Topic: Mining Equipment Manufacturers - page 19. (Read 55712 times)

Quote from: jimmy3dita on June 10, 2013, 08:08:48 AM

Confused about KNCMiner numbers though. It offers less GH/$ than MetaBank, and delivers later, but for some reason the ROI is like 5x higher? Maybe it's explained in the 8 pages that I don't want to read, if so, I apologize.

KnC may be offering less in Gh/$, but is promising much more of those Gh (350,000)!
And that's what counts in this race - more Gh in the start (first months) means early 'break even' and better ROI.

Sorry, but that post doesn't make any sense. It isnt total hash rate that determines break even, but a mix of cost per hash rate, date released, and power cost and looking at those, bitfury should do better. It is true that the to ROI is in bitcoins (which is s little strange, you should change it to percent of origional investment) which would naturally benefit larger products, but bitfury still shouldnt be negative.

Made sense to me. The more hashing power you have while the difficulty is low the better your machine will do. The problem is that I had the power cost from the old FPGA still on there.
So yeah, you're right they shouldn't have had a negative, it was just an extremely high power cost. I wasn't able to find the power cost estimate on the new machine so I foolishly forgot to change the stats I had. At the moment I have it listed as a 500w machine, but it could be even less with these chips.

Thanks for keeping me on track again guys

Power consumption is 0.7W per Gh/s

Wow, 170w machine that can do 120GH?

skat23

member

Activity: 83

Merit: 10

Your work is anyway awesome, and very helpful for all of those that "rush for the hash" thinking that bitcoinx is enough.

One question: when you compute the yearly ROI, the 12months are being calculated "from today" or today+delivery(*diff percentage increase)*12 months?

In other words: when I read that the Saturn will make 300ish BTC in 12 months, the analyzed period is today+12 or october+12?

Thanks

After a quick view of the formulas of spreadsheet I think october+12!

P.S. ciao jimmy! Wink

jimmy3dita

hero member

Activity: 588

Merit: 500

Your work is anyway awesome, and very helpful for all of those that "rush for the hash" thinking that bitcoinx is enough.

One question: when you compute the yearly ROI, the 12months are being calculated "from today" or today+delivery(*diff percentage increase)*12 months?

In other words: when I read that the Saturn will make 300ish BTC in 12 months, the analyzed period is today+12 or october+12?

Thanks

ujka

hero member

Activity: 630

Merit: 500

Quote from: FCTaiChi on June 10, 2013, 07:56:44 AM

Confused about KNCMiner numbers though. It offers less GH/$ than MetaBank, and delivers later, but for some reason the ROI is like 5x higher? Maybe it's explained in the 8 pages that I don't want to read, if so, I apologize.

KnC may be offering less in Gh/$, but is promising much more of those Gh (350,000)!
And that's what counts in this race - more Gh in the start (first months) means early 'break even' and better ROI.

Sorry, but that post doesn't make any sense. It isnt total hash rate that determines break even, but a mix of cost per hash rate, date released, and power cost and looking at those, bitfury should do better. It is true that the to ROI is in bitcoins (which is s little strange, you should change it to percent of origional investment) which would naturally benefit larger products, but bitfury still shouldnt be negative.

You're right.
I re-checked calculation in https://bitclockers.com/calc, with monthly diff change of 22% (that is 9% on each retarget) and Metabank 120Gh earns about 300 btc first year, if lead time is september.
Retargeting at 18% (46 per month) gives 110 btc.
Retargeting at 21% (55 per month) gives 87 btc.

Mabsark

legendary

Activity: 826

Merit: 1004

Confused about KNCMiner numbers though. It offers less GH/$ than MetaBank, and delivers later, but for some reason the ROI is like 5x higher? Maybe it's explained in the 8 pages that I don't want to read, if so, I apologize.

KnC may be offering less in Gh/$, but is promising much more of those Gh (350,000)!
And that's what counts in this race - more Gh in the start (first months) means early 'break even' and better ROI.

Sorry, but that post doesn't make any sense. It isnt total hash rate that determines break even, but a mix of cost per hash rate, date released, and power cost and looking at those, bitfury should do better. It is true that the to ROI is in bitcoins (which is s little strange, you should change it to percent of origional investment) which would naturally benefit larger products, but bitfury still shouldnt be negative.

Made sense to me. The more hashing power you have while the difficulty is low the better your machine will do. The problem is that I had the power cost from the old FPGA still on there.
So yeah, you're right they shouldn't have had a negative, it was just an extremely high power cost. I wasn't able to find the power cost estimate on the new machine so I foolishly forgot to change the stats I had. At the moment I have it listed as a 500w machine, but it could be even less with these chips.

Thanks for keeping me on track again guys

Power consumption is 0.7W per Gh/s

FCTaiChi

sr. member

Activity: 308

Merit: 250

decentralizedhashing.com

Confused about KNCMiner numbers though. It offers less GH/$ than MetaBank, and delivers later, but for some reason the ROI is like 5x higher? Maybe it's explained in the 8 pages that I don't want to read, if so, I apologize.

KnC may be offering less in Gh/$, but is promising much more of those Gh (350,000)!
And that's what counts in this race - more Gh in the start (first months) means early 'break even' and better ROI.

Sorry, but that post doesn't make any sense. It isnt total hash rate that determines break even, but a mix of cost per hash rate, date released, and power cost and looking at those, bitfury should do better. It is true that the to ROI is in bitcoins (which is s little strange, you should change it to percent of origional investment) which would naturally benefit larger products, but bitfury still shouldnt be negative.

Made sense to me. The more hashing power you have while the difficulty is low the better your machine will do. The problem is that I had the power cost from the old FPGA still on there.
So yeah, you're right they shouldn't have had a negative, it was just an extremely high power cost. I wasn't able to find the power cost estimate on the new machine so I foolishly forgot to change the stats I had. At the moment I have it listed as a 500w machine, but it could be even less with these chips.

Thanks for keeping me on track again guys

ashaw596

full member

Activity: 141

Merit: 100

Confused about KNCMiner numbers though. It offers less GH/$ than MetaBank, and delivers later, but for some reason the ROI is like 5x higher? Maybe it's explained in the 8 pages that I don't want to read, if so, I apologize.

KnC may be offering less in Gh/$, but is promising much more of those Gh (350,000)!
And that's what counts in this race - more Gh in the start (first months) means early 'break even' and better ROI.

Sorry, but that post doesn't make any sense. It isnt total hash rate that determines break even, but a mix of cost per hash rate, date released, and power cost and looking at those, bitfury should do better. It is true that the to ROI is in bitcoins (which is s little strange, you should change it to percent of origional investment) which would naturally benefit larger products, but bitfury still shouldnt be negative.

ujka

hero member

Activity: 630

Merit: 500