Leading SHA256 Solution Provider Acquires Venture Capital Funding - page 2.

MrTeal

legendary

Activity: 1274

Merit: 1004

Quote from: P4man on June 17, 2012, 03:57:53 PM

If you want to see what a 90nm asic could do:
http://www.cosic.esat.kuleuven.be/publications/article-1500.pdf
Table 3
5.5 Gbps @ 3.1mW

Would a core throughput of 5.5Gbps translate to a single through hashrate of 10MH/s, and a double SHA2 hashrate of ~5MH/s?

P4man

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 500

If you want to see what a 90nm asic could do:
http://www.cosic.esat.kuleuven.be/publications/article-1500.pdf
Table 3
5.5 Gbps @ 3.1mW

P4man

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 500

Quote from: MrTeal on June 17, 2012, 03:19:21 PM

To be fair, the paper from Virginia Tech is also using 0.13 standard cell. If BFL isn't lying about the ASIC being full custom, there could be optimizations on the ASIC side as well.

Highly unlikely they used anything other than standard cell. But their published performance is completely believable for a 130nm standard cell implementation (particularly if its optimized for bitcoin only) and no one has said its 130nm, it could even be a smaller node.

Some skepticism regarding BFLs claims and in particular, the timetable is warranted, but its ridiculous to pretend these numbers are somehow completely impossible.

P4man

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 500

Quote from: eldentyrell on June 17, 2012, 03:07:26 PM

Right there on the front page almost in tags:

Great, so you (mis)read the first paragraph, now scroll down to the last page and see the power and performance results for the reference 130nm asic implementation.
Roll Eyes

MrTeal

legendary

Activity: 1274

Merit: 1004

To be fair, the paper from Virginia Tech is also using 0.13 standard cell. If BFL isn't lying about the ASIC being full custom, there could be optimizations on the ASIC side as well.

eldentyrell

donator

Activity: 980

Merit: 1004

felonious vagrancy, personified

Quote from: eldentyrell on June 17, 2012, 02:50:31 PM

...

Quote from: P4man on June 17, 2012, 02:59:38 PM

If you had read the papers I linked...

Damn, dude, you expect me to read them in 9 minutes? (see timestamps above) Anyways, please refer to the ginormous red text two posts back; it answers your concern. I made it big and huge and glaring and red so you wouldn't miss it this time.

sadpandatech

hero member

Activity: 504

Merit: 500

Quote from: P4man on June 17, 2012, 02:59:38 PM

If you had read the papers I linked, you would have seen how that kind of power efficiency is more than plausible with a 130nm asic, nevermind a 90 or 65nm one.

I honestly wouldnt have thought someone with your background would even need to see such papers to believe that though, so Im gonna assume you are just pretending.

I read those papers but could not find where almost 100% utilization of the chips they were using would provide such effciency. I saw the low mW usage listed for each participants section but no indication of the actual utilization of the silicon in those sections to indicate whether the MHz they were running at was maxed out, etc. And we have no clue at this point what Freq BFL will be running theirs at.

eldentyrell

donator

Activity: 980

Merit: 1004

felonious vagrancy, personified

Quote from: P4man on June 17, 2012, 03:26:43 AM

http://rijndael.ece.vt.edu/sha3/publications/DSD11SHA3.pdf

WTF? What part of "not peer reviewed" do you not understand? This is some powerpoint slide deck thrown together by a student. About as academically credible as my press release.

Quote from: P4man on June 17, 2012, 03:26:43 AM

http://filebox.vt.edu/users/xuguo/homepage/publications/CESCA_Seminar_SHA3.pdf

Right there on the front page almost in tags:

Quote

Our objective is to use the FPGA as a prototyping technology for the ASIC, rather than a direct technology target. Hence, dedicated FPGA optimizations are not used.

They didn't optimize the FPGA design at all. Notice that their performance section only compares the ASIC implementations against each other (which was the whole point of the paper), not against the FPGA implementation.

P4man

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 500

If you had read the papers I linked, you would have seen how that kind of power efficiency is more than plausible with a 130nm asic, nevermind a 90 or 65nm one.

I honestly wouldnt have thought someone with your background would even need to see such papers to believe that though, so Im gonna assume you are just pretending.

eldentyrell

donator

Activity: 980

Merit: 1004

felonious vagrancy, personified

Quote from: eldentyrell on June 16, 2012, 03:10:32 AM

I'm sorry, I know the silliness factor is already pretty high with the claimed 5600% improvement in efficiency:

Quote from: P4man on June 16, 2012, 04:37:57 AM

… ~40x efficiency improvement for SHA256 hashing from 65nm FPGA to 130nm ASIC.

Quote from: eldentyrell on June 16, 2012, 07:06:21 PM

Spartans are 45nm FPGA, not 65nm.

Quote from: P4man on June 17, 2012, 03:26:43 AM

So what? Do you know what node BFL used?

No, and I don't care. They're claiming 5600% improvement over the current best MH/J, which is Spartan-6. Spartan-6 is 45nm.

BR0KK

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 500

Quote

I couldn't help but notice that the same label applies to the people on the forum that spend the most amount of time promoting BFL.

And they are still waiting to get them, while we can happily miner

P4man

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 500

Quote from: eldentyrell on June 16, 2012, 07:06:21 PM

Citation, please. Preferably from someplace serious like ISSCC. You're probably wildly misinterpreting whatever it is you're reading.

http://rijndael.ece.vt.edu/sha3/publications/DSD11SHA3.pdf
http://filebox.vt.edu/users/xuguo/homepage/publications/CESCA_Seminar_SHA3.pdf

and read it before saying its about SHA3..

Quote

Spartans are 45nm FPGA, not 65nm.

So what? Do you know what node BFL used?

galambo

sr. member

Activity: 966

Merit: 311

Quote from: nguoinhaque on June 16, 2012, 04:14:08 PM

Seems that some guys are crying because they betted too much on their mining rigs.

I couldn't help but notice that the same label applies to the people on the forum that spend the most amount of time promoting BFL.

eldentyrell

donator

Activity: 980

Merit: 1004

felonious vagrancy, personified

Quote from: P4man on June 16, 2012, 04:37:57 AM

Quote from: eldentyrell on June 16, 2012, 03:10:32 AM

I'm sorry, I know the silliness factor is already pretty high with the claimed 5600% improvement in efficiency:

Why is that silly? Its completely in line with academic papers

Citation, please. Preferably from someplace serious like ISSCC. You're probably wildly misinterpreting whatever it is you're reading.

Quote from: P4man on June 16, 2012, 04:37:57 AM

which promised ~40x efficiency improvement for SHA256 hashing from 65nm FPGA to 130nm ASIC.

Spartans are 45nm FPGA, not 65nm.

bulanula

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 500

Quote from: nguoinhaque on June 16, 2012, 04:14:08 PM

Seems that some guys are crying because they betted too much on their mining rigs.

Just look at the FPGA developers : yohan and OP.

They really mad at this point.

FYI most miners with GPUs paid off their rigs a long time ago like me Wink

nguoinhaque

newbie

Activity: 22

Merit: 0

Seems that some guys are crying because they betted too much on their mining rigs.

arklan

legendary

Activity: 1778

Merit: 1008

Quote from: P4man on June 16, 2012, 03:23:26 PM

Being able to spell doesnt even guarantee it. Sure does help.
Shocked

doh! fixed.

P4man

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 500

Being able to spell doesnt even guarantee it. Sure does help.
Shocked

arklan

legendary

Activity: 1778

Merit: 1008

Quote from: Pipesnake on June 16, 2012, 02:29:53 PM

Quote from: bulanula on June 16, 2012, 10:12:22 AM

Quote from: Paladin69 on June 16, 2012, 10:09:59 AM

Is this a thread to prove that anyone can BS a PRweb?

Yep. This elden tyrell guy got big game.

He spent $500 just for this. Could have used that to buy 3 Jalapeno coffee warmers for 10.5 GHash/s in the future presumably.

Guy must be mad BFL ASIC screwed over his bitstream licensing plans.

Don't jump off the bridge mate ! There is still hope Cheesy

$500 is not really anything when you're a financially successful adult.

fixed that for you. age and maturity don't guarantee financial status.

edited for horrid, horrid spelling.

Pipesnake

legendary

Activity: 1012

Merit: 1000

Quote from: bulanula on June 16, 2012, 10:12:22 AM

Quote from: Paladin69 on June 16, 2012, 10:09:59 AM

Is this a thread to prove that anyone can BS a PRweb?

Yep. This elden tyrell guy got big game.

He spent $500 just for this. Could have used that to buy 3 Jalapeno coffee warmers for 10.5 GHash/s in the future presumably.

Guy must be mad BFL ASIC screwed over his bitstream licensing plans.

Don't jump off the bridge mate ! There is still hope Cheesy

$500 is not really anything when you're an adult.

Topic: Leading SHA256 Solution Provider Acquires Venture Capital Funding - page 2. (Read 6165 times)