Pages:
Author

Topic: The best selling FPGA board (Read 10331 times)

legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1000
I owe my soul to the Bitcoin code...
May 03, 2012, 07:49:46 PM
#97
Aren't you guys worried about never paying off your wonderfully efficient FPGAs due to Largecoin/ ASICs?

Why would that happen? FPGAs are well within profitable operating range. Even at high electricity prices, the operating expense is just like 10% of the mining income. So unless the difficulty explodes by a factor of ten, this would just delay the payoff.

In order to double difficulty you'd have to invest like $15M into largecoin units. In order to make FPGAs unprofitable you'd have to invest like $150M, and your own payoff would take ages as well, even assuming you control 90% of BTC production (at the current exchange rates, and if those increase you'd have to invest even more to kick the FPGAs out) that would take like 15 years, not counting interest rates.

FPGAs are certainly a threat to GPUs these days, but ASICs aren't one to FPGAs because of the similarly high investment cost (which becomes the dominating factor instead of operating expense, as for the GPUs).

Thank you, I'm now planning to buy some FPGAs. Just not sure which one. I don't want to wait forever and end up paying high duty fees here in Europe for those coming from USA. Aren't their european/chinese alternatives? Anyway, will read some more.

Yeah, ztex.  I think they are in Germany.
legendary
Activity: 1526
Merit: 1001
May 03, 2012, 07:13:16 PM
#96
Aren't you guys worried about never paying off your wonderfully efficient FPGAs due to Largecoin/ ASICs?

Why would that happen? FPGAs are well within profitable operating range. Even at high electricity prices, the operating expense is just like 10% of the mining income. So unless the difficulty explodes by a factor of ten, this would just delay the payoff.

In order to double difficulty you'd have to invest like $15M into largecoin units. In order to make FPGAs unprofitable you'd have to invest like $150M, and your own payoff would take ages as well, even assuming you control 90% of BTC production (at the current exchange rates, and if those increase you'd have to invest even more to kick the FPGAs out) that would take like 15 years, not counting interest rates.

FPGAs are certainly a threat to GPUs these days, but ASICs aren't one to FPGAs because of the similarly high investment cost (which becomes the dominating factor instead of operating expense, as for the GPUs).

Thank you, I'm now planning to buy some FPGAs. Just not sure which one. I don't want to wait forever and end up paying high duty fees here in Europe for those coming from USA. Aren't their european/chinese alternatives? Anyway, will read some more.
hero member
Activity: 504
Merit: 500
FPGA Mining LLC
May 03, 2012, 05:38:16 PM
#95
Aren't you guys worried about never paying off your wonderfully efficient FPGAs due to Largecoin/ ASICs?

Why would that happen? FPGAs are well within profitable operating range. Even at high electricity prices, the operating expense is just like 10% of the mining income. So unless the difficulty explodes by a factor of ten, this would just delay the payoff.

In order to double difficulty you'd have to invest like $15M into largecoin units. In order to make FPGAs unprofitable you'd have to invest like $150M, and your own payoff would take ages as well, even assuming you control 90% of BTC production (at the current exchange rates, and if those increase you'd have to invest even more to kick the FPGAs out) that would take like 15 years, not counting interest rates.

FPGAs are certainly a threat to GPUs these days, but ASICs aren't one to FPGAs because of the similarly high investment cost (which becomes the dominating factor instead of operating expense, as for the GPUs).
legendary
Activity: 1526
Merit: 1001
May 03, 2012, 05:17:22 PM
#94
Aren't you guys worried about never paying off your wonderfully efficient FPGAs due to Largecoin/ ASICs?
hero member
Activity: 504
Merit: 500
FPGA Mining LLC
May 03, 2012, 01:13:35 PM
#93
Did anybody ever calculate the estimated hashing power coming from (known) FPGAs sold compared to the total network hashing power?

It would be very interesting to see where we are right now. And of course, it will be a guess at best, nothing accurate. If not, I may just do that on a slow day (which is rare these days).


We don't have exact numbers how many FPGAs are in the wild, but I'd estimate that around 5% of the network hashrate are coming from FPGAs these days.
hero member
Activity: 489
Merit: 500
Immersionist
May 02, 2012, 08:48:55 PM
#92
Did anybody ever calculate the estimated hashing power coming from (known) FPGAs sold compared to the total network hashing power?

It would be very interesting to see where we are right now. And of course, it will be a guess at best, nothing accurate. If not, I may just do that on a slow day (which is rare these days).
legendary
Activity: 3878
Merit: 1193
May 02, 2012, 08:