Topic: High Efficiency FPGA & ASIC Bitcoin Mining Devices https://BTCFPGA.com - page 31. (Read 218469 times)

Since you two seem to have trouble reading, here's a link back to the post:  https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1285889


Syke, can you please provide actual links to where I said that?  Seriously, I would like to see you link to a post where I said any of those things.  If you can't, then I'm afraid it's you who is the liar.

Soon it shall be done... Cue the music!

(spoken with a divining undertone)

I couldn't care less about the dreamy promises that BFL is making about their products. What i do care, and what i do want to see in this thread are actual informations about the bASIC products. So please, let this psycho scream for attention and leave him alone, this will do the most harm to his strategy. Do you really don't understand that Inaba is only trying to trick Tom into being "unconfortable" about their bASIC power requirements? it's clear to me. They are trying to slow him down, with whatever method possible. Tom, do not buy this dirty trick. Release your power informations, i'm personally fine with even 800W for 54 Ghash/sec if you keep the delivery promise of early December for example, and i'm sure others will encourage you to do so as well. Also, you said you have a prototype board laying around, why don't shoot some pictures ? even if it's ugly, we understand it's not a final product.
Tom I support you wholeheartedly, please listen to my advices!

He said this weekend.  And the weekend isn't quite 1/2 over yet.

M

Where do you get that crack you're smoking? I need to get me some of that if you think 400w @ 54 GH/s is GPU-land.


Since you like calling Tom a liar, let's quote some of your lies.


ROFL. You lied about when they'd ship. This lie went on for months.


ROFLMAO. You lied about performance and power usage.

The trifecta of lies. You lied about performance, power usage, and shipping date. Good job.

This thread is very long, so I could miss the info, but judging by the latest posts, Tom changed his mind and didn't publish the power estimates, did he?

With the first batch of ASIC chips produced for Tom (a 1000 of them), not with the first batch of bASICs shipped.
Why? Let's see:



Having 750 orders now, shipping in batches of 50 every 5 days (the optimistic assumption) - your order will likely ship 75 days after bASIC starts shipping.
Having 750 orders now, shipping in batches of 30 every 10 days (the pessimistic assumption) - your order will likely ship 250 days after bASIC starts shipping.
So, the answer for Bitcoin_Bing is: today placed order will likely ship 75-250 days after bASIC starts shipping.

If things has changed from 4th September, let Tom correct me.

Dude seriously? When did Tom lie? He stated from the very beginning he will release the power numbers when he has them. Like I said before, he does not want to release some bullshit estimate number like BFL did with their FPGA Singles and be way the hell off. If you don't like it, don't buy from him. The end. Stop posting this bullshit on his thread. I come to this thread to read updates from Tom about his bASIC progress, not this crap.

You are being generous? If we use the same logic you are using and quote BFL's fpga device as a "reliable" estimate then your device will consume twice as much power as the supposed bASIC will since the MMQ is twice as efficient as the BFL single. The ridiculousness of your claim is outstanding.

Btw, SHA256 isn't that complicated and has been around for awhile. While full-custom has the potential for the best performance, that is only the case with complicated architectures. Since SHA256 isn't that completed, and there already exist cell libraries for this system its reasonable to say that Tom's device can be competitive to BFL's device simply because the complexity of a SHA256 device just isn't there.

where exactly did he do that? Enlighten us please. Otherwise i call you the one lying now.
agreed

Telling me to not publish any figures that may not be accurate is transparancy to me. Tell anyone to not do something is telling them what you will do. Isnt this transparancy?
At least its better than publish childish figures, than come up with something 4 times that high. Rember?

Edit: i just think about trolling your threads and ask about your power consumption, bringing up those FPGA stories of yours on every reply. Because you cant prove them, i tell everyone its a lie and stuff. Maybe i should mention in every post that your power consumption now is 240 watt, because you know why..
but then again, im not a screwed up person after all.

PuertoLibre:  You seem to be confused on a great many details.  I'd be happy to refute your incorrect points if you want, so which is it:  Do you want me to leave this thread alone or continue to point out the ludicrous nature of both Tom's waffling and your incorrect assessment of details (that can be easily verified if you spent 10 seconds actually, you know, reading my posts)?

Tom admitted that he lied about BFL's power, good enough for me.  It's a shame that he continues to lie to his customers, but that's not really any of my business if he continues to hide the important details about his product.  He's fleecing people for their pre-orders, and that's sad, but there's not much I can do about that.

Here's something I want you to ask yourself:  Tom has announced that he's using Cell ASIC design.  He's not announced the process node, but lets be generous and say it's 45nm, since he has already stated that it was BGA based.  He's stated that he has licensed the SHA256 IP core from somewhere, but where?  If it's licensed from somewhere, has it been optimized for bitcoin's requirements? Perhaps it's a hardcopy from his "prototype" he claimed to have back at the beginning of September... but regardless of the source of his the IP core, it's going to be power hungry by the very nature of it being a CBIC, and again, being generous, lets say it uses only 30% of the power of the Modminer Quad.

Modminer quad: 40w @ 800 MH/s = 20 MH/w

30% of 40w = 12w per 800 MH/s or 810w for 54 Gh/s ... and I'm being pretty darned generous with the figures.  But heck, I'm a generous guy, lets cut that in half just for giggles!  405w for 54 GH/s.  Welcome back GPU's!  At least we've found a use for all the extra PSU's out there from the GPU mining era.  Of course, I'm just speculating, since Tom won't release any details, so it could turn out that my speculation is totally off base... but if not and I were Tom, I'd be keeping my power estimates secret, too.

How's that transparency working out for you, BTW?

i recall Tom telling me that roughly half of the order # represents real orders; so ~750.

We must be getting close with confirmed orders numbering in the 1500's:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=117955.0;topicseen

I think Tom said first production run could be up to 1000 units, I don't think he has made any statement yet regarding if we have reached that quantity yet.

Can you elaborate? this was my expectation as well.

Nope, untrue.

Consider that if you order a bASIC today, your order will likely ship out with the first batch, whereas if you instead order the mentioned competing product, your order will likely have to wait in the queue a good while after shipping begins before being shipped out.

?

I don't recall Tom having offered the money to charity? You were the only one who did that.

Condition 1: His bet was about whether you (as in BFL) would come out under 1.1 watts per Gh/s....

AND

Condition 2: Stay out of this thread until that was proven....

-------------------------

If both condition was met as true, he would fork over 1000 BTC to you. (or BFL)

If either condition was false, you would fork over 1000BTC to him.

-------------------------

Thats what I read in this thread over the last ~5 pages~.

You then rejected his offer based on the second clause of having to leave this thread until the first condition was proven true or false.

You made a counter proposal to Tom after you turned his down. He must prove his power figures are competitive with BFLs product and you would not be staying out of his thread.

------------------------

Then you opened a thread on BitCoinTalk, announcing, you would suddenly be donating 1000BTC to charity if you "won the bet". Though Tom has already rejected your bet. He decided to announce his power figures or other device specification on schedule as he had planned weeks in advance.

(Still unclear as it is still developing on your part)

As a result of your thread over "which charity" would win the [supposed] spoils of a bet that was already rejected before the thread was ever even opened....you started a spirited argument/debate over which charity is ti be "blessed" by BFL.

Then just today, not inconsistent with actual events, you announce that you never expected Tom to accept the bet....and....therefore you had no actual intention to go through with the bet that was already rejected before the thread started.

Now you have changed your tune to the cost of 1000 BTC. You have now stated you will donate 1000 BTC to charity despite the fact that Tom would never accept the bet.

------------------------------

You know Inaba, you really need to think these things through before you act. You even made me look away in disgust at the charity thing. Because your playing with peoples hearts. Thats like playing a game over which orphanage is lucky enough to be blessed and which one isn't.

You tried to create goodwill among members despite already knowing and expecting that the bet would never even get off the ground. VERY DISTURBING behavior....

Whats worse is doing it when you know the other party has already rejected your bet and therefore there is no point in taking suggestions over which charity will reap the rewards. You are probably gonna blast me to kingdom come for pointing this out.

But you haven't yet, and I assume it is because you hope no one actually paid any attention to what lead to the thread being posted.

Now you have to explain to your boss why you need to give away 1000 BTC on the company dime.

---------------------------

You know your company has at least 1 million in capital. So that means even if you started out aiming for 110nm...when the influx of orders and money came in you could have easily have asked the right people for a significant die shrink.

Based on your confidence, your company is probably using a very expensive process node. Which means your power figures are closer to 30 or 40 watts. You would likely have won Toms bet without a sweat.

The charity thing....as you played it was ultra bad PR.

Especially in light of the offer already being rejected. You asked people to talk over hot air and a premise that would never be. Only now, are you changing your tune and justifying a sudden large payment to charity despite the bet being rejected.


Someone needs to get your boss's email and efax him pages of your conversation. You have a way of somehow rubbing people the wrong way. Whatever the cost is in reputation, you boss should know you are costing him money. No matter what kind of person he may be, he would be hopping mad if he heard about this affair.

You succeeded [somehow] in making people walk away with extra capital for your company. God help you if your current customers have any problems with the hardware. You're the first in ASIC technology. The last in any reasonable sense of treating people with "the right touch".

You really have no idea how to deal with people. Your situation management is 10 times worse.