Topic: HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s - page 549. (Read 880461 times)

Same here. 

you sure, come across as a prick.

im not biased! i wanted to order a baby jet but didnt have the BTC. ugh. ok im quitting anyway.

Biased AGAINST HF!! what a retard

im not biased you dick head. i have orders with knc, xcrowd and bfl (still waiting)

can we just stop while we are ahead.

Another biased shithead here! surprise surprise
Fuck ur mother anytime

oh they dont exist, but im saying dont start comparing shit when its not out yet. asshole.

LMAO: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2967744

Show me the chips u ordered asshole

big talk from someone who doesnt even have a chip in hand.

I'd like to write today about a small piece of why we are confident our product is better than KnCs.

So today's topic: Our silicon design is superior.

Both are 28nm designs, but HashFast's is far more powerful and energy-efficient.

Let's look at KnC's 28nm ASIC, and some basic details as we can pull from their documentation. https://www.kncminer.com/news/news-25

First let's calculate the hash rate per square millimeter of silicon. This is a measure of the efficiency of the design.

Honestly, we don't need much to estimate this. The lid size for their chip is enough to make some good estimates.
  
KnC's diagram shows their chip has a 41.2mm lid, and implies that the silicon under that lid may be between 30mm x 30mm, and 36mm x 36mm. (The additional space is needed for decoupling capacitors and such.)
    Let's use those two numbers as bounds for the size of the silicon under the lid. If the die(s) take up just 30x30mm of the space under the lid, then:
     30x30mm = 900mm^2
     100 GHash / 900 mm^2 = 0.11 GHash/mm^2

    Or if the die takes up a bit more of the space under the lid,
      36x36mm = 1296mm^2
      100 GHash / 1296mm^2 = 0.077 GHash/mm^2

HashFast's Golden Nonce chip: I don't have to estimate the size because I work at HashFast.
   One 18x18mm die is able to do 400 GHash (nominal - more overclocked**)
   Hashing per square mm:
      18x18mm = 324mm^2
      400 GHash / 324mm^2 = 1.23 GHash/mm^2
  
Let's compare those numbers, for the high and low values for KnC's chip:

      1.23 / 0.11 = 11.2
      1.23 / 0.077 = 16

So HashFast's chip is between 11 and 16 times more efficient, in hashing per square mm, than KnC's chip.

This has an impact on how fast we can deliver units to customers. One wafer of HashFast's chips has the same capacity as 11 to 16 wafers of KNCs. The initial engineering run from TSMC is limited to 12 wafers, out of which KNC will be able to satisfy 11 to 16 times fewer customers than HashFast will be able to. You'll get your units faster once production starts from us.

In addition, the HashFast chip operates much more efficiently. You get four times the hash rate for the same amount of power (250W). That's 1.6 GHash/W for HashFast, and 0.4 GHash/W for KnC.

Calculations such as this are a small part of why we are confident that we are delivering a quality product to our customers.

We figure it's time to start sharing such information.

Amy Woodward

VP Engineering
HashFast

** P.S. Simon made me put in the line about overclocking. But no one would ever do that to our beautiful chips, right?

I thought it was a  treacherous hive of scum and villainy , or am I in the wrong place again?


I'm a fan of power draw in small chunks, wanna spread the load across my circuits, have only got a couple that I could run to the limit.


That's one of the reasons I decided to shill for KNC in my sig, they have a reasonable power requirement and you can pick from 3 different levels of hash/power. Go on, order a bunch of Mercuries to top off that last few hundred watts on each breaker, you know you wanna.

BTW, you could run a Saturn or similar "for free" kinda if you replaced all your lightbulbs with CCFLs (Or even better LEDs if you can swing a deal)   I realised I had 2 lighting circuits that only have 100W of bulbs on now with everything on, methinks I will tap them in the basement near the box for another couple of miners when the time comes.

+1

Our shop is live on HashFast.com!

yep

hmm visit the site!

In Norway, on all new installations.

EDIT: Actually, a correction. I took a look at my newly-installed mains breaker and it is rates for 230V @ 60A, with each circuit from it rated at 16A.

Good comment. That is what we need and I always emphasize on!!

This is the number ~1400W.  It doesn't really matter that some people in some countries have higher capacity.  An ASIC unit which uses >1400W PSU makes global sales "difficult".  It is possible to install 240V circuit in US residences and many US businesses are wired with a lot of 240V drops but it doesn't really matter.  An ASIC provider using more than 1400W per unit would need to segregate their product offering.  Also while it isn't exactly a requirement all ASICs to date have used either low output PSU or standard ATX PSU.  Those PSU tend to max out at <1400W for the same exact reason.  Making them run at 110V to 240V and keeping output below 1400W allows a single PSU to be used almost anywhere in the world by simply changing the cord.

Lastly 1400W is a lot of heat to remove and given how parallel mining is it simply is easier, cheaper, and simpler to make 2x <1400W units then trying to make one "monster hasher" which uses say 2500W and then needs a lot of creative engineering to figure out hot to get power in, and heat out safely.

You're right -- i was thinking of #s on old voltage selectors. In US, i think it used to be 110->117->120, and, not being attached to the decimal system, we gots 60Hz, which lets us keep the gearing simple in synchronous motor wall clocks  That's how awesome we are
Edit: and our transformers are more efficient

A lot of US circuits are 15A @ 120V. Continuous load should stay under 80%. So 15 * 120 * .8  = 1440 watts max.