Topic: [GLBSE] BFLS.RIG - BFL Hardware mining & Sales - page 6. (Read 28359 times)

Just to clarify: The conversion factor of existing BFLS shares to 'new shares' would be diffferent than the conversion factor of existing BFLS.RIG shares to 'new shares'; there should not be a 'blanket' conversion if we want to be fair (I own approximately equal amounts of both so this doesn't affect me much, but it would negatively impact those holding more BFLS than BFLS.RIG). I assume we want to be fair.

BFLS is worth more than BFLS.RIG in terms of $; even more so if we are constrained to the same power envelope simply because a BFLS share represents significantly more power than a RIG share and can be converted to significantly more SC hardware/hashrate/income.

My calculations a few posts up show the details of this.

True.

I was checking giga's post (https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ann-first-500ghs-bfl-unit-up-and-running-237710) and it seems each 500GH minirig behaves internally like 8 SC singles with a max of 480GH (8*60GH), so if space is not a problem the SC singles should be the best choice (more redundance with larger area for heat dissipation, lesser work for fans).

So, if Inaba prefers to convert everything to SC singles (or do a mix, with one asic minirig counting as 8 sc singles), using the .RIG referencial (more granularity),

(hardware # based): [#new SC singles]*433*3/2.52 - [#existing fpga singles]*200*3/2.52 - [#existing fpga minirigs]*6058 = [#new BFLS.RIG shares assigned to Inaba]
or
(share # based): [#new SC singles]*433*3/2.52 - [#existing fpga singles' shares]*3/2.52 - [#existing fpga minirigs' shares] = [#new BFLS.RIG shares assigned to Inaba].

This assumes all BFLS shareholders get their shares converted to .RIG shares, using [#shareholder's new .RIG shares] = 3/2.52*[# shareholder's actual BFLS shares].

Edit: Added formula.

Oh, I just looked it up now that this thread reappeared and it seems I have still one single unclaimed share in BFLS.RIG...

Any way to still claim that?

SC minirigs and SC Singles have roughly the same power efficiency. Space requirements are different.

Maybe now it would be more beneficial to you (to increase power efficiency) to just convert all those singles into minirigs? Using Epoch's values, a "1.5TH asic minirig" is 11842 .RIG shares, so a real 500GH asic minirig is 3947.3(3) shares.

So, [#new 500GH asic minirigs]*(3947+1/3) - [#existing fpga singles]*200*3/2.52 = [#new BFLS.RIG shares assigned to Inaba].

With three 500GH asic minirigs, that's 3*(3947+1/3) - 40*200*3/2.52 = ~2318.19 .RIG shares to you; existing BFLS shareholders get converted to .RIG shares = 3/2.52*#BFLS shares.

(another option is using 2*500GH minirigs + 4*SC singles, for example)

Edit: Asic MiniRigs behave internally as 8 SC singles (480TH), see my post below.

I'm fine with swapping out for the same power footprint, as that is ultimately the root of the problem.  Space can be managed most likely, but power is much more difficult to manage - 19 singles would consume almost double what power consumption is now, which is right around 3000w. 

Let me see what I can shuffle around and see if I can somehow fit almost 20 singles in somewhere.

Following RHA, my proposition to keep power costs at a minimum would be to trade only the "necessary" singles. Inaba told me he has almost 40 fpga singles atm, so that's around 3200W.

If he were to "upgrade" all the 40 fpga singles, those would give 2.4TH (40*60GH), of which,

• 2.4TH * 200/433 = 1.108TH would go to BFLS shareholders
• 2.4TH * 233/433 = 1.292TH would go to Inaba

So "only" 1.108TH is needed to fulfill all BFLS shareholders, which is about 40*200/433= 18.48 asic singles, consuming ~5543W.

Since we need an integer number and there is an overhead to pay for power, 19 asic singles should be enough (consuming a total of 5700W), since those remaining 0.52 (worth 227 shares, around 31455GH) yield at the moment $2629.81/month, while the power costs for all 19 asic singles (5700W) should be around $625/month ($0.15/kWh).


The underlying math is simple,

For BFLS: [#new asic singles]*433 - [#existing fpga singles]*200 = [#new BFLS shares assigned to Inaba]. So, with 19 asic singles, Inaba will get 19*433 - 40*200 = 227 new shares.

For .RIG: [#new asic minirigs]*11842 - [#existing fpga minirigs]*6058 = [#new BFLS.RIG shares assigned to Inaba].

Or, alternatively,

For BFLS: [#new asic singles]*433 - [#existing fpga singles' shares] = [#new BFLS shares assigned to Inaba].

For .RIG: [#new asic minirigs]*11842 - [#existing fpga minirigs' shares] = [#new BFLS.RIG shares assigned to Inaba].

Using this proposal, it's just a matter of Inaba deciding on the number of new shares he wants/needs to cover for the overhead cost margin of running the hardware.

RHA makes some good points ...

I missed the posts from last week, so I can answer only now.

Inaba, you worries unnecessarily. You should simply order/allocate more power for each coming new SC device. 10% of the increased revenue will easily cover the new costs. Vbs has proved it.

Each 200 BFLS shares were entitled to 200/440 of the 60 GH/s after upgrading to Single SC.
At the beginning you intended to replace each one Single to one Single SC (for ease of calculations lets forget for a moment about conversion to Minirigs).
It would give for your disposal additional 240/440 of the power. I think you should keep to that.

The alternative is to use lesser number of Singles SC, eg. half of them - replacing each two old Singles with one Single SC.
Each 400 BFLS shares would be then entitled to 400/440 of the Single SC hashing power, and you would get 40/440 of it.

With Minirigs you should proceed similarly.

The important point is to keep the level of hashing power per share equal to what was promised to be after upgrading. The price of the shares was driven by this expectancy.

Looks like gigavps has an SC minirig hashing already:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2514804

Any ETA of when BFLS will start getting SC equipment?

(Updated above post with FPGA mini-rig values)


For a Single SC (60GH/s@300W) to have a ~10% overhead in power costs, the difficulty has to be around 275 million ($32.87 power cost/month at $0.15/kWh vs. $329.03/month revenue @ $100.56/BTC). Assuming $/BTC goes up, the power costs in $ go down proportionately.

Guys, I still think there's something we're missing? Aren't we seeing the problem in reverse?  

For example, an FPGA single has ~10.40 MH/s/W, FPGA Mini-Rig ~18.80MH/s/W while a Single SC has ~200.00 MH/s/W. I did the following estimates using current diff=15,605,633, $/BTC=100.56 and $/kWh=0.15 and a monthly time frame.



The FPGA single has currently a ~10.9% power cost overhead, the FPGA mini-rig ~6% and the SC single will have a ~0.57% power cost overhead.

Yes, that makes sense (5W per gigahash/s). I've updated my post using 7500W per 1.5Thps for the minirig SC. Looks like people holding BFLS will be in a much better position than BFLS.RIG holders (61Mhps/share vs 35Mhps/share respectively) ... which is why it remains important to keep the 2 share groups distinct.

(the reason for this large difference is that the FPGA Singles use about double the power per gigahash than the FPGA minirig boards. Thus they can be converted to a lot more SC hardware while keeping within the same power envelope).

300w estimate on the Singles is a good estimate.  The minirig will be 500 GH/s +/- 10% for about 2500w or so, or 7500w for 1.5 TH/s.

I've ran the calculations for both BFLS and RIG, based on an upgrade to SC holding to an identical power envelope.

For BFLS:

FPGA Single   
power: 80 watts
cost:   $600.00   
shares: 200 per Single
cost/share:   $3.00   
      
SC Single      
hashrate: 60000   Mhps nominal
power: 300 watts (a guess for now)
upgrade cost: $700.00   
Amount of SC Singles for same power as FPGA:   0.267   
upgrade cost from 80W FGPA to 80W SC: $186.67   
extra shares created per FPGA Single to SC upgrade:   62 (assigned to Inaba)
hashrate/share after upgrade: 61.0 Mhps

For BFLS.RIG:

FPGA Minirig:
power: 1250 watts (a guess)
cost:   $15295
shares: 6058 per minirig
cost/share:   $2.52   
      
SC Minirig:    (this is the original 1.5Thps unit; I can re-run these for the 500Ghps unit if it makes more sense)   
hashrate: 1500000 Mhps nominal
power: 7500 watts
upgrade cost: $14705 (a guess; does anyone remember the original number?)
Amount of SC minirigs for same power as FPGA:   0.167   
upgrade cost from 1250W FGPA to 1250W SC: $2450.83
extra shares created per FPGA minirig to SC upgrade:   970 (assigned to Inaba)
hashrate/share after upgrade: 35.57 Mhps

It is worth mentioning that, after the upgrade to SC, the hashrate of a BFLS share will significantly exceed that of a BFLS.RIG share (by 71%). If anyone can contribute more accurate numbers let me know and I'll update these.

UPDATE 1: edited for 7500W minirig SC (1.5Thps)

I also agree to what Epoch suggested. This seems like a good solution, indexing share #'s to power consumption (system input), as miners are really just W to H/s converters.

It also allows you the possibility to later trade the singles for more power-efficient hardware, while staying within the same total power envelope (more hardware in this case).

Hmm, that idea could certainly work.  Let me give that some thought, but off the cuff I like it.

I have an alternative suggestion to liquidation. As you say, you cannot afford to host a 1:1 upgrade to the SC hardware.

Let's say you are currently hosting 25kW worth of FPGA equipment. You could swap it out for 25kW worth of SC equipment. That way your power costs stay as they are now, but hashrate goes up. Similar to what I proposed earlier in this thread, shares could be converted like this:

Taking BFLS (Singles) as an example:
- currently 1 FPGA Single represents 200 shares and is worth $600 ($3/share).
- a Single SC upgrade cost $700 for a 60Ghps unit (I believe 60Ghps units have been ordered, not 50Ghps, and for the original upgrade cost of $700 not $1900 as it became after the recent price jump).
- 1 FPGA Single uses 80W.
- 1 SC Single uses 300W (a guess for now)
- thus for the same 80W you can host 0.267 SC Singles (or 0.267 x 60ghps, or 16Ghps)
- the cost of 0.267 SC Single Upgrade is 0.267 x $700 or $187. Or 62 BFLS shares (a BFLS share represents $600/200 or $3).
- thus upgrading 1 FPGA Single (80W) to 80W worth of SC equipment would be $187 and gives you 0.267 SC Singles.
- this means Inaba would create/assign 62 new shares to himself for every 200 BFLS shares currently in existence; current BFLS owners would keep whatever amounts they now have.
- tl;dr: after this conversion, 262 shares will represent 1 FPGA Single converted to 0.267 SC Singles (16Ghps, 80W). This is a hashrate of 61Mhps per share.

If we go this route, power requirements stay exactly as they are now but we all gain a hashrate increase from ~3.75Mhps (now) to 61Mhps per share. Hosting costs (i.e. power) remain the same as they are now. With less physical units (1 SC replaces 5 FPGAs), maintaining them should be less work as well.

So, at least for the time being, I would like to think that most of us would prefer to go this route (i.e. convert 80W worth of FPGA to 80W worth of SC) instead of liquidating what we have now. It gives shareholders a 16x hashrate increase, represents no additional cost for datacenter hosting, and less maintenance for the operator. Later, depending on circumstances, we can consider liquidating the SC hardware.

Thoughts?

Contracts. Made to be breached.

I'm not sure how that is possible, except to forcibly remove shares from people.  I'd imagine that won't go over so well.