1GH/s, 20w, $700 (was $500) — Butterflylabs, is it for real? (Part 2)

[yochdog]

I am sure they never thought it could deliver 1.05 (remember it wasn't an estimate but 1.05 GH 2 digits of significant value) at 19.8W.  That was simply a tactic to freeze out any sales of competitor products.

Which really cuts to the core of the issue, no?  It does the entire BTC community a diservice.  I imagine at least a couple enterprising individuals ceased developing their own products when they saw the "magical" specs for the bitforce.  Flash forward 5 months and loe and behold the actual product is really not that much more efficient than a undervolted 5970. 

It is too bad, as the more options for FPGA there are, the better it is for all of us as the proverbial "consumer".

I would love to announce a revolutionary vehicle I invented that gets 90 MPG (based on projections), at a price of $17,000.  I would be inundated with pre-orders and have gobs of cash to then develop my product.  Then when I actually delivered, and it only gets 63 MPG (not much better than a Prius), I would be thrown in jail for fraud. 

[1714054180]

1714054180

[1714054180]

1714054180

[1714054180]

1714054180

[SysRun]

I am sure they never thought it could deliver 1.05 (remember it wasn't an estimate but 1.05 GH 2 digits of significant value) at 19.8W.  That was simply a tactic to freeze out any sales of competitor products.

Which really cuts to the core of the issue, no?  It does the entire BTC community a diservice.  I imagine at least a couple enterprising individuals ceased developing their own products when they saw the "magical" specs for the bitforce.  Flash forward 5 months and loe and behold the actual product is really not that much more efficient than a undervolted 5970. 

It is too bad, as the more options for FPGA there are, the better it is for all of us as the proverbial "consumer".

I would love to announce a revolutionary vehicle I invented that gets 90 MPG (based on projections), at a price of $17,000.  I would be inundated with pre-orders and have gobs of cash to then develop my product.  Then when I actually delivered, and it only gets 63 MPG (not much better than a Prius), I would be thrown in jail for fraud. 

Point taken, but no one is holding a gun to your head... Are they?! Are you in danger?!

[Mousepotato]

I don't get it.  Why would a BFL unit have $0 resale value?

[Inaba]

I am sure they never thought it could deliver 1.05 (remember it wasn't an estimate but 1.05 GH 2 digits of significant value) at 19.8W.  That was simply a tactic to freeze out any sales of competitor products.

Which really cuts to the core of the issue, no?  It does the entire BTC community a diservice.  I imagine at least a couple enterprising individuals ceased developing their own products when they saw the "magical" specs for the bitforce.  Flash forward 5 months and loe and behold the actual product is really not that much more efficient than a undervolted 5970.  

It is too bad, as the more options for FPGA there are, the better it is for all of us as the proverbial "consumer".

I would love to announce a revolutionary vehicle I invented that gets 90 MPG (based on projections), at a price of $17,000.  I would be inundated with pre-orders and have gobs of cash to then develop my product.  Then when I actually delivered, and it only gets 63 MPG (not much better than a Prius), I would be thrown in jail for fraud.  

First of all, the car analogy is crap, since a Prius only gets good milage under a very limited set of circumstances.  Any modern diesel is far superior to the current crop of hybrids as far as fuel efficiency goes.  So comparing an FPGA to a car, you'd need to say XXX FPGA gets 250 MH/s only when you give it EXACTLY 121.742v, at 72F ambient temperature, with the fans spinning at 2311 RPM.  Anything other than that, and it doesn't get those specs.  It's ridiculous is what I'm saying.

I very seriously doubt that any enterprising individuals were/are the least bit dissuaded by another FPGA entering the market.  If anything, it would have spurned them to figure out how exactly it's done and copy the design... it would not put anyone off from developing their own product, that is just ridiculous.

I have absolutely no idea how you are coming up with the statement that it's not much more efficient than an undervolted 5970... lets say, being super, extra, double sugar on top generous, you can power a 5970 with 250w... that gives you ~750 MH/s.  The BFL unit does 800 MH/s at 85w... that is 1/3 the power for more MH/s.  In what world, exactly, is that "not much more efficient?"  In reality, you aren't getting a 5970 to 250w at 750 MH/s, just not happening, and this isn't even including the host system, which to be fair, the BFL unit basically requires as well.. however, you could load up a host system with more BFL units than you can 5970's, so it's more efficient in that area, too.

Undervolted 5970 can get 5MH/W

This statement is just laughable.  You aren't getting a 5970 to spit out 750 MH/s for 150w... that is just a joke, right?  Or are you, gasp, fudging your numbers to make them look legitimate, when they are, in reality, complete bullshit... just like you're accusing BFL of doing?  

[SysRun]

I don't get it.  Why would a BFL unit have $0 resale value?

Its a very small market, so who would you sell a BFL Single to if the bitcoin experiment fails? your risk with GPUs are mitigated by the resale value that is fairly stable. $0 is a bit of hyperbole, but they make a good point.

[DeathAndTaxes]

I have absolutely no idea how you are coming up with the statement that it's not much more efficient than an undervolted 5970... lets say, being super, extra, double sugar on top generous, you can power a 5970 with 250w... that gives you ~750 MH/s.  The BFL unit does 800 MH/s at 85w... that is 1/3 the power for more MH/s.  In what world, exactly, is that "not much more efficient?"

UNDERVOLTED.  250W is at stock.  Actually w/ memclock reduced it is less.  I run 3x5790s.  Full system 2.25 GH/s @ 870W AC (at the wall).  So the idea that it is impossible is just stupid.  

Undervolted 5970 can get 5MH/W

This statement is just laughable.  You aren't getting a 5970 to spit out 750 MH/s for 150w... that is just a joke, right?  Or are you, gasp, fudging your numbers to make them look legitimate, when they are, in reality, complete bullshit... just like you're accusing BFL of doing?  

Your laughable.    Please educate yourself.  

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=58912.0

More than one person has gotten >5MH/W with UNDERVOLTED 5870/5970.  Notice the prefix "under" in undervolted as in voltage less than stock.  Power consumption decreases by the SQUARE of the voltage reduction so a decent voltage reduction (say 15%) reduces power consumption by a significant amount (27% power reduction on a 15% voltage reduction).

Yes you can get >5MH/W on a 5870 or 5970.  You can do the same thing w/ 7970, (and likely a 7990 also).  Can you run it at stock clock?  No and nobody said you could.

Before your start insulting people how about your a) READ and b) MAKE SURE YOUR ARE INFORMED.

Note I never said it the single "barely beats" a 5970.  I don't undervolt.  My electrical rates are cheap I simply experimented w/ 5970 to see if I COULD when the time came and 5970 reached end of life and difficulty increases made mining at stock voltage uneconomical.  

[simonk83]

                                7970   |   BFL
 
Cost :                        550     |  599
Performance :                700   |  700
Warranty :                 3 years |  6 month
Resale value :                 50% | 0%

Wattage:          574W | 80W

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/02/08/gigabyte_radeon_hd_7970_oc_video_card_review/8

You missed that little tidbit

[DeathAndTaxes]

                                7970   |   BFL
 
Cost :                        550     |  599
Performance :                700   |  700
Warranty :                 3 years |  6 month
Resale value :                 50% | 0%

Wattage:          574W | 80W

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/02/08/gigabyte_radeon_hd_7970_oc_video_card_review/8

You missed that little tidbit

Ok BFL uses less wattage (but more than any other FPGA) but 574W?  Really I mean lets as least be slightly realistic shall we?

[yochdog]

I am sure they never thought it could deliver 1.05 (remember it wasn't an estimate but 1.05 GH 2 digits of significant value) at 19.8W.  That was simply a tactic to freeze out any sales of competitor products.

Which really cuts to the core of the issue, no?  It does the entire BTC community a diservice.  I imagine at least a couple enterprising individuals ceased developing their own products when they saw the "magical" specs for the bitforce.  Flash forward 5 months and loe and behold the actual product is really not that much more efficient than a undervolted 5970.  

It is too bad, as the more options for FPGA there are, the better it is for all of us as the proverbial "consumer".

I would love to announce a revolutionary vehicle I invented that gets 90 MPG (based on projections), at a price of $17,000.  I would be inundated with pre-orders and have gobs of cash to then develop my product.  Then when I actually delivered, and it only gets 63 MPG (not much better than a Prius), I would be thrown in jail for fraud.  

First of all, the car analogy is crap, since a Prius only gets good milage under a very limited set of circumstances.  Any modern diesel is far superior to the current crop of hybrids as far as fuel efficiency goes.  So comparing an FPGA to a car, you'd need to say XXX FPGA gets 250 MH/s only when you give it EXACTLY 121.742v, at 72F ambient temperature, with the fans spinning at 2311 RPM.  Anything other than that, and it doesn't get those specs.  It's ridiculous is what I'm saying.

I very seriously doubt that any enterprising individuals were/are the least bit dissuaded by another FPGA entering the market.  If anything, it would have spurned them to figure out how exactly it's done and copy the design... it would not put anyone off from developing their own product, that is just ridiculous.

I have absolutely no idea how you are coming up with the statement that it's not much more efficient than an undervolted 5970... lets say, being super, extra, double sugar on top generous, you can power a 5970 with 250w... that gives you ~750 MH/s.  The BFL unit does 800 MH/s at 85w... that is 1/3 the power for more MH/s.  In what world, exactly, is that "not much more efficient?"  In reality, you aren't getting a 5970 to 250w at 750 MH/s, just not happening, and this isn't even including the host system, which to be fair, the BFL unit basically requires as well.. however, you could load up a host system with more BFL units than you can 5970's, so it's more efficient in that area, too.

Undervolted 5970 can get 5MH/W

This statement is just laughable.  You aren't getting a 5970 to spit out 750 MH/s for 150w... that is just a joke, right?  Or are you, gasp, fudging your numbers to make them look legitimate, when they are, in reality, complete bullshit... just like you're accusing BFL of doing?  

Inaba, I am not making this a personal issue, and I think you would do well not to take it that way.  I don't think the car analogy is crap at all.....BFL came out with projected specs that were wildly inaccurate in regards to both hashing power as well as power consumption.  No one is asking that they be absolutely precise......but being off by 30% and 400% in regards to hashing and power consumption seems more than trivial.

I am not trying to get into an argument over this, I just think they way they went about releasing their product is completely lame.  

Anyway, I hope you get a bunch of them, and they work out well for you.  

[simonk83]

                                7970   |   BFL
 
Cost :                        550     |  599
Performance :                700   |  700
Warranty :                 3 years |  6 month
Resale value :                 50% | 0%

Wattage:          574W | 80W

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/02/08/gigabyte_radeon_hd_7970_oc_video_card_review/8

You missed that little tidbit

Ok BFL uses less wattage (but more than any other FPGA) but 574W?  Really I mean lets as least be slightly realistic shall we?

Blame HardOCP

[kjlimo]

Thank you for these enlightening results.

Thus, it seems that the overclocked 7970 can get more than this unicorn BS.

I mean WTF

                                7970   |   BFL
 
Cost :                        550     |  599
Performance :                700   |  700
Warranty :                 3 years |  6 month
Resale value :                 50% | 0%

The ONLY advantage I see is the consumption of power but surely that is not worth it for some US guys that have 0.10 prices. Maybe this is for EU market but VAT and import duty kills that as well so it is LAME right now from the promised holy 1000 MHash/s, 20W, $500 figures ...

BFL deserves a medal for fail of the year.  

Thermal throttling due to bad design FTW !

I think the advantage of plugging it into a USB drive as well as being able to "stack" the singles is advantageous.  My wife is complaining about the noise & effects of me over clocking the GPU (glitchy screen display).

[Syke]

Still if 700 MH/s is what is sustains and it pulls 80W at the wall we are looking at 8.75 MH/W.

Even 80 watts is optimistic:

Consumes between 85 and 90w at full load.

