Pages:
Author

Topic: Nanominer - Modular FPGA Mining Platform (Read 18923 times)

newbie
Activity: 34
Merit: 0
March 26, 2012, 11:43:44 PM
How easily would this scale up to something along the lines of this: http://www.xilinx.com/products/boards-and-kits/EK-V7-VC707-G.htm

Or its wicked big brother the XC7V2000T?
newbie
Activity: 59
Merit: 0
If you read more carefully you'd notice I have no intention of using a Cyclone V. What I said was, when the new series is released it will hopefully mean price improvements on the chips that are currently giving 200 MH/s.

Verifiable: That is to say, I'm not developing a particularly novel bitstream, it's widely understood and proven that with the chips available to us we can get 200 MH/s.  The parts for the rest of it are available to purchase now, and once decisions are made on feature sets I will post what those parts are.  Again, verifiable, already in existence, not some insane thing that I need to prove.  The rest is PCB design, programming, and construction, all of which I am quite capable of doing.

Feel free to preface your comments by saying you didn't read carefully if you didn't.
legendary
Activity: 1270
Merit: 1000
just verifiable numbers and efficient design.
Where are they? For spartan 6 there are ztex,icarus and the X6500 and for the cycloneV no datasheet, prices nor chips you can buy.

But stop, there was something,

Quote
4cm x 4cm x 3cm

very funny, but exact, verifyable numbers Cheesy
newbie
Activity: 59
Merit: 0
We're going dedicated. And reasonable, no more pies in the sky, just verifiable numbers and efficient design.
It all continues here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/nanominer-announcement-68352
legendary
Activity: 1029
Merit: 1000
February 23, 2012, 05:31:47 PM
Everything depends on hardware. If you buy some old dev kit with ancient chips then forget about mining. New hardware=possibility of high MH/s. But propably very pricey...
FPGAs on widely avaible dev kits have big disadvantage, price. There is just to many things on board thats are not needed. And mostly VRM's  on that boards are not good enough to deliver required amount of power.
member
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
February 23, 2012, 04:31:23 PM
so nanominer will work on an FPGA hardware?  lets say i stumble on a dev kit at a great price, but its not one used before for bitcoin, would there be any required optimization, or special steps needed?
legendary
Activity: 1029
Merit: 1000
February 23, 2012, 04:20:16 PM
...
@wondermine

can you tell us when we can expect an working fpga miner to buy ?

Never?
He only promised to deliver an IP core. Not a hardware.
IP= Intelectual Property.

Move along....
legendary
Activity: 966
Merit: 1000
February 23, 2012, 03:40:36 PM
@inspector

can you inform us when you get the miner ?


@wondermine

can you tell us when we can expect an working fpga miner to buy ?

greetings
pazor
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
February 23, 2012, 11:03:55 AM
The least expensive Stratix IV kit seems to be Terasic's DE4, which retails for $2,995
Currently wondermine gets 800 MH/s on it (but obviously, future improvements in hash rate are a distinct possibility).
But right now, that's about $3.75 per MH/s.  Sad

BFL Single: $600 for 800 MH/s, which is about $0.75 per MH/s.

I guess, I'll take the BFL Single (in fact, I just ordered four more of them this morning).  Grin
newbie
Activity: 59
Merit: 0
February 23, 2012, 03:09:39 AM
In your first post you claim "I have a modified core running on a Stratix IV at 3.6GH/s"

I do not ask for anything more than that. Is this part true ?

How much would it cost me to have your software that run on it ?

You can find your answer by reading through the posts or re-checking the first post, or my site.  The FPGA currently is running at 800MH/s verified.
As far as it costing you, the software is free, and like I've said, I'll be publishing it after crunch time is over at school.  Donations, however, are always welcome.


Not related to BTC mining, but I have about 12 Arduinae among other microcontroller dev boards (PIC, ARM) here or in my lab.
They're great boards, they will not, like the man says, generate BTC though.  If you have a specific question feel free to email me; this thread should probably be kept to BTC talk.

Still doing exams, thought I'd pop my head up. Smiley
rph
full member
Activity: 176
Merit: 100
February 22, 2012, 02:25:49 PM
Rather, I think the 5ns clock cycle is due to two sequential 32 bit additions, implemented with ripple carries.  Angry

In Spartan6, the ternary addition uses only ~2ns. The routing delays - and ISE's inability to
consistently minimize them - are a bigger problem.

-rph
hero member
Activity: 1596
Merit: 502
February 22, 2012, 06:53:37 AM
What do you want to know about it?
It's not a FPGA and if it is possible to mine on it, it would be very slow and no networksupport on it.
Maybe a normal pc can mine faster in just the time it takes to talk to this thing.
donator
Activity: 1731
Merit: 1008
February 21, 2012, 08:55:34 PM
In your first post you claim "I have a modified core running on a Stratix IV at 3.6GH/s"

I do not ask for anything more than that. Is this part true ?

How much would it cost me to have your software that run on it ?
member
Activity: 70
Merit: 10
February 21, 2012, 02:52:10 PM
Quote from: wondermine
Regarding whether this project is official or has a greenlight: Simply put, nope.

Thanks for the update and good luck on exams. I'm just a curious bystander to all that is BTC. I find the FPGA solution to be the most interesting part. I think you know that the BTC world has tons of frauds and many on these forums. So the questions are partly a legit-test too.

FPGA combined with free energy sources will dominate the mining world. I'm sure someone's working on a mining asic and they may be able to go faster and use less power but the price will be high.
newbie
Activity: 59
Merit: 0
February 18, 2012, 10:50:31 PM
Sorry for the delays in update, it's exam time and I'm pretty busy.
To answer a few questions:

Regarding "reinventing the wheel": I'm all for working from what there is, but I'm doing this project partially as a way to augment my understanding of circuit design, HDL design, cryptography/analysis, and mathematics.  I will build my own IP for things if I deem it educational.  Will that slow things down? Sometimes. Will that also potentially improve the final product? Possibly. I'm not doing this project because it's so lucrative... it's not.  It's educational.

Regarding when you can see the code: I'll be uploading it I have in entirety to my website once I'm finished exams, it just needs to be commented and some translated into VHDL from Verilog.

Regarding whether this project is official or has a greenlight: Simply put, nope.  This is entirely of my own volition, all funding is from donations, and the time is what I can spare when I'm not designing vehicle and robotics control systems, doing homework, or attempting to have a social life.

Another comment I'd like to make regarding the design of Nanominer:  This project will be the best I/we can make it; however I know there are a lot of people working on FPGA mining technology, and I may well not have the technical edge; I certainly don't have the time/funding.  My hope is, despite the possible disadvantages, is to have it be fully open-source and extremely well documented, I'd love to make something that any of you can download and modify to your liking or improve upon with ease, Bitcoin is a great platform on which to learn a lot of topics.  The "edge" I hope for in this project is a mathematical one, which may be a pipe dream, or never work, and I won't let it get in the way of Nanominer being what we want it to, but I will put time into mathematical research, even if it seems like a dead end to people.

If you're looking for a good, solid community project you can help work on and improve, with someone at the head who's willing to learn and improve, this is for you.  I'm not here to make money, I'm here to learn.  If that bothers you, there are a lot of other projects for FPGA who are interested in profits.

I'll keep you all posted, and I'll let you know when exams are finished, that should give me a decent amount of time to get things going.

member
Activity: 70
Merit: 10
February 17, 2012, 08:30:36 PM
Does this project have a greenlight? Is this a college project too? How much funding do you have so far?
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
February 16, 2012, 02:47:44 AM
5 ns, that is a delay straight from the 70s. A TTL technology-like delay. Certainly we can do better than that?!?

FPGA fabric frequencies have been stuck around 200-300MHz for 10+ years
because, while the LUTs are still getting (slightly) faster, the wires between them aren't.

So you have to go wider instead of faster.

-rph


As far as I understand, long wires don't come into the picture much when you enter a counter-pattern on the left, let it percolate through 128 stages and then wind up with a yes/no value on the right. Rather, I think the 5ns clock cycle is due to two sequential 32 bit additions, implemented with ripple carries.  Angry
The irony is that FPGAs have hardware multipliers (in the DSP blocks), but few or no hardware adders. (I think there is an adder in each DSP block also, feeding into the multiplier, but there are not enough of them.)
rph
full member
Activity: 176
Merit: 100
February 16, 2012, 02:03:08 AM
5 ns, that is a delay straight from the 70s. A TTL technology-like delay. Certainly we can do better than that?!?

FPGA fabric frequencies have been stuck around 200-300MHz for 10+ years
because, while the LUTs are still getting (slightly) faster, the wires between them aren't.

So you have to go wider instead of faster.

-rph
member
Activity: 70
Merit: 10
February 16, 2012, 12:36:27 AM
Quote from: lame.duck
This are not the tools required to generate FPGA bitstreams. This ist a (as far i see) an IDE to develop Software for Soft and hard-cores.

I misread the offering, I thought they had a free version and a commercial version but you have to go through sales to get the SDK.
And it's not clear what they offer in the SDK. I got to that site from another site that made it sound like something different.
Pages:
Jump to: