LargeCoin is scared of BFL

[jimbobway]

The fact that LargeCoin is conducting such a survey is troubling to me and doesn't make sense.  From what I know about LargeCoin they don't know what they are doing.  I hope they prove me wrong and maybe they will have an actual product.

[1714058506]

1714058506

[1714058506]

1714058506

[defxor]

The fact that LargeCoin is conducting such a survey is troubling to me and doesn't make sense.  From what I know about LargeCoin they don't know what they are doing.  I hope they prove me wrong and maybe they will have an actual product.

On the contrary, they should be in the best position of everyone to weigh in on the validity of BFL's claims.

[jimbobway]

The fact that LargeCoin is conducting such a survey is troubling to me and doesn't make sense.  From what I know about LargeCoin they don't know what they are doing.  I hope they prove me wrong and maybe they will have an actual product.

On the contrary, they should be in the best position of everyone to weigh in on the validity of BFL's claims.

Technically, they should be able to weigh in on BFL's claims.  But why are they asking the masses through a survey on the validity of BFL's claims?

I think LargeCoin already know the truth but they are afraid to believe in it or are in denial mode.  LargeCoin said:

Unless you want to spend $5-10M in NRE, you're going with a structured ASIC process.

So they are guessing BFL is using NRE processes but they seem to refuse to believe it.  So they are creating a survey?  There was a quote that went something like this (copied from Wikipedia), "When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."

[ElectricMucus]

A smart move by largecoin, I would wish them luck getting a few customers who have been scammed by bfl if I wouldn't condemn their business model. Selling mining equipment to people which they don't have full control over is a bad move.

So they are guessing BFL is using NRE processes but they seem to refuse to believe it.  So they are creating a survey?  There was a quote that went something like this (copied from Wikipedia), "When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-recurring_engineering (NRE)
The rest of the post is so full of garbage that I don't even care to respond to it.

[MrTeal]

Unless you want to spend $5-10M in NRE, you're going with a structured ASIC process. eASIC and Alterra HardCopy are the only options here. Chips will be capable of 2GHash/s each, approximately. So, assuming BFL is using a structured ASIC process to keep NRE less than millions, they'd need 500 ASICs to generate a terahash. Unit costs are small if you produce 10,000s of ASICs; however, when your production is in the hundreds or low thousands, you're looking at $100s per unit. That terahash box has a cost base of $500K, by our estimation.

I would love to know if you have actually seriously investigated a full custom or standard cell ASIC and have actually got quotes to justify the $5-10M NRE that you mention. Is that a figure you actually priced out? Since it's apparent you won't be going that route, I'm sure there's a bunch of people here who would love to hear the quotes you've gotten for different nodes for things like the mask set, packaging, test wafers, per wafer prices, etc.

[uuidman]

They have clearly stated that it is not structured but full custom. Meaning they are jumping over one generation of hardware and have budget of tens of millions USD on R&D.

I have no idea whether they will deliver or not.
[/quote]
Vladimir, I guess you stopped your ASIC project ? If full custom from BFL and then they deliver (probably late and maybe not up to spec), but still.

[rjk]

Unless you want to spend $5-10M in NRE, you're going with a structured ASIC process. eASIC and Alterra HardCopy are the only options here. Chips will be capable of 2GHash/s each, approximately. So, assuming BFL is using a structured ASIC process to keep NRE less than millions, they'd need 500 ASICs to generate a terahash. Unit costs are small if you produce 10,000s of ASICs; however, when your production is in the hundreds or low thousands, you're looking at $100s per unit. That terahash box has a cost base of $500K, by our estimation.

I would love to know if you have actually seriously investigated a full custom or standard cell ASIC and have actually got quotes to justify the $5-10M NRE that you mention. Is that a figure you actually priced out? Since it's apparent you won't be going that route, I'm sure there's a bunch of people here who would love to hear the quotes you've gotten for different nodes for things like the mask set, packaging, test wafers, per wafer prices, etc.

+1, although it's probably all under NDA.

[mrb]

We have a good guess.  They claim their 3.5 GH/s chip is USB powered.  So there you go.  1400 MH/watt (or better), which means if the 1 TH/s Rig is using the same chips in parallel, 714 watts.

This 130nm shared wafer research ASIC can achieve 140 MH/J performing SHA-256 on a streaming input.  



http://rijndael.ece.vt.edu/sha3/index.html

Keep in mind:
a) this was designed as a testbed for SHA-3 and runs at only 50 Mhz.  Not exactly ideal for SHA-256.
b) it is on a 130nm platform.  65nm would be roughly 4x the MH/J. 45nm would be roughly 8x the MH/J
c) VT own data shows the chip can easily run at much higher clock speed without increasing the gate count.
d) the design is optimized for multi-round hashing which is ill suited for Bitcoin (where single nonce header is hashed once, check and discarded or returned).
e) it was designed as research project at my alma mater Virgina Tech (hardly ultra cutting edge fabrication).

