Topic: Bitfury: "16nm... sales to public start shortly" - page 12. (Read 108588 times)

MS mentioned this in a blog post in May on their website.

A

Fwiw the guy from Mining Sweden was going on about a Bitmain S9 being ready for release very soon, can't find the post at the mo.

Anyone notice that hashrate has started climbing fairly fast again, after almost a month of near-flat?

 Smells a bit of SOMEONE bringing some new gear online somewhere.....

Because the emperor has no clothes.

I've been using bitmain for awhile now, and I have to agree with the guys above- BitFury is just a strip tease.

I don't know how any self respecting company can be two months late and have no publicly given reason as to why.

1. They are losing a lot of money or are  under pressure from their investors to make more and need to
2. They are worried that Bitmain have got a very cost effective solution which will ultimately come to
dominate the network before they can get any real advantage from 16nm. I'm guessing that as well as
mining Bitmain make very healthy margins from their S7's
Other suggestions are most welcome.

Agreed. Nor are they AMT/Bitmine.ch, Cointerra et al.
Last update from TSMC on 16nm production was Feb. 17 http://www.tsmc.com/tsmcdotcom/PRListingNewsAction.do?action=detail&newsid=THHKHIHITH&language=E

Do note that they differentiate between main production (IMHO meaning only Tier-1 customers) and others.
"Consequently, TSMC has devoted maximum resources to make up for all the impacted wafers. Nevertheless, we still expect to see wafer delivery delays in the first quarter. More precisely, for Fab 14A, the wafer delivery will be delayed by 10 to 50 days, and delivery of about 100K (12-inch) wafers will be delayed from 1Q to 2Q. "

Wanna bet that the 10-50 days is Tier-1 and the '100k wafers' being moved to 2Q are boutique chips including those from BitFury (and probably Bitmain as well but who knows there).

While it's sad, disappointing, and frustrating, this is as much self-inflicted as something evil on BitFury's part. They never asked for money, and then for whatever reason their plans change. That's life and all the hype that folks laid on top of it along the way, wasn't the fault of BitFury.

In this case, BitFury is NOT Butterfly Labs.......

all they see is $$ it's the same any place with anything all most,  it  seems if big bucks are there it's pretty much fuck the rest, just with bitcoins it seems more obvious .  but i didn't believe bitfury form day one when they first posted it back in DEC i hoped I was wrong but they played us got what they wanted . the rest well is fuck off, again i do indeed hope I'm wrong .

personally i don't think they care about their rep anymore. i think alot of companies get to a point where they choose profit over rep
(only to a point where their rep affects their profit of course, but "us" the community no longer have any power over Bitfury) <-- we used to have some say when our btc was funding their research with products they made and such, but let's face it that time is done, we have outlived our usefullness to them ;\

at this point i just pray they do SOMETHING to cut us in, even if it's open up some form of cloud mining with them
(remember on cex-io ,Bitfury's cloud mining has been "unprofitable" forever now) RIGHT ;\ so i shouldn't have faith on that front probably either...

They don't care. Companies like bitfury have determined it is more profitable to use the chips themselves and supply big customers. Us small mining operations can f*** off as far as they are concerned.

So May and nothing?? Do these companies even care about saving any little shred of their reputation that is left? Anyway seems like they are having some big problems with their 16nm chip and are now trying to distance themselves from being just a "mining company" with their recent announcements.

I'm curious, are you building a 16nm miner?

Sound good but what are the biggest chagnes for the Mining Game?

Here's maybe not the best, but an interesting article on the technology driving GPU's: http://wccftech.com/amd-unveils-polaris-11-10-gpu/

What's interesting is the following:

1) AMD's follow on GPU's (400 series) to be released in the next few months (NLT summer) will be using Samsung's 14nm Finfet process which has also been licensed to Global Foundries.

2) The 14nm process will double the number of transistors in the main GPU processor to 16 billion.

3) The comments from AMD are that these new processors will be "extremely power efficient".

4) It look's like the money is flowing to the 14nm FF process. If capacity is tied up, this maybe also affecting miner chips.

So doing a crude back of the envelope calculation, if nothing else, at the minimum because of die reduction, you get a 2X increase in hash rate. So just to keep up with the having, the efficiency has to double in order to stay within the same consumer power and size form factor. Very roughly, assuming the generous 120 day flat ROI from BITMAIN and $0.05/kW, you are looking at about $620 (1.4 btc) per unit just scaling up from what an  S7 goes for and using today's difficulty with the block reward cut in half. This doesn't look like a lot of profit.

The NRE engineering not only has to depend on the obvious improvement due the reduction in real estate but hope that the FinFet process, better design, tweaking etc result in better performance which would help profit margins.

I think what might be slowing down hash chip development is that they are probably producing sample chip on multiple (16nm, 14nm?) fab processes in search of performance and yield whereas in the past they could just go to one  28nm, 40nm house and be pretty confident in their NRE costs and results.

Well, now that the pony-tail measuring contest is over we can get back to business as usual.

***crickets***

Nope, they're just opportunists hoping to hop onto the Blockchain bandwagon, probably are not earning enough from their mining activities to feed all their hangers-on, sorry, executives. And why not? Virtually every 'application' for the technology is pure hokum, it's unbelievable how many organisations have fallen for this.

Definitely a case of The Emperor's New Clothes.

@sidehack and @2112 I admit I have zero knowledge on ASIC's and that's the reason why I wanted to talk to you guys about it and yes I'm obsessed with VoIP's because I find it easy and comfortable and as per your requirement of keeping a record log, I don't mind me being recorded. Between Mr. 2112, I'm sorry if you were annoyed by my PM's but I guess that's kind of rude towards people who look up to you in a community. I know you guy's are smart and knowledgeable, I also thought that you might share some light but it's OK now if that doesn't happen. Between I thank you guys to take out you precious time and giving a reply to my annoying PM's. Thank you. and Sorry.

Are we cool now?

Is it just me or has BitFury tacitly admitted to their failure on the 16nm node?

http://bitfury.com/content/4-press/the_bitfury_group_announces_next_step_as_a_digital_asset_platform_company.pdf

That portion agrees with my self-assessment.
This doesn't.

This portion show that you've didn't read my post with understanding. I never used Apache, I quoted Hashfast's CEO.

-15% -20% (or any mention of +%) is pure science fiction. The "very important" thing missed by HyperMega (and others) is that coin miner is unlike nearly every digital chip it will be only operated  overclocked/undervolted, in the regions where digital model don't apply and one has to use the mixed-signal or analog design flows.
Yeah, I'm slowly getting the "new way" of selling the ASIC design services. There are no plans for repeat business, it is strictly one-time hit-and-run affair.

Personally, I wonder about why Spondoolies' subcontractor designed POST (Power-On Self Test) circuitry into otherwise quite competent ASIC design. Then Spondoolies' software had to explicitly re-enable hashing cores that only failed POST when cold, but hashed fine when hot. No other vendors made such a mistake.

This got be something related to the contract between Spondoolies' and their vendors, like somebody doing excessive sandbagging to cover their asses. I wish somebody familiar with current practices (and not bound by NDA) could post their SWAG (Scientific Wild-Ass Guess).