Topic: [ANN] Spondoolies-Tech - carrier grade, data center ready mining rigs - page 297. (Read 1260290 times)

How can you know about a shipping problem before ordering if the product was never shipped before? A bit redundant don't you think?

I only wish, it overpriced. In stock SP20 miner shipped in Time.
Why do I need to read it in a forum?
I want this information to my email. I want to know it before ordering and payment.


But still sells Spondoolies miners delivered  in  October.
http://www.spondoolies-tech.com/products/sp20-jackson-october-batch-1

Open your eyes. We have reached 8 November

Why a new software will make my miner only get worse?

The new software was the  speed only 1550GH/s, the same room, the same temperatures.

I paid for the last  SP20 November 5. 1360 USD,  and they can not find a suitable box for shipping?
On the same day paid Antminer S4, has already shipped.


Open my eyes that I, too, would be able to see the same .

Hi, it might be a dumb question but ..... can someone tell me if I can determine the kW usage of my SP31 based on the web interface settings or do I need a device similar to Kill-a-watt?

One of the PSU shows:
PSU[EMERSON1200]: 1472->1328w[1328 1328 1328] (->1361w[1361 1361 1361]) (lim=1330) 0c cooling:0/0x10007000

thx

I rolled back to 2.5.6 with Ziv's help yesterday but I am still getting that error :

17: disabled (bist cant start, stuck X)

hope my Asics did not get damaged or something

Maybe the code needs to be tweaked to restart those stuck asics or something after a while since it seems if I restart minergate or cgminer
the dead asic comes back for a while.

What worries me most though its the same Asic that fails all the time , sometimes 13 will fail as well.

'slow corners' go with that vocabulary in amt, ba or knc thread!!!
I see top hardware, good communication, best user support, nice ethics!!!
Da fuck do u want???

Yeah, but this time maybe you ought to check for 'slow corners' before you take shitloads of people's money and deliver woefully short performance. 

I had one unit that had the same problem as jtoomim, but restart got the chip back up. I am downgrading to 2.5.6 right now.

I am not buying miners to earn BTC or ROI and cloud mining is useless as an educational tool for my school. I am not personally buying any unprofitable cloud mining you have me confused with someone else obviously or didn't read my post all the way through. I am pretty certain you don't have all the numbers for larger shipments per kg that SPTech might have for large palette shipping but again I am not going to be buying millions of dollars of miners am I. I suspect again your current AMHash with current tech is not going to be profitable even for AM to run much longer. AMHash may want to order something in 2015 that out performs AM stuff so you can call SPTech then.

Send port forwarding to my mail/skype I will take a look

When buying miners though you've got to add in the costs of shipping, which is a considerable amount. Look at the SP20, for example.

It costs $1190 and shipping is $115 for me. That's almost 10% of the cost. Then you need a 1300W PSU which costs about another $200, so about $1500. Given that the hashrate is 1700 Gh/s and it consumes 1200W then it costs about 0.88 $/Gh @ 0.71 J/Gh. If electricity cost 0.1 $/kWh, that's 2.88 $/day. With the network hash rate at 290,522,381 Gh/s, 1700 Gh/s would represent 0.000585% of the hashing power, therefore would receive that much of the reward giving 0.0211 BTC/day. At 344 $/BTC, that's 7.26 $/day, minus the electricity costs that's 4.38 $/day and dropping.

Compare that with AMHash which you can purchase for <= 1.25 mBTC, which at 344 $/BTC is upto 0.43 $/Gh. After fees, 1700 AMHash shares would pay out 0.0216 BTC/day and dropping.

So, 1700 AMHash shares are equivalent to running an SP20 with electricity costs of 0.1 $/kWh, only they cost less than half the price of an SP20 and there's simply no hassle. It's simply a far more efficient way of selling hash power and I'll be seriously surprised if Spondoolies' don't start offering cloud mining services too.

Not noticed a problem with mine on 2.5.7.

I had been running 2.5.7, then upgraded to 2.5.9 last night. Neither were giving any noticeable errors. I have since downgraded to 2.5.6 as a precaution.

I should add that this is for the SP31

Does anyone else see problem with 2.5.7?

I am investigating.
Please downgrade to 2.5.6.

I got notification from a client that version 2.5.7 caused him to loose ASICs on machine.
I looked at the machine and that is a possibility.
Please don't upgrade (and if you upgraded - downgrade back to 2.5.6) till I investigate

The form factor is certainly not 1TH $30 machine ...

Currently asics need to be priced $ 190 TH at .6 watts efficiency just to  break even. Its hard to believe to see on the market by mid next year that there will  be $30 1TH machines with the increased  efficiency.  Not to mention  difficulty  will  be  5-6 times higher  than today.

Quoted for future reference.

I have no doubt they believe they can reach those numbers.

I have not seen once in these forums or in their media releases any attempt other than to challenge the competition to keep pace with them. What you see as a ploy I see as supreme confidence in a team. Having met a number of these people don't kid yourself on that these people are a solid professional team. They work at being a team all the time and it shows.

If you feel threatened as a shareholder of AM stock ok that is fine I have no money in SPTech or AM at this point. Given the economies of scale required I doubt I will be buying any hardware unless it is for use at our school on altcoins as part of our ICT curriculum we have. Given the mess with AM currently you should be more worried about what they are promising given SPTech has been pretty much spot on with most of the design and delivery of their products.

It is time to admit they rarely if ever have failed to make their customers happy. That has nothing to do with what is possible or probable chip design wise but SPTech is very very careful to craft their message in order to not fail at the critical moment and even the time they did miss their numbers they compensated their customers proactively. As one of those customers I was happy to receive the unit even though it didn't hit the numbers it certainly mined well, retained its value right up until it was sold and I came out on top even when BTC was plummeting to sub 400. As a consumer I can't be any happier than that really. Now look at AM threads? Are you really flinging shit here and not there? Seriously.

Now we are not talking home miners anymore. We are talking larger scale outfits with massive needs. Who would you want? I think that question gets answered pretty fast after you meet Guy and his team. As well that is why you see teams like Bitmaintech or Asicminer and especially BitFury starting to take a more serious approach to building a team that can win not just survive. Right now SPTech has the better team all around.

One other glaring aspect is the fact that of the big four SPTech is the only one not playing with larger mining operations or cloud mining as part of their portfolio. That has implications as they have less exposure to the issues of large scale farms as an investment and a much more defined focus on product and design alone. I really think many are going to opt for SPTech over those who are in direct competition with them for ever decreasing btc from mining. I think they have a significant advantage over everyone else since they are only supporting the build of a customers mining operation. There is no direct competition unlike BitFury, Bitmaintech, KnC or Asicminer or Rockminer that impact their potential industrial clients bottom line when mining.

With total absence of a reliable technical information about the chips it is hard to make predictions. About the only source available are the "preliminary data sheets". But even with those one could make educated guesses.

1) If the future chips still contain BIST circuitry/instructions that means that they still weren't able to internalize their own experience that dedicated test circuitry is nearly a complete waste of silicon resources and that the chips have to be continuously calibrated while running, not just tested at the start.

Other things that may indicate that they were finally capable of doing a true full custom/analog design:

2) BIST is still present, but no longer gives binary result PASS/FAIL, but some vector of values

3) PLL programming information will have additional parameters besides "frequency", either duty cycle (instead of the default 50%) or explicit phase shifts (for multi-phase clocking)

4) package information showing more than one "core" voltage, eg. positive Vdd and negative Vss (in addition to ground GND)

(3) and (4) would mean that they are capable of exploiting imperfections in the "C" of "CMOS".

Edit: Anyway, there is a Jewish proverb (approximately): Don't ask the tailor if the suit he's making is going to fit you.

Yes to the first, No to the second.