[rph]

Show me one shipping unit that comes anywhere even CLOSE to BFL's offering.  Go on... send me a link.

There are at least 3 FPGA miners shipping today, with ~2X the MH/W of BFL:

BitcoinFPGA

If BFL takes off and starts driving difficulty - no worries - all of these units will still be profitable.
If these Spartan6 designs begin to drive the difficulty - they will make the BFL units unprofitable.

It doesn't matter if it was cheaper per MH up front, once it's losing money every month.

-rph

[DeathAndTaxes]

Still if 700 MH/s is what is sustains and it pulls 80W at the wall we are looking at 8.75 MH/W.

Even 80 watts is optimistic:

Consumes between 85 and 90w at full load.

Yeah but it may end up doing more than 700 MH/s.  Was just trying to grab a middle of the road figure.

Best case scenario it does 850MH/s sustained @ 85W = 10 MH/W
Worst case scenario it does ~700MH/s sustained @ 90W = 7.8 MH/W


To look at it on a larger scale.

CPU Rig (i5-2600)  ~0.2 MH/W
Casual GPU Gamer rig ~1.5 to 2.0 MH/W (single graphics card, high end CPU, a gaming rig used for mining)
High efficiency GPU rig ~2.5 MH/W  (sempron, minimal build, linux on usb drive, 80Plus-Gold PSU, 3x5970)
Underclocked GPU rig ~5 MH/W  (i.e. 3x 5970 550Mhz @ 0.8 VDDC)
BFL Single Worst Case ~8 MH/W (excluding host system power draw)
BFL Best Case ~10MH/W (excluding host system power draw)
Ztex FPGA Boards ~ 20MH/W (and other Spartan-6 based rigs, excluding host system power draw)
28nm "next gen" FPGA ~40MH/W (guestimate based on die-shrink of 40/45nm designs)
28nm SASIC ~60MH/W (guestimate based on power savings due to reduce gate count going from FGPA -> SASIC)
Custom 65nm ASIC  ~100MH/W (based on "testbed" processor for SHA-2 testing)
Custom 45nm ASIC  ~200MH/W (Moore's law applied to "testbed" processor)
Custom 28nm ASIC  ~400MH/W (Moore's law x2)

Note: each data point is likely upper limit in its category and likely is overly optimistic but provides a rough estimate for SHA-256 efficiency.

[kano]

...
Ztex FPGA Boards ~ 20MH/W (and other Spartan-6 based rigs, excluding host system power draw)
...

Overnight Icarus was getting
(5s):10.2 (avg):357.7 Mh/s | Q:7671  A:3818  R:11  HW:0  E:50% U:5.36/m
and the U: figure suggests the Hash is either correct or even low (5.36/m if calculated directly gives 383.7MH/s)
So using the number at 19.5W, 357.7 Mh/s is 18.3MH/W so certainly not far from your number there.
(He had it plugged into his MIPS router ... running cgminer 1% CPU ... so not much extra power there either )

Anyway, yeah, 20MH/W +/- 10%

(383.7MH/s is 19.7 MH/W)

[Inaba]

UNDERVOLTED.  250W is at stock.  Actually w/ memclock reduced it is less.  I run 3x5790s.  Full system 2.25 GH/s @ 870W AC (at the wall).  So the idea that it is impossible is just stupid.  

This statement is just laughable.  You aren't getting a 5970 to spit out 750 MH/s for 150w... that is just a joke, right?  Or are you, gasp, fudging your numbers to make them look legitimate, when they are, in reality, complete bullshit... just like you're accusing BFL of doing?  

Your laughable.    Please educate yourself.  

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=58912.0

More than one person has gotten >5MH/W with UNDERVOLTED 5870/5970.  Notice the prefix "under" in undervolted as in voltage less than stock.  Power consumption decreases by the SQUARE of the voltage reduction so a decent voltage reduction (say 15%) reduces power consumption by a significant amount (27% power reduction on a 15% voltage reduction).

Yes you can get >5MH/W on a 5870 or 5970.  You can do the same thing w/ 7970, (and likely a 7990 also).  Can you run it at stock clock?  No and nobody said you could.

Before your start insulting people how about your a) READ and b) MAKE SURE YOUR ARE INFORMED.

So I just read that whole thread, and now I'm pissed.  Basically, either you just lied to me and I wasted my time, which is why i'm pissed, or I completely missed the post where someone achieved 750 MH/s at 150W on a 5970.  The best I saw was 550 MH/s at 250w... that's not even close.  NOT. EVEN. CLOSE.  So please, point out where in that thread someone achieved 750 MH/s at 150w with an undervolted 5970. I'm all over the ability to run a 5970 at 150w and I will gladly retract my statement.  After you do that, if you can produce the link that I missed, I want to see it run stable for 24 hours at that voltage and hashrate.

To add insult to the injury of that thread, it was performed with a single 5970's to measure the wattage.  This is a false reading - you can't compare mining wattage with idle wattage on the primary card, since the primary card is engaged in the display, thus increasing it's "idle" draw.  You have to perform it on an inactive card.  You need two cards in the system.  Measure idle, crank up the miner on the second card and measure mining wattage to get an accurate power draw per card. Additionally, I would like to see any of those numbers stable for 24 hours.  I very seriously doubt the system would remain stable for long, making the whole experiment moot, other than to show the card will run briefly at those voltages. Hell, I can OC my CPU to 6 GH/s for a benchmark run... doesn't mean I have a magical 6 GHz CPU either.

I call complete bullshit until then.  I call making up numbers to make the argument possible.  I call the same tactics BFL is being accused of used to bolster a counter argument.

Note I never said it the single "barely beats" a 5970.  I don't undervolt.  My electrical rates are cheap I simply experimented w/ 5970 to see if I COULD when the time came and 5970 reached end of life and difficulty increases made mining at stock voltage uneconomical.  

I didn't say you did, I quoted Yochdog.

[legolouman]

UNDERVOLTED.  250W is at stock.  Actually w/ memclock reduced it is less.  I run 3x5790s.  Full system 2.25 GH/s @ 870W AC (at the wall).  So the idea that it is impossible is just stupid.  

This statement is just laughable.  You aren't getting a 5970 to spit out 750 MH/s for 150w... that is just a joke, right?  Or are you, gasp, fudging your numbers to make them look legitimate, when they are, in reality, complete bullshit... just like you're accusing BFL of doing?  

Your laughable.    Please educate yourself.  

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=58912.0

More than one person has gotten >5MH/W with UNDERVOLTED 5870/5970.  Notice the prefix "under" in undervolted as in voltage less than stock.  Power consumption decreases by the SQUARE of the voltage reduction so a decent voltage reduction (say 15%) reduces power consumption by a significant amount (27% power reduction on a 15% voltage reduction).

Yes you can get >5MH/W on a 5870 or 5970.  You can do the same thing w/ 7970, (and likely a 7990 also).  Can you run it at stock clock?  No and nobody said you could.

Before your start insulting people how about your a) READ and b) MAKE SURE YOUR ARE INFORMED.

So I just read that whole thread, and now I'm pissed.  Basically, either you just lied to me and I wasted my time, which is why i'm pissed, or I completely missed the post where someone achieved 750 MH/s at 150W on a 5970.  The best I saw was 550 MH/s at 250w... that's not even close.  NOT. EVEN. CLOSE.  So please, point out where in that thread someone achieved 750 MH/s at 150w with an undervolted 5970. I'm all over the ability to run a 5970 at 150w and I will gladly retract my statement.  After you do that, if you can produce the link that I missed, I want to see it run stable for 24 hours at that voltage and hashrate.

To add insult to the injury of that thread, it was performed with a single 5970's to measure the wattage.  This is a false reading - you can't compare mining wattage with idle wattage on the primary card, since the primary card is engaged in the display, thus increasing it's "idle" draw.  You have to perform it on an inactive card.  You need two cards in the system.  Measure idle, crank up the miner on the second card and measure mining wattage to get an accurate power draw per card. Additionally, I would like to see any of those numbers stable for 24 hours.  I very seriously doubt the system would remain stable for long, making the whole experiment moot, other than to show the card will run briefly at those voltages. Hell, I can OC my CPU to 6 GH/s for a benchmark run... doesn't mean I have a magical 6 GHz CPU either.

I call complete bullshit until then.  I call making up numbers to make the argument possible.  I call the same tactics BFL is being accused of used to bolster a counter argument.

Note I never said it the single "barely beats" a 5970.  I don't undervolt.  My electrical rates are cheap I simply experimented w/ 5970 to see if I COULD when the time came and 5970 reached end of life and difficulty increases made mining at stock voltage uneconomical.  

I didn't say you did, I quoted Yochdog.

He can say +/- 40% on the mh/s and +/-400% on the power consumption. BFL did and apparently, I'm wrong for thinking that is bait and switch.

[DeathAndTaxes]

So I just read that whole thread, and now I'm pissed.  Basically, either you just lied to me and I wasted my everyone's time, which is why i'm pissed (at myself for being an idiot), or I completely missed the post where someone achieved 750 MH/s at 150W on a 5970 (because no such post exists outside my delusional mind).  The best I saw was 550 MH/s at 250w... that's not even close (because I have difficulty reading).

I can't help that you can neither read nor follow a subject.  Undervolting involves lowering voltage however that requires lowering the clock also.  The goal is to increase system MH/W, not keep maximum clock and magically get something from nothing.

It is possible to acheive 5MH/W on a 5970.  I have verified it myself at the wall using kill-a-watt and using clamp meter at the card level.

Nobody (I mean nobody on the entire forum in any thread including this one) claimed you can get 750MH/S @ 150W.    NOBODY.  Since you are easily confused I will say it one more time.  Nobody but you was that stupid.  Nobody.
 
I don't care if you are pissed.  
I don't care if you are too stupid to read a thread properly.
I don't care if you don't believe.

Your ignorance doesn't really affect the efficiency of undervolting does it?

You have progressed past annoying into being downright stupid.

[this time]

It's very possible to get 5MH/W out of a GPU. The reason why people don't do it much is that space is usually limited. In that case, you'd rather have 1 rig than 2 more efficient undervolted rigs. I think the main reason these look attractive (to some) is the space/convenience factor. Otherwise, on a $/mh/s or $/mh/w basis they aren't that compelling.

[Inaba]

97w is bullshit, though.  You aren't mining at 550 MH/s at 97w on a 5970.  Sorry.  I already told you why the test Mousepotato did was flawed, therefore your 5 MH/w is also flawed.  Retest with a proper setup and report back... I would do it, but I'm sure my numbers would be called into question as being biased.  Put a 5870 as your primary card and your 5970 as a secondary card.  Measure your idle, then fire up the 5970 and measure power consumption, and leave it running for 24 hours.  I will be glad to retract my statement if you can produce 97w at 550 MH/s for 24 hours.

You have progressed past annoying into being downright stupid.

That's ok, at least I'm joining you at the bottom, since you achieved that pages and pages ago... but I digress.  Please describe how you verified this at the card level with a clamp meter... I wait with baited breath for you to describe the machinations you went through to achieve this marvel of electrical engineering.  I also question how someone with your apparent knowledge of things technical, somehow thinks that using a clamp meter is an accurate measurement of power.  Clamp meters are notoriously inaccurate unless you have a fairly expensive one, coupled with the fact that I wait to hear how you used a clamp meter "at card level," again, complete bullshit.  Though I admit, I've not tried to measure a DC load with a clamp meter... it will be interesting to hear how you achieved this with not one, not two, but THREE separate conductors that need to be measured to check the load "at card level."  In DC no less...  It will be a mother fucking breakthrough of epic proportions... in fact, I think Fluke will buy your design for a tidy sum.

So please, do tell... how did you achieve this?  What clamp meter did you use? When was the last time it was calibrated, assuming it actually is a true RMS meter.   What, exactly, did you measure with this clamp "at card level?"  It's amazing how much bullshit you've been able to pack into a few sentences, you should market that ability.