Topic: [ANN] Sfards:SF100, the first 28nm Dual-Mode Miner is accepting pre-order now - page 57. (Read 129811 times)

Lets say you can buy them at 15  chip...that would be pretty nice....24 chips = 2TH = 360 in chip costs.

How much could the board cost for this? Lets say 2 boards at 12 chips each...20 bucks a board from china?

Slap then inside your existing cases and fans and your looking at a little over 200 bucks per TH.

Would drool if that would be achievable to do with these.

 yeah but look at f2pool and antpool they add to about 130ph

 50ph minimum is for small miners.  Many miners are small and mining and are not going anywhere why is that?

They have 1kwatt or 2watts of dirt cheap power.  

I have access to 1 kwatt of 2.4 cents.  I also need heat where those miners are located. I will always look to mine  close to my 1kwatt of power in that spot.

 My 3 s-3's  set to use 900 watts and run 1150 gh can earn profit at a diff of 200.  While that may be all I ever mine there are others like me

You do not see the problem with 2 or 3 conglomerates controlling all of the mining?

In my humble opinion it will cause a huge transformation, albeit not the one we want.
Unfortunately, the direction mining is on is causing a 180 degree turn.
Where bitcoin was about taking the control from the 'bankers' and putting it in the hands of many, it is now headed right back in control of the bankers, which are the people who own and fund the largest corporations, who are the people who own these conglomerates. While the technology will certainly enable the 'unbanked' the access they need. The people who profit from this will be the same greedy bastards who have our world in the economic quagmire where we keep sinking.

The less choices you and I have equals less votes we may cast. Without the 'Spondoolies of December 2014' mindset you will see these mega companies lose touch with what having a customer is all about. The larger they get, the less they care about what one individual thinks.

IF your only goal is a less expensive bitcoin process then centralization is the answer. Personally I do not believe that was the intent of the creator. Unfortunately, I do not think Satoshi is the all-knowing, crystal ball yielding, wizard so many seem to think. I believe he simply made an error in choosing a mining process so easily centralized.
If you want to make the world we live in a better place then you get back to decentralization and the core team would implement radical changes which forced such and threw the entire landscape into a frenzy.

There should be an upheaval sooner than later to rectify the mistakes made by Satoshi by changing bitcoin to a completely new mining model which has a better chance of surviving.

Bitcoin has the best chance of being the one world currency because it will be easily controlled by our governments through the mining process much sooner than it ever should have been. It will be adopted, regulated, and controlled by the same people most of us complain about today.


See my reply here:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.11297696

I think this is completely on topic and I feel strongly about the direction our beloved BITCOIN has taken. While the technology of the blockchain has forever changed our lives in a positive way, and it will never go back in the box; bitcoin as a currency is doomed to fail where it concerns who continues to control our economic future. At this point in our evolution that was the single biggest thing I saw it have the power to accomplish.

If you want to change something you better be great at convincing the right people it needs to be changed. The right people are always the ones with the most money, unfortunately.

My main point would be if bitcoin mining only leads to a few people controlling it no matter what advantages are gained from that scenario it simply leads back to the same old problems we have now.
No amount of technological advances will ever be as useful to humankind as the power to vote.


Sfards better get a real miner to market quickly. Bitmain are probably already mining with next gen, and I imagine SPtech as well. The home mining market has shrunk for various reasons, but with such a dry spell of offerings today is the best time to market to us. I fear they are all self-mining. Understandable from a business stand point as it is, it is another nail in the coffin of what bitcoin was originally intended to be.

Do you think the current price of bitcoin causes any of the major players to lose money? Not based on any model created within the past few months, and it is certainly not a problem for Bitmain type companies. We pay the difference. The price of the coin will rise, but will it be enough for anyone except KNC, Bitmain, and the new SPtech partnerships? They are making profits at the current price, and will continue to do so until they are all one big happy family owned by the banking systems.

if is the biggest 2 letter word in the English language.

What if they had 1,000,000 chips made each one cost them 4 dollars. Or 4,000,000 for the lot

They are clever and realize selling 600,000 at 12 dollars each = 7.2 million a nice 3.2 million profit - shipping and other expenses =  Maybe 2 million profit and 400,000 free chips.

My point is selling at 12 to 20 a chip is feasible.  Base on my if just as much as selling for 50 a chip on your if.

And what that change if chips will be priced like 50$? No one will make open sourced miners becuse it will not to be economical...

Well at least these guys seem to be promoting the whole open source thing, and are mainly interested in selling chips. People are already working with their designs and could have an open sourced miner pretty quickly.

Thanks, you got my shipping informations, I'm now back to routing the board

Sorry for my delay to response.

As for your question, please kindly find the answers below.

         1.  for non symmetrical voltages to body bias, we don't recommend it.
         2. BTC_VDDS0/1 and BTC_GDNS0/1 are all for BTC, because the BTC has 160 cores and the area is so large, we need more pad to drive them.
         3. if you have only one chip,  for DNRX, please pullup. DNTX don't need any action.
         4. internal oscillator, the SF3301 has an internal OSCILLATOR, but it need an crystal to connect XCLKIN and ZO. so if you use it, please reference the following schematic. Please note “for internal OSC”, at the same time, please connect the 2/3 of J1, make sure the OSC_BP = 0.

http://i58.tinypic.com/2w20g7d.jpg

BTW, we will upload the software very quickly

Sfards, gimme a sample review unit, I will be needing the heat come winter time. (or however cold it gets here.)

30 or 40 pools or farms may work.
The problems I see are why neglect the obvious : So many home owners that use electrical  heating in the forms of:

 hot water tanks
baseboard radiators
spot electric oil heaters.

BTW I use gas heat .
So I don't get much from the above.

I just don't see why potential  users of miners like these  above should be cut out. As they are spending the power anyway.

The companies only need us to support they're own mining operations.  Once they're self sufficient well invested goodbye home mining.  The next year will definitely be the deciding factor in which way this goes.  If Btc falls below certain levels it could bring these companies to closing or downsizing as there investors fall back.  What a wonderful world it would be for open source asic designs and a strong company to do battle supplying decentralized Super miners to the world for little profit.  Greed consumes all of us at some point.

While I can see some small advantages to a large and diverse mining base, it doesn't seem to be REQUIRED by any stretch of the imagination. Why would 10,000 30TH miners be better than 30 10PH mining farms for an aggregate of 300 PH let's say of hashrate? What's the threshold for "decentralized" and why must Bitcoin be decentralized to survive? It seems to me that in 50 years, long after I care, we'll want the most efficient "mining" (really transaction processing) setup to get by on the slender fees provided by transactions and the fraction of a new BTC in every block.

I understand the visceral reaction to a few large mining farms, but I haven't seen a compelling argument beyond the 51% attack scenario. It feels like the desire for a "miner in every home" is more driven by nostalgia of a few years ago than anything else.

Cool man  i just hope there miners are affordable and every one benefits from them. and not Priced like they were way back when ..

good points . made here .

We are in a very interesting time for BTC from now till the half-ing next year a lot of moves and double moves are to be made.

 Sfards looks like they are making a move in the next 60 days.

I only see KNC  doing that if at all but they are under more control now, after all they screwed us all .  SP-tech do seem to care can't say much about bitfury they seem to be more for volume buys but seem to be cool.

your right id say but time will tell.

 okay bick I play this game. bitfury can run at 0.07 watts per gh and build cheaply using cheap power.
knc can run at 0.08 watts  per gh and build it cheaply using cheap power.

lets argue why expand hash risking downward btc price pressure.  how about swap  new gear for old gear and cut power cost.
thus the two of them keep a good share of the market hash wise but simply lower expenses with more efficient gear.

  I can simply show no big self building miner should ever expand hash power
 they should keep changing the older power hungry gear for new power sipping gear.
If knc bitfury and sp-tech  do ever expanding hash rate growth they only hurt each other. 
 If they self mine with more efficient gear the hurt does not happen.

But only time will tell.

Yup.

And what happened?
You broke even maybe?
How many Bitfury chips can you buy today?

Millions bought them and now we had decentralized mining right? 100's did that is great but that is not millions, not enough to do much more than keep some hobbyists happy.

There are things you can change. There are things you can't change. I don't see how you break a monopoly that is coming at all.

Expecting these companies to be like you vs3 in anyway is not the hope you should be waiting for. I don't see anyone going to put the time and the effort in to make an ASIC and then get miners in the hands of millions which is the only way you beat the big players. It is over unless that happens somehow. I submit that the end is now and the monopoly on mining is already here and won't be challenged.

well - for example all you have to do is buy Bitfury's chip design and open-source it.
I have already done #2, and plenty of people did #3. #4 will happen by itself.

Don't kid yourself. The price war is not the issue it is the efficient and hashrate volume that is the battle ground.

The price of these chips and units for the small and ever shrinking home market is not what will drive the end of these companies. Guy at Spondoolies already laid it out numerous times on what will kill these wannabes competing with the those with a game plan, real engineering teams and the money.

The battle for $ per gh/s is silly and meaningless given the volume of hashpower that might come online before 2016. The nuclear weapons are ready to be unleashed. This will leave only 2 or 3 main superpowers.

---

As for wanting big centralized systems based on 2 or 3 companies. NO FUCKING WAY!

Here is how we stop it.

1. Open source ASIC chip.
2. Open source low cost miner design.
3. Low cost miners in every hand.
4. P2Pool with those miners.

If you can ship more Terahash Petahash in a small, quiet, unobtrusive low cost device to millions that is the only way to decentralize things and get those miners on a P2Pool. Counting on Avalon or Bitmain or SFards as your chip / miner supplier saviour is like asking the fox to watch the hen house.

Insanity. No one learned a lesson from KnC or Bitfury did they? If you have a chip and it makes economic sense to mine massively for your benefit as company you will do it.

Be realistic this won't happen so the best we can hope for is a few more months maybe a year of projects like Gekkoscience or J4bberwock's effort.

We clearly don't need a winner. I wonder though if the price of Bitcoin won't keep ALL the ASIC vendors in check. By that I mean a  low BTC/USD price keeps them from trying to kill each other. A high BTC price may encourage a "winner take all" strategy, which may not benefit any miner long term (past a couple of difficulty adjustments).

A little competition is probably good, but not a WAR