Topic: BFL - Update 3/4 (Read 5053 times)

While this is undeniably true, things which change your financial projections are a big deal and can have massive implications for the future of your company.  While reducing the number of chips per device doesn't significantly reduce the cost per unit of those devices, it does allow you to build significantly more devices at $1300 each (or to fill more orders which have already been paid for).  If they can scavenge 16,000 chips out of the 74,000 by reducing the number of chips per unit, that's 2,000 more Single orders which can be filled without having to order additional chips - that represents an $2,600,000 in revenue for the first production run, which is significant by anyone's criteria.

While BFL is a bit of a black box in terms of information regarding its funding sources, nothing they have said suggests that they have access to a bottomless well of cost-free money.  One way or another, these delays are costing them significant money and they have to find that money from somewhere - whether it's from pre-orders, selling equity, or loans.  Whatever money they're spending now on unanticipated costs is money which won't be available for something else in the future.

I agree that Josh has appeared not to know a lot of material information until the last moment, but it's been obvious for months that Josh is not directly over-seeing this project and that he gets much of his information second or third hand.  Josh being unaware of something doesn't mean that those actually involved in the step concerned had incomplete or inaccurate information (hell, Josh seemed surprised to learn that piddly little orders aren't going to be given priority when it comes to facilities allocating production time at short notice).

BFL customers have been somewhat over-involved during the last 9 months.  How many chips were being produced/had been ordered is not information which would normally be shared with customers, especially when no information has been given about how many of each unit type are going to be produced from the first 5,000 chips and the following 6,000.  People have reacted to this over-sharing by feeling entitled to have a voice in the business decisions made by BFL.

Given how little we know about BFL's process and history, it's hard to say anything with any certainty. We know that BFL is only paying their contract manufacturer on completion of a successful project, so it could be just as likely that BFL is paying a fixed cost per chip as opposed to per wafer. Hell, for all we know there might not even have ever been 100k chips. They didn't know their first batch of wafers off the line was 6 instead of 12 until they were almost in the air.

Regardless the cost of the actual chips in a Single is going to be a pretty small part of the $1300 they charge for it. While having to eat whatever the cost of the wafers was will hurt their bottom line, going from 8 chips to 7 chips is not going to be a big cost savings.

They can fill less orders with 74,000 chips than with 100,000 chips, so their financial projections and their break-even point are going to be significantly affected by the diminished "first run" revenue.  A 25% reduction is revenue is huge and it needs to be offset as much as possible as it's very likely some of that revenue was earmarked for meeting costs associated with the second mass production run. 

Ordering another 100 wafers requires having the money to pay for them (and the cost of packaging and assembling them).  We simply don't know whether any funds from existing pre-orders have been spent over the last 8 months or the amount of revenue from first run sales which was earmarked for the second production run.

If the QFN to FCBGA conversion goes well and BFL doesn't need to redo the design, they really only need to worry about the quantity of chips they have on the way if they are going to be able to ship and sell all 75k before they can get another set of chips done. With the design being done there's no real reason they couldn't get started on another 100 wafers and have finished chips delivered in June.

They haven't just sacrificed one wafer, though.  The combined impact of various decisions made by BFL since late last year means that instead of Batch 1 plus their bulk order yielding 100,000 chips, Batch 1 plus their bulk order will now yield 74,000 chips. 

You cannot make the same number of units with 74,000 chips as you can make with 100,000 chips unless you use less chips per unit - and the response to Josh mentioning that possibility suggests that BFL will lose orders if they reduce the amount of chips per unit.  It's hard to know how many people would follow through and actually cancel their orders as many customers have previously stated that they'll bail "if X occurs" and then not done so, but it's very clear that a non-trivial amount of customers planned to over-clock the fuck out of their units and are deeply unhappy about that possibility being removed or diminished.

new pics
https://forums.butterflylabs.com/dbtgallery.php?do=browse_user&userid=1&gal=gallery&id=7&type=albums

Yep.

I think it is the first time I've hit the ignore button on someone with such a low post count. 

I'll not be put in the position of defending BFL. Let em have it, they're completely full of sh1t.

You lose credibility immediately however when you lump jgarzik, friedcat, eleuthria, and bitcoin foundation in with the butterfly cowboys.

It's funny . That i am newbie in this forum does nothing to what i am and what i can . It is not right for me as a company onwer to say that but as far as i know BFL sales  mining equipment since 2011 and they even dont have any prototype yet, and they will ship thausends of them in any moment, very funny. There are some pictures of ASIC miners  like  PCB's and boxes, but no VIDEO that shows  it actualy working! If i have build working one l would make many  videos that shows how it work realtime with statistics, yeah, definetily would  do that like all the good guys in you tube that build bitcoin farms with many GPU's.
for me 67117 is proxy pool with big rejection rate.
It is fine to call me newbie. 

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1572769

TAKE MY MONEY NOW!

Umm...since you essentially called friedcat and eleuthria liars and they have just a wee bit more street cred around here than a newb using an account created last week...I'm gonna have to go ahead and ask you for some kind of evidence on this. Nothing personal you understand.

This:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/asicminer-user-ranking-on-btc-guild-148162

...btw sir sockpuppet does NOT count as evidence.

110nm is an old  technology. You cant expect GH from that. If it was possible the miners with Cyclone and Spartan FPGA already can be made. They aren't so dont be fool to be involved in this ASIC hoax. Also 67117 in btcguild is proxy pool.
regards.

BFL is using a 300mm wafer.

BFL's die is 7.5mmx7.5mm.

I also suspect the BFL package is 15x15, not the die. 15x15 would be quite large and the die seems rectangular. 15mm is a standard package size though.

That is one damn tiny chip!

(If it is ASICMiners specs...wow, they must have a hell of alot of chips worth to bring online.)

I believe Avalon's die size is 4x4 and the packaged QFN size is 7x7, but I don't feel like looking it up. I might have ASICMiner's die size instead, but either way the actual die size will be less than 7x7.

I don't recall. I think it may have been 4,000 chips per wafer. I only recall that the die size is 7x7mm while BFL's is 15x15.

Sounds like they buffered the clocks too much

I guess time will tell.

How many chips per wafer does Avalon get?

http://bitbet.us/bet/265/bfl-will-deliver-asic-devices-before-april-1st/

^ there is a lot of free money for your here, Josh!

Actually my estimate is if anything, rather high for a 200mm wafer. Have a look here:
http://www.gsaglobal.org/email/2010/general/0222w.htm

If they are using 300mm wafers it might be over $2000, but it still wont cost a fortune, particularly not on such old processes. Note that this doesnt include testing, dicing and packaging, which may cost more than the wafer, but BFL didnt do that on their "burnt" wafer anyway.

They'll just make more wafers.  They're not gonna lose any orders for having sacrificed that one wafer (IMO).

It still told them that the chips operate at a basic level.  The test could have gone the other way where the chips didn't operate at all, and they would have needed to start looking for a cause right away.

I think that the manually-wirebound test had value.

Actually I meant expensive in the sense of recouping the NRE with shipped product and not the actual cost of the wafer.

Avalon pays (it is estimated) about 4k per wafer at 110nm.

How is BFL paying half that at 65nm? Somehow your estimates sounds kinda off.

To be fair, the cost of a processed 65nm wafer is likely somewhere between $1500-$2000. Not exactly a fortune.

This whole testing fiasco is really a wonderment.  To lose that many precious (and expensive) chips to only gain a marginal amount of useful information is insane.  At any company I have worked for that kind of decision would have landed someone a pink slip.

Even if only 30GH is obtained, the product is so much better than Avalon's and there are so many more TH sold that it won't actually change profits that much.  Sure, 66GH would be better, but we're talking about a 10x increase in difficulty here.  Go ahead and do the math - for 33GH, say the diff increases 13x (because of avalon+asicminer), and for 66GH say it increases 21x, and see what comes out.  Running that shows $11/day vs $13/day per single SC - not much to cry over.

More proof that BFL is full of BS.

Prayer works, just how you use it matters. But we can discuss that elsewhere.


"Please oh please God, just let these chips perform super duperly so we can satisfy all of our empty promises to our customers up until now. And so we can make lots of MOH-KNEEz! Amen"

Just a thought of what they are praying...sounds ridiculous lol. 

More proof that prayer doesn't work.

Its Josh or whoever is calling the shots for him, not having a clue. I pretty much predicted this spot on:


So as predicted,  he now learned that testing a manually wirebonded chip doesnt really tell you all that much and they still cant green light the other wafers (which was the stated purpose) until they have a few BGA packaged chips to test with. Making that 6000 candidate sacrifice an utter waste.

Only in bitcoin world can a semi company that constantly screws things up this badly still be considered a market leader thats on track to making a shitload of money. In any other market they would have been bankrupt by now. Lets hope helveticoin is for real and shows them how its done.

This ^

Reality is going to set in fast with BFL once their customers get their units that dont run at the speeds advertised or they do and then burn out or BFL doesn't ship at all and continues delays.

Pick your poison, at the end of the process, BFL is essentially screwed, but BFL customers are screwed^2.

That's about what I paid for my Singles on Day 1.  I thought I would get my ASIC before most everyone and be able to make the 200+ BTC back.  I'll make my $1350 back but I did not intend to "sell" the BTC - I wanted to leverage it into more BTC.  In that aspect I have failed (or rather somebody failed me).

Actually I do not find this sacrificing one wafer odd at all. I am not sure if they are sacrificing really anything. My bet is going to be they are not.

The thing you all are overlooking is that is really really difficult to ramp up production so fast as BFL claims and as everyone expects. Avalon did not ramp up that fast either as they claimed to have done.

My bet is that the first batch size was selected to be high enough so that they do not run any risk of having shortage of chips while there are other factors that are going to affect the number of boxes they can possibly build on the first couple of weeks. So now they probably have realized that they were really optimistic when choosing the size of first batch of ASICs and they can safely "sacrifice" one wafer without actually loosing anything. They could probably use a second and third wafer from this batch for target shooting practice and still not limit the box output in any way and still have unused chips in corner when the second batch of ASICs arrive. All they "lost" was some manpower from their subcontractor which is going to send them a bill for.

Someone made a list of tests a reputable ASIC design house runs to declare whether a ASIC is really good or not. My bet is none of the bitcoin ASIC design teams are going to run even 10% of those tests. They cost money to run and who cares if the ASIC fails in some temperature. Actually if the ASIC fails some of the more obscure tests it costs the bitcoin ASIC design house a huge amount of money as they have to throw the whole lot to the bin and make a respin. Better make sure no tests are failed and that is made sure by not running the tests. It is a basic seems to work OK or NOT only test and away you go with manufacturing. Good luck with warranty claims covering the whole lot, not just some individual machines. This basic OK/NOT test has now been run on the test chip and it will be repeated on packaged chip and that is pretty much all testing there is going to be. Or if there any any other tests run it is just for giggles only and any fails observed while doing so will be promptly un-seen.

I don't believe they have actually given the go-ahead to finalize the next 6 wafers.  Read the announcement again.



In this case I disagree.  For as normal product this would be true, but in this case I think that customers would rather have it for a few weeks and have to return it than not.

It would suck for the vendor though.



Imagine ppl who ordered then and paid in BTC.  A Single would cost about 216 BTC.

Yeah its definitely concerning. Why test the chips at all if they cant do it at the full speed? What happens if they build the prototype and only 50% of the chips are stable above 400mhz?

Until they have working protoypes in the casing with a stock powersupply and cooling, everything is still a gamble.

Im a customer so Im trying to stay optimistic but I cant even imagine how people who ordered summer of 2012 are feeling with thousands of $ locked up for 8 months and endless excuses and delays. 

any update of shipping date? the bumping took so  much time, i have a bad feeling about the shipping

Just hope that they do all the function test thoroughly, returning a buggy product after several weeks of running will be even more terrible from an end user's point of view

BFL is making it look like the chips working are a done deal. To give the aura that things will be done soon. All the while updating people with details on what....well what they actually don't know yet "for sure"...whether the chips actually work at the speed they originally intended.

Josh mentioned at the beginning of the weekend that the chips were about to go through full speed tests a few days ago after they ran a low speed functionality test. Then he turns around at the end of the weekend and reveals that this can't be done without the full packaging.

You can tell they are cowboys. Cowboys that are clearly disconnected from the process or the innate knowledge of what is necessarily possible by the professionals making the ASIC design.

So far, they sacrificed 1,000 chips (a full wafer) for functionality tests. Seemingly without a reason (they are cowboys remember?). Had they actually known that the full speed tests could not be done without proper packaging, they would probably have not scarified a full wafer. When they did sacrifice a full wafer, they seemed to be unaware that full speed tests would not be "do-able".

Next, they have begun finalizing the next batch of 6 wafers before they actually know what will actually happen when all 16 cores hash at full speed. (magic smoke?)

So if there is anything wrong, the second batch will likely suffer from it as well.

You know what I find interesting?

The fact that in this ASIC project they are using valuable time to test the chips and at the same time convince customer(s) they actually work.

This is what should normally take a few weeks as pointed out by a few hardware folks on this forum. This necessary testing process is being compressed into a few days in an "Ad-Hoc" manner.

What is even more interesting, is that some false impressions are being beamed out.

For example, BFL customers are being comforted with the illusion that their chips will ship soon "for certain". But...they are still running the chips through "functional tests". NOT full throttle performance evaluation(s) mind you, no, just basic low speed functionality tests.)

So in essence BFL is taking a calculated risk for the sake of speed. What normally would have been done in a back room somewhere (away from prying eyes) for a few weeks is actually being done in open view.

That doesn't bother me much as a spectator.

What really does bother me, is that two mixed impressions are being given out. The first false implied impression that the chips work and will ship soon. (they don't know this yet, but thats why they are testing it.)

The second false impression is that the chips are just undergoing a "little testing" to confirm things are in working order. That isn't the case. The testing going on is whether the design actually functionally works, whether it meets (performance/electrical) specs and finally whether the chips ultimately are worth while.

Anyone with a semblance of understanding would read these updates and realize that alot of praying is going on as they rush through each step.

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

Keep this in the back of your mind when you read what is being disseminated or at the very least when you ask the next question. Because someone who has a false impression would be disappointed if the chips break at stock speed.

While someone who is an engineer or a semi-conductor designer knows this is simply a reality of the "testing phase" of a design.

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

28th of Feb they were going to be testing to 500Mhz the following day, ie the spec they were designed to work at. 3-4 days later still only tested at 350Mhz and some mumblings about certain non-specific issues.

Sounds like the same old delaying tactic deployed for months on end now. Can't see BFL actually surviving much longer.

If they don't deliver something soon they WILL go bust. Avalon aren't far behind following suit with their BS stunt using #2 to fund #1 orders.

Think i'm gonna place a bet on BFL not delivering this month, and take the winnings on an up.

Can't wait for tomorrow's thread 3/5 .... then maybe 3/6??? yes?? PLEASE?!?!?!

For anyone who doesn't want to browse their forums:

https://forums.butterflylabs.com/announcements/692-bfl-asic-status-2.html#post16987


From Josh:


I wonder why they sacrificed the 1k chips for testing, if they can't even fully test them? It was only a few days ago that they entered testing phase. It would have made more sense to save the 1k chips, wait the 5 days, and be able to deliver that many more chips to customers instead of making them wait even longer. Me thinks something else may have happened, but that's pure speculation.