Topic: HashFast launches sales of the Baby Jet - page 29. (Read 119650 times)

Yeah the sustained output seems to be significantly lower than 400 per day.   A longer term loo, reading between the lines of their shipping updates it looks like KNC Batch 1 is known to be ~3085 units (~ 1PH/s).  More details:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=283820.msg3405759#msg3405759  

On 10/23 KNC indicated they were less than 1 good day (~400 units) from complete but as of today not all orders have shipped but lets assume every single Sept/Oct customers receive their units by the end of this week.  That is 5 weeks of shipping and 3000 maybe 3500 unit shipped in Batch 1 or 600 to 700 per week.

So while they had some peak days obviously something kept them from full capacity.   Still I would guess they learned a lot and Batch 2 (3,4,5,6,7,8) should ship in higher throughput but I doubt that is the limiting factor, customer demand will be.  As diff goes higher, the demand to fill all this massive capacity is not materializing.  Say KNC (and HF and Cointerra) can all ship 1,000 units combined per day.  Lets fast forward to January.   Lets also assume between all 3 vendors and product lines the average hashpower per unit is 1 TH/s.   That's 1 PH/s per day, 30 PH/s per month.  Even at $5 per GH/s we are talking sustained sales of $5M per day, $150M per month.   Anyone think miners are going to be buying $150M worth of new hardware, every month, month after month with no end in sight.  All major vendors have available unsold capacity in the later month batches, the days of Avalon Batch 1 selling out in 5 hours are over.  

While they havent said it, KnC should be ready with batch by now, so I assume assembly is idle until batch 2. Also the 600 was over a weekend it seems, the biggest per day production number they achieved was 455
https://www.kncminer.com/news?page=2

Is the number of 600 boxes per day still up-to-date, only what happend on the first day(s) or the potential output of KnC?

I don't even know what's after peta off the top of my head is how irrelevant high magnitude SI scales have been to me thus far...

edit: it's exa

Ill grant you 650PH in a year is at the extreme upper end of what I think is even conceivable. But only a very small % of all bitcoins mined by the device will happen after the 6 month mark, which at 9B isnt exactly far fetched, so the last 6 months or so of that simulation are irrelevant compared to the first 6 months; just as 650PH at the end of 1 year isnt very likely, its equally unlikely to me the next 10 difficulty adjustments will all be smaller than the past 10. The next 10 will coincide with KnC B2+, Hashfast, ActM, Bitmine, Cointerra,  Black arrow  perhaps even BFL Monarch, next gen avalons and next gen asicminers hitting the market,  the previous 10 were caused basically by just 2 vendors.

SO the simulation is very flawed  (why doesnt anyone implement a calculator with a sigmoid function for difficulty?), the conclusion might still be true for the simple reason that I cant think of a mechanism that would cause asic manufacturing and deployment to stop as long as each of these miners is operationally reasonably profitable for those with access to cheap electricity. The real question therefore becomes how fast these vendors can produce and deploy, and KnC shipping up to 600 boxes per day gives us a glimpse of how fast this could go, particularly with 10 competing suppliers (at least one of which is using monster sized manufacturing facilities)..

When you plug your numbers into this calculator, do you ever stop to think about the practicality of 91B difficulty/650PH in a year? Is difficulty just a number that keeps going up inexplicably to you?

Also why are you paying 8000 USD for a BabyJet?

To clarify, TSMC makes wafers but they also dice and package chips.    BUT, they DO NOT mount the chips onto boards, so it seems reasonable to show pictures of the 550-570 boards that were built and awaiting the packaged chip to be mounted.

Very risky pricing here.

November orders will make around 15BTC, and you will pay 13.8BTC to buy it.

Why take the risk just to make 1 BTC profit?

http://btcinvest.net/en/bitcoin-mining-profit-calculator.php?diff=390928787.63809&dcosts=8000&diff_mincrease=30&blpbtc=25&dhsmhs=400000&diff_mincreasedecrease=3&btcusd=190.75&dpowcon=30&btcusd_mincrease=1&pcost=0.25&calcweeks=32&dleadtime=3&action=calc

A fair price would be 10BTC, shipped by the end of november. I would suggest not ordering this hardware.

Their exact words:

So, I really don't know where the barrier is, but I'll ask.

Can you get detailed clarification on the pcb photo question?  Either something is missing or something was lost in communication because that doesn't make much sense.  TSMC is the foundry they make wafers nothing more.  CIARA is an assembly and distribution company they wouldn't own the right to any PCB or prevent photos from being taken.

I am not saying you are wrong just that #4 as stated doesn't make any sense.

Crossposting this;

If it really bothers anyone that the corners of radiator are covered you could always use a shroud.

http://www.frozencpu.com/cat/l3/g30/c429/s163/list/p1/Liquid_Cooling-PC_Water_Cooling_Radiator_Shrouds-120mm_Shrouds-Page1.html

In theory it will allow more even airflow and optimal cooling.  In the watercooling world this has always been subject to a lot of debate and anectodatal reports.

A pretty scientific aproach to testing fan configuration (including the use of shrouds) showed essentially no improvement in performance
http://martinsliquidlab.org/2012/01/15/radiator-shroud-testing-v2/

TL/DR for those who don't like reading.  Shroud vs no shroud = 0C to 1C difference.  In some tests the use of shroud showed marginally higher temps but that is probably just the limit of temp accuracy.  So square radiator and round hole doesn't really matter but if it will bother you buy a couple $5 shrouds/spacers and make it optimal (just don't expect much if any real world performance gain).

I guess you mean this one?

Corsair H80

Take a look at the Sierra renders, there are fans on both sides of the radiators. The corners of the radiators are going to be covered by the fan frame.

You mean the area other than the fan blade spinning circle is going to blocked by the fan casing anyways?

Hence why having square holes wouldn't help.

The fans are round.  Technically, the blades of the propellers arent round, but when rotating they move in a curiously circular pattern ;-)

Going off the renders, they use a push-pull fan arrangement on the radiators, so having square holes wouldn't help and would take away more aluminum that stiffens the case.

Talking about fans, if the water cooling blocks are square, why are they pegged against a round hole? Wouldn't it make more sense to
have a different back plate on the Sierra?