Topic: HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s - page 573. (Read 880816 times)

Our site is up... minus the product offerings.
www.hashfast.com

More to come...

To be fair, refunding in BTC is all well and good if payment in BTC is held and not touched, or if there is a float of Bitcoins they can use to refund, in which case there would be little point requesting pre-orders.

Fact is though suppliers and wages need paying in fiat (currently), so chances are BTC is changed into dollars at poit of sale, presumably using Bitpay, as such refunds are generally then paid back in the dollar equivilent as it is hard to foresee what the future brings with current BTC SP fluctuations...

I wonder if what happened is that they just hired some random "internet marketing" person who was used to doing shady things, without realizing they were shady and that any obvious shadiness would get called out immediately.

If these things are priced right, they'll basically sell themselves. On the other hand, if they're priced wrong it's going to piss a lot of people off.

___
Oh, one word of advice if you actually want to sell direct to customers: Make sure your order queue system is extremely clear and transparent.  Aside from delays, nothing causes more angst on these boards then order queue positioning.  And of course delays just make it worse.

If I were I would make sure the queue system is programmed and automated and clear to the user before you take orders.  (If you don't want to disclose exactly how many units are in the queue, you should do something like show a percentage: i.e. what percentage of orders are in front of you, and what % of orders has already shipped)

Also, you probably want hire someone specifically to deal with customer service.

Other nice things: You should allow users to get refunds in BTC if they want (if most expenses are already paid then you can just hang on to the coins), and even better would be to offer pro-rated discounts if you are ultimately delayed.

I think they are legit.

I'm just very surprised Hashfast allowed Gridfinity to run the way they did, and has created a bumpy start to say the least. There is nothing to doubt Simon's ability, he comes from a strong academic and professional background, but it's just a shame to see yet another new company drop the ball with respect to communications so soon.  Be it Gridfinity, or Hashfast, they should have consulted eachother, especially as Hashfast is yet to fully divulge their intentions and it appeared they had outsourced fundraising to an unknown.

Hashfast should be on top of this, and any official announcement should have it's content scrutinised before releasing into the wild and being open to misinterpretation if they care about how they are to be perceived by investors, public or competitors, etc.

This problem is by no means exclusive to Hashfast, but for us miners who are waiting on professional companies to take both Bitcoin and their customers seriously, it's incredibly frustrating that we are consistently let down by poor comms...

This makes me think it's legit.


This, as Ytterbium is super weird, and I'm eagerly waiting for the fat lie they're going to pull off, trying to cover their shady "marketing".

*cough* .. they are good guys trust me and mean well.. this forum is a whole different beast to tackle and get right hell its prob easier to do a asic chip then deal with everyone here

Me too, am feeling so much comforted by this 3 posts account statement.

I'd still like to hear an official explanation about this weird twitter account thingie.

+1

First of all, a 600Mhz PIII is actually a lot more then 100x as powerful as an 8088. The PIII can crunch through multiple instructions per clock, while the 8088 would take multiple clocks to do one instruction.

Also, keep in mind how old some of these processes are. 130nm chips first came out in 2001. That's 12 years ago

So for example, 12 years is a bit less then the difference between the first Pentium chip (1993) and the Core 2 (2006).   It's also about the difference between the 286 (1982) and the Pentium Pro (1995), as well as the difference between the P4 and today.

Now, you'll notice that the jump from the P4 to today is way less then the jump between the first Pentium chip and the 286.  That's because thermal issues are a big deal now compared to when the first Pentium came out.

There's also the die size issue.  HashFast may simply be making really large chips. That's what KnC plans to do, and they're planning on at least 100Ghash per chip, compared to 0.3 for the Avalon.

at least they should start to take preorders soon! can't wait to give my money away...


someone located in this area to give a visit? 

HashFast Technologies LLC

97 South Second Street #175
San Jose, CA 95113

You guys should deff bookmark the site and subscribe to the email list, trust me these guys are pretty freaking on the ball on the tech side of things and im sure people will be quite surprised as to what is coming next  

Wow... this is the first useful information found in this thread.

Now it gets interesting!

It's not a scam. It's a legitimate company - I talked with Mr.Bateman and he confirmed that 400g/h miners will be available November 2013 at $4-5k usd.

This means miners of 1 T/Hs or more will be sold for the price of one 500g/h BFL miner

When you guys get these please do not join BTC-guild that is all

You doubted the author of a peer reviewed and journal published article?!

They put up pictures of themselves... now we know they are legit.

it is almost party time!!!

http://hashfast.com/

You left out the part where you only had to believe us, but you are so addicted to FUD that you couldn't.

Bingo.

Yep, that's a biggie, I know bitcoin ASICs in general have a bit of a way to go before they're fully bleeding edge state of the art, but this seems like an exponential jump that's larger than might be expected. As if we were all using 8088s at 6mhz (PC/XT class) and then all of a sudden there's a 600Mhz Pentium III (Or if you like 486sx33s to 3.3Ghz  i5s)

Then experience in the community thus far has led us to believe that fabless developers and layout houses have been extremely over optimistic about device performance, and we've seen products or samples hit 1/6 to 1/3 of expected process maximum clock rate, and round about a half of initially projected hash.

I don't think Yifu or friedcat ever told us what they were aiming for on their processes, but initial CPUs on 130nm were running 1.5Gh before they were tuned up. I think 500Mhz on their devices is considered "highly overclocked" so they're below 1/3, nominal clock being under a quarter.

I have some suspicion that the massive parallelism of multiple SHA cores throws the developers for a loop as regards power distribution and heat removal, when other devices they have made have maybe been more sequential, i.e. less of the chip actually turned "on" per clock tick, leading to false assumptions.

Anyway, if Uniquify has spun Hashfast a line of 28nm being good for 4Ghz... then past experience seems to indicate a SHA ASIC will have an absolute maximum of about 1.33Ghz on that, and may need to be dropped to 1Ghz or below to meet power targets. 100 engine chip at 4Ghz, too good to be true. 400 engine chip at 1Ghz, too big to be true.

So from extrapolating from the previous efforts in the field, it certainly seems too good to be true, and sideshow shenanigans with 419-like megabuck solicitations and mysterious shills don't paint a pretty picture.

Just to be clear though- I am very interested in what HashFast can produce... some of it sounds almost too good to be true, but I am hopeful that they'll be able to meet their targets.  I just can't stand shills!  If you have something legitimate you shouldn't have to resort to such tactics.  Keep it real.