Pages:
Author

Topic: BFL ASIC is bogus - page 10. (Read 22392 times)

legendary
Activity: 1666
Merit: 1057
Marketing manager - GO MP
August 08, 2012, 02:09:36 PM
#48
I personally think the only thing about the ASIC Jalepeno that isn't going to deliver is the coffee warmer part. The hashing power, as I see it, is possible, but good luck warming a coffee cup on a USB3.0. Espresso maybe?
You'd have to do better than that.
We have gone to great length explaining why we think BFLs numbers are fallacious. So you better address those arguments or at least provide some of your own.
legendary
Activity: 1713
Merit: 1029
August 08, 2012, 01:26:42 PM
#47
I personally think the only thing about the ASIC Jalepeno that isn't going to deliver is the coffee warmer part. The hashing power, as I see it, is possible, but good luck warming a coffee cup on a USB3.0. Espresso maybe?
legendary
Activity: 1666
Merit: 1057
Marketing manager - GO MP
August 08, 2012, 01:18:05 PM
#46
What will you bump with if they turn out to be accurate to the pre-released specs?

That I have proven the Riemann Hypothesis.

For those who don't know (including me):  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riemann_hypothesis
Im being serious here. I have read that thing twice now, And have no fucking idea what you could use it for/what the hell it is, Could someone graciously explain to me WTF that is?

tbh I don't quite understand it myself, I've read a book on the subject titled "music of the primes".
It's "uses" are limited, and I don't think there really is something to do with it other than in math. You could for example derive a function to know the exact quantity of prime numbers below some particular value without calculating the primes themselves. (Don't nail me on that though, might be wrong)
legendary
Activity: 1428
Merit: 1001
Okey Dokey Lokey
August 08, 2012, 12:02:17 PM
#45
What will you bump with if they turn out to be accurate to the pre-released specs?

That I have proven the Riemann Hypothesis.

For those who don't know (including me):  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riemann_hypothesis
Im being serious here. I have read that thing twice now, And have no fucking idea what you could use it for/what the hell it is, Could someone graciously explain to me WTF that is?
legendary
Activity: 1666
Merit: 1057
Marketing manager - GO MP
August 07, 2012, 03:10:28 PM
#44
Even a 180nm full custom chip would blow away today's fpga solutions and - I am almost certain of that - the actually to be released BFL products (if any).
FYI all those small microcontroller ICs from PIC to AVR to the Parallax Propeller and so on are done in 180nm and they are very competitive.
sr. member
Activity: 252
Merit: 250
Inactive
August 07, 2012, 03:02:22 PM
#43
I have to admit, I've been a chip fabrication nut for 30 years and I just can't figure out how the hell they can build this within the scope of power they claim. They have (again in my opinion) zero chance at getting access to 45nm or lower wafer starts with this small a market, so that leaves the larger processes only. Given that, the power doesn't add up. Even at 45 I'm thinking the power claims wouldn't add up.

But anyhow, it's put huge uncertainty in the mining market and may have been partially responsible for keeping difficulty down as people eschew the purchases of new hardware either GPU or other.

Guess we'll see.

Anyone taking real bets on this? I'll take a piece of the triumvirate .. that they miss POWER, HASH and DELIVERY DATE claims as they are now.



Couple of disturbing facts.

In the SC line announcement BFL states that they've only had, "one minor blemish," in their track record which was missing their power and performance claims for the Single.  According to that logic missing the power and performance claim for the SC line would also be a minor issue.

Sadly, a continuous missing of specs only cultivates the desire for alternative vendors.  Only one problem.  No alternative vendor exists at the moment.  There's only so much capital investment in Bitcoin mining and the longer BFL continues to be the only sane choice for mining profitability the less likely other options are to rise.  BFL's comment about free market competition, "Competitors naturally emerge in profitable free markets," glosses over the finer points of Bitcoin mining and proves false under certain conditions.

ASIC would have been a better proposition on multiple fronts if it were community developed.  If profitability post ASIC equalizes to current profitability, a best case scenario IMO, all that has been done is a profit extraction by BFL of Bitcoin mining in return for an increased obsolescence timeline.  If this holds true and the only thing we gained as a community is a lengthened obsolescence curve that is hard to quantify on the bottom line then it would have been just fine, and less costly as a whole, for a community developed ASIC on 90 or even 130nm. 
full member
Activity: 238
Merit: 100
August 07, 2012, 01:42:13 PM
#42
I have to admit, I've been a chip fabrication nut for 30 years and I just can't figure out how the hell they can build this within the scope of power they claim. They have (again in my opinion) zero chance at getting access to 45nm or lower wafer starts with this small a market, so that leaves the larger processes only. Given that, the power doesn't add up. Even at 45 I'm thinking the power claims wouldn't add up.

But anyhow, it's put huge uncertainty in the mining market and may have been partially responsible for keeping difficulty down as people eschew the purchases of new hardware either GPU or other.

Guess we'll see.

Anyone taking real bets on this? I'll take a piece of the triumvirate .. that they miss POWER, HASH and DELIVERY DATE claims as they are now.
legendary
Activity: 2492
Merit: 1473
LEALANA Bitcoin Grim Reaper
August 06, 2012, 06:55:16 PM
#41
Im going to buy two to keep my feet warm in winter while sitting at the computer  Cheesy

LOL!
hero member
Activity: 686
Merit: 500
Wat
August 05, 2012, 05:50:33 PM
#40
Im going to buy two to keep my feet warm in winter while sitting at the computer  Cheesy
legendary
Activity: 1820
Merit: 1000
August 05, 2012, 05:47:16 PM
#39
Does anyone *really* care whether the Jalapenos work as coffee warmers or not?
full member
Activity: 238
Merit: 100
★YoBit.Net★ 350+ Coins Exchange & Dice
August 01, 2012, 03:50:54 PM
#38
Wait, if it's perfectly insulating, how would it let heat through to the liquid?

Also, USB coffee warmers have been around, but can anyone that has tried one let us know whether they work?

For argument sake let's just say you submerged the ASIC in your coffee =P

Doesn't work according to Amazon for lack of heating power.
hero member
Activity: 784
Merit: 500
August 01, 2012, 04:38:41 AM
#37
They work .....and kill your USB Ports :d
rjk
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
1ngldh
July 31, 2012, 08:40:00 PM
#36
Wait, if it's perfectly insulating, how would it let heat through to the liquid?

Also, USB coffee warmers have been around, but can anyone that has tried one let us know whether they work?
full member
Activity: 238
Merit: 100
★YoBit.Net★ 350+ Coins Exchange & Dice
July 31, 2012, 08:27:03 PM
#35
ill keep asking myself: how could a 2.5 watt coffee warmer keep my Caffein warm? isn't that way to less power?

Depends on how insulating your coffee mug is =P

To start off, some facts:

A. Specific heat of water is 4.1813 Joules/(grams*Kelvins).
B. 2.5 watts = 2.5 Joules per second.

Now we make 2 assumptions:

1. We assume your coffee is mostly water (most are 98-99%) and that you have 250 mL (1 cup).
2. Your coffee mug is perfectly insulating.

From the volumetric density of water, we know that 250 mL of water has mass of 250g. Crunch the math and that would make it ~1050 J/K.

At 2.5 watts, it would take ~7 minutes just to raise your coffee by 1 degree assuming your coffee mug is perfect. I dont know how that thing is going to keep your coffee appreciably above room temperature if you have to account for heat loss.


hero member
Activity: 784
Merit: 500
July 26, 2012, 04:44:23 PM
#34
ill keep asking myself: how could a 2.5 watt coffee warmer keep my Caffein warm? isn't that way to less power?
legendary
Activity: 1274
Merit: 1004
July 24, 2012, 12:29:08 PM
#33
i wonder what they're back up plan is for the "oh crap we can't meet our stated stats, and we promised..." situation...

they would probably just point to the obscure statements they like to make that generalize instead of actually making any promises...
BFL would never do such a thing.

Quote from: BFL
I really dislike being drawn into these discussions but in this case it's necessary to correct you.  BF Labs has never gone on record claiming it's previous generation processors are pure ASIC.  Never.  Forum members simply came to their own conclusions based on our FAQ (which did not say it was pure ASIC, just left it ambiguous).
hero member
Activity: 504
Merit: 500
July 24, 2012, 12:22:45 PM
#32
i wonder what they're back up plan is for the "oh crap we can't meet our stated stats, and we promised..." situation...

they would probably just point to the obscure statements they like to make that generalize instead of actually making any promises...
legendary
Activity: 1778
Merit: 1008
July 24, 2012, 11:22:39 AM
#31
i wonder what they're back up plan is for the "oh crap we can't meet our stated stats, and we promised..." situation...
newbie
Activity: 25
Merit: 0
July 24, 2012, 11:03:58 AM
#30
According to this:  www.xilinx.com/support/documentation/white_papers/wp298.pdf

Going from 130nm to 65 or even 45nm would give you savings at ~40-50%

Hence, the ballpark is 25-50W. No way it is going to be 5W Smiley)

if it ever materializes that is.
sr. member
Activity: 336
Merit: 250
July 18, 2012, 02:31:40 AM
#29
28nm is not realistic at all, 130nm down to 65nm is most likely by far.
Pages:
Jump to: