THs, when that is obviously an expected peak value, is a little demanding. Either I win the superbowl by 40 points, or it's a loss for my team.

Though, I can find a nice 30-min block to mine... solo, that should appease any average conditions.

BTW, software is used also to "tune" voltages and frequency... So that can't be ruled-out. However, throwing another PSU or swapping for a better PSU, or replacing components on the PCB would understandably be unacceptable.

I'll think about the bet...

As for the specs... (Right from the miners page)
1,200 GH/s nominal performance (+/– 10%)
Included accessories:
2x USB Cable
2x Network Cable
1x Power Cord
Bitcoin Miner Weight: 18 lb.
Dimensions: 18 x 7 x 18 high
Chip: Asic 28nm
Warranty: This unit’s system board has a
lifetime warranty from manufacture defect
or component failure.
Product specifications may differ from  (+/- 10% running variance)

1.2THs +/-10% and +/-10% Product specifications (Of which, power is a spec), IS exactly what they are selling... (now) xD

Thus, the minimum specs is 1.2THs - 10% (Least expected hashing power) and the maximum power would be 900W + 10% (Greatest consumed power while hashing)

[MrTeal]

The 5 second average in cgminer is meaningless, as it can very greatly in a short period of time due to the way its calculated. The only thing that matters is average speed over a reasonable period of time. I am proposing a 30 minute run.
I would allow an optimization period of one week after the first units begin arriving in customers hands. However, it must be software optimization. The hardware must remain unchanged over that period. For example, the customer adding a couple extra modules and underclocking/volting them to reach 1.2TH/s would not be acceptable.
I won't wait past my deadline. Of course it is a blind bet, equally so for both parties. If we waited for it to be resolved it's hardly a bet.
As for your strange objection to "hit" vs "average", I am contesting that over a minimum 30 minute run, the average hashrate must be at least 1.2TH/s. If at some point in that 30 minutes the 5s number hits 1.2TH/s but the average over the full run is 1.1TH/s, that is not sufficient.

And no I don't lift. What a silly question.

It should be a fairly easy choice for you. Less than two months ago you seemed certain a worst case scenario would be 750W for 1.2TH/s. I'm giving you a margin of 32% over that, AND offering 3:1 odds.

Adjusting voltage is part of "tuning", and also part of the "max speed"... so that is unreasonable to say it would not be an option for consideration. Since 1.2THs is implied as a "potential" with the stated wattage. If it normally operates at 1.0THs, with a modest voltage, for stability or warranty, but peak is 1.2THs, running at the max-wattage the unit is designed for... then that has met the estimation criteria for "reaches speeds of", or "up to", or "peak"... also if it requires additional cooling, or "ideal conditions". Because running this in summer-time, near the equator would not be fair to judge against a guy in Siberia, in winter running it out in the snow. One will obviously hit the mark, while the other obviously will not. (I live in Florida, it is already getting to temps of 80F here. So I NEED to make provisions to "get ideal operating conditions". Like someone might have, running it in an air-conditioned shop or house.)

Though, I can find a nice 30-min block to mine... solo, that should appease any average conditions.

BTW, software is used also to "tune" voltages and frequency... So that can't be ruled-out. However, throwing another PSU or swapping for a better PSU, or replacing components on the PCB would understandably be unacceptable.

I'll think about the bet...

As for the specs...
1,200 GH/s nominal performance ( + / – 10% )
Included accessories:
2x USB Cable
2x Network Cable
1x Power Cord
Bitcoin Miner Weight: 18 lb.
Dimensions: 18 x 7 x 18 high
Chip: Asic 28nm
Warranty: This unit’s system board has a
lifetime warranty from manufacture defect
or component failure.
Product specifications may differ from  (+/- 10% running variance)

1.2THs +/-10% and "running variance"=power +/-10%, IS what they are selling

Voltage changes are fine, as long as they are software controllable. Having to remove and replace resistors to adjust the voltage is beyond the ability of most customers, and cannot be considered after sales tuning. Adding additional modules (which was the whole point of that) and then underclocking the boards to improve efficiency is likewise not "tuning".

I will give you the 10%, but only once. You can either have the hashrate +/- 10% (minimum 1080GH/s) at 900W, or the hashrate at 1.2TH/s and the power at 990W. This bet is primarily on AMT's unrealistic power efficiency claims, I have no doubt they will be able to hit their rated hashing speed.

Also, I don't particularly care if they only ship 90% of the USB, network or power cords.