Pages:

Author

Topic: BitForce SC - full custom ASIC - page 14. (Read 52478 times)

ice_chill

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 250

Quote from: yjacket on June 01, 2012, 01:14:34 AM

Has this been mentioned???

The only reason for BFL to make this announcement is to prevent people from ordering from similarly priced competitors. That is why they offer the trade-in. Assuming everything is the way they say it is, it would be stupid to order from anyone else. As soon as the ASIC comes in(crosses fingers) you can zoom to higher efficiencies while everyone who ordered elsewhere is stuck.

BFL is savy, but if they don't deliver the ASIC quickly, in quantity, and at affordable prices, they will have pulled off quite the trick in destroying competitors market share.

My 2 cents.

1. If you watched their website, it has been known for several months that announcement for an Institutional Grade Super Computer would be made in June.

2. Where have you seen similar priced competitors ? I haven't seen any, which is the reason people are willing to wait long for the order to arrive from BFL. The 110Ghs Bitfury is hardly a competitor at $90k and a 10KW requirement that you can't simply install in your bedroom.

3. They offer trade in because the initial customers are the ones that took their business off the ground, and are also the ones who are likely to reinvest over and over, thus it would work against them in the long term if they neglected such customers, and made people lose trust in them.

Inspector 2211

sr. member

Activity: 448

Merit: 250

Quote from: yjacket on June 01, 2012, 01:14:34 AM

Has this been mentioned???

Yes, it has. In post #84.

yjacket

full member

Activity: 202

Merit: 100

Littleshop

legendary

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1003

Quote from: Inspector 2211 on June 01, 2012, 12:11:17 AM

Quote from: Littleshop on May 31, 2012, 11:39:14 PM

Quote from: Entropy-uc on May 30, 2012, 09:25:57 AM

I suspect BFL is paying rent, lights and salaries with mini-rig orders they still haven't shipped. BFL prove me wrong: publish a report from a lawyer or CPA showing that they are holding payments for these systems for you in escrow.

By my calculations BFL is making about $300 a single. Lets say about 100 a month (I am guessing most orders are NOT on the thread in this forum) so they could be making in excess of $30,000 a month on the hardware. I think they can pay the bills with that.

You'd be surprised what senior electronics engineers and senior software engineers make nowadays, and that doesn't even include QA, custumer support, marketing, sales...

Taking your numbers, they're losing money, not making money.

Startups usually don't pay full scale wages. Outsourcing also helps.

Inspector 2211

sr. member

Activity: 448

Merit: 250

Quote from: Littleshop on May 31, 2012, 11:39:14 PM

Quote from: Entropy-uc on May 30, 2012, 09:25:57 AM

Littleshop

legendary

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1003

Quote from: Entropy-uc on May 30, 2012, 09:25:57 AM

KIDC

member

Activity: 80

Merit: 10

"Subed".

By the way, some interesting speculation happening here in this thread. I've been watching closely.

Garr255

legendary

Activity: 938

Merit: 1000

What's a GPU?

Quote from: rjk on May 31, 2012, 04:57:46 PM

Quote from: RoadStress on May 31, 2012, 04:55:46 PM

BTC-engineer or BFL please tell us if the announcement will be somewhere close from this date or close to the end of the month. We all know that waiting sucks a lot! Thank you.

FYI, BTC-Engineer and BFL-Engineer are not the same.

AFAIK, BTC-Engineer has 0 affiliation with BFL. In case that wasn't clear enough...

rjk

sr. member

Activity: 448

Merit: 250

1ngldh

Quote from: RoadStress on May 31, 2012, 04:55:46 PM

BTC-engineer or BFL please tell us if the announcement will be somewhere close from this date or close to the end of the month. We all know that waiting sucks a lot! Thank you.

FYI, BTC-Engineer and BFL-Engineer are not the same.

RoadStress

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1007

BTC-engineer or BFL please tell us if the announcement will be somewhere close from this date or close to the end of the month. We all know that waiting sucks a lot! Thank you.

sadpandatech

hero member

Activity: 504

Merit: 500

Quote from: 2112 on May 31, 2012, 01:37:07 PM

I'm just going to quote this for posterity, since this board software allows editing of posts long after the original poster had calmed down.

*grins*

2112

legendary

Activity: 2128

Merit: 1068

JusticeForYou

vip

Activity: 490

Merit: 271

Quote from: tosku on May 31, 2012, 12:19:13 PM

Quote from: P4man on May 31, 2012, 08:42:02 AM

Quote from: smracer on May 31, 2012, 08:35:56 AM

I think getting 10 units shipped a day would be tough to keep up. You run out of cases, or power supplies, or cables and orders get backed up.

For something they could initially easily sell at over 10x or 100x the cost to produce, I imagine they can find solutions for that.
Hint:

That'd be wonderful. After a month, there would be "ASIC+FPGA bitdollar processing units" for $10 from DealExtreme

Worker 451 Right, No Soup for You !!!

tosku

sr. member

Activity: 367

Merit: 250

Quote from: P4man on May 31, 2012, 08:42:02 AM

Quote from: smracer on May 31, 2012, 08:35:56 AM

I think getting 10 units shipped a day would be tough to keep up. You run out of cases, or power supplies, or cables and orders get backed up.

For something they could initially easily sell at over 10x or 100x the cost to produce, I imagine they can find solutions for that.
Hint:

That'd be wonderful. After a month, there would be "ASIC+FPGA bitdollar processing units" for $10 from DealExtreme

Inaba

legendary

Activity: 1260

Merit: 1000

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: Inaba on May 31, 2012, 10:27:41 AM

Quote

I'm not entirely certain that this can be clearly proven given what's on the table. BFL provided statements that they were experts in this area with a history of delivery. The bona fides were lightweight in terms of evidence, but argue against significant ignorance.

I don't know you. You seem intelligent but a little too emotional on this particular issue. This could be because you believe in the longer-term goals of BFL and are offended at what amounts to pure BS on the part of many of its detractors. I understand this, but it's the Internet. Use the Ignore link with great prejudice. I do, and it helps my outlook significantly.

I'm sorry you feel that way and that some how my deconstruction of your arguments are somehow "emotional." I have no personal stake in BFL, but I to take umbrage to the fact that people spout all sorts of misinformation and outright lies (not saying that's the case here, I'm referring to another thread) and I would defend the subject with the same "emotion" you are attributing here. I'm highly opposed to bullshit and armchair lawyers, yes it's true.

Quote from: Inaba on May 31, 2012, 10:27:41 AM

Given that fact, it's not unsurprising that even experienced designers would be surprised and appalled by the requirements of a bitcoin miner. Throwing in a little bit of veritable conjecture: I suspect this is exactly what happened to LargeCoin when they realized that their initial ASIC designs were not going to meet their targets, as they were designed with traditional simulations and not mining simulations. Which, I suspect, is why they abandoned the LargeCoin unit, since it wouldn't be anywhere close to what they wanted.

The claim would be reasonable had it not been so easy for smaller shops (ngzhang, ztex, etc.) to deliver FPGA-based solutions in a timely fashion. The programming is obviously accessible to a reasonable practitioner in the craft, given the number of byte streams that have been produced that push the LX150.

What does the programming have to do with it? The bitstream has never been a bone of contention as far as I know (someone correct me if I'm wrong) - the only bone of contention has been the power usage (which directly correlates to the hashrate as related to heat). I'm sure none of the engineers you have listed would argue that the chips BFL uses are incapable of producing a 1 GH run for brief periods, as described by "normal" FPGA applications. The breakdown occurs when you try to mine at upwards of a 50% switching rate, instead of the industry norm of 12%... suddenly those 1.2 GH/s chips start to overheat and fail at 50%, whereas they can run all day for years at 12%. Any FPGA designer coming into that territory and being unfamiliar with bitcoin, yet familiar with industry standards would conceivably make that mistake.

I am not making excuses for BFL or their failure to deliver. I am simply pointing out why your argument is flawed. I am sorry if that offends you or somehow puts you on edge, but the facts are facts. BFL could have easily delivered a comparable product to Ztex, nghzhang, et al, since their hashrates are so far removed from what BFL was offering, even AFTER the reduction... but the fact that they were offering a product that, after refactoring, was 4x the speed for 1/2 the cost should afford them quite a bit of leeway when it comes to the very first product delivered. Using the other products as examples is disingenuous at best, since they are fall so very short in terms of performance and price.

Quote

The FPGA-to-ASIC process is capital intensive but not difficult. It's a very well-worn path. We have tools such as Verilog and friends. We can prototype on the FPGA, validate with various circuit validation tools (OK, these are _all_ buggy), simulate (slowly) on our beefy workstations, and have a reasonable shot at a successful IC, especially one as simple as a BTC ASIC. This isn't a Pentium 60, where you're going to run into corner cases with FDIV. The rest is glue and IO, and the smart move is to leave the ASIC as dumb as possible and leverage existing tech for this.

I don't disagree with this... but I'm not sure what is has to do with anything or how it's relevant to your previous statements. If you could clarify?

nedbert9

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 250

Inactive

Quote from: DiabloD3 on May 30, 2012, 11:01:41 PM

I think the hardware subforum should get a new rule. I am going to ask all the manufacturers to make official product threads, I am going to sticky those threads, and then we, collectively, are going to feel sorry for anyone dumb enough to troll in said official product threads.

What does everyone think?

Yes.

rjk

sr. member

Activity: 448

Merit: 250

1ngldh

Quote from: Inaba on May 31, 2012, 10:27:41 AM

Which, I suspect, is why they abandoned the LargeCoin unit, since it wouldn't be anywhere close to what they wanted.

Did they actually? I haven't heard from them, but the website is still up.

Not sure when they were planning on delivering either. The guy has chatted to some buyers on the phone, maybe they should give him a ring and see what's up.

fizzisist

hero member

Activity: 720

Merit: 525

Quote from: Inaba on May 31, 2012, 10:27:41 AM

I would imagine the ASIC assembly will be far less complicated than the FPGA unit they have now, so it would likely be faster. The current assembly method is labor intensive and if it were designed differently, could be reduced quite a bit...

Quote

While I don't expect you to take my word for it, please check around with other FPGA and IC developers and ask them how a Bitcoin application compares to basically every other FPGA application in terms of chip utilization. The unusual requirements of mining compared to basically all other applications of FPGAs impose unusual requirements that a typical designer would not factor in without prior knowledge of the situation.

Given that fact, it's not unsurprising that even experienced designers would be surprised and appalled by the requirements of a bitcoin miner. Throwing in a little bit of veritable conjecture: I suspect this is exactly what happened to LargeCoin when they realized that their initial ASIC designs were not going to meet their targets, as they were designed with traditional simulations and not mining simulations. Which, I suspect, is why they abandoned the LargeCoin unit, since it wouldn't be anywhere close to what they wanted.

Sure, the power usage would be surprising to most FPGA designers. That doesn't mean you can't wait until after you've built and testing a prototype to announce exact specs to 3 significant figures and start collecting payments.

Inaba

legendary

Activity: 1260

Merit: 1000

Quote

Dexter770221

legendary

Activity: 1029

Merit: 1000

Quote from: smracer on May 31, 2012, 08:35:56 AM

Are they shipping 50 units of BFL singles a day? It seems like they are around 10 units a day shipping average. Why would these new units be able to be shipped 5X faster? These have to have some human interaction to build which slows down the building.

In my normal 8 hours work day I'm able to assemble 15 PCBs with 50 SMD elements (resistors, capacitors, 44TQFP microcontroller) and few other bigger parts like transformer, connectors. Of course not 8 hours straight, I like to use my right for break Wink

ASIC designed with caution shouldn't require many parts, mostly SMD. So, even one person should be able to assemble 25 PCB per day without any hassle. Not to mention some automatic manufacture. That extra 10$ for assembly isn't much compared to 100$ chip and 1999$ final price.