Topic: BitFury 110GH/s per rack? - page 3. (Read 11049 times)

Although the parts may not be very modern, the ideas and things surrounding it are very relevant and fun to discuss. Theoretically if designed correctly, it should be possible to replace all the little FPGA modules with 28nm models when those come along, or even specially designed ASICs.

This thread is boring, it's just speculation on a very uncompetitive product.

For those of you that were trying to figure out the network overhead, here is some good info:


Also, those copper busses look like exactly what I need for my rig. I'll have to study the pics a bit more.

RS485 bus. I had same idea months ago... I need to quit job...

Nice chilled water setup to keep those cores cool. This is the shit I'd like to do, if I knew how to program for FPGAs. I have the cooling experience but lack that critical skill 

No, his was 3 distinct colors for each of the unrolled hashers.

That was eldentyrell with his own FPGA configuration

I would say yes and here are some reasons.

First.
As pointed out yet nobody has got one yet.  Nobody has also gotten a mini-rig yet either.  Lets see the delivered iron operating in the real world.

Second.
It would take 4.4 BFL Mini Rigs to equal 110 GH/s.  That would cost ~$67K and use 5.5 KW of electricity.  This system (as stated) is $90K and uses 7KW direct.  I didn't add in cooling costs because 5.5KW of mini rigs will require AC for most locations.  So it is ~$23K more and 1.5KW higher electricity.  Granted the BFL comes out ahead but who knows with volume or revisions they may be able to close the gap.

Third.
They were able to acheive 147GH/s by overclocking.  While one may not want to risk the entire rig doing that I could see overclocking say 20% of the array to get some reliability testing over the course of 6 months or so.   Maybe overclock only in winter (when watercooled setup w/ radiator place outside can suystain lower core temps).    If 147GH/s can be kept stable (granted a huge if) it would require 5.8 mini-rigs to equal the performance which would consume nearly 8 KW (plus AC load) and cost $90K.

Fourth.  
Who knows if BFL will be able to deliver (and when) on the mini-rig.  It is possible power consumption will be higher, or output will be lower.  Maybe they will hit on all specs but there is at least the chance they won't.  Hypothetically say they miss by 10% on power and 15% of performance.  That means 6.8 mini rigs costing $105K consuming 9KW (plus AC load)

Lastly (and the big one for me).  
The design is very good.  None of this slap an extra fan on the bottom and hope that keeps it cool.  It shows a very methodical approach.  That same skill set can apply to 28nm FPGA when they start hitting the market in volume coming 2013.  Imagine a 200 GH/s per rack system for roughly the same amount of power and cost.

Holy epic shiet, this is an awesome setup.

EDIT: I'm pretty sure someone has this in their profile pic...

1. No-one is getting it.
2. We see FPGA boards less competitive than BFL still being sold.

I just don't understand why someone would get this when they could get 4 mini-rigs for 30000 cheaper and half the power usage?

I am not knocking what they have done, it is truly impressive but is it really competitive?

awesome design

EDIT:

by review their design, i must say, they are real FPGA and arithmetic experts, well done.
with open mind too, they described their design method without reservation. i pay my tribute to them.

our new design is in very similar way, if we could solve the high-voltage-stabilized problem, we will share the method too.

 

I should stop posting when not fully wake up :S
But I don't think it is a major fail, I just calculated something else by accident

MAJOR FAIL! PLEASE ENROLL ON A MATHS COURSE!

$90000 per 110GHs means $0.81/Mhs (not $1.22)
$599 for 832Mhs means $0.72/Mhs (not $1.39)
$15295 for 25.2Ghs means $0.61/Mhs (not $1.65)

Butterfly is still by far the best.

Rear:

Rear 2:

Open:

Front:

Motherboard:

Power distr.:

Power supply:

Overview:

And what I understand, they don't use a fully unrolled hashing core, they use multiple rolled cores.
Very interesting idea, an idea I also had but can't really test because I don't have the tools to try.

That's what I thought as well when I saw this...

It is their unverified claim. (Unverified, but plausible, given they overvolt and overclock the Spartan 6...)

Submitted to HN: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4006650

They are getting 305 mh/s per spartan6

Sorry, early in the morning here, not yet fully awake
Edited and corrected.