It looks like we won't be seeing any more of the GMO B2 and B3.
According to CoinDesk, GMO announced on Tuesday, December 25, 2018 that they will "no longer develop, manufacture, and sell mining machines." GMO's cryptocurrency mining division apparently recorded losses of $3.2 million in Q2 2018 and $5.6 million in Q3 2018.
Topic: GMO B3 33th/s Asic (Read 1022 times)
https://gmominer.z.com/en/spec/
Thoughts? This thing looks like it will would eventually become a flame thrower in my garage set up. 3.4kw. .. .
edit for typo
Thoughts? This thing looks like it will would eventually become a flame thrower in my garage set up. 3.4
edit for typo
Ahahaha, very funny (no)
my company requested an invoice for 2 samples. they need over 1 month now for calculating "shipping costs". i guess they have some production errors and cant deliver on time. what a mess 
New design looks like cry for help. Guess they have to offload it all somehow since more efficient gear has already beaten them to market and at lower cost. 33 TH/s @ 3,417 watts 
2k and wait until maybe oct 31 for shipping = bad.
Fans are lopsided = bad
And if btc moons 4 s9i ordered today cost the same.
They do 56 th at the same watts per th as the b3 does 33th.
I can not create a few cases where the b3 would be better
This is much the same as Avalon 851 it seems to be crazy dumb idea compared to the 841.
So b2 to b3 = dumb
841 to 851 = dumb
I have been breaking my balls trying to get a good setup of the 851s. Compared to the 841s
Step backwards 841=better. This is first hand testing.
B2 to b3 I am reading specs and looking at photos. But I think it is going to be the same b2 will beat the b3
Fans are lopsided = bad
And if btc moons 4 s9i ordered today cost the same.
They do 56 th at the same watts per th as the b3 does 33th.
I can not create a few cases where the b3 would be better
This is much the same as Avalon 851 it seems to be crazy dumb idea compared to the 841.
So b2 to b3 = dumb
841 to 851 = dumb
I have been breaking my balls trying to get a good setup of the 851s. Compared to the 841s
Step backwards 841=better. This is first hand testing.
B2 to b3 I am reading specs and looking at photos. But I think it is going to be the same b2 will beat the b3
Everyone seen the redesign of the B3 yet? Would love to hear some thoughts.
That miner design triggers OCD. The chips on one side will run hotter. But that does not matter as they do not offer competitive price or efficiency.
Everyone seen the redesign of the B3 yet? Would love to hear some thoughts.
who ever designed these did a huge fail.
but the boss of the company most likely does not give a shit and has his own agenda .
but the boss of the company most likely does not give a shit and has his own agenda .
Talk here (mfb) has this unit being viable for an extended Q4 return, essentially banking on a bull run like LY. Where efficiency isn't necessarily desired over total hash. A scenario where miners will plug in every asic available as prices rise for profits. Making these bread winners, only problem is arrival date. Maybe they'll arrive just in time, late, early? It's all luck and speculation. Worth $2k? maybe if you're the type to find that amount in the couch. Then, people paid well over $2k for miners through march batches. Considering perspective it could be seen as a "deal". With shipping and psu for a 3400w flamethrower, this might make a mineral oil cooling set up more efficient. Who though is set up to that on a mass scale to farm with these? Not my single garage.
You have no idea how surprised our team was the b2 was so far out (maybe you do). ... We may delist in a few weeks, we want to deliver a service and this may not fit our model. Specifically since we can't back up their claims due to lack of interaction to inquiries not just orders.
Heya,
Same conclusion I came to when I saw the first announcement of GMO;s 7nm Miners. Whoever designed this board, really did a piss poor job in regulating power consumption.
But, in all honesty it could be coming down to the limitation of the first generation of 7nm chips just not being up to spec. (Yes 7nm is still in first generation stages, these could also be just out of proof of concept stage)
Bitmain will most likely make a better machine since they wont be using Samsung, and will be sticking with TSMC who generally makes much better semiconductor technology. You wont see better systems until last quarter of 2018 to first quarter of 2019 as most 7nm fabs are only being completed around this time right now.
Same conclusion I came to when I saw the first announcement of GMO;s 7nm Miners. Whoever designed this board, really did a piss poor job in regulating power consumption.
But, in all honesty it could be coming down to the limitation of the first generation of 7nm chips just not being up to spec. (Yes 7nm is still in first generation stages, these could also be just out of proof of concept stage)
Bitmain will most likely make a better machine since they wont be using Samsung, and will be sticking with TSMC who generally makes much better semiconductor technology. You wont see better systems until last quarter of 2018 to first quarter of 2019 as most 7nm fabs are only being completed around this time right now.
who ever designed these did a huge fail.
but the boss of the company most likely does not give a shit and has his own agenda .
