Topic: HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s - page 564. (Read 880461 times)

This is a great question.

Here is the answer:
Uniquify was gracious enough to allow the entire HashFast staff to work inside of their offices.  This is to both ensure that HashFast's engineering team is fully embedded with Uniquify, and to minimize any separation of HashFast's business and engineering teams during a critical time. In addition, we have rented temporary space for meetings, etc. in San Jose, and have access to additional space in San Francisco.

Since Simon and most of his team live in San Francisco, one should expect to us to soon relocate our offices closer to home. (I for one, hope this happens sooner rather than later

John

Hey Bitcoinorama,

Thanks for pointing this out. We used an online service to generate a privacy policy, and we missed that section.
You are right, and it's been removed.  We will absolutely not sell or share anyone's data.


Thanks,
John Skrodenis

What was the address you visited them at?

For what it is worth... google says this address is a place called Nextspace -- a co-working office.  Seems weird to me that a company that can afford a 28nm chip without preorders can't find their own office.

when will your asic be available and are there any prices?

I guess he stopped the argument from ignorance tack and is going back to straw man/red herring.

Thanks for the well-needed dose of sanity sprinkled with a dash of humor crumbs, this was a good Sunday morning read .

I'm bursting with gratitude & can hardly believe our luck. 
Buying 50 Bitcointalk accounts to properly welcome our new ASIC overlords

ain't they all just the altruistic type?

That guy is in his own world making jokes that only make sense to himself.  Just click the ignore button.

And FCTaiChi is inspired to type up pages of HashFast apologia on his site.  Just as my faith in human kindness was starting to wane, an act of pure altruism.  
What will happen if FCTaiChi proves to be a roper or a shill?  The same thing that happened with Gridfinity -- nothing. HashFast didn't even bother to distance themselves -- why let a short con ruin an otherwise scammy relationship, amirite?  
Sure, there was sockpuppetry & blatant lying, but those were just innocent pranks -- HashFast is here for the long con run.

What impresses me the most, though, was the altruism of HashFast themselves.  They are promising us not to oversaturate the market with hashpower and to protect the network from nefarious "secret mines."  
I guess it's stoopit of me to worry about them not delivering, if they have to reassure us that they won't deliver too much too cheap.
Ahm'a staking mah claim on this hea comedy goldmine.

Edit:  Lol.  Another 28nm chiper https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2861080  Everyone wants to protect the network

Figured I should add that yet another person checked the connection between HashFast and Uniquify.
I'll try to keep this updated with the relevant facts, anyone (other than crumbs) see anything that should be changed?
http://decentralizedhashing.com/2013/08/another-leap-in-the-asic-race-hashfast-400gh-gn-chip/


I apologize if you are new here and the first response to you was negative.  That is uncalled for, and I welcome you to join us.

Oh, I see, you know what you are talking about!

But I think there is also a higher risk to fail completely at the first time, because the expected extreme power noise will have effect on setup and hold timing. If they miss hold violations caused by power noise, they can't solve these issue by just reducing the clock frequency or changing the supply voltage.
Ok, if you search long enough you will maybe find a sweet point, where the ASIC runs stable without errors, but this point could be individual for each single die in worst case.

Is there really a good reason to waste electrons on continuing this charade? Come on now.  You cluttering the thread is not going to change anyone's minds. You're just wasting your own time, as well as ours from having to scroll past this junk.

The stuff announced may be too funny at this moment, may be a trick for some believers.

I'm afraid the Sam Cole cannot provide the thing on or before 30 September 2013.

Thermal and power and simultaneous switching noise. Standard cell libraries are designed for standard toggle rates. SHA-2 is very close to the theoretical maximum toggle probability (when doing the approximate/probabilistic power/thermal/noise simulations).

Is there any evidence that Uniquify designed a IC that required a heatsink? Or are they experienced CAD-monkeys that "design" ICs by cutting and pasting "intellectual property" black boxes to create SoC-s for the portable and battery-operated market segments?

It would also probably help to define what the word "risk" means here. It isn't the risk of getting a non-working or extremaly bad yielding chip. The risk is that the chip has to be severely derated to actually work. And by derated I mean underclock but overvolt to combat the internal noise in the chip.

The helveticoin user was also from some established ASIC design house and they had 28nm prototype hashing chips either late last year or early this year. But their design seems to be non-viable commercially because it was designed like just another integrated peripheral for the SoC CPU.

I have no doubt they can deliver a product.

Lead designer checks out.

Design team check out.

Location makes sense and they would have to be truly unfortunate, not to deliver on time from there with all that surrounds them.

What I don't understand is why the shady marketing tactics, and willingness to sell people's personal info to third parties?

If you are capable of delivering you don't need that crap.

It's not cool.

Simple opt out box, all that's required. In the mean time register a throw away email addy if you don't want yours handed around.

HashFast announced today it plans to continue tapeout of its new HashFast® Golden Dunce® 28nm ASIC, as soon as stickier duct tape is sourced.
  
For gamers miners seeking insanely fast performance and smooth frame hash rates for their favorite games coins, the choice is clear: "HashFast® Golden Dunce®," said Simon Barber, Chief Technology Officer at HashFast. "At a starting price of only $5,000,00, the HashFast® Golden Dunce® ushers in a new level of performance, features and affordability, so gamers miners can experience today's hottest PC games coins, including BTC, BCC, CCC and the ever-exciting PCP."  

To satisfy gamer miner demands for greater customization and overclocking options, the HashFast® Golden Dunce® includes HashFast Boost™ 2.0 technology, which automatically increases the GPU's core clock speed for enhanced performance, while adding temperature target and fan controls, as well as extra over-voltage headroom and optimizations for advanced water-cooling solutions.
"It's a great time to be a PC gamer, miner!"



Floor plan of the soon-to-be-released HashFast® Golden Dunce®

So the main argument of Mr. Simon Barber why the Hashfast 400 GH/s ASICs are feasible is, that he was assuming that KnC does a 100 GH/s chip based on a structured ASIC (FPGA-hardcopy)? Because he thought that KnC must go with eASIC and eASIC only offers structured ASICs?

I hope Hashfast did not did their target specification based on that wrong assumption and a little silicon valley hubris in the way:
"KnC can realize 100 GH/s based on a hardcopy. So we can do easily 400 GH/s based on a real standard cell ASIC!"

Hashfast also will use multiple instances of pipelined hash core as base. They are not reinventing the wheel. It's still 28nm, a single hash core can't be much smaller as 0.5 mm2 (for sure not based on this poor (hopefully initial) floorplan they published on their website with more than 30% unused area ).

For a 400 GH/s ASIC, we are talking about:
200 cores @ 2 GHz -> 100 mm2 die (probably to high supply voltage required to meet power constraints)
400 cores @ 1 GHz -> 200 mm2 die (most feasible solution)
800 cores @ 500 MHz -> 400 mm2 die (would be the complete reticle size)

I don't say, that such an implementation is impossible. But it's is extremely risky and the thermal and power issue will be the hell. And based on what they have shown so far, I would say they are far away from tape-out.

The only thing which confuses me a bit is that Uniquify LOI. Why should Uniquify risk its reputation with false statements?
But maybe they just don't care about it, because the Bitcoin ASIC business always will be low volume and not that important for them.

+1