Despite all those handicaps this unoptimized (for Bitcoin hashing) ancient 130nm multi-purpose shared wafer chip built at a university research fab can achieve 140MH/J.  With optimization and a modern 45nm process >2 GH/J is certainly "possible".  

Once again before you misinterpert.  I am not buying a BFL product (or any mining hardware).  I don't really care if BFL has the greatest hasher on the planet or the best scam.  I agree it is foolish to give money upfront and hope for the best.  All that being said you undermine your argument when you claim the possible is impossible.

Is a 3.5 GH/s ASIC running on 3.5W possible?  Most certainly.  
Will BFL produce it (and on time, and on spec)?  Who the frack knows.

Are you sure that's right? They listed 13.76mJ/Gbits.

Hmm, isn't it wrong? I think the paper contradicts itself because Table III lists SHA-256 doing 1.51Gbps at 5.18mW measured (first Power column, not the second). That would be 5.18/1.51 = 3.43 mJ/Gbits. Why would the table also lists 13.76 mJ/Gbits?

I emailed the authors for a clarification.

[MrTeal]

You didn't read the notes. The Tp was listed at max frequency (200MHz for the SHA-2), while power for all the candidates was measured at 50MHz.

[mrb]

Right. This is confusingly explained, but it gives sense to all the numbers.

[ErebusBat]

Unless you want to spend $5-10M in NRE, you're going with a structured ASIC process.

Who's to say they haven't spent that much? With a VC investor, you can spend more than you normally would without one.

Also wonder how applicable these chips would be to the new Utah NSA datacenter.... if they would be then the idea of having VC is *very* probable.

[ttul]

Updated:

[Stephen Gornick]

if there is an issue and a respin is required, the customers are basically unsecured creditors of a likely insolvent company and are fucked. If BFL could show proof that the preorder money is in a relatively safe store of value and isn't being used for RnD and production, I would probably feel comfortable enough to buy a single or two to keep mining next year.

And if the funds weren't being spent as you suggest they might be then BFL would have no reason not to put those funds into an escrow account and to have an independent party or auditor periodically review and assure that there is at least X dollars in the escrow account.

[K1773R]

Yes, we certainly are. And so should everyone in the ASIC business, including Intel. If BFL's numbers are to be believed, our assertion is that they have discovered new manufacturing processes that are vastly more efficient than anything the semiconductor industry has seen before.

i hope BFL will continue to invest in these technologies, i love hardware hackers and maybe one day there will be BFL CPUs

[-ck]

Yes, we certainly are. And so should everyone in the ASIC business, including Intel. If BFL's numbers are to be believed, our assertion is that they have discovered new manufacturing processes that are vastly more efficient than anything the semiconductor industry has seen before.

i hope BFL will continue to invest in these technologies, i love hardware hackers and maybe one day there will be BFL CPUs

BFL CPUs? Yep, they're only 4-6 weeks away.

[Zeek_W]

Yes, we certainly are. And so should everyone in the ASIC business, including Intel. If BFL's numbers are to be believed, our assertion is that they have discovered new manufacturing processes that are vastly more efficient than anything the semiconductor industry has seen before.

i hope BFL will continue to invest in these technologies, i love hardware hackers and maybe one day there will be BFL CPUs

BFL CPUs? Yep, they're only 4-6 weeks away.

HAHAH

[K1773R]

Yes, we certainly are. And so should everyone in the ASIC business, including Intel. If BFL's numbers are to be believed, our assertion is that they have discovered new manufacturing processes that are vastly more efficient than anything the semiconductor industry has seen before.

i hope BFL will continue to invest in these technologies, i love hardware hackers and maybe one day there will be BFL CPUs

BFL CPUs? Yep, they're only 4-6 weeks away.

hehe

[crazyates]

Interesting that they were claiming that the SC MR was 1.5TH/s. At the time, the advertised specs were only 1.0TH/s.

[Unacceptable]

I noticed that too,hhmmmmm

[Syke]

i hope BFL will continue to invest in these technologies, i love hardware hackers and maybe one day there will be BFL CPUs

BFL CPUs? Yep, they're only 4-6 weeks away.

"Butterfly Labs (BF Labs Inc.), a market leader in microprocessor design". LOL.