ASICMiner BE300S Samples Arrived, <0.2W/G Achieved at Board Level

[bbxx]

pity that for decent miner you need 100 chips...
costs matter, those miners cant be cheap

look at bitmain they have so few to get 1.15TH

[1714765725]

1714765725

[1714765725]

1714765725

[1714765725]

1714765725

[1714765725]

1714765725

[sidehack]

Right, only 60 chips that are larger.

[Dexter770221]

pity that for decent miner you need 100 chips...
costs matter, those miners cant be cheap

look at bitmain they have so few to get 1.15TH

Cost of that chip for AM is likely ~1$. PCB in large quantities is something like 5$. Rest of parts (few caps and resistors per chip is 0.1$ most), so 100 chips board will be around 120$ (assembly included). Bitmain sells for 0.27$/GH? If AM do the same it's over 100% profit.

[sidehack]

I'd like to see about a 30-chip board that can be software volt/clocked between 100 and 300GH with a quiet fan and can run off a DC brick. That'd make a really good entry-level miner, Jalapeno or U3 market sector.

Maybe I should just go design it. But that's about three projects away. But I think it's a good idea.

[Dexter770221]

I'd like to see about a 30-chip board that can be software volt/clocked between 100 and 300GH with a quiet fan and can run off a DC brick. That'd make a really good entry-level miner, Jalapeno or U3 market sector.

Maybe I should just go design it. But that's about three projects away. But I think it's a good idea.

Yeah, this chips scales quiet good. Bitmain's chips don't do well in that matter. Going to double hashrate means decreasing efficiency almost twice.


With AM chips double hashrate = only 25% worse efficiency.
 3.6GH/s | 0.2095W/G
 7.2GH/s | 0.2495W/G

[sidehack]

Yeah, it is fairly flat. The upperbound on clocking is going to depend on a lot on how easy it is to keep the chips cool. If they're like AM's chips of the past though, they won't mind high temperatures too much, but in a 5x5mm package (if I'm remembering right, it's several pages back) that's a real question. I know BE100 chips, in I believe a 6x6mm package, it took some rigging to make them run reliably at 4W dissipation. That was a PCB-cooled chip with not-the-best PCB-heatsink contact though (at least on Blades), so maybe a top-cooled chip will have a better overall thermal resistance between case and sink?

[dogie]

Yeah, it is fairly flat. The upperbound on clocking is going to depend on a lot on how easy it is to keep the chips cool. If they're like AM's chips of the past though, they won't mind high temperatures too much, but in a 5x5mm package (if I'm remembering right, it's several pages back) that's a real question. I know BE100 chips, in I believe a 6x6mm package, it took some rigging to make them run reliably at 4W dissipation. That was a PCB-cooled chip with not-the-best PCB-heatsink contact though (at least on Blades), so maybe a top-cooled chip will have a better overall thermal resistance between case and sink?

5x5mm is a 30% reduction in surface area which is a huge hit. Getting that heatsink right is going to be mighty important as to the formfactor of the device. Nice thin blades like in the Cube at this point are really required to get any sort of 'next generation' density out of these things.

I'd like to see about a 30-chip board that can be software volt/clocked between 100 and 300GH with a quiet fan and can run off a DC brick. That'd make a really good entry-level miner, Jalapeno or U3 market sector.

Maybe I should just go design it. But that's about three projects away. But I think it's a good idea.

Yeah, this chips scales quiet good. Bitmain's chips don't do well in that matter. Going to double hashrate means decreasing efficiency almost twice.

With AM chips double hashrate = only 25% worse efficiency.
 3.6GH/s | 0.2095W/G
 7.2GH/s | 0.2495W/G

That's not really a fair comparison when the BE300 is running / being tested in a range far far lower than the BM1384 is running at. If the graph continued back towards 0 it would probably look very, very similar to that of the AM chip.

[sidehack]

5x5mm is a 30% reduction in surface area which is a huge hit. Getting that heatsink right is going to be mighty important as to the formfactor of the device. Nice thin blades like in the Cube at this point are really required to get any sort of 'next generation' density out of these things.

That's my main concern, but hopefully the chips will be priced low enough that density isn't prohibitively expensive. Novak and I have discussed working up a design for a 30-chip board which could be roughly the same size as a Cube board, and several could be stacked together in modular miner configurations for devices of different hashrates. Nominally 150-200GH per board is probably a decent setpoint. If we could build them to be compatible with S1 and Tube heatsinks could make for some fun upgrade kits as well.

[Finksy]

If we could build them to be compatible with S1 and Tube heatsinks could make for some fun upgrade kits as well.

This x1,000,000.  I'm tired of excessive depreciation of redundant hardware, when the only portion of it that is redundant is the PCB's/Chips/Controllers. If upgrading made financial sense, more miners would do it (I.E. NOT the Bitmain S1 upgrade flop).  The savings on purchase and shipping of frames/heatsinks and fans would also give the manufacturer an edge in production cost of working miners compared to competitors, and give them more room to mark-up the important parts while still saving us money at the door.  Do this!

[MrTeal]

pity that for decent miner you need 100 chips...
costs matter, those miners cant be cheap

look at bitmain they have so few to get 1.15TH

Cost of that chip for AM is likely ~1$. PCB in large quantities is something like 5$. Rest of parts (few caps and resistors per chip is 0.1$ most), so 100 chips board will be around 120$ (assembly included). Bitmain sells for 0.27$/GH? If AM do the same it's over 100% profit.

I think if you're expecting $20 over the cost of the chips you're going to be a little disappointed. You aren't going to get PCBs, other components, PCB assembly, heatsinks/fan, controller, unit assembly and testing for $20, even in quantity in China. At current prices they'll still be able to make money on BE300, but 100% markup in this market is wildly optimistic.

[sidehack]

Hey Icebreaker, please leave. Nobody wants you here if you're not going to be polite.

He's mostly mentioning because the single-chip data was posted last year and the prototype string board was already being tested at that time. Basically it's a commentary on how inept ASICMiner's PR/communications can be, more than any questioning of their technical competence or engineering efficiency.

[Swimmer63]

Hey Icebreaker, please leave. Nobody wants you here if you're not going to be polite.

He's mostly mentioning because the single-chip data was posted last year and the prototype string board was already being tested at that time. Basically it's a commentary on how inept ASICMiner's PR/communications can be, more than any questioning of their technical competence or engineering efficiency.

If no one talks to him, he goes away. Just like grade school.

[xstr8guy]

pity that for decent miner you need 100 chips...
costs matter, those miners cant be cheap

look at bitmain they have so few to get 1.15TH

You must mean Spondoolies. The SP20 uses 4 chips while a Bitmain S5 uses 60 chips, which is less than AM but still, that's a lot of chips.

[sidehack]

I'd much rather see a "many small chips" design than one relying on the operation of a single large chip - but this has already been discussed extensively in previous pages. Cooling is a lot easier, as well as increased redundancy (which is somewhat negated by a string design, especially with no cap/FET buffering). Providing a single incredibly-high-current low-voltage power source is also very problematic and prone to resistive-loss inefficiency up the butt.

[dogie]

pity that for decent miner you need 100 chips...
costs matter, those miners cant be cheap

look at bitmain they have so few to get 1.15TH

You must mean Spondoolies. The SP20 uses 4 chips while a Bitmain S5 uses 60 chips, which is less than AM but still, that's a lot of chips.

Only if integers matter on their own. The (cost per chip per GH) or [(cost per chip per GH) + (board components per chip per GH)] is the most important thing.

Edit: Seems I imagined you said something totally different, but my comment still stands on its own

[pak13]

Kudos on what looks to be a promising miner! Thank you for being transparent in the process.

[philipma1957]

24 chip (6 chip chain x 4) test result posted.
The mosfets and big capacitors are safely removed due to the constant workload of BE300.



Results:

273.60GH/s | 0.38W/G
176.64GH/s | 0.31W/G
155.04GH/s | 0.27W/G
118.56GH/s | 0.26W/G

With more accurate control on the variance between chips we could in principle gain less power consumption in advance.

Okay 155 gh  x .27 = 42 watts   once you figure psu in  47 watts .

lets say 5x =

    775gh at 235 watts on the low clock.
  1365gh  at  576 watts on the high clock .
 this is a 120 chip design.

right now I can buy the sp20 for under 400 usd.

It will do 970gh at 450 watts

the s-5 will do 1300gh on overclock at 676 watts  cost shipped right now is 342 usd if you have a coupon.

For a 120 chip AM to be worth buying it needs to come out soon and be cheap.
  At least the board did decently (not .2 watts) more like .3 or .33 watts. 
The sp20 can do .46 via underclock.

Since I have owned every AM miner I will buy it just to fuck with it.  Hurry up with one.

[friedcat]

Okay 155 gh  x .27 = 42 watts   once you figure psu in  47 watts .

lets say 5x =

    775gh at 235 watts on the low clock.
  1365gh  at  576 watts on the high clock .
 this is a 120 chip design.

right now I can buy the sp20 for under 400 usd.

It will do 970gh at 450 watts

the s-5 will do 1300gh on overclock at 676 watts  cost shipped right now is 342 usd if you have a coupon.

For a 120 chip AM to be worth buying it needs to come out soon and be cheap.
  At least the board did decently (not .2 watts) more like .3 or .33 watts. 
The sp20 can do .46 via underclock.

Price of 120 chip design should be in principle at 230-250 usd w/o the PSU.

If the mid-term future Bitcoin price allows significant quantity, the end-game price can be below 200 usd.

[J4bberwock]

Okay 155 gh  x .27 = 42 watts   once you figure psu in  47 watts .

lets say 5x =

    775gh at 235 watts on the low clock.
  1365gh  at  576 watts on the high clock .
 this is a 120 chip design.

right now I can buy the sp20 for under 400 usd.

It will do 970gh at 450 watts

the s-5 will do 1300gh on overclock at 676 watts  cost shipped right now is 342 usd if you have a coupon.

For a 120 chip AM to be worth buying it needs to come out soon and be cheap.
  At least the board did decently (not .2 watts) more like .3 or .33 watts. 
The sp20 can do .46 via underclock.

Price of 120 chip design should be in principle at 230-250 usd w/o the PSU.

If the mid-term future Bitcoin price allows significant quantity, the end-game price can be below 200 usd.

Does that mean you'll sell the chips for a sub 1200$ for 1000 price?
If the answer is yes, I may be interesed to buy a few samples at sample price when they will be available

[jdany]

I understand squeezing the competition.
We just witnessed the squeeze for the last 10 months.

When your next competitor is charging $342 for a product that is less efficient,  why would you price your product at $250?
I don't think there are going to be enough rounds of these chips to keep weeding out competitors before you can enjoy a little harvesting.

Maybe I misunderstood your comment.
Maybe you were just saying you could lower your pricing down to $250 and still make money.

But, please.  Cheap hashing power isn't going to do anyone any good.
Pricing war.
Difficulty into the stratosphere.
Investors make shit returns.