Well, runeks just bought us, for 2 BTC, the information that the Single SC @ 40 GH/s will not consume more than 114W.
Kinda expensive just to know that if you ask me.
Topic: BFL ASIC is bogus - page 6. (Read 22392 times)
Yeah, you go'in broke, son!
Quote
At 500:1 odds I, runeks, bet 2 BTC that the first line of ASIC-chips shipped by Butterfly Labs (ie. not any later series/revision) in their 'SC' line of products will have an efficiency of less than 350 Mhash/Joule. This figure pertains only to the chip itself, so any inefficiency in the power supply will allow for a higher power usage of the device in which the chip resides. So, power supply inefficiencies are excluded, but other components on the board that are required for the device to work will be included in the power efficiency measurement, as the power efficiency figure is irrelevant if the device - under ideal conditions - can't operate at that efficiency anyway.
At the odds of 500:1 that are in effect for this bet I will win 1000 BTC if I am correct (power efficiency is less 350 Mhash/Joule), and lose 2 BTC if I am incorrect (power efficiency is greater than or equal to 350 Mhash/Joule).
Power efficiency shall be measured over a 24 hour period.
Inaba, if you agree then quote this post and say you agree, or suggest a revision of the terms if you think I'm missing something or being unfair.
At the odds of 500:1 that are in effect for this bet I will win 1000 BTC if I am correct (power efficiency is less 350 Mhash/Joule), and lose 2 BTC if I am incorrect (power efficiency is greater than or equal to 350 Mhash/Joule).
Power efficiency shall be measured over a 24 hour period.
Inaba, if you agree then quote this post and say you agree, or suggest a revision of the terms if you think I'm missing something or being unfair.
I agree with this bet.
Can someone please quote this to act as a witness? Thank you.
Nice betting with you Inaba. I better buy the coins now to lock in the price
.
Quote
At 500:1 odds I, runeks, bet 2 BTC that the first line of ASIC-chips shipped by Butterfly Labs (ie. not any later series/revision) in their 'SC' line of products will have an efficiency of less than 350 Mhash/Joule. This figure pertains only to the chip itself, so any inefficiency in the power supply will allow for a higher power usage of the device in which the chip resides. So, power supply inefficiencies are excluded, but other components on the board that are required for the device to work will be included in the power efficiency measurement, as the power efficiency figure is irrelevant if the device - under ideal conditions - can't operate at that efficiency anyway.
At the odds of 500:1 that are in effect for this bet I will win 1000 BTC if I am correct (power efficiency is less 350 Mhash/Joule), and lose 2 BTC if I am incorrect (power efficiency is greater than or equal to 350 Mhash/Joule).
Power efficiency shall be measured over a 24 hour period.
Inaba, if you agree then quote this post and say you agree, or suggest a revision of the terms if you think I'm missing something or being unfair.
At the odds of 500:1 that are in effect for this bet I will win 1000 BTC if I am correct (power efficiency is less 350 Mhash/Joule), and lose 2 BTC if I am incorrect (power efficiency is greater than or equal to 350 Mhash/Joule).
Power efficiency shall be measured over a 24 hour period.
Inaba, if you agree then quote this post and say you agree, or suggest a revision of the terms if you think I'm missing something or being unfair.
I agree with this bet.
Can someone please quote this to act as a witness? Thank you.
Nice betting with you Inaba. I better buy the coins now to lock in the price
. Quote
At 500:1 odds I, runeks, bet 2 BTC that the first line of ASIC-chips shipped by Butterfly Labs (ie. not any later series/revision) in their 'SC' line of products will have an efficiency of less than 350 Mhash/Joule. This figure pertains only to the chip itself, so any inefficiency in the power supply will allow for a higher power usage of the device in which the chip resides. So, power supply inefficiencies are excluded, but other components on the board that are required for the device to work will be included in the power efficiency measurement, as the power efficiency figure is irrelevant if the device - under ideal conditions - can't operate at that efficiency anyway.
At the odds of 500:1 that are in effect for this bet I will win 1000 BTC if I am correct (power efficiency is less 350 Mhash/Joule), and lose 2 BTC if I am incorrect (power efficiency is greater than or equal to 350 Mhash/Joule).
Power efficiency shall be measured over a 24 hour period.
Inaba, if you agree then quote this post and say you agree, or suggest a revision of the terms if you think I'm missing something or being unfair.
At the odds of 500:1 that are in effect for this bet I will win 1000 BTC if I am correct (power efficiency is less 350 Mhash/Joule), and lose 2 BTC if I am incorrect (power efficiency is greater than or equal to 350 Mhash/Joule).
Power efficiency shall be measured over a 24 hour period.
Inaba, if you agree then quote this post and say you agree, or suggest a revision of the terms if you think I'm missing something or being unfair.
I agree with this bet.
Looks ok to me, but let me clarify in these terms as well:
You believe, for example, the Single SC will not have a power consumption less than ~114W. You are, in effect betting:
The Single SC, hashing at 40,000 MH/s will consume more than 114W consistently over a 24H period. I use this as an example, and we will use the 350 Mhash/Joule as the actual authentication of who wins the bet, but I just wanted to be sure we are talking about the same power consumption metrics.
This is correct. Will you quote my previous post saying you agree to the bet? It's getting somewhat late here and I want to finish this tonight You believe, for example, the Single SC will not have a power consumption less than ~114W. You are, in effect betting:
The Single SC, hashing at 40,000 MH/s will consume more than 114W consistently over a 24H period. I use this as an example, and we will use the 350 Mhash/Joule as the actual authentication of who wins the bet, but I just wanted to be sure we are talking about the same power consumption metrics.
. 
Kinda hard to believe that there would be so many companies falsifying information about asics.
Looks ok to me, but let me clarify in these terms as well:
You believe, for example, the Single SC will not have a power consumption less than ~114W. You are, in effect betting:
The Single SC, hashing at 40,000 MH/s will consume more than 114W consistently over a 24H period. I use this as an example, and we will use the 350 Mhash/Joule as the actual authentication of who wins the bet, but I just wanted to be sure we are talking about the same power consumption metrics.
You believe, for example, the Single SC will not have a power consumption less than ~114W. You are, in effect betting:
The Single SC, hashing at 40,000 MH/s will consume more than 114W consistently over a 24H period. I use this as an example, and we will use the 350 Mhash/Joule as the actual authentication of who wins the bet, but I just wanted to be sure we are talking about the same power consumption metrics.
I thought about that, but I wasn't sure how to state it without the bet becoming invalid if BFL doesn't meet their projected performance claims. I don't care about their performance claims, only about them shipping a product that does 350 Mhash/Joule. I feel that it's enough to say that the bet concerns the "first line of ASIC-chips shipped by Butterfly Labs" ie. not some custom product, but the actual, shipped product. I doubt they are willing to alter their whole line of products just so Inaba can win his bet. Inaba, do you have any thoughts on this?
You might want to add a condition that the efficiency has to be measured at the advertised hashing rate, otherwise a downclocked and undervolted bitstream could satisfy that bet.
[...]
If you truly think that BFL cannot achieve, oh, say, 350 Mhash/Joule, then you can easily make 50 BTC by betting as little as 0.1 BTC (since people have yet to bet against my entry on betsofbitco.in). See https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/50-btc-bet-that-bfl-asic-will-do-350-mhashswatt-or-more-ie-mhashjoule-109357
If you will guarantee me 500:1 odds on this bet, I'd take it in a heartbeat. Unfortunately, betsofbitcoin doesn't guarantee odds: someone could come in after me and place a bet and ruin my odds. I don't make bets for which I don't know the odds.If you truly think that BFL cannot achieve, oh, say, 350 Mhash/Joule, then you can easily make 50 BTC by betting as little as 0.1 BTC (since people have yet to bet against my entry on betsofbitco.in). See https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/50-btc-bet-that-bfl-asic-will-do-350-mhashswatt-or-more-ie-mhashjoule-109357
Would you be willing to escrow a bet amount at 500:1 odds? If so, how much are you willing to risk?
Would you be willing to escrow a bet amount at 500:1 odds? If so, how much are you willing to risk?
I'm willing to bet 2 BTC on this, if you are also willing to escrow your 1000 BTC with a party we both trust.Here's the thing, I have no problem taking the odds from either of you... what I do have a problem with is tying up my BTC for so little return for weeks at a time. I mean, tying up $1200 to win $12 for a few weeks is just not lucrative for me. I mean, it's a guaranteed win for me, but the lost revenue of not having access to that money does not make it desirable for me.
Sure I can do it without escrow, but please define the bet specifically before I commit.
At 500:1 odds I, runeks, bet 2 BTC that the first line of ASIC-chips shipped by Butterfly Labs (ie. not any later series/revision) in their 'SC' line of products will have an efficiency of less than 350 Mhash/Joule. This figure pertains only to the chip itself, so any inefficiency in the power supply will allow for a higher power usage of the device in which the chip resides. So, power supply inefficiencies are excluded, but other components on the board that are required for the device to work will be included in the power efficiency measurement, as the power efficiency figure is irrelevant if the device - under ideal conditions - can't operate at that efficiency anyway.At the odds of 500:1 that are in effect for this bet I will win 1000 BTC if I am correct (power efficiency is less 350 Mhash/Joule), and lose 2 BTC if I am incorrect (power efficiency is greater than or equal to 350 Mhash/Joule).
Power efficiency shall be measured over a 24 hour period.
Inaba, if you agree then quote this post and say you agree, or suggest a revision of the terms if you think I'm missing something or being unfair.
Sure I can do it without escrow, but please define the bet specifically before I commit.
Here's the thing, I have no problem taking the odds from either of you... what I do have a problem with is tying up my BTC for so little return for weeks at a time. I mean, tying up $1200 to win $12 for a few weeks is just not lucrative for me. I mean, it's a guaranteed win for me, but the lost revenue of not having access to that money does not make it desirable for me.
Are you willing to do it without escrow then? Or are you afraid I'll run away with the 2 BTC in case I lose? Here's the thing, I have no problem taking the odds from either of you... what I do have a problem with is tying up my BTC for so little return for weeks at a time. I mean, tying up $1200 to win $12 for a few weeks is just not lucrative for me. I mean, it's a guaranteed win for me, but the lost revenue of not having access to that money does not make it desirable for me.
Fair enough.
Here's the thing, I have no problem taking the odds from either of you... what I do have a problem with is tying up my BTC for so little return for weeks at a time. I mean, tying up $1200 to win $12 for a few weeks is just not lucrative for me. I mean, it's a guaranteed win for me, but the lost revenue of not having access to that money does not make it desirable for me.
I might be interested in a bet based on your claimed power specs Inaba, depending on the odds. 1TH/s from 1250W or less at the wall for the SC Minirig. Would you take a bet like that at 100:1 odds?
Would you be willing to escrow a bet amount at 500:1 odds? If so, how much are you willing to risk?
I'm willing to bet 2 BTC on this, if you are also willing to escrow your 1000 BTC with a party we both trust. 
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.
how much would you have to pay for global foundries to make you a 45 nm wafer? 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.
Would you be willing to escrow a bet amount at 500:1 odds? If so, how much are you willing to risk?
Inaba it's an unfair bet
Jump to: