Bitcoin Forum
December 10, 2016, 03:12:24 PM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: would you be interested in an next generation ASIC trade up program for your ModMiner Quad?
YES
NO

Pages: « 1 ... 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 [71] 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 »
  Print  
Author Topic: High Efficiency FPGA & ASIC Bitcoin Mining Devices https://BTCFPGA.com  (Read 200915 times)
dani
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 525


..yeah


View Profile
October 19, 2012, 06:54:21 PM
 #1401

wow I haven't checked this thread in awhile, it's getting crazy!  Shocked


Hai
1481382744
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481382744

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481382744
Reply with quote  #2

1481382744
Report to moderator
1481382744
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481382744

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481382744
Reply with quote  #2

1481382744
Report to moderator
1481382744
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481382744

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481382744
Reply with quote  #2

1481382744
Report to moderator
"Bitcoin: the cutting edge of begging technology." -- Giraffe.BTC
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
regular
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 284


View Profile
October 19, 2012, 07:13:15 PM
 #1402

Quote

Might I just say you are one hell of an employee! I hope you get a raise for all you have done, infact is it possible for your boss to see this thread? has he/she been watching?


When your ceo is a convicted scammer of millions from elderly people, you can only expect the employees to behave similarly since their tactics seem to be effective in generating sales.

Always welcoming donations: 1NmxEfzU4psW7DMjogWsQSDoebubTLjHST
bobitza
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168



View Profile
October 19, 2012, 07:37:30 PM
 #1403

The people who have the view that the power doesn't matter only have it because they have high profitability expectations.  The people saying that power is all that matters are expecting very long payoff horizons due to difficulty increases.  I think the latter view is safer and also more correct, especially if you're not counting on being very early in your deployment.

Well summarized.

And mybe epoch is right and thinking too long term doesn't make sense and instead we should focus on Gh/$. What if you have similar Gh/$ offers? Wouldn't you go for the one with best Gh/W? Smiley

Bitcoin is like a variation of Schrodinger's Cat. Everything about it is both scam and fully legit at the same time until you open the box.
MrTeal
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246


View Profile
October 19, 2012, 07:55:59 PM
 #1404

The people who have the view that the power doesn't matter only have it because they have high profitability expectations.  The people saying that power is all that matters are expecting very long payoff horizons due to difficulty increases.  I think the latter view is safer and also more correct, especially if you're not counting on being very early in your deployment.

Well summarized.

And mybe epoch is right and thinking too long term doesn't make sense and instead we should focus on Gh/$. What if you have similar Gh/$ offers? Wouldn't you go for the one with best Gh/W? Smiley
Depends on other factors as well, delivery time being the biggest. Cablepair has said he could do up to 1000 units in the first batch the he planned to have shipping the week after Thanksgiving, and as far as I know that number hasn't been reached yet. BFL has a much larger list of preorders; if an order placed today doesn't ship until January that's a pretty huge difference. If the bASIC is consuming 150W@54GH/s, and you got it Dec 1 vs Jan 1 for a BFL Single, you would make $284 in December assuming an average difficulty of 250TH/s. That's enough to pay for electricity @ 150W and $0.15/kWh for 17 months.

Other things to consider are the company's track record and what else is offered. If BFL's SC singles are anything like the FPGA ones, it's pretty likely that they'll look the nicest of the new generation products sitting on a desk, so that could be a factor for you as well.
regular
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 284


View Profile
October 19, 2012, 08:21:47 PM
 #1405

Having free power, it'd be nice if there was an ASIC that was grossly inefficient but had great $/MHash

Always welcoming donations: 1NmxEfzU4psW7DMjogWsQSDoebubTLjHST
squid
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112


View Profile
October 19, 2012, 08:26:31 PM
 #1406

Not too long ago Josh "Inaba" must have figured out that BFL was a losing venture, and secretly resigned.  He then went to Tom and said, hey, can I work for you?

Tom said, sure.  Here's your first task.  Go into my forum and troll away.  Make it look like you're attacking me, but in reality you're discrediting BFL and making bASIC look good.

Only thing that makes sense really.

M

+1, seriously, if I were Josh's boss I would fire him right away. All this is doing is making BFL look like a giant douche.
Gomeler
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 645



View Profile
October 19, 2012, 08:27:35 PM
 #1407

It is Friday. I didn't bother to read any of the posts that weren't Tom's but I gather the big announcement with power consumption estimates, process specifications and board renders didn't happen? Had a reminder set on my calendar but I wasn't sure if that date had changed? Gave up trawling this thread for information due to all the trolling by BFL.

RHA
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 389


View Profile
October 19, 2012, 08:31:00 PM
 #1408

Let's see some illustrative calculations:

Let's assume bASIC 57GH/s uses 120 W.
The cost of electricity (say 0.11 $/kWh) is about $58 per year higher than that of BFL SC Single.
If one buy this instead of BFL SC Single, the price difference ($230) pays for the more power for 4 years.

Let's assume bASIC 57GH/s uses 180 W.
The cost of electricity (say 0.11 $/kWh) is about $115 per year higher than that of BFL SC Single.
If one buy this instead of BFL SC Single, the price difference ($230) pays for the more power for 2 years

Let's assume the difficulty is 10 times greater than now (10 x 3054627), one block gives 25 BTC, and 1 BTC is $12.61.
In unlikely case of being them constant for a year, the Single net annual profit is 4488 $/year and bASIC net annual profit is 4261 $/year.
The difference is... $227. Interesting coincidence. (I didn't set the BTC price, it was left in my BTC calculator from two weeks ago.)
For 100 times greater difficulty the yearly net profits difference is $396 - $374 = $22.

I believe the differences are way below an error coming from uncertainty (of tech specs, of difficulty changes, of price changes, etc.).
The date when the mining starts is surely the most important factor.

EDIT: The 57 GH/s number should be 54 GH/s. The differences of annual profit are actually two times greater: $454 and $44.
The annual profit I'd calculated as if both devices use the same power (60 W for both), so I shouldn't call it "net".
Syke
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2100


View Profile
October 19, 2012, 09:14:13 PM
 #1409

The people who have the view that the power doesn't matter only have it because they have high profitability expectations.

All the people claiming power matters aren't showing the math. Power only matters at end-of-life. GPUs are still profitable today. Initial cost and starting date are the biggest factors.

Buy & Hold
||bit
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644


View Profile
October 19, 2012, 09:17:53 PM
 #1410

Let's see some illustrative calculations:

Let's assume bASIC 57GH/s uses 120 W.
The cost of electricity (say 0.11 $/kWh) is about $58 per year higher than that of BFL SC Single.
If one buy this instead of BFL SC Single, the price difference ($230) pays for the more power for 4 years.

Let's assume bASIC 57GH/s uses 180 W.
The cost of electricity (say 0.11 $/kWh) is about $115 per year higher than that of BFL SC Single.
If one buy this instead of BFL SC Single, the price difference ($230) pays for the more power for 2 years

Let's assume the difficulty is 10 times greater than now (10 x 3054627), one block gives 25 BTC, and 1 BTC is $12.61.
In unlikely case of being them constant for a year, the Single net annual profit is 4488 $/year and bASIC net annual profit is 4261 $/year.
The difference is... $227. Interesting coincidence. (I didn't set the BTC price, it was left in my BTC calculator from two weeks ago.)
For 100 times greater difficulty the yearly net profits difference is $396 - $374 = $22.

I believe the differences are way below an error coming from uncertainty (of tech specs, of difficulty changes, of price changes, etc.).
The date when the mining starts is surely the most important factor.

Makes me think. If Tom really wanted to throw a wrench into the debate, he'd drop his unit price by say 25% - 50%.

||bit
crazyates
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938



View Profile
October 19, 2012, 09:22:39 PM
 #1411

All the people claiming power matters aren't showing the math. Power only matters at end-of-life. GPUs are still profitable today. Initial cost and starting date are the biggest factors.
+1 No one's saying it's not more profitable to pay for less electricity, it's just not a deal-breaker for most. Compared to the BFL Single, the bASIC is 90% of the hashrate at 82% of the cost. In the long run, power usage can make up for this discrepancy, but it won't be by much, and hopefully by then both pieces of hardware will have been paid back.

Tips? 1crazy8pMqgwJ7tX7ZPZmyPwFbc6xZKM9
Previous Trade History - Sale Thread
crazyates
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938



View Profile
October 19, 2012, 09:23:46 PM
 #1412

Makes me think. If Tom really wanted to throw a wrench into the debate, he'd drop his unit price by say 25% - 50%.

||bit
Why would he do that? He's already got them beat on MHs/$.

Tips? 1crazy8pMqgwJ7tX7ZPZmyPwFbc6xZKM9
Previous Trade History - Sale Thread
sturle
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1418

http://bitmynt.no


View Profile WWW
October 19, 2012, 09:56:16 PM
 #1413

Power usage is *everything* when it comes to ASIC.  If you think it's not, you have no grasp on the economics of mining.
My simple math shows that power usage is almost irrelevant for an ASIC miner.  Price per Ghash produced throughout the miners lifetime will almost certainly always be dominated by the initial investment, not power consumption.  Price per Ghash/s is the important factor.

Is my math wrong?
No, just your assumptions on difficulty. I don't expect any of these 60 GH range ASIC products to make even $1000 in 2013 alone. By design, difficulty will always bring the cost-to-mine very close to power costs. When it catches up, power costs will be all that matters. Until then, delivery dates before it adjusts are the key importance.
I didn't make any assumptions on difficulty.  I fully agree with you there.  Plugging it in first of all matters, but the gold rush will be over in a few days.  Almost everyone buying ASIC miners will get them after the few first difficulty jumps, and probably after the block reward halving as well.

I do not agree that power costs matters as a competition factor between different current ASIC designs.  All are going to be within the same order of magnitude.  If it takes 25 years to spend as much on power for the product as you spent for the product itself, the price of the product is all that matters.  In 25 years the next generation graphene ASICs will make the current ones compare to CPU mining in 2013.

Power costs is only a concern for miners using old technology.  ASIC miners only have to worry about price per Ghash/s, because power costs will be negligible compared to their initial investment.

Sjå http://bitmynt.no for veksling av bitcoin mot norske kroner.  Trygt, billig, raskt og enkelt sidan 2010.
I buy with EUR and other currencies at a fair market price when you want to sell.  See http://bitmynt.no/eurprice.pl
I support the roadmap.  If a majority of miners ever try to forcefully take control of Bitcoin through a hard fork without 100% consensus, I will immediately split out and dump all my forkcoins, and buy more real Bitcoin.
Bogart
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868


View Profile
October 19, 2012, 10:25:16 PM
 #1414

ASIC is not CPUs, it's not GPUs and it's not FPGAs.  It's the end of the line for mining technology for the foreseeable future.

This got me to thinking, aside from the obviously huge gains to be had from process shrink, do you suppose any of the current ASIC designs use memristor technology?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memristor

Maybe my understanding is insufficient, but is it not reasonable to think that more efficient circuits could be created with the availability of a "new" component type?

What about these "3D transistors"?  Are you guys using them?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trigate_transistors#Tri-gate_transistors

"All safe deposit boxes in banks or financial institutions have been sealed... and may only be opened in the presence of an agent of the I.R.S." - President F.D. Roosevelt, 1933
Mobius
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 957



View Profile
October 19, 2012, 10:26:44 PM
 #1415


Power costs is only a concern for miners using old technology.  ASIC miners only have to worry about price per Ghash/s, because power costs will be negligible compared to their initial investment.


Power cost does matter, but it's negligible for single device, or small-scale mining. Scale the issue up, and you will be forced to consider those costs more seriously.

sturle
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1418

http://bitmynt.no


View Profile WWW
October 19, 2012, 10:52:17 PM
 #1416

Power costs is only a concern for miners using old technology.  ASIC miners only have to worry about price per Ghash/s, because power costs will be negligible compared to their initial investment.
Power cost does matter, but it's negligible for single device, or small-scale mining. Scale the issue up, and you will be forced to consider those costs more seriously.
Wrong.

If you buy one, two or a hundred ASIC miners, the initial costs vs power consumption equation comes out exactly the same.  Small or large scale makes no difference at all.

Sjå http://bitmynt.no for veksling av bitcoin mot norske kroner.  Trygt, billig, raskt og enkelt sidan 2010.
I buy with EUR and other currencies at a fair market price when you want to sell.  See http://bitmynt.no/eurprice.pl
I support the roadmap.  If a majority of miners ever try to forcefully take control of Bitcoin through a hard fork without 100% consensus, I will immediately split out and dump all my forkcoins, and buy more real Bitcoin.
Bogart
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868


View Profile
October 19, 2012, 10:55:32 PM
 #1417

If I already have one order, will new orders I make be added to the end of the order/shipping queue or the same place as my first order?

This was answered earlier and it was yes. I am not sure if this has changed due to popularity.

Any chance you could quote it?  I can't find it.

(also a "yes" answer is ambiguous to the question given.)

"All safe deposit boxes in banks or financial institutions have been sealed... and may only be opened in the presence of an agent of the I.R.S." - President F.D. Roosevelt, 1933
gmaxwell
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2030



View Profile
October 19, 2012, 10:58:58 PM
 #1418

Let's assume bASIC 57GH/s uses 180 W.
[...]

Uhh. If you want to do conservative figures— which you ought to if you're trying to convince other people since non-conservative figures will be ignored— you should be using about 3-4x that power consumption. I'd potentially be willing to entertain bets that no 54GH/s device is ever going to exist on 130nm at that level of power consumption, but regardless, it's certainly not a conservative number.

Though the below analysis shows that even using 150w it's not super attractive.

All the people claiming power matters aren't showing the math. Power only matters at end-of-life. GPUs are still profitable today. Initial cost and starting date are the biggest factors.
Uh.  GPUs are power substantially power cost dominated now.

Lets go through the math:

The equilibrium for mining profits is
Code:
(17179869184*diff*kwh)/(719989013671875*exc*mhj)=1
exc = BTC/$ exchange rate, we'll use 11
mhj = MH/joule, lets use 2 (which is conservative as hell: it's the best gpu figure, and ignores cooling costs)
diff = difficulty, currently 3072321.73202076
kwh = $/KWH

So right now, that means that breakeven is at $.30/KWH. Anyone paying that much or more for power is losing money on GPU mining— thats most (all?) of germany, brazil, most of california (the initial rate is lower, but the marginal rate is higher) and some other places. The US average is $0.12/KWH.  At that price power consumption is _40%_ of your mining income.

Thats where GPUs are today and I believe that the deployment of hashrate is somewhat retarded by expectations around asics: People would buy _more_ GPUs and FPGAs and mining would be even less profitable but they're waiting on ASIC products and they're anticipating the halving.  I don't see any reason to assume the stable point for difficulty vs power to be more profitable in the future than it is now.

Regardless.... It's better if we compare these things without caring with the difficulty will do, since future difficulty just adds a lot more debate to the question.

But how do we compare an operating cost with one-time cost? Trying to figure in lifetime costs creates confusion because we don't know what the devices lifetime is: we don't know how long it will last, how long until 13nm ASICs, when really clever SHA256 optimizations make it obsolete, or what its resale value would be. So instead lets use the opportunity cost. Opportunity cost is especially useful when the good in question is durable and can be resold at any time at the same price, so every day you're effectively making the same decision to keep the device or not, which may not apply here but it frees us from having to pick a bunch of debatable parameters.

Lets say you have a stack of cash. You could buy a miner ASIC or you could put it in another investment, so one way to look at the price of a miner is the forgone income which you could have received by doing something else with it.  8%/yr is a commonly used figure for very long term average stock market returns, so lets use that.

8% per year is 0.6434% per month.

For the BFL:
 $1300 costs you $8.36/month in forgone investment income. At 60 watts it takes 43.83 KWH/month, or $5.26 at .12/KWH to power.

For the btcfpga:
 $1070 costs you $6.88/month in forgone investment income. It's also only advertised as having 9/10th the performance.

So for the btcfpga device to match the BFL operating cost (($8.36 + $5.26) * 9/10 =$12.258) under this model it must use less than 12.258-6.88 = $5.378 in power or 61.35 watts. This isn't going to happen. (And I'm a little shocked by how low BFL's claimed power is...).

This tradeoff depends on power costs, So the formula under this model is:
Code:
((1300*.006434)+(730.5*60/1000*kwh))*(54/60)=(1070*.006434)+(730.5*cpwatts/1000*kwh)
 which we can rearrange to:
kwh = 6434 / (7305 * cpwatts - 394470)
So at 300w your power must cost only $.00358/kwh for them to match, or $.009/kwh for 150 watts.

So I suppose it could be a good deal for people who wouldn't pay for a few hundred watts of additional power (e.g. flat rate rent), or for people who could otherwise make use of the waste heat and only have electrical heating available. Of course, for those people it really is only about the initial cost... at least up to the power consumption level that they can get for 'free'.

We could instead solve for the initial price needed to make it match:
Code:
price=-(365250*kwh*cpwatts - 19723500*kwh - 3763890)/3217

At $0.12/kwh the btcfpga would need to draw no more than 139.87 watts (which isn't going to happen) or the price would have to be _negative_ to make it more attractive than a $1300/60w/60GH device. At $0.04/kwh (about as low as it goes in the US), it could use as much as 311 watts before you should ask to be paid to run one instead of a BFL. At $0.04/kwh and 150 watts the price would need to be $734 or less to make it more attractive.

Of course, all of this analysis can be largely mooted by a small difference in shipping times, failures of BFL to live up to their specs, or CP's device beating its specs.

I'm personally pre-ordered for the btcfpga devices (as well as avalon, which I expect to have similar economics)— but I expect to lose money on them, and I wanted to support secondary players. If they arrive early enough then even if the BFL's use a lot less power a faster arriving alternative still may have turned out to be a better buy. I expect major price wars in the future, and getting on a backlog list now sounds really unwise to me even ignoring BFL's long history of schedule slips (even on this product now).  (I don't begrudge them for this: doing this kind of small scale high tech stuff is hard... but it is what it is)

Plug in your own discounting rate for the costs of assets, but you'll reach the same conclusion for any reasonable value.

It was an analysis like this that convinced me to not produce a ASIC miner myself on 130nm over a year ago. It would have been a bit win IF I was one of only a few to do it. I estimated the odds of someone doing a miner on better process (which was a bit too costly and risky for me to undertake personally) as too great to justify because once they were available they'd be much more competitive than 130nm. I still have a hard time really believing that BFL's products are going to be real and meet their claims, but assuming that they are Inaba is right about his power arguments but at the moment it's all about shipping times.  Six months from now this market may be radically different.

99Percent
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 179



View Profile
October 19, 2012, 11:02:02 PM
 #1419

Let's see some illustrative calculations:

Let's assume bASIC 57GH/s uses 120 W.
The cost of electricity (say 0.11 $/kWh) is about $58 per year higher than that of BFL SC Single.
If one buy this instead of BFL SC Single, the price difference ($230) pays for the more power for 4 years.

Let's assume bASIC 57GH/s uses 180 W.
The cost of electricity (say 0.11 $/kWh) is about $115 per year higher than that of BFL SC Single.
If one buy this instead of BFL SC Single, the price difference ($230) pays for the more power for 2 years

Let's assume the difficulty is 10 times greater than now (10 x 3054627), one block gives 25 BTC, and 1 BTC is $12.61.
In unlikely case of being them constant for a year, the Single net annual profit is 4488 $/year and bASIC net annual profit is 4261 $/year.
The difference is... $227. Interesting coincidence. (I didn't set the BTC price, it was left in my BTC calculator from two weeks ago.)
For 100 times greater difficulty the yearly net profits difference is $396 - $374 = $22.

I believe the differences are way below an error coming from uncertainty (of tech specs, of difficulty changes, of price changes, etc.).
The date when the mining starts is surely the most important factor.

This is a good post.  When the power cost is small compared to the hardware cost, it becomes a negligible consideracion. In GPU mining power cost was important because one would expect to pay several times the electricity over the cost of a graphic card, especially in the case of cheaper GPUs. Obviously these untra efficient Asics are very pricey compared to how much one is going to end up paying for electricity so unless bAsics consume 10 times the wattage of a BFL Single this is not going to be an issue. More important is the release date and price per GH as others have said. Another considerations above power usage is modularity and ease of set up, and of course custormer service and miner support.
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
October 19, 2012, 11:17:18 PM
 #1420

Let's assume bASIC 57GH/s uses 180 W.
[...]

Uhh. If you want to do conservative figures— which you ought to if you're trying to convince other people since non-conservative figures will be ignored— you should be using about 3-4x that power consumption. I'd potentially be willing to entertain bets that no 54GH/s device is ever going to exist on 130nm at that level of power consumption, but regardless, it's certainly not a conservative number.
...
Just thought I'd quote that little gem of ... hmm not quite sure what to call it Smiley

...
At $0.12/kwh the btcfpga would need to cost draw no more than 139.87 watts (which isn't going to happen) or the price would have to be _negative_ to make it more attractive than a 60w/60GH device. At $0.04/kwh (about as low as it goes in the US), it could use as much as 311 watts before you should ask to be paid to run one.
...
Ooh another one Smiley

...
It was an analysis like this that convinced me to not produce a ASIC miner myself on 130nm over a year ago. It would have been a bit win IF I was one of only a few to do it. I estimated the odds of someone doing a miner on better process (which was a bit too costly and risky for me to undertake personally) as too great to justify because once they were available they'd be much more competitive than 130nm. I still have a hard time really believing that BFL's products are going to be real and meet their claims, but assuming that they are Inaba is right about his power arguments but at the moment it's all about shipping times.  Six months from now this market may be radically different.
And a 3rd one to add to that.

Well the delivery dates aren't all that far away 1-2 months ... so will be interesting to see if you got anything correct ...

Though I guess I have the risk of you deleting my post in the future as you have done before to other posts of mine ... twice ... under Luke-jr's orders ... or editing them which the evil space aliens told me you would do the last time I forgot to take my meds.

Pool: https://kano.is BTC: 1KanoiBupPiZfkwqB7rfLXAzPnoTshAVmb
CKPool and CGMiner developer, IRC FreeNode #ckpool and #cgminer kanoi
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with Stratum, the best protocol to mine Bitcoins with ASIC hardware
Pages: « 1 ... 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 [71] 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 »
  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!