Topic: Estimate of ASIC pre-orders: 13 to 15 PH/s (diff 1.8B to 2.1B) by end of 2013 - page 10. (Read 30648 times)

I think you may be underestimating KnC as they pan to mine on their own devices and we have no idea how much that will add.

Ok, I had heard some talk that it was a combined pool of various, numerous people who had bought those chips

Single person is probably not accurate.  It is a single entity I imagine it takes more than one person to build, manage, and maintain it.

You know what would be very, very interesting to see?

$ sent to these companies over time.

IIRC, BFL got something like 50,000,000$ in pre-orders.

Avalon's chips total about 8,000,000$

KNC?  Terrahash? Less than 8,000,000$

The hashing power is a sigmoid curve (low, exponential growth for a period, then levels off because the hashing power and absurd costs means that we go from the old days of making 100% ROI in ~3 days - 3 months, to a sane, stable 100% ROI in 1-2 years even with no hashrate change

The money spent to each company is an inverted sigmoid curve

People talk about moore's law but don't understand it.  That's part of a trillion dollar computing industry.  Bitcoin doesn't work that way.  And frankly, any increases past cointerra will be marginal at best.

This is a single person with this hasing power?

So for all the competition and talk, the future if bitcoin is STILL controlled by BFL.

Wow

3 fucking petahash


Not viable for 99.99% of people.

Only groups like ASICminer or others with millions of $ invested can make this move.

Long-term miners are going to shift to much cheaper electricity. .12 USD is not sustainable.

Updated BTCGarden & 100/200TH project (based on Bitfury).

I think it may be important to start considering the inability for all companies to meet sales quotas.  Take BTCGarden for example their main run 1.5 PH/s is 130nm arriving in Nov with a selling price of $14 per GH/s.  I just don't see that being popular giving the rising hashrate, and the fact that power will be more important in 2014.  I think ~6 PH/s by end of 2013 is probable and would be willing to wager at least that much has already been pre-ordered.  Sales beyond that I think are more questionable.  I see Cointerra ($8 per GH & 0.7 J/W) being more likely to fill their orderbook than BTCGarden ($11 per GH & >7 J/GH). If I get a chance I may break out "pre-sold" (as in already paid) from "planned capacity" (which may not be able to attract sales).   

Another thing to consider is the combined total is ~15 PH/s.  This is getting close to the electrical break even point for the less efficient miners.  These two topics go hand in hand.  The hardware rollout gives us an idea of how quickly we will approach the break even point for various devices.  Beyond the BE point we will begin to see the least efficient hardware "retire" and that is going to slow hashpower growth.  Anyone interested should probably read both topics even if you disagree with my assumptions you can come up with your own.

It looks like BTCGarden is ~ 1750TH in 2013 https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.3033042

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/picostocks-100ths-bitcoin-mine-100th-140366
https://picostocks.com/stocks/view/19
https://picostocks.com/docs/index/19

link?

And where is 200TH mine? Bitfury chips. ghash.io is private bitfury pool, different story than 200TH mine.

Assuming:
1) 0.25 kW per TH/s
2) 0.12 USD per kWh
3) 6 blocks per hour
4) no income from fees

then 100000 TH/s requires 500 USD per BTC just to cover the power costs - which is actually more viable than I thought it was going to be. 

(across the network, over 26 million USD per year in power costs alone)

I had already included HF and I added 0.5 PH/s to Cointerra to reflect 20% "bonus" for late delivery.  I am not aware of any other company offering additional hashrate capacity.

Don't forget Bitfury's private pool(at least I believe it is his pool) -> https://ghash.io/. I haven't been keeping up with it but I know it has grown to 100 TH/s very quickly. This has nothing to do with the 100TH(now 200TH) mine. Wouldn't be surprised to see Bitfury just maintain 20% of the network for months to come given how efficient his chips are.

edit: Just realized this post may not be useful for the purpose of your thread. Just something that should be considered though given the opportunity that Bitfury has to replace ASICMINER as the 800 pound gorilla on the network. If ASICMINER's 2nd generation chips can compete with Bitfury you could end up with a large chunk of the network held by those two.

One question you may also want to consider, with the manufacturers that have a promise to increase the hashing power in certains circumstances, how much will that then ultimately add to the 6PH estimate you have? 

That is why we are looking at pre-orders.  A large portion of the initial 6 PH/s in 2013 has ALREADY been paid.  Now maybe miners overpaid and will never see a return but that hashing power will come online regardless because it is a sunk cost.   Take Avalon chips as an example.  There is a very good chance those that bought them will never see a positive return because they aren't online yet however once manufactured they are a sunk cost.  Not mining just means a -100% ROI.  Mining means something better.  They may still lose but a -20% ROI is better than -100% so they will be used ... by somebody.

Now I agree with some of the numbers it is tough to estimate how many sales have occured.  Cointerra indicated they are selling 2 PH/s.  How much of that 2 PH/s have they sold.  The good news is most of the "may not be able to sell" are further out.  I would consider the 2013 numbers to be of a higher confidence.  I would also point out that the amount of capital depends on the selling price.  The cost per GH (excluding NRE) of 28nm silicon is probably less than $0.25.  An entire system is probably about $1 (people forget how much power supplies including DC to DC PSU cost).

So if we assume 6 PH/s has already been paid the question becomes how much more capacity could be sold at prices declining to $2 per GH/s.  

Simple version:
Price reflects supply and demand not cost.  If people are buying $20 per GH/s and you are selling out why would you lower the price.  You lower the price when it is higher than your marginal cost of production AND you are no longer able to sustain sales at the current price.  I think we can get to 100 PH/s eventually just by cutting prices however that is harder to project.

It's an interesting way to think about it, but how would you get the spend numbers? It's not like these chip companies are publicizing revenue.

I think this needs to be looked at as much from the expenditure side as the forecast fabrication side.

In essence, a years worth of investment is coming onto the network now and over the next few months.  A lot of new miners (like me) have spent their available cash on pre-orders.  I'm not sure that the market will be there to pay for the production of the ~ 6 PH/s that's been announced by the new ASIC foundries over the past couple of weeks.

Of course, I could be very wrong, and new corporate-scale mining companies with new external capital might appear, but the existing contract 'cloud' hashing services don't seem to me to be capturing that much interest.

So another way to look at the question would be to try and calculate retrospective month-by-month dollar spends, and projecting that curve and factoring in some approximate hashrate-per-dollar forecasts. 

Reserved.