Why are you wrong here is why:
as of today the majority of miners are in the hands of less then 10 companies.
as of today the majority of miners are in the hands of less then 10 companies.
Whoops I said 12, totally wrong there
Topic: 20ph increase in btc mining network (Read 4382 times)
Whoops I said 12, totally wrong there
Looking at OoC's weekly network pool stats it seems most of the pools had bad luck. Still we are going to see around a 20% jump tomorrow. If we get a streak of luck it may go above 20%. Either way since there was bad luck this time it will continue to go up next difficulty as well unless we continue to have bad luck.
Ooh look, a 13K dump just dropped the price to 309
Ooh look, a 13K dump just dropped the price to 309
Coinbase is currently at $460. I'm sure glad I slept through that $309 slump!
Looking at OoC's weekly network pool stats it seems most of the pools had bad luck. Still we are going to see around a 20% jump tomorrow. If we get a streak of luck it may go above 20%. Either way since there was bad luck this time it will continue to go up next difficulty as well unless we continue to have bad luck.
Ooh look, a 13K dump just dropped the price to 309
Ooh look, a 13K dump just dropped the price to 309
and that comes to 3 sp30's which is a drop in the bucket 13.5th is not much against 200ph
Yes, but the days only thousand or so people GPU mined Bitcoin is long over. Bitcoin is much more popular and much more home miners mining, not even counting huge farms.
Hopefully none of them gets an extreme advantage in technology, otherwise centralisation is inevitable.
Centralisation is already happening as we speak.
At the current rate, by the end of the year the majority of the hashrate will come from a dozen or more large corporations running multiple data centres around the globe. They will probably go at each other for a period until a few drop off, and the equilibrium will probably be spread across about 5 or 6 major corporations throughout 2015 - 2016.
Why are you wrong here is why:
as of today the majority of miners are in the hands of less then 10 companies.
In Fact KNC + CEX +BFL + BITMAINTECH +ASICMINER + SPONDOOLIES = more then 51% of the gear in data centers. They mine for their selves or rent their hash out.
Home miners with serious fire power no longer exist.
In order to have a big in house setup. you need to rent a warehouse . what homeowner can give 10k watts in their house for mining alone.
and that comes to 3 sp30's which is a drop in the bucket 13.5th is not much against 200ph
Lets just hope that it would not be fully centralized, that would not be a good news for BTC.
Hopefully none of them gets an extreme advantage in technology, otherwise centralisation is inevitable.
Centralisation is already happening as we speak.
At the current rate, by the end of the year the majority of the hashrate will come from a dozen or more large corporations running multiple data centres around the globe. They will probably go at each other for a period until a few drop off, and the equilibrium will probably be spread across about 5 or 6 major corporations throughout 2015 - 2016.
The hashrate seems to be accelerating even more so today as the block solves in the last 24 hours is exceeding 200 now. Could be luck, could be lots of new eq. I haven't bothered to look at all the pools to see if it's luck.
Now done to 173 and block time up over 8.5 minutes. Jumpy. 
The hashrate seems to be accelerating even more so today as the block solves in the last 24 hours is exceeding 200 now. Could be luck, could be lots of new eq. I haven't bothered to look at all the pools to see if it's luck.
What gets turned off will likely get turned back on... heh... I don't think we've seen the last of our 20ph "friend". 
I doubt we will ever know what it was or who it belonged to.
I doubt we will ever know what it was or who it belonged to. There is a lot of conjecture here on what Bitfury is doing with their hardware but the truth is... we may never know since they are not releasing their new chip to the public.
The original 55nm chips did under 1w/GH. But they did a respin/redesign on the 55nm which had some dead engines in the original chip. And perhaps they were able to improve it by a considerable margin. Now just imagine if they could shrink the die size to 28nm or lower. And they certainly have the money to be able to afford a 14nm chip. They'd leave every competitor in the dust .
The problem they face is when it rolls out and how much it costs to put into production. I ran the numbers on a 0.1 Watt/GHS rig rolling out on 1/1/2015.The original 55nm chips did under 1w/GH. But they did a respin/redesign on the 55nm which had some dead engines in the original chip. And perhaps they were able to improve it by a considerable margin. Now just imagine if they could shrink the die size to 28nm or lower. And they certainly have the money to be able to afford a 14nm chip. They'd leave every competitor in the dust .
@ 0.02KWH, $600/BTC and the current 2014 average of 16% and 12 days per bump, it cash flows on power only for 312 days. A 1 THS rig will produce 1/3 BTC before going negative on power only. Starting difficulty was 1.17116E+11 which is today increasing at 16% every 12 days.
If they wait until 3/1/2015 to go into production with the 1Watt/GHS rig, that same 1 terahash rig will produce 1/6th of a BTC.
I don't see the business case for a major new investment in mining technology. It is a prisoner's dilemma http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner's_dilemma type of problem. If everyone stops investment, the value of the existing investment is maximized. If one entity keeps investing, the value of everyone's investment decreases.
In the years to come, I think the economic behavior of the big BTC players over the next 12-18 months will be studied in great detail. It is a mathematically bounded problem where the outcomes only depend on the behavior of the other big players.
There is a lot of conjecture here on what Bitfury is doing with their hardware but the truth is... we may never know since they are not releasing their new chip to the public.
The original 55nm chips did under 1w/GH. But they did a respin/redesign on the 55nm which had some dead engines in the original chip. And perhaps they were able to improve it by a considerable margin. Now just imagine if they could shrink the die size to 28nm or lower. And they certainly have the money to be able to afford a 14nm chip. They'd leave every competitor in the dust .
The original 55nm chips did under 1w/GH. But they did a respin/redesign on the 55nm which had some dead engines in the original chip. And perhaps they were able to improve it by a considerable margin. Now just imagine if they could shrink the die size to 28nm or lower. And they certainly have the money to be able to afford a 14nm chip. They'd leave every competitor in the dust .
No way is BitFury getting 0.5W per GH/s on that 55nm chip. I'd say the increase is a combination of hardware from BitFury, Spondoolies-Tech and Bitmain and good old fashioned variance.
We're certainly well within the normal ranges for variance. Looking at the log plots:
https://blockchain.info/charts/hash-rate?showDataPoints=false&show_header=true&daysAverageString=1×pan=&scale=1&address=
The previous difficulty period looks like it was a pretty unlucky period (could be statistical variance, could be hardware was offline and is now back online) and we're now seeing things returning to the sort of trajectory that they probably should have been on all along.
No way is BitFury getting 0.5W per GH/s on that 55nm chip. I'd say the increase is a combination of hardware from BitFury, Spondoolies-Tech and Bitmain and good old fashioned variance.
We're certainly well within the normal ranges for variance. Looking at the log plots:
https://blockchain.info/charts/hash-rate?showDataPoints=false&show_header=true&daysAverageString=1×pan=&scale=1&address=
The previous difficulty period looks like it was a pretty unlucky period (could be statistical variance, could be hardware was offline and is now back online) and we're now seeing things returning to the sort of trajectory that they probably should have been on all along.
No way is BitFury getting 0.5W per GH/s on that 55nm chip. I'd say the increase is a combination of hardware from BitFury, Spondoolies-Tech and Bitmain and good old fashioned variance.
20 mw for 40 ph comes to .5 watts a gh . I am thinking that chip can do under 1 watt say .9 not .5 watts
Do we know of any .5 WATT/GHS setup?
no confirmed tested gear for the little guy does .5 watts
the sp30 is .6 watts not sure if dogie has done his review on it.
20 mw for 40 ph comes to .5 watts a gh . I am thinking that chip can do under 1 watt say .9 not .5 watts
Do we know of any .5 WATT/GHS setup?
Something doesn't add up.
You claim to know about their chips. You claim to know about their datacenters. You claim that they brought up 20MW in Iceland. However, almost 40PH/s just hit the network.
So, the question that all of your customers want answered: Are they using your chips or not? Otherwise how do you explain 40PH/s?
You claim to know about their chips. You claim to know about their datacenters. You claim that they brought up 20MW in Iceland. However, almost 40PH/s just hit the network.
So, the question that all of your customers want answered: Are they using your chips or not? Otherwise how do you explain 40PH/s?
They're not using SP-Tech chips. The bitfury group has their own desing which also happens to be the best 55nm chip to have ever hit the market. In fact it competes on the same level as other manufacturers 28nm.
So to put it succintly. The Bitfury group, who opened up the 20MW/40PH farm is using their own hardware with their own (and VC) money.
so you think they are getting .5 watts a hash?
20 mw for 40 ph comes to .5 watts a gh . I am thinking that chip can do under 1 watt say .9 not .5 watts
the 40 ph may be a bit less say 20-25ph bitfury and some sp30's alog with some s-3's and a bit of good luck
still may top us over 20% . I wonder if we get 3 under 10% after this big jump
It looks like longterm only the chip producers themselves will be able to mine profitably. Hopefully none of them gets an extreme advantage in technology, otherwise centralisation is inevitable.
Something doesn't add up.
You claim to know about their chips. You claim to know about their datacenters. You claim that they brought up 20MW in Iceland. However, almost 40PH/s just hit the network.
So, the question that all of your customers want answered: Are they using your chips or not? Otherwise how do you explain 40PH/s?
You claim to know about their chips. You claim to know about their datacenters. You claim that they brought up 20MW in Iceland. However, almost 40PH/s just hit the network.
So, the question that all of your customers want answered: Are they using your chips or not? Otherwise how do you explain 40PH/s?
They're not using SP-Tech chips. The bitfury group has their own desing which also happens to be the best 55nm chip to have ever hit the market. In fact it competes on the same level as other manufacturers 28nm.
So to put it succintly. The Bitfury group, who opened up the 20MW/40PH farm is using their own hardware with their own (and VC) money.
Jump to: