Topic: Mining Equipment Manufacturers - page 10. (Read 55714 times)

Lol your the one acting like a @#$# posting in FCThaiChi's thread "correcting" him and frankly I read you to be the rude one.

Hey buddy.

When you want to RESPOND to a thread. Do it in the same thread.

Don't be rude and cross over threads. That is just impolite.

I am rarely impressed with a lack of courtesy.

If I have the time to RESPOND to your thread then I will, but with a simple PM you could have got my attention in a polite way. Rather than trying to provoke me unnecessarily. Just a lack of manners I guess on your part. I suggest you drop the attitude first off and then you might get a lucid response in a timely fashion. Hounding anyone like that is just bad form. I am always available to those who have an interest in learning more about our K1s given they treat me with a minimum level of decorum. You sir have not.

I'm not sure what it means, but as I wasn't getting a response from Bicknellski I thought I'd post the message exactly as you see it posted here in the Big Picture Mining thread.  He deleted my message.

He may not want people to see his numbers in my table, or maybe thinks my response puts him in a negative light.

Whatever the reason, I'm rarely impressed by a person deleting things they don't like.  Doesn't exactly lead to transparency.

Under the column "Your Chips" you have a "no"  This is correct already I think.

All components for manufacturers are included, and if they are not I try to get estimates on what they will be.

I read Yifu remark that 450 is the hard cap.  I think people will be running these around 350 like you say, but every manufacturer using Avalon chips is listed at 282, since that is the claimed number, and the agreed upon hashrate.  I would only have to change one number to update everyone, so it's not an issue of time.  I just want to have an even field.
That being said, I've thought for a long time that Avalon and the rest of the manufacturers were underselling their selves.  Are you saying that you are going to sell the miner overclocked, or that you assume that people will use it this way?

The prices of each miner are linked directly to the price of bitcoin at the top of the table.  At the moment I'm showing .50BTC Maybe what you are seeing is the BTC/GH column at .56  The bitcoin per miner column is not shown on the website.

BPMC

Chips included.
Heat Sink Included.
Given overclocking to 350 Mh/s pretty much given with current components. (Hardware component changes might improve this beyond 350+ Mh/s for our K1 models.
Price fluctuates from $49.99 USD set price against the MtGox price.

Current MtGox Price $99.34 / BTC or BTC 0.50 per K1 Unit.


Please revise your table accordingly.

Page for each company is up.  These will be updated with extras, like multiple pricing scenarios on many models.


Big Picture Mining added

50 bucks!  The website is here:

https://bigpicturemining.com/

Ok every column in every table has a new equation that makes it so I neither have to change any individual cell data, nor will I make a mistake doing so.  This naturally fixed a few errors.  I'm much happier at the current state.

Little Fury added.  They should have more for sale soon.

Tables for all companies on the list added, just putting up individual pages with links now.

Seems likely it will be 1 Million.  At just 8% difficulty hits 1M in February.  10% hits it just before the year is out.

You should Bitcoin bet on this.

A few rational scenarios and... we would be done. Average Hashrate from December 15 to december 22 (Christmas time and it is winter, colder, good for mining equipment).

I did couple calculations a month ago - somebody might find useful - predicted network speed over 1,000,000 Ghash/sec around September (it's more than 220,000 now).

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2452732

feel free to amend. Another interesting thread about ROI is from FCTaiChi.

Woouu,

whatever it means, you deserve it for being a rational voice in all the "Bitcoin mining is dead, because everyone is doing it so everyone will lose money forever!" herd-stampeding.

I think you're too pesimistic, though. I'd easily see 3.2PH by the end of the year. Keep growth up after that, assuming the herd for once is right, will be insanely expensive and only idiots with huge wallets and completely lacking functional brains will invest. There aren't that many of them available.

Keep in mind, a lot of the growth we're seeing now has been incoming for over a year. It's not like a couple of weeks of preorders will suddenly be delivered in a few days, and with the attitude now shifting towards 'this will not make money', the willingness to invest will decrease to where mining again becomes profitable, and we'll be back to where we are now.

It's a very nice balance, sometimes leaning one way, sometimes the other. Never will it lean continuously towards one direction over time.

.b

We've gone from ASICS of 130nm (ASICMiner) to 28nm (KnC/AMC) in less than a year. That is a 400% increase in efficiency. To keep that up, we'd need to reach ~6nm in 2014, which is at least 10 years ahead of us. I'm sure Intel would buy up anyone capable of going sub 14nm in an instant, as that's where they are planning to go.

Costs also increase exponentially. AM got up on just a few hundred thousand dollars, and their insane growth (~40x) is only barely able to keep up with Bitcoin price increases. As an investment opportunity, the cost, risks, and potential for Bitcoin price increase makes large scale investments less feasible.

Even in a perfect world, where we'd match Intel's current process of 20nm and used Bitfury's efficiency, we're nowhere near financially capable of maintaining a perpetual proportional growth. Of course, in Bitcoin, anything beyond three months ahead or behind is left for our grandparents or grandchildren, so I'm not really expecting anyone to be rational about this.

.b

Ok I changed the link for BitFury to the one you posted.  Also added the Oct. model.

Ok, rather than try to figure out what it will be I think I will show what people have requested and they can pick.  If the range is not large enough tell me why and most likely I'll be glad to accommodate.  I'm starting quite large though, please have a reason.

Did not add BitFury for the US one https://megabigpower.com/shop/index.php?route=common/home

I meant if there was no spike upward from ASICs at all, we would still see growth in the next couple years from FPGA.  At the current prices of ASICs we could have about 15% growth in the year and there would still be a return for those getting their miners ASAP.  Prices could go down considerably now that the startup costs have been paid.  There are some companies that sell miners like crazy even though they have negative ROI.  
Like you say, though, the deciding factor will be if there is profit to be made.  With current tech we could average up to 25% before the new chip designs are unprofitable.  A good part will depend on the companies.  Are there a couple groups nobody knows about working on a design that they will use for their selves?  Will all the companies currently using the first generation ASIC designs go to gen 2 or 3?  They will have to, to remain competitive.
I agree this won't be like the big spikes of the past.  But it will be a well maintained plateau.  There are a lot of companies heavily invested in bringing ASICs online.  Even if bitcoin tanks and they wont even make their return, they'll still be plugged in by someone, as long as the energy cost vs price and a possibility of future markets exist.

edit - I realized the first sentence is not fully stated, and runs into the next idea. 
I was comparing the rate of growth at the end of a cycle of technology still being fairly high, and that you would expect the new tech to have a significant impact.

If we give an over-optimistic figure of 1W per Gigahash/s, the break even of any ASiC -at current btc prices- cannot sustain such increases, free energy isn't scalable

Without ASICs, 8% constant increase from feb. 5th, gives 200TH in Jan. 2014.
At $100/btc GPU miners will stop mining, hashrate drops or stays at that level with more efficient FPGAs. Increase in 2014 - none, or few % up or down, depends on btc price, energy cost... Equilibri, says one forum member here.

When I talk about 'not that big impact' on the network I mean this:
- back when GPU era started, network total hashrate was 10GH, hashing speed of a decent GPU card 300MH. 33 GPU cards easily doubled network hashrate!

- start of ASIC era: network was at 20 000GH, for doubling that we needed 300 Avalons @66GH

At what price? (one GPU card ~$300, one Avalon $1500).

Continuing:
GPUs were accessible, and price in the range a new miner could afford.
ASICs? Preordering games, overpriced (only for big wallets), limited quantities (batches), not delivered...