Topic: HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s - page 316. (Read 880479 times)
be sure to clear your calendar for the next three weeks and forgo sleeping as you nursemaid these babies
Everything that they have said is here
https://twitter.com/HashFast
No clear idea of perf/power usage.
https://twitter.com/HashFast
No clear idea of perf/power usage.
I must have missed something. Where did they state that the 1200GH/s was a single BJ?
They said that the pool address of their twitter feed is connected to a single BJ. If they connected a sierra instead, they should have told us, they didn't. Because they told us so.
-Instigate your customers to suppose what you want to tell but can't
-Don't deny it
-Win
It looks like that everyone in this thread is sure that a single board does 800GH+. They told us that the 1200GH is a single BJ, so why we shouldn't believe them? I'm so tired of this...
I must have missed something. Where did they state that the 1200GH/s was a single BJ? -Instigate your customers to suppose what you want to tell but can't
-Don't deny it
-Win
It looks like that everyone in this thread is sure that a single board does 800GH+. They told us that the 1200GH is a single BJ, so why we shouldn't believe them? I'm so tired of this...
Because they told us so.
-Instigate your customers to suppose what you want to tell but can't
-Don't deny it
-Win
It looks like that everyone in this thread is sure that a single board does 800GH+. They told us that the 1200GH is a single BJ, so why we shouldn't believe them? I'm so tired of this...
-Instigate your customers to suppose what you want to tell but can't
-Don't deny it
-Win
It looks like that everyone in this thread is sure that a single board does 800GH+. They told us that the 1200GH is a single BJ, so why we shouldn't believe them? I'm so tired of this...
not 800 here..... my money is on 700
i disagree... we were at easy 700 with one chip.. the sierra will be at 1900 - 2100
If we knew that a) that was actually 1 module and b) Eligius stats weren't skewed at the time then Yes, you would be correct.
However. We don't have confirmation of either. In fact their own Twitter post admitted to messed up stats and a lower estimated hashrate.
Honestly not trying to be a downer here.
you are correct...... guess i started drinking the koolaid. the HF coolaid!
Because they told us so.
-Instigate your customers to suppose what you want to tell but can't
-Don't deny it
-Win
It looks like that everyone in this thread is sure that a single board does 800GH+. They told us that the 1200GH is a single BJ, so why we shouldn't believe them? I'm so tired of this...
-Instigate your customers to suppose what you want to tell but can't
-Don't deny it
-Win
It looks like that everyone in this thread is sure that a single board does 800GH+. They told us that the 1200GH is a single BJ, so why we shouldn't believe them? I'm so tired of this...
Why are you assuming that 1.2TH/s is one BJ?
dont forget that the waterblock pump + fans probably draw another 20-50W
https://twitter.com/HashFast/status/417022058908770304
"Tests came out very well tonight. Production has been given the go-ahead!"
"Tests came out very well tonight. Production has been given the go-ahead!"
What night are they talking about since that they are in the pacific side of the USA? (this bothers me since the beginning of their chip updates)
https://twitter.com/HashFast/status/417022058908770304
"Tests came out very well tonight. Production has been given the go-ahead!"
"Tests came out very well tonight. Production has been given the go-ahead!"
So I mine at eligius.
My KNC Jupiter gives me an average of about 540 gh/s.
I checked my graphs about 3 hours ago and it showed that my miner was down for 2 hours which brought my 12 hour average down to something like 460 gh/s. At the time when I was checking my stats it showed my miner was mining at 680 gh/s. I just checked it now and it seems to be regulating. My 12 hour average is up to 530 gh/s and my current 128 sec average is at 630 gh/s.
So basing this off of my stats, if they were getting 700+ at one point, then the chip is more realistically mining at ~600 gh/s.
My KNC Jupiter gives me an average of about 540 gh/s.
I checked my graphs about 3 hours ago and it showed that my miner was down for 2 hours which brought my 12 hour average down to something like 460 gh/s. At the time when I was checking my stats it showed my miner was mining at 680 gh/s. I just checked it now and it seems to be regulating. My 12 hour average is up to 530 gh/s and my current 128 sec average is at 630 gh/s.
So basing this off of my stats, if they were getting 700+ at one point, then the chip is more realistically mining at ~600 gh/s.
What makes no since whatsoever to me is that they should KNOW what the hashrate is. It will tell them in CGMiner. All of this "Ecstatic over 700GH performance" then "Think we are really around 400-500" just shows that whomever is posting to the Twitter feed doesn't really have a deep grasp of the situation.
In other words, we still don't have any information coming out of Hashfast.
In other words, we still don't have any information coming out of Hashfast.
There is quite a bit of chum in the water right now.
Hopefully HF will soon provide more details about the test rig. I.e. how many GN1 chips... what power supply and system draw. Also performance on another pool would be helpful to compare against Eligius.
All I can say... if the machine is detecting as 1.2TH/s with 1 chip at eligius... I think I can speak for all of B1 to say we will be mining at Eligius
Hopefully HF will soon provide more details about the test rig. I.e. how many GN1 chips... what power supply and system draw. Also performance on another pool would be helpful to compare against Eligius.
All I can say... if the machine is detecting as 1.2TH/s with 1 chip at eligius... I think I can speak for all of B1 to say we will be mining at Eligius
i disagree... we were at easy 700 with one chip.. the sierra will be at 1900 - 2100
If we knew that a) that was actually 1 module and b) Eligius stats weren't skewed at the time then Yes, you would be correct.
However. We don't have confirmation of either. In fact their own Twitter post admitted to messed up stats and a lower estimated hashrate.
Honestly not trying to be a downer here.
So, standing to their story, this PSU is doing at least 1200W at 12V:
http://eligius.st/~gateway/sites/default/files/Baby-Jet.jpg
Is that even possible? (gonna search for some datasheets)...
http://eligius.st/~gateway/sites/default/files/Baby-Jet.jpg
Is that even possible? (gonna search for some datasheets)...
Thanks, now we know their yield per wafer is around 110Th/s
I'm terribly sorry that i made you lose the time needed to write all of that, but that is Cointerra chip, not Hashfast's one. I wanted to post it here to remember everyone that the competition isn't waiting for HF to tell us whatever that stats are for a BJ or a Sierra or whatever.There goes my model
I had a unit from them too for jan but requested a refund
why?
Thanks, now we know their yield per wafer is around 110Th/s
I'm terribly sorry that i made you lose the time needed to write all of that, but that is Cointerra chip, not Hashfast's one. I wanted to post it here to remember everyone that the competition isn't waiting for HF to tell us whatever that stats are for a BJ or a Sierra or whatever. Outside chance it's a BJ with two modules.
In fact, thinking, that makes sense to me. They've gotta be sure the upgrade kit will work before shipping the BJ box. So test the BJ with two boards and the shipping power supplies, etc.
In fact, thinking, that makes sense to me. They've gotta be sure the upgrade kit will work before shipping the BJ box. So test the BJ with two boards and the shipping power supplies, etc.
Your being way to optimistic. Their target hashrate for a Sierra is 1.2TH so it appears to me to be a slightly under-performing Sierra. Considering where they are in the tuning phase, this would make sense.
i disagree... we were at easy 700 with one chip.. the sierra will be at 1900 - 2100
Jump to: