ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It

[empoweoqwj]

Large dump just happened on Havelock: sold all the way down to 0.451. Lots of shares up for grabs in the low .50s.

let's hope the sell was intentional 

[1715096058]

1715096058

[1715096058]

1715096058

[1715096058]

1715096058

[freedomno1]

I was just like why did my low balls get eaten
Any news ?
Or just some random person going screw it sell sell sell

[Fabrizio89]

I was just like why did my low balls get eaten
Any news ?
Or just some random person going screw it sell sell sell

Chip testing results were not great, more than someone thought it's better to be safe than sorry.
Bear market in btc probably over.

[lophie]

I was just like why did my low balls get eaten
Any news ?
Or just some random person going screw it sell sell sell

Initial tests shows that the chips are not as good as expected. some freakedout and sold since we all know that gen3 is considered at the current prices, included and thought of.

p.s. I utterly disagree in fact I just bought extra 50 shares to my stake because I am VERY bullish on ASICMINER at the moment

[freedomno1]

I was just like why did my low balls get eaten
Any news ?
Or just some random person going screw it sell sell sell

Chip testing results were not great, more than someone thought it's better to be safe than sorry.
Bear market in btc probably over.

Thanks
Saw that news in Rockxies thread but those were initial tests read Franks post as well so was of the opinion to wait guess I just balanced to the new range if the price holds (depending on the actual stable results)

Note: "Efficiency" is comparing the the ROCKMiner test blade with all other hardware. Data was obtained from The Genesis Block. ROCKMiner blade is only after very few, unoptimized tests. It is subject to change.

Well a few more days to confirm the real specs up or down hehe back to lurking  

@lophie
Same opinion just grabbed a few myself

[SyRenity]

I think that Spoondoolies is missing from that list. Granted they are pretty new - I'm fairly certain their numbers come close to AM.

AM3 power usage is a bit better then Hammer (SP10 chips), but only a bit.

That said, it's Spond 1st ASIC, and the 2nd gen Rockerbox (SP30 chips, tape-out start of May) have already a much improved numbers:
http://storage.googleapis.com/spond_public/materials/rockerbox_brief.pdf

[jimmothy]

SP30 chips, in tapeout now

Last I heard tapeout was beginning of may. Has this changed?

[SyRenity]

SP30 chips, in tapeout now

Last I heard tapeout was beginning of may. Has this changed?

Sorry, mixed up indeed, corrected the post above.

[minerpumpkin]

I've just submitted our new batch of questions. Some of you voiced their concerns about asking "mission critical" questions. Some of you wrote more suggestions via PM and said the list was fine. In conclusion, I think it is in all shareholders' interest, to try and getting to know those things. If friedcat deems them to be internal or trade secrets, he may simply opt to not answer them. But I think it is well worth giving it a shot.

The questions I've submitted, with all amendments and minor alterations:

- Thank you Friedcat and the whole team of ASICMiner for always working very hard and being one of the few honest ASIC companies in the Bitcoin world!
- What is the status, size, and expected delivery of the next batch of chips? What about the one after that?
- What are the final specifications of the generation 3 chips? Initial tests of ROCKMINER showed an increased power consumption (http://blog.rockminer.com/#!/2014/04/13/Testing_Results_Of_BE200.md). What is the actual power consumption?
- When will the ordering terms for generation 3 chips be published? Has the pricing been adjusted in any way meanwhile? What about auctions like we had with generation 1 hardware?
- When are the new chips expected to start mining in ASICMiner datacenters and what hashrate are you currently planning on deploying?
- When are the sales revenues of the chips expected to be paid out to shareholders?
- What conditions/prices does ROCKMINER (as a big shareholder of ASICMiner) get for generation 3 chips?
- Is there an ongoing cooperation with Allied Control in terms of Datacenter development? How does ASICMiner/shareholders profit from it?
- What current plans for generation 4(+) are there?

[CMMPro]

I don't know if any of you were involved like I was but the KNC first batch went through this inefficiency stage as well.
They went through about 5-6 firmware versions before squeezing out the last of the efficiency...and I believe it was close to 50% better after optimizing the firmware.

My KNC uses ~320watts and hashes at 285gh rock steady.

I expect once they get better firmware the number on these Rockminer units will come down as well.

Stop looking for things to worry about.

[juicejoyce]

I've just submitted our new batch of questions. Some of you voiced their concerns about asking "mission critical" questions. Some of you wrote more suggestions via PM and said the list was fine. In conclusion, I think it is in all shareholders' interest, to try and getting to know those things. If friedcat deems them to be internal or trade secrets, he may simply opt to not answer them. But I think it is well worth giving it a shot.

The questions I've submitted, with all amendments and minor alterations:

- Thank you Friedcat and the whole team of ASICMiner for always working very hard and being one of the few honest ASIC companies in the Bitcoin world!
- What is the status, size, and expected delivery of the next batch of chips? What about the one after that?
- What are the final specifications of the generation 3 chips? Initial tests of ROCKMINER showed an increased power consumption (http://blog.rockminer.com/#!/2014/04/13/Testing_Results_Of_BE200.md). What is the actual power consumption?
- When will the ordering terms for generation 3 chips be published? Has the pricing been adjusted in any way meanwhile? What about auctions like we had with generation 1 hardware?
- When are the new chips expected to start mining in ASICMiner datacenters and what hashrate are you currently planning on deploying?
- When are the sales revenues of the chips expected to be paid out to shareholders?
- What conditions/prices does ROCKMINER (as a big shareholder of ASICMiner) get for generation 3 chips?
- Is there an ongoing cooperation with Allied Control in terms of Datacenter development? How does ASICMiner/shareholders profit from it?
- What current plans for generation 4(+) are there?

need answers.

[necro_nemesis]

I was just like why did my low balls get eaten
Any news ?
Or just some random person going screw it sell sell sell

Initial tests shows that the chips are not as good as expected. some freakedout and sold since we all know that gen3 is considered at the current prices, included and thought of.

p.s. I utterly disagree in fact I just bought extra 50 shares to my stake because I am VERY bullish on ASICMINER at the moment

Agree. The unoptimized test results were good news. I don't know what these people who bailed were expecting? Nice opportunity to acquire. Hopefully more reasonably good news will drive it down further in the short term. 

[minerpumpkin]

I was just like why did my low balls get eaten
Any news ?
Or just some random person going screw it sell sell sell

Initial tests shows that the chips are not as good as expected. some freakedout and sold since we all know that gen3 is considered at the current prices, included and thought of.

p.s. I utterly disagree in fact I just bought extra 50 shares to my stake because I am VERY bullish on ASICMINER at the moment

Agree. The unoptimized test results were good news. I don't know what these people who bailed were expecting? Nice opportunity to acquire. Hopefully more reasonably good news will drive it down further in the short term. 

Well, I'm a declared bull in terms of AM. But I do understand, that it is tensing for people to receive such sobering results, especially when friedcat didn't speak since the "chips are working" confirmation. The results are, of course, no disaster but they aren't exactly what we've all hoped for. I do understand it when people have their doubts or feel uneasy, but I think this isn't the time for panic or rash decisions, either. This has been a preliminary test of an external party, done on a somewhat faulty board. I think it isn't far-fetched to assume that they haven't done all the optimizations that are possible or even made some mistakes. We should definitely wait until we receive further test results and/or statements from Friedcat. Even if the consumption actually is higher than expected, the chips still work and are on par - or even slightly better - than current competitors.

[bitfair]

Agree. The unoptimized test results were good news. I don't know what these people who bailed were expecting? Nice opportunity to acquire. Hopefully more reasonably good news will drive it down further in the short term. 

A power consumption 100% above expected is "good news"?

You can argue that it's not entirely unexpected, you can argue that it still beats many competitors, and you can argue that it may improve.

But calling it "actually good news" sounds somewhat disingenuous, don't you think?

[necro_nemesis]

Agree. The unoptimized test results were good news. I don't know what these people who bailed were expecting? Nice opportunity to acquire. Hopefully more reasonably good news will drive it down further in the short term. 

A power consumption 100% above expected is "good news"?

You can argue that it's not entirely unexpected, you can argue that it still beats many competitors, and you can argue that it may improve.

But calling it "actually good news" sounds somewhat disingenuous, don't you think?

Put in perspective of being in the gen3 game or not, yes. I gather people underestimate the complexity of the task and just accept the ASIC will materialize as specified.

[teek]

One thing to note is rockxie seems to have initially tested the chips at .72v.  I'm definitely no EE,  but FC did mention that the chips were versatile with several different modes.  The 0.2J/G he mentioned originally was stated to be at .55v,  which probably means a lower clock as well.  Rockxies boards appear to have only one crystal.. i think given this setup he hasn't really been able to see what low power mode does (or overclocking for that matter).   Will low power mode dump the consumption down ~50% ?  MY limited experience tells me probably not,  but .72 to .55 is quite a difference in and of itself..

teek

[rudi]

A power consumption 100% above expected is "good news"?

You can argue that it's not entirely unexpected, you can argue that it still beats many competitors, and you can argue that it may improve.

But calling it "actually good news" sounds somewhat disingenuous, don't you think?

58% more (0.5539/0.35) than expected, not 100%. 

[mc_lovin]

One thing to note is rockxie seems to have initially tested the chips at .72v.  I'm definitely no EE,  but FC did mention that the chips were versatile with several different modes.  The 0.2J/G he mentioned originally was stated to be at .55v,  which probably means a lower clock as well.  Rockxies boards appear to have only one crystal.. i think given this setup he hasn't really been able to see what low power mode does (or overclocking for that matter).   Will low power mode dump the consumption down ~50% ?  MY limited experience tells me probably not,  but .72 to .55 is quite a difference in and of itself..

teek

+1

[minerpumpkin]

One thing to note is rockxie seems to have initially tested the chips at .72v.  I'm definitely no EE,  but FC did mention that the chips were versatile with several different modes.  The 0.2J/G he mentioned originally was stated to be at .55v,  which probably means a lower clock as well.  Rockxies boards appear to have only one crystal.. i think given this setup he hasn't really been able to see what low power mode does (or overclocking for that matter).   Will low power mode dump the consumption down ~50% ?  MY limited experience tells me probably not,  but .72 to .55 is quite a difference in and of itself..

teek

Well, the rated voltage is 0.72 and is supposed to consume 0,35 J/GH/s and does consume 0,5539 J/GH/s in rockxie's test. We're not looking at low power modes at the moment. Right now we are at 160% of the advertised consumption. Yet, I don't see any reason why this can't be optimized further. Look at the improvements KNC managed to obtain through software, and we're even talking about hardware optimizations here. This is an experimental board!

[juicejoyce]

One thing to note is rockxie seems to have initially tested the chips at .72v.  I'm definitely no EE,  but FC did mention that the chips were versatile with several different modes.  The 0.2J/G he mentioned originally was stated to be at .55v,  which probably means a lower clock as well.  Rockxies boards appear to have only one crystal.. i think given this setup he hasn't really been able to see what low power mode does (or overclocking for that matter).   Will low power mode dump the consumption down ~50% ?  MY limited experience tells me probably not,  but .72 to .55 is quite a difference in and of itself..

teek

also wonder