ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It

[xhomerx10]

It seems that Spondoolies-Tech's chip is better than AM  3-generation ship on power consumption, but it's more expensive than AM.

Miners are concerned about the the chips minutest performance characteristics at the inflated prices paid at retail. This is factoring in what at retail is considered optimal in terms of cost, energy usage and heat management. If there's a cost benefit at the manufacturing level you can afford to add in additional chips and change the whole complexion of the equation. Just look at what was done to produce the S2 underclocking the BM1380 and adding in proportionately more ASICs to achieve the desired performance. They are willing to throw ASICs at the solution to improve efficiency. Cost at the manufacturing level can be crucial to altering the situation considerably. There additionally are cooling=space benefits to adding more ASICs and running at lower consumption/heat dissipation. This can be particularly exploited in mining and franchising right from the onset where markup is of no importance.

I would like to see the overall test data and as I mentioned when the ASIC specs were first released an explanation for the selectable higher clock range given what the ranges were stated at.

As a miner, I can tell you that I am not concerned with this at all.  I want my miner delivered on time - period.  Minutia is meaningless to the individual miner.  One difficulty retarget late in delivering and you have negated all of these efficiencies which you are dreaming about.  Spoondoolies is shipping - where is AM? It's too little and too late.  Diff will double while AM dithers.

[Newar]

Why is this thread getting shorter... what posts are getting removed... the fact that anything is getting removed is bothering me.

You can check "the archive"

https://bitcointa.lk/threads/asicminer-entering-the-future-of-asic-mining-by-inventing-it.61268/

[necro_nemesis]

It seems that Spondoolies-Tech's chip is better than AM  3-generation ship on power consumption, but it's more expensive than AM.

Miners are concerned about the the chips minutest performance characteristics at the inflated prices paid at retail. This is factoring in what at retail is considered optimal in terms of cost, energy usage and heat management. If there's a cost benefit at the manufacturing level you can afford to add in additional chips and change the whole complexion of the equation. Just look at what was done to produce the S2 underclocking the BM1380 and adding in proportionately more ASICs to achieve the desired performance. They are willing to throw ASICs at the solution to improve efficiency. Cost at the manufacturing level can be crucial to altering the situation considerably. There additionally are cooling=space benefits to adding more ASICs and running at lower consumption/heat dissipation. This can be particularly exploited in mining and franchising right from the onset where markup is of no importance.

I would like to see the overall test data and as I mentioned when the ASIC specs were first released an explanation for the selectable higher clock range given what the ranges were stated at.

As a miner, I can tell you that I am not concerned with this at all.  I want my miner delivered on time - period.  Minutia is meaningless to the individual miner.  One difficulty retarget late in delivering and you have negated all of these efficiencies which you are dreaming about.  Spoondoolies is shipping - where is AM? It's too little and too late.  Diff will double while AM dithers.

Agreed, profit margin on every individual ASIC goes down with every tick of the clock. It's looking at AM as an enterprise over the course of months given the hardware they can build.

FWIW some second hand evidence of progress does filter it's way onto the net. RM posted this today. I'll leave it to your own interpretations as to what it indicates.

[klondike_bar]

FWIW some second hand evidence of progress does filter it's way onto the net. RM posted this today. I'll leave it to your own interpretations as to what it indicates.

heres what I can estimate from the picture:

- each group of three chips probably draws 30-60W  assuming 30A-rated components like seen in most designs (both bitfury and bitmain used the 30A TPS53355 regulator and the same inductor i can see in this image).  I would assume that each chip is able to draw up to 15W but this depends on operaing voltage (anyone have this spec?)

- assuming 12GH/chip is still correct, that's about 1w/GH in the shown configuration, possible with the ability to overclock further at a loss to efficiency

- 24 chips per single PCI-e power jack. assuming reasonable loads on power supply cables it would be unwise for this board to consume more than 250W without a risk that cheap wires will melt.  that means 10W/chip, or under 1w/GH

[necro_nemesis]

RM's results as of the 14th of April.

Results:

Board:one chip testing board
Frequency:360Mhz
Volt:0.72V
Hashrate per chip:11.52Ghash
Power consumption:6.375W per chip
Power consumption per Ghash:6.375/11.52=0.5539W/Ghash
After power supply changeover:0.5539/81% = 0.684W/Ghash（at blade)
Power consumption on wall:0.684/0.8 = 0.855W/G
Adding other components loss about 1KW/Thash

Tips:this result is not very accurate just for reference.

[_mr_e]

RM's results as of the 14th of April.

Results:

Board:one chip testing board
Frequency:360Mhz
Volt:0.72V
Hashrate per chip:11.52Ghash
Power consumption:6.375W per chip
Power consumption per Ghash:6.375/11.52=0.5539W/Ghash
After power supply changeover:0.5539/81% = 0.684W/Ghash（at blade)
Power consumption on wall:0.684/0.8 = 0.855W/G
Adding other components loss about 1KW/Thash

Tips:this result is not very accurate just for reference.

Is this good?

[CoinBomb]

as we've talked (in length!) when the results came out, its not stellar, but not terrible..more testing/optimisation required.

[necro_nemesis]

RM's results as of the 14th of April.

Results:

Board:one chip testing board
Frequency:360Mhz
Volt:0.72V
Hashrate per chip:11.52Ghash
Power consumption:6.375W per chip
Power consumption per Ghash:6.375/11.52=0.5539W/Ghash
After power supply changeover:0.5539/81% = 0.684W/Ghash（at blade)
Power consumption on wall:0.684/0.8 = 0.855W/G
Adding other components loss about 1KW/Thash

Tips:this result is not very accurate just for reference.

Is this good?

Good enough to plan to produce a significant number of them according to a recent report.

[bitcoin.newsfeed]

http://www.cybtc.com/article-900-1.html

?

[Puppet]

FWIW, this is what BFL published recently:

[antirack]

RM is only one AM customer and one board designer of many. Seems his boards are using USB.

There are other board designs in progress from other board designers. With Ethernet and with a different power consumption. And a different number of chips per board.

[xhomerx10]

FWIW, this is what BFL published recently:

 Two pre-orders, many lies and delays later, I do not trust anything they have to say.
You need only look at this disinfographic to understand their ways.  It's more lies.  Everyone knows that KNCminer shipped ~ 1W/Gh at the wall for example.

BFL, your efficiencies - real or imagined - are already lost to your competition.  Mining for longer is moot since the difficulty will be so high you will be making NOTHING but heat and an infinitesimally small fraction of a Bitcoin per day.

By the way, the very day before the disinfographic was posted, Josh said that the new BFL chip was more than 2x more efficient than anything our there.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=262052.msg6449710#msg6449710

 A day later and it's already 3 to 5 times more efficient?  Imagine how efficient it will be when it finally delivers in two weeks^tm

Caveat Emptor!  Information asymmetry detected.

 

[btc6000]

Been away a while....so, when/why have we stopped receiving weekly dividends?

Cheers,

[minerpumpkin]

RM is only one AM customer and one board designer of many. Seems his boards are using USB.

There are other board designs in progress from other board designers. With Ethernet and with a different power consumption. And a different number of chips per board.

They've posted some web interface on their twitter feed so I assume they'll do standalone miners (as well)

[Puppet]

Caveat Emptor!  Information asymmetry detected.

ITs not meant as promotion for BFL, Id be the last person to suggest you order anything from there. But the chart is interesting and relevant to earlier discussions about how you can scale power efficiency of every ASIC. Even if you take those numbers with a table spoon of salt, it nicely illustrates my point.  There is about a factor 3x difference in power efficiency depending what voltage/frequency point you pick. That spread is not going to be vastly different for any other bitcoin asic.

[jimmothy]

Caveat Emptor!  Information asymmetry detected.

ITs not meant as promotion for BFL, Id be the last person to suggest you order anything from there. But the chart is interesting and relevant to earlier discussions about how you can scale power efficiency of every ASIC. Even if you take those numbers with a table spoon of salt, it nicely illustrates my point.  There is about a factor 3x difference in power efficiency depending what voltage/frequency point you pick. That spread is not going to be vastly different for any other bitcoin asic.

I think it illustrates the exact opposite. Notice the diminishing returns at around 0.3w/gh? Other manufacturers may have hit that limit at 0.6w/gh (bitfury excluded).

[Puppet]

I think it illustrates the exact opposite. Notice the diminishing returns at around 0.3w/gh? Other manufacturers may have hit that limit at 0.6w/gh (bitfury excluded).

Either you cant read a chart or you are assuming current asics run at a point to the extreme left of that chart, which would also imply those other asics can be overclocked by factor of 2-3x. Here is hint: almost none can. KnC, HF, CT, bitmain, Bitmine .. you'd be lucky to hit advertised speeds, let alone 2-3x more.

Either way, welcome to my ignore list.

[jimmothy]

Either you cant read a chart or you are assuming current asics run at a point to the extreme left of that chart

Yes this is exactly what I am assuning due to the fact that no asic manufacturer has advertised below 0.5w/gh (bitfury excluded) and nobody has been able to significantly undervolt below advertised limit.

which would also imply those other asics can be overclocked by factor of 2-3x. Here is hint: almost none can. KnC, HF, CT, bitmain, Bitmine .. you'd be lucky to hit advertised speeds, let alone 2-3x more.

Either way, welcome to my ignore list.

Heres a hint:

knc can be overclocked 1.7 times  (700gh/s vs advertised 40gh/s)
Hashfast can be overclocked 2 times (800gh/s vs 400gh advertised)
And bitmain can be overclocked 2 times (200gh vs 100gh advertised)

All of which have no problem hashing at advertised speeds.

Again, got any evidence that other manufacturers are not on the far left side of that chart?

[necro_nemesis]

Here's a real world example where three S1's are consuming a total of 500w hashing at 140gh/s each:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=526060.0

[jimmothy]

Here's a real world example where three S1's are consuming a total of 500w hashing at 140gh/s each:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=526060.0

What about it? bitmain always advertised up to 0.68w/gh.