Heya,
Same conclusion I came to when I saw the first announcement of GMO;s 7nm Miners. Whoever designed this board, really did a piss poor job in regulating power consumption.
But, in all honesty it could be coming down to the limitation of the first generation of 7nm chips just not being up to spec. (Yes 7nm is still in first generation stages, these could also be just out of proof of concept stage)
Bitmain will most likely make a better machine since they wont be using Samsung, and will be sticking with TSMC who generally makes much better semiconductor technology. You wont see better systems until last quarter of 2018 to first quarter of 2019 as most 7nm fabs are only being completed around this time right now.
Same conclusion I came to when I saw the first announcement of GMO;s 7nm Miners. Whoever designed this board, really did a piss poor job in regulating power consumption.
But, in all honesty it could be coming down to the limitation of the first generation of 7nm chips just not being up to spec. (Yes 7nm is still in first generation stages, these could also be just out of proof of concept stage)
Bitmain will most likely make a better machine since they wont be using Samsung, and will be sticking with TSMC who generally makes much better semiconductor technology. You wont see better systems until last quarter of 2018 to first quarter of 2019 as most 7nm fabs are only being completed around this time right now.
Yeah no, that's a pretty extreme fire hazard. If it requires 4 fans to keep cool, it should be in a box twice the size. Ask any mining datacenter in the world, they'll all tell you "keeping a miner from bursting into flames" matters quite a bit more than "being tiny".
Why are people so addicted to the S7 size/cooling concept that they'd try and shoehorn 2-3.5KW into what's already not a great plan for 1.5KW?
Why are people so addicted to the S7 size/cooling concept that they'd try and shoehorn 2-3.5KW into what's already not a great plan for 1.5KW?
You pretty much hit the nail in the head there. Especially in Asia, having this miner is probably not the brightest idea, especially if you don't wanna see your 2m$ mine go up in flames because one of the (4! wtf?) fans died.
As was the case with the B2, Antminers are a better deal now.
GMO B3:
Antminer S9i 13.5TH w/ PSU:
For now it's wise to keep your money and see what Bitmain next SHA256 is going to bring eventually.
GMO B3:
- 103W per TH
- 0.0165 TH per Dollar
Antminer S9i 13.5TH w/ PSU:
- 97W per TH
- 0.0193 TH per Dollar
For now it's wise to keep your money and see what Bitmain next SHA256 is going to bring eventually.
3.4 kW is way too much in such small steel tube case.
I find this hashrate and electrical consumption asterisk curious.
And then on the B3 page there's this.
Quote from: GMO
* It could operate as the same conditions as GMO miner B2.
And then on the B3 page there's this.
Quote from: GMO
Operating Environment
Temperature: 0°C to 30°C
Humidity: 30% to 80% RH, prevent condensation
Altitude: Below 2,000m
Temperature: 0°C to 30°C
Humidity: 30% to 80% RH, prevent condensation
Altitude: Below 2,000m
I wonder if the phrasing is a translation error? "Could operate as the same conditions" referring to environment? Or maybe that it can be down clocked to hit b2 hash/efficiencies? Still not instilling confidence in this unit.
We've tried to get testing units form them for the b2 and now their b3, zero service outside automated reply's. I guess everyone waits till November. . ..
I find this hashrate and electrical consumption asterisk curious.
And then on the B3 page there's this.
Quote from: GMO
* It could operate as the same conditions as GMO miner B2.
And then on the B3 page there's this.
Quote from: GMO
Operating Environment
Temperature: 0°C to 30°C
Humidity: 30% to 80% RH, prevent condensation
Altitude: Below 2,000m
Temperature: 0°C to 30°C
Humidity: 30% to 80% RH, prevent condensation
Altitude: Below 2,000m
It looked like two fans back to back on each end, but it could be just one extra-super-duper fan. For the kind of cooling that would be infinitely easier to achieve from, say, an S4-sized housing. And also quite a bit less susceptible to dust. A lot of people don't consider just how much fan power draw, and chip-level temperatures, can hurt machine-level efficiency.
A longer housing for the same power would help with per-chip power dissipation, which in general means lower chip temperatures so easier cooling and longer expected lifetime. However, don't forget that the last chips in the line are being cooled by air that's already gone over everything ahead. This is a lot of why Spondoolies' 3.5KW 2U rack miners were impossible to run at rated speeds, and let's not forget the AM Prisma debacle. All things being equal, a short wide miner will always cool more effectively than a long narrow one.
MFB, if you're using a 135-chip S7, you can also undervolt for improved efficiency.
A longer housing for the same power would help with per-chip power dissipation, which in general means lower chip temperatures so easier cooling and longer expected lifetime. However, don't forget that the last chips in the line are being cooled by air that's already gone over everything ahead. This is a lot of why Spondoolies' 3.5KW 2U rack miners were impossible to run at rated speeds, and let's not forget the AM Prisma debacle. All things being equal, a short wide miner will always cool more effectively than a long narrow one.
MFB, if you're using a 135-chip S7, you can also undervolt for improved efficiency.
You're correct got a closer look, two fans attached. Seem incredibly counter intuitive to blow into another fan to cool.
I imagine manufacturers don't want to disrupt spacing for hardware on mid to large scale operations. Like GMO who sells hosting or hash power (?) makes it easier for them specifically to insert new machine in place of old. Where I, at home wouldn't matter as my set up is much more malleable. I suppose a fan hanging off a shelf is much better than part of the housing. Just feels off as a whole and hard to take GMO seriously without efficiencies and design function. My first view was a literal wft moment.
I got word we're going to list, as B2 did well for us but efficiencies were better. Nov is forever time like philipma said so we'll see.
Sidehack, I am brushing up on a couple of your threads on the s7. I plan solo mine unless market rises, or I have a friend who may host at their work for free power.
It looked like two fans back to back on each end, but it could be just one extra-super-duper fan. For the kind of cooling that would be infinitely easier to achieve from, say, an S4-sized housing. And also quite a bit less susceptible to dust. A lot of people don't consider just how much fan power draw, and chip-level temperatures, can hurt machine-level efficiency.
A longer housing for the same power would help with per-chip power dissipation, which in general means lower chip temperatures so easier cooling and longer expected lifetime. However, don't forget that the last chips in the line are being cooled by air that's already gone over everything ahead. This is a lot of why Spondoolies' 3.5KW 2U rack miners were impossible to run at rated speeds, and let's not forget the AM Prisma debacle. All things being equal, a short wide miner will always cool more effectively than a long narrow one.
MFB, if you're using a 135-chip S7, you can also undervolt for improved efficiency.
A longer housing for the same power would help with per-chip power dissipation, which in general means lower chip temperatures so easier cooling and longer expected lifetime. However, don't forget that the last chips in the line are being cooled by air that's already gone over everything ahead. This is a lot of why Spondoolies' 3.5KW 2U rack miners were impossible to run at rated speeds, and let's not forget the AM Prisma debacle. All things being equal, a short wide miner will always cool more effectively than a long narrow one.
MFB, if you're using a 135-chip S7, you can also undervolt for improved efficiency.
Yeah no, that's a pretty extreme fire hazard. If it requires 4 fans to keep cool, it should be in a box twice the size. Ask any mining datacenter in the world, they'll all tell you "keeping a miner from bursting into flames" matters quite a bit more than "being tiny".
Why are people so addicted to the S7 size/cooling concept that they'd try and shoehorn 2-3.5KW into what's already not a great plan for 1.5KW?
Why are people so addicted to the S7 size/cooling concept that they'd try and shoehorn 2-3.5KW into what's already not a great plan for 1.5KW?
4 fans? Not just wider 120mm? At least the s9 is longer than the s7. still though I can't think of augment to support GMO thoughts on this.
@philipma I had been bringing an s7 and down clocking to heat the house and I would love to see more efforts in regard to efficiencies.
Yeah no, that's a pretty extreme fire hazard. If it requires 4 fans to keep cool, it should be in a box twice the size. Ask any mining datacenter in the world, they'll all tell you "keeping a miner from bursting into flames" matters quite a bit more than "being tiny".
Why are people so addicted to the S7 size/cooling concept that they'd try and shoehorn 2-3.5KW into what's already not a great plan for 1.5KW?
Why are people so addicted to the S7 size/cooling concept that they'd try and shoehorn 2-3.5KW into what's already not a great plan for 1.5KW?
yeah if I were in charge of this gear it would have under 1000 watts
say 800 watts and 10,000 gh and slower fans that pull less power.
I would sell with home miners as my priority and market it as such.
"why run this when you can be paid for running this"
Yeah no, that's a pretty extreme fire hazard. If it requires 4 fans to keep cool, it should be in a box twice the size. Ask any mining datacenter in the world, they'll all tell you "keeping a miner from bursting into flames" matters quite a bit more than "being tiny".
Why are people so addicted to the S7 size/cooling concept that they'd try and shoehorn 2-3.5KW into what's already not a great plan for 1.5KW?
Why are people so addicted to the S7 size/cooling concept that they'd try and shoehorn 2-3.5KW into what's already not a great plan for 1.5KW?
Jump to: