[Avalon ASIC] Batch #2 pre-Sale Thread - page 35.

SolarSilver

legendary

Activity: 1112

Merit: 1000

Quote from: SyRenity on February 01, 2013, 06:02:29 PM

Anybody knows how the customs will be declared here?

Will it be possible to declare them on certain sum, i.e. 250$ for example?

Don't do that... customs does google for the real value of your sale

One guaranteed way to get your package stuck in their warehouse for a fairly long time...

lucif

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

Clown prophet

http://www.theverge.com/2013/2/1/3941768/new-chips-mine-bitcoins-50-times-faster

SgtSpike

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1005

Quote from: Nemesis on February 01, 2013, 05:44:23 PM

Quote from: lastbit on February 01, 2013, 05:33:03 PM

Quote from: Fuzzy on February 01, 2013, 01:08:39 PM

Quote from: Tesla71 on February 01, 2013, 01:01:17 PM

Quote from: PuertoLibre on February 01, 2013, 12:55:54 PM

Any ASIC is vulnerable to changes in Bitcoin. (Including BFL)

Should any changes occur, the losses could be staggering. Those with FPGA's ought to keep them as insurance. Especially in light of the GPU miner shutting down once ASICs dominate the market.

How and from whom could such a change be done ? is there any kind of "consortium" who decides which algorythm is used ?

Any change in the bitcoin code will create a new fork, which will no longer be the the original "Bitcoin".

So while you COULD change the code, none of your new coins will work on the original Bitcoin platform, where all the ASICs are.

Maybe not? let's say change is from sha256(sha256(x)) to sha256(sha512(x)) and change will be implemented at block number Z. All old transaction (recorded in blocks older than Z) will be verified with old algorithm. All newer will be verified with new algorithm.

But I doubt such change will occur. ASICs are a necessity for bitcoin network to make it less vulnerable to a malicious entity, even if it will mean small miners will be taken out of the mining party.

LOL you must be new....

For a fork to work, the miner must support it. If more than 50% of miners are ASIC, you should forget about new fork.

Not true at all.

Any miners who do not support it will continue mining on the old blockchain, and will not validate any of the new blocks. Any miners who switch over to the new algorithm will continue on the new blockchain, and will not validate any blocks still using the old algorithm. So, the blockchain would split into two (why it is called a "fork"), and it would pretty much be a disaster if they both continued to attempt to call themselves Bitcoin, as it would cause a great deal of confusion (are you sending me Bitcoin coins on the new algorithm blockchain or the old one?)

You could have 1 MH/s support a new chain if you wanted, and you wouldn't need anything more.

SyRenity

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 502

Anybody knows how the customs will be declared here?

Will it be possible to declare them on certain sum, i.e. 250$ for example?

Nemesis

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

Quote from: lastbit on February 01, 2013, 05:33:03 PM

Quote from: Fuzzy on February 01, 2013, 01:08:39 PM

Quote from: Tesla71 on February 01, 2013, 01:01:17 PM

Quote from: PuertoLibre on February 01, 2013, 12:55:54 PM

Any ASIC is vulnerable to changes in Bitcoin. (Including BFL)

Should any changes occur, the losses could be staggering. Those with FPGA's ought to keep them as insurance. Especially in light of the GPU miner shutting down once ASICs dominate the market.

How and from whom could such a change be done ? is there any kind of "consortium" who decides which algorythm is used ?

Any change in the bitcoin code will create a new fork, which will no longer be the the original "Bitcoin".

So while you COULD change the code, none of your new coins will work on the original Bitcoin platform, where all the ASICs are.

Maybe not? let's say change is from sha256(sha256(x)) to sha256(sha512(x)) and change will be implemented at block number Z. All old transaction (recorded in blocks older than Z) will be verified with old algorithm. All newer will be verified with new algorithm.

But I doubt such change will occur. ASICs are a necessity for bitcoin network to make it less vulnerable to a malicious entity, even if it will mean small miners will be taken out of the mining party.

LOL you must be new....

For a fork to work, the miner must support it. If more than 50% of miners are ASIC, you should forget about new fork.

SolarSilver

legendary

Activity: 1112

Merit: 1000

Quote from: siggy on February 01, 2013, 12:31:46 PM

I'm curious: will batch #2 base units be a larger form factor? or will the Batch #2 modules have a smaller form factor to be able to fit 6 modules in the same space as 4 batch #1's ?? (( Possibly as thinner, but more efficient heat sink? ))

Can somebody do the math with me, I'm taking guess from this picture:

In the back, there are 3 fans, they look like the 12 cm x 12 cm type. That makes the current case 36 - 38 cm wide
[4.724 in x 4.724 in] [14.173 in - 14.96 in]

In the front, there is the power supply (8.5 cm x 15 cm), let's take 9 cm wide
[3.345 in x 5.90 in] [3.543 in]

The modules look like they are 6 cm wide
[2.362 in]

So if you put 6 modules in a wider case, the case would have to be 6 x 6 + 9 cm= 45 cm wide
[17.716 in]

45 cm is about as wide as the inner space of a 19" rack is

But there are a few gaps that would add to a size > 45 cm like the lip on the outside of the case, and some gaps on the inside.

Yifu, can you confirm the batch #2 cases will still fit into a 19" rack (even if you don't provide the ears, they can just
sit on little shelves).

Some of us do plan (dream?) of hosting these machines usually in a colo with 19" racks.

lastbit

full member

Activity: 206

Merit: 100

Quote from: Fuzzy on February 01, 2013, 01:08:39 PM

Quote from: Tesla71 on February 01, 2013, 01:01:17 PM

Quote from: PuertoLibre on February 01, 2013, 12:55:54 PM

Any ASIC is vulnerable to changes in Bitcoin. (Including BFL)

Should any changes occur, the losses could be staggering. Those with FPGA's ought to keep them as insurance. Especially in light of the GPU miner shutting down once ASICs dominate the market.

How and from whom could such a change be done ? is there any kind of "consortium" who decides which algorythm is used ?

Any change in the bitcoin code will create a new fork, which will no longer be the the original "Bitcoin".

So while you COULD change the code, none of your new coins will work on the original Bitcoin platform, where all the ASICs are.

Maybe not? let's say change is from sha256(sha256(x)) to sha256(sha512(x)) and change will be implemented at block number Z. All old transaction (recorded in blocks older than Z) will be verified with old algorithm. All newer will be verified with new algorithm.

But I doubt such change will occur. ASICs are a necessity for bitcoin network to make it less vulnerable to a malicious entity, even if it will mean small miners will be taken out of the mining party.

SolarSilver

legendary

Activity: 1112

Merit: 1000

Quote from: darkip on February 01, 2013, 03:35:23 PM

Quote

We are aware this will introduce Import issues for certain EU and SA countries. Avalon ASIC hope re-sellers will take this opportunity to grow and take care of this problem.

I'm in the UK so this possibly covers me. Does anyone know what "issues" they're referring to other than the obvious customs (VAT) charges?

Somebody complained that if he can't show to customs the proof of payment, they make a fuss about it. I guess they want to see if the value declared is not lower than the amount he paid.

Sounds a bit strange as the only thing customs wants to see is a valid invoice declaring the package value and if possible the uniform customs code for the item (the infamous GN (EEG) nr. 2658/87 reference)

Customs does not care if you paid with a wire transfer, paypal, credit card or bitcoins. Resistance is futile, you will be taxed.

So unless you live in Poland, it's probably not a problem

SolarSilver

legendary

Activity: 1112

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Grix on February 01, 2013, 04:30:42 PM

So can we get a confirmation or something on the 09:00 EST Feb 2nd? Quite terrible timing for europeans, if I decide to order I'll have to wake up at 3 o'clock in the middle of the night not to risk missing it.

09:00 EST is 15h Brussels/Paris/Amsterdam time

http://www.timebie.com/timezone/easternbrussels.php

Korbman

legendary

Activity: 1064

Merit: 1001

Quote from: kaerf on February 01, 2013, 04:28:23 PM

supposedly it's a trivial optical shrink from 110nm to 55nm (trivial technically. financially...harder).

I've heard exactly the same, so I think you might be right as well. 110 to 55 is just a more expensive process thanks to the shrinkage...just like ASICMiner could probably go from 130nm to BFL's 65nm with a bit more cash.

darkip

full member

Activity: 160

Merit: 100

Quote from: Grix on February 01, 2013, 04:30:42 PM

Quite terrible timing for europeans

Eh? I'm in the UK and 9am EST = 2pm GMT.

Grix

hero member

Activity: 536

Merit: 500

So can we get a confirmation or something on the 09:00 EST Feb 2nd? Quite terrible timing for europeans, if I decide to order I'll have to wake up at 3 o'clock in the middle of the night not to risk missing it.

kaerf

hero member

Activity: 631

Merit: 500

supposedly it's a trivial optical shrink from 110nm to 55nm (trivial technically. financially...harder). just what i've read on irc. i have no idea if that is true or not.

Fuzzy

hero member

Activity: 560

Merit: 500

Quote from: kaerf on February 01, 2013, 04:11:11 PM

[...] when they do a die shrink

It'll be interesting to see how long it takes the competition to shrink down to 65nm after BFL starts shipping their chips. Seeing as there are already well established 65nm manufacturing processes in the fab industry.

kaerf

hero member

Activity: 631

Merit: 500

Quote from: Carlton Banks on February 01, 2013, 03:45:08 PM

Quote from: Korbman on February 01, 2013, 03:13:37 PM

I'm actually quite curious about this as well. It would be very cool if they were able to maintain the current board layout while packing more chips on each module at 55nm..not to mention the power efficiency increase.

Well, there's never a good reason not to do this that isn't technical. That never stops certain technology companies and standards bodies from altering all sorts of physical standards for the sake of making money out of everyone having to switch and/or controlling separate regional markets in the case of the standards bodies. But I reckon Avalon will keep it practical, at least while they're still fairly small new business themselves, they probably can't afford not to be.

I'm pretty sure Avalon's plan is to provide upgrade boards when they do a die shrink (or some other upgrade). The launch website calls this "Future Proof".

Carlton Banks

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 3080

Quote from: Korbman on February 01, 2013, 03:13:37 PM

Quote from: Carlton Banks on February 01, 2013, 03:07:01 PM

Quote from: kaerf on February 01, 2013, 12:59:01 PM

Another reason not to order the extra modules is the power supply. I doubt the stock 3 module unit is going to ship with a power supply that can support 6 modules.

In fact, if you look at the bitcoin foundation pictures, there is a different PSU in the 4 module box that jeff has in his 3 module box. the bitcoin foundation PSU looks like an enermax while jeff's is an antec.

What if Avalon release a 55nm chip revision with the same board layout? It'd be interesting to hear how much wattage headroom the 3x20 GH/s have with their stock PSU, people that don't upgrade their 110nm boards early on might be able to use the space more efficiently if Avalon can stick with their module dimensions through their chip upgrades.

I'm actually quite curious about this as well. It would be very cool if they were able to maintain the current board layout while packing more chips on each module at 55nm..not to mention the power efficiency increase.

Well, there's never a good reason not to do this that isn't technical. That never stops certain technology companies and standards bodies from altering all sorts of physical standards for the sake of making money out of everyone having to switch and/or controlling separate regional markets in the case of the standards bodies. But I reckon Avalon will keep it practical, at least while they're still fairly small new business themselves, they probably can't afford not to be.

darkip

full member

Activity: 160

Merit: 100

Well they're not charging in BTC, they're charging in US dollars? BTC is just the method of payment?

Tesla71

sr. member

Activity: 302

Merit: 252

Maybee they adressing the point that you have to show the invoice to the customs to calculate the vat. And if the bill says only "83 BTC" maybee thy will not handle you the unit because they cant do the calculation because they did not know anything about BTC

darkip

full member

Activity: 160

Merit: 100

Quote

We are aware this will introduce Import issues for certain EU and SA countries. Avalon ASIC hope re-sellers will take this opportunity to grow and take care of this problem.

I'm in the UK so this possibly covers me. Does anyone know what "issues" they're referring to other than the obvious customs (VAT) charges?

eleuthria

legendary

Activity: 1750

Merit: 1007

Sure would be nice if this didn't require waking up before 6 AM on the west coast Sad

. I didn't need that sleep anyways.

Topic: [Avalon ASIC] Batch #2 pre-Sale Thread - page 35. (Read 107712 times)