Topic: Avalon Asic Design Discussion (Read 8194 times)

Quote from: PuertoLibre on February 07, 2013, 01:12:16 AM

Quote from: mrb on February 08, 2013, 02:08:15 PM

A 280mm fan would have made the 4U (178mm) chassis way taller. Not good.

Wrong direction. Like a computer case intake on the side.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835705056

This would not be proper airflow in a rack (and Avalon is designed to be racked).

Strange, I have seen Server racks online with those kinds of configurations. (mostly 120mm fans)

These fans you guys are looking at are crap. Server, rackmounts fans are substantial and HUGE. 120mm, but 2-3 inches thick with crazy high power motors.

I have some 120mm fans that run on 48V, and they're rated to move 200CFM each. About 10 times what most 120mm fans will do.

When I powered one up loose on a table, it blew with enough force to push itself across the table, and drew blood when it walked right off the table edge and I tried to catch it.

They're loud as hell too, with a real high tone.

I like Avalon's design where the air flows in a straight path in the front, across the fins, and out the back.

I never liked the BFL and bASIC designs where the air is forced to make a right-angle turn.

They make tiny fans of 30 to 40mm that push about 125cfm each if I recall correctly. My server has about 4 on each side. (8 total at 15-16 thousand RPM)

So at 120mm a high end delta fan should be doing quite a bit. From what I understood the static pressure is more important as it keeps the components nice and cool. The Avalon seem to be pull only configuration. I also wonder why they didn't buy a modular power supply. The top where the powersupply is located has restricted airflow with all those cables. It would be interesting to measure if that is a spot where heat can build up and cause power supply issues.

Nemesis

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

Quote from: kev7112001 on February 08, 2013, 09:07:55 AM

Well this is a topic of design so we need to stop talking about shipping who was first or last cause technically no one has one, so there is yet to be a first shipper

Anyway, talking about who shipped or not is irrelevant to prove my point: Avalon is first to mine. This would not have been possible had they chosen a more complex 90nm or 65nm design, therefore 110nm was the right choice in order to beat BFL on time having devices mining as we speak (prototype or not, shipped or not).

Nemesis: watch your language - this is your 2nd warning. Next time you will find yourself in my ignore list.

And i said your point is moot if those AVALONs arent not in their customers hands. Having prototypes with unknown bugs means.... they beat BFL?

Its also amusing that you said " shipped or not" ...

Sure, ignore me. Or grown up and admit your point is nonsense.

mrb

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1028

Quote from: kev7112001 on February 08, 2013, 09:07:55 AM

Well this is a topic of design so we need to stop talking about shipping who was first or last cause technically no one has one, so there is yet to be a first shipper

Anyway, talking about who shipped or not is irrelevant to prove my point: Avalon is first to mine. This would not have been possible had they chosen a more complex 90nm or 65nm design, therefore 110nm was the right choice in order to beat BFL on time having devices mining as we speak (prototype or not, shipped or not).

Nemesis: watch your language - this is your 2nd warning. Next time you will find yourself in my ignore list.

Bogart

legendary

Activity: 966

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Aseras on February 07, 2013, 10:03:26 AM

Quote from: PuertoLibre on February 07, 2013, 03:29:22 AM

Quote from: PuertoLibre on February 07, 2013, 01:12:16 AM

Quote from: Aseras on February 08, 2013, 10:18:05 AM

A 280mm fan would have made the 4U (178mm) chassis way taller. Not good.

Wrong direction. Like a computer case intake on the side.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835705056

This would not be proper airflow in a rack (and Avalon is designed to be racked).

Strange, I have seen Server racks online with those kinds of configurations. (mostly 120mm fans)

These fans you guys are looking at are crap. Server, rackmounts fans are substantial and HUGE. 120mm, but 2-3 inches thick with crazy high power motors.

I have some 120mm fans that run on 48V, and they're rated to move 200CFM each. About 10 times what most 120mm fans will do.

When I powered one up loose on a table, it blew with enough force to push itself across the table, and drew blood when it walked right off the table edge and I tried to catch it.

They're loud as hell too, with a real high tone.

I like Avalon's design where the air flows in a straight path in the front, across the fins, and out the back.

I never liked the BFL and bASIC designs where the air is forced to make a right-angle turn.

jjiimm_64

legendary

Activity: 1876

Merit: 1000

THIS:

These are all first generation "prototypes" they are not super tested rugged bulletproof designs. they are all made by hobbyists and fly by night companies. The first gen machines are going to have issues. It happens. BFL has issues with their first FPGA singles overheating and causing problems. However the early adopters get to make a larger profit by taking the risk.

Aseras

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 500

These are all first generation "prototypes" they are not super tested rugged bulletproof designs. they are all made by hobbyists and fly by night companies. The first gen machines are going to have issues. It happens. BFL has issues with their first FPGA singles overheating and causing problems. However the early adopters get to make a larger profit by taking the risk.

Nemesis

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

Quote from: mrb on February 08, 2013, 05:04:45 AM

Quote from: Nemesis on February 07, 2013, 11:16:04 PM

Quote from: Nemesis on February 07, 2013, 11:16:04 PM

How you define "should have been done" is arbitrary. Obviously Avalon has done it the right way for them: a design with many small 110nm chips was simpler and allowed them to ship before BFL who is struggling with fewer more complex 65nm chips.

by ship, you meant you received one? If not, STFU already.

You seem upset that BFL did not ship first. That is not a reason for writing an abusive post. Watch your language.

No I'm stating the fact. You need to learn to use the brain between your ears.

kev7112001

sr. member

Activity: 479

Merit: 250

Well this is a topic of design so we need to stop talking about shipping who was first or last cause technically no one has one, so there is yet to be a first shipper

mrb

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1028

Quote from: hardcore-fs on February 07, 2013, 01:17:19 AM

How you define "should have been done" is arbitrary. Obviously Avalon has done it the right way for them: a design with many small 110nm chips was simpler and allowed them to ship before BFL who is struggling with fewer more complex 65nm chips.

by ship, you meant you received one? If not, STFU already.

You seem upset that BFL did not ship first. That is not a reason for writing an abusive post. Watch your language.

smoothie

legendary

Activity: 2492

Merit: 1473

LEALANA Bitcoin Grim Reaper

Quote from: Inaba on February 06, 2013, 11:27:10 PM

We found the vias to be inadequate to cool the QFN package during Bitcoin mining. Under normal operations (e.g. anything not Bitcoin mining, with a toggle rate < 20%, so basically every other application on the planet) vias are more than adequate to dissipate the heat. With bitcoin mining, the heat generation is much higher and sustained, so the heat starts spreading out into the ground and thermal planes, degrading (and possibly destroying) surrounding components after a long enough time scale. Granted, our heat density is vastly greater than Avalon's density, so this is probably not nearly the issue it is with BFL's chips, so the cooling with via's are probably the right choice in this application.

In short, the cooling method on the back side of the board is normal and expected with this type of design. Adding a HSF to the top of the chip would solve any potential remaining issues if they exist(ed) I would imagine.

It is extremely POOR PCB design practice to attempt to use VIAS for cooling, one only has to take a look DOWN the via to see why......

Plus I fail to see how something only a few micons thick could be expected to 'cool' a large thermal load, thankfully BFL saw through this particular alchemists fantacy.

typo?

johnyj

legendary

Activity: 1988

Merit: 1012

Beyond Imagination

By far the most beautiful ASIC layout comes from ASICminer

It reminds me of the time when every company use their own design to make various computer boards 20-30 years ago, so lively and full of inspiration

Littleshop

legendary

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1004

Quote from: Nemesis on February 08, 2013, 12:18:55 AM

Quote from: Littleshop on February 08, 2013, 12:16:48 AM

Quote from: Nemesis on February 07, 2013, 11:25:27 PM

Quote from: Littleshop on February 07, 2013, 11:18:58 PM

Quote from: kev7112001 on February 07, 2013, 10:57:55 PM

BFL design is how it should have been done there should be no reason to need that many chips

Each design has its merits. The Avalon design is cheaper do design and has lower startup costs. The BFL design is much more expensive to start but is cheaper to manufacture and cheaper to run long term. The real prize goes to who builds first, and in this case it is Avalon. If they can pump out two or three rounds of these they make a pretty good profit. There also may be a secondary market for these chips outside of bitcoin.

What a pile of wishful thinking.

Do you survive life on daily basis with all the big IFs?

Secondary market for these chips? LOL

It is not wishful thinking, they are taking orders for batch two now. This strategy has worked.

Considering that these chips probably cost less then $5 each, a single chip on a USB device as a SHA256 accelerator that could be sold at a profit for $39.

Tom would like to thank you for letting him know he's successful.

This community got jerked left and right and still keep smiling to the next scam.

You seem to be talking about something quite different then me, or the subject of this thread. I am talking about Avalon, a company that has started to ship.

Nemesis

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

Quote from: Littleshop on February 08, 2013, 12:16:48 AM

Quote from: Nemesis on February 07, 2013, 11:25:27 PM

Quote from: Littleshop on February 07, 2013, 11:18:58 PM

Quote from: kev7112001 on February 07, 2013, 10:57:55 PM

BFL design is how it should have been done there should be no reason to need that many chips

Each design has its merits. The Avalon design is cheaper do design and has lower startup costs. The BFL design is much more expensive to start but is cheaper to manufacture and cheaper to run long term. The real prize goes to who builds first, and in this case it is Avalon. If they can pump out two or three rounds of these they make a pretty good profit. There also may be a secondary market for these chips outside of bitcoin.

What a pile of wishful thinking.

Do you survive life on daily basis with all the big IFs?

Secondary market for these chips? LOL

It is not wishful thinking, they are taking orders for batch two now. This strategy has worked.

Considering that these chips probably cost less then $5 each, a single chip on a USB device as a SHA256 accelerator that could be sold at a profit for $39.

Tom would like to thank you for letting him know he's successful.

This community got jerked left and right and still keep smiling to the next scam.

Littleshop

legendary

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1004

Quote from: Nemesis on February 07, 2013, 11:25:27 PM

Quote from: Littleshop on February 07, 2013, 11:18:58 PM

Quote from: kev7112001 on February 07, 2013, 10:57:55 PM

BFL design is how it should have been done there should be no reason to need that many chips

Each design has its merits. The Avalon design is cheaper do design and has lower startup costs. The BFL design is much more expensive to start but is cheaper to manufacture and cheaper to run long term. The real prize goes to who builds first, and in this case it is Avalon. If they can pump out two or three rounds of these they make a pretty good profit. There also may be a secondary market for these chips outside of bitcoin.

What a pile of wishful thinking.

Do you survive life on daily basis with all the big IFs?

Secondary market for these chips? LOL

It is not wishful thinking, they are taking orders for batch two now. This strategy has worked.

Considering that these chips probably cost less then $5 each, a single chip on a USB device as a SHA256 accelerator that could be sold at a profit for $39.

Nemesis

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

Quote from: Syke on February 07, 2013, 11:32:56 PM

Quote from: Nemesis on February 07, 2013, 11:23:28 PM

Quote from: Syke on February 07, 2013, 11:18:27 PM

Quote from: Nemesis on February 07, 2013, 11:16:04 PM

Quote from: kev7112001 on February 07, 2013, 11:31:42 PM

How you define "should have been done" is arbitrary. Obviously Avalon has done it the right way for them: a design with many small 110nm chips was simpler and allowed them to ship before BFL who is struggling with fewer more complex 65nm chips.

by ship, you meant you received one? If not, STFU already.

Avalon has working chips, BFL doesn't. Plain and simple.

working? you meant for 24hrs max? Yes thats your definition of working.

Those all appear to be software-related issues. You know, the kind of issues BFL hasn't run into yet because they don't have working chips to start developing the software for yet.

Is this even a debate or arguement? You dont know anything for sure or just purely speculate

You trust what they say? Oh yes, it doesnt matter u trust them or not, they already said... NO BS TERM OF SALE... no questions, no guarantee

software related? hmmm k.

mrb

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1028

BFL has had a working prototype

BFL has never had a working prototype.

Syke

legendary

Activity: 3878

Merit: 1193

Quote from: Nemesis on February 07, 2013, 11:23:28 PM

Quote from: Syke on February 07, 2013, 11:18:27 PM

Quote from: Nemesis on February 07, 2013, 11:16:04 PM

Quote from: Littleshop on February 07, 2013, 11:18:58 PM

How you define "should have been done" is arbitrary. Obviously Avalon has done it the right way for them: a design with many small 110nm chips was simpler and allowed them to ship before BFL who is struggling with fewer more complex 65nm chips.

by ship, you meant you received one? If not, STFU already.

Avalon has working chips, BFL doesn't. Plain and simple.

working? you meant for 24hrs max? Yes thats your definition of working.

Those all appear to be software-related issues. You know, the kind of issues BFL hasn't run into yet because they don't have working chips to start developing the software for yet.

kev7112001

sr. member

Activity: 479

Merit: 250

BFL has had a working prototype and Avalon the same the only difference between the two is Avalon sent there prototypes to two people, then claim there done. Well if you can send 2 you can send them all.

Nemesis

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

Quote from: kev7112001 on February 07, 2013, 10:57:55 PM

BFL design is how it should have been done there should be no reason to need that many chips

Each design has its merits. The Avalon design is cheaper do design and has lower startup costs. The BFL design is much more expensive to start but is cheaper to manufacture and cheaper to run long term. The real prize goes to who builds first, and in this case it is Avalon. If they can pump out two or three rounds of these they make a pretty good profit. There also may be a secondary market for these chips outside of bitcoin.

What a pile of wishful thinking.

Do you survive life on daily basis with all the big IFs?

Secondary market for these chips? LOL

Nemesis

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

Quote from: Syke on February 07, 2013, 11:18:27 PM

Quote from: Nemesis on February 07, 2013, 11:16:04 PM

Quote from: kev7112001 on February 07, 2013, 10:57:55 PM

How you define "should have been done" is arbitrary. Obviously Avalon has done it the right way for them: a design with many small 110nm chips was simpler and allowed them to ship before BFL who is struggling with fewer more complex 65nm chips.

by ship, you meant you received one? If not, STFU already.

Avalon has working chips, BFL doesn't. Plain and simple.

working? you meant for 24hrs max? Yes thats your definition of working.

Plain and simple.

For any sane person, Avalon is still working on their units still. BFL has done the design for 65nm chips which is the hardest part. Testing these chips is very trivial (either work or dont), with only 8 chips per board, its even less prone to bugs.

Littleshop

legendary

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1004

BFL design is how it should have been done there should be no reason to need that many chips

Each design has its merits. The Avalon design is cheaper do design and has lower startup costs. The BFL design is much more expensive to start but is cheaper to manufacture and cheaper to run long term. The real prize goes to who builds first, and in this case it is Avalon. If they can pump out two or three rounds of these they make a pretty good profit. There also may be a secondary market for these chips outside of bitcoin.

Syke

legendary

Activity: 3878

Merit: 1193

Quote from: Nemesis on February 07, 2013, 11:16:04 PM

How you define "should have been done" is arbitrary. Obviously Avalon has done it the right way for them: a design with many small 110nm chips was simpler and allowed them to ship before BFL who is struggling with fewer more complex 65nm chips.

by ship, you meant you received one? If not, STFU already.

Avalon has working chips, BFL doesn't. Plain and simple.

Nemesis

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

How you define "should have been done" is arbitrary. Obviously Avalon has done it the right way for them: a design with many small 110nm chips was simpler and allowed them to ship before BFL who is struggling with fewer more complex 65nm chips.

by ship, you meant you received one? If not, STFU already.

mrb

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1028

The added PCB complexity of Avalon is completely negligible compared to the complexity of making a working 65nm chip.

kev7112001

sr. member

Activity: 479

Merit: 250

Quote from: PuertoLibre on February 07, 2013, 03:29:22 AM

How you define "should have been done" is arbitrary. Obviously Avalon has done it the right way for them: a design with many small 110nm chips was simpler and allowed them to ship before BFL who is struggling with fewer more complex 65nm chips.

using that many adds to complexity and we do know if they have actually shipped yet

mrb

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1028

How you define "should have been done" is arbitrary. Obviously Avalon has done it the right way for them: a design with many small 110nm chips was simpler and allowed them to ship before BFL who is struggling with fewer more complex 65nm chips.

kev7112001

sr. member

Activity: 479

Merit: 250

BFL design is how it should have been done there should be no reason to need that many chips

Aseras

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 500

For this chip, at 100nm I don't think a QFN and vias is a problem. That's how they were all made back when the process was started. It's when you shrink the process and you start having chips with astronomical heat densities that you need better thermal conduction and BGA and heatspreaders come into play. Some of the current chips like the VRM on a 5000+ AMD or quad core chip are higher thermal densities than nuclear reactors per sq cm under full load. It's ridiculous. No we have exotic cooling and heatpipes and vapor phase cooling, along with water and other ideas.

MrTeal

legendary

Activity: 1274

Merit: 1004

There are a wide number of calculators available that will allow to find out what your thermal resistance is through a via. Simple ones are usually worst case since they only take into account the conduction of the plating and not the reflow of the solder in the untented via, but it's not rocket science to find the thermal resistance going from one side of the PCB to the other. I'd be shocked if ngzhang didn't know pretty accurately what kind of temperature rise he's expecting from the thermal pad to the heatsink.

Aseras

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 500

Quote from: PuertoLibre on February 07, 2013, 01:12:16 AM

Quote from: PuertoLibre on February 07, 2013, 12:30:34 AM

A 280mm fan would have made the 4U (178mm) chassis way taller. Not good.

Wrong direction. Like a computer case intake on the side.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835705056

This would not be proper airflow in a rack (and Avalon is designed to be racked).

Strange, I have seen Server racks online with those kinds of configurations. (mostly 120mm fans)

These fans you guys are looking at are crap. Server, rackmounts fans are substantial and HUGE. 120mm, but 2-3 inches thick with crazy high power motors.

Aseras

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 500

Quote from: ?? on ??

I've been asked to make a water cooling block for these, not sure how it will work out with the via's but it should give much more even cooling. With the way the boards are laid out it should also be fairly straightforward to cool both sides of the chips. Waiting on dimensions atm, should have it together fairly soon.

It would be interesting to know if the blank space behind the chip has traces or if it could be drilled out. If you could make direct contact with the pad underneath you could cool them far better.

Aseras

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 500

Quote from: kev7112001 on February 06, 2013, 11:14:26 PM

What I would at least like to see in the next batches are better use of forcing air in the fins of the heatsinks especially when adding more modules.I bet it would decrease temps by 5 to 10 degrees which would allow better overclocking.It should also be a more push pull fan design since the module heatsink is so long.

I actually agree,

They should have probably have gone with a large 280mm+ fan assembly. (IMO only)

Edit: Push/pull would have been better than what they did. I have to agree. I wonder how it will fare in summer to be honest. Jeffs machine is having issues. Some say it is heat related and other say it isn't.

I wish the guy with the thermal imager (Aseras I think it was) would get his machine soon.

Yep, that's me, and I am waiting. I can't wait to get mine and tear it open and look around. I can't help it, that's the scientist in me. ( I work for a very large university )

Photon939

sr. member

Activity: 452

Merit: 250

Quote from: ?? on ??

I've been asked to make a water cooling block for these, not sure how it will work out with the via's but it should give much more even cooling. With the way the boards are laid out it should also be fairly straightforward to cool both sides of the chips. Waiting on dimensions atm, should have it together fairly soon.

It will be interesting to see what kind of a price point you come up with since the chip arrays in the Avalon are so large, making it from copper would be very expensive and aluminum causes corrosion problems in water cooling loops.

mrb

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1028

Rackable server chassis pull air from the front, and push it to the back. Any opening on top or bottom of the chassis must assume it is obstructed by the chassis below or above.

PuertoLibre

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1003

Quote from: PuertoLibre on February 07, 2013, 01:12:16 AM

Quote from: PuertoLibre on February 07, 2013, 01:12:16 AM

A 280mm fan would have made the 4U (178mm) chassis way taller. Not good.

Wrong direction. Like a computer case intake on the side.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835705056

This would not be proper airflow in a rack (and Avalon is designed to be racked).

Strange, I have seen Server racks online with those kinds of configurations. (mostly 120mm fans)

cedivad

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1001

I've seen many racked servers working even without the jet-like fans. However, these fans are not slow and they draw a lot correct? I bet that they do their job correctly.

mrb

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1028

Quote from: cedivad on February 07, 2013, 01:43:07 AM

A 280mm fan would have made the 4U (178mm) chassis way taller. Not good.

Wrong direction. Like a computer case intake on the side.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835705056

This would not be proper airflow in a rack (and Avalon is designed to be racked).

PuertoLibre

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1003

You guys should investigate more on how server heat dissipation works. There is a reason if they are done that way. Avalon design is correct.

Servers use fans with high static pressure. (I don't recall the correct term)

The current way seems to be more in line with a normal ventilation technique.

------------------------

I'll deposit a question:

Why did it matter what Jeffs Garziks environmental conditions were like if these units are (supposedly) rated up to 105F operation? (Has this changed?)

I assume Jeff wasn't roasting himself in his home. I myself am a fan of Avalon but keep in mind that does not mean I will overlook some glitches. Was Jeffs errors about software and not temperature?

I think Ngzhang seems to think it was just a bug. I would love some confirmation that this is indeed the case.

Edit: I live in an environment where temperatures reach 105F to 110F pretty regularly. I plan to move the device even further south where it will probably be just as equally hot.

BFL devices were last rated only for 95F operation.

cedivad

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1001

You guys should investigate more on how server heat dissipation works. There is a reason if they are done that way. Avalon design is correct.

crazyates

legendary

Activity: 952

Merit: 1000

Quote from: kev7112001 on February 07, 2013, 01:01:38 AM

Has anyone seen this http://techcrunch.com/2012/06/26/this-fanless-heatsink-is-the-next-generation-in-cpu-cooling/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=JWQZNXEKkaU

Those are still experimental, and would not be good for something with 80 chips @ 2W each.

On the other hand, have you guys looked into Water Cooling?

hardcore-fs

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 100

Quote from: Inaba on February 06, 2013, 11:27:10 PM

We found the vias to be inadequate to cool the QFN package during Bitcoin mining. Under normal operations (e.g. anything not Bitcoin mining, with a toggle rate < 20%, so basically every other application on the planet) vias are more than adequate to dissipate the heat. With bitcoin mining, the heat generation is much higher and sustained, so the heat starts spreading out into the ground and thermal planes, degrading (and possibly destroying) surrounding components after a long enough time scale. Granted, our heat density is vastly greater than Avalon's density, so this is probably not nearly the issue it is with BFL's chips, so the cooling with via's are probably the right choice in this application.

In short, the cooling method on the back side of the board is normal and expected with this type of design. Adding a HSF to the top of the chip would solve any potential remaining issues if they exist(ed) I would imagine.

It is extremely POOR PCB design practice to attempt to use VIAS for cooling, one only has to take a look DOWN the via to see why......

Plus I fail to see how something only a few micons thick could be expected to 'cool' a large thermal load, thankfully BFL saw through this particular alchemists fantacy.

PuertoLibre

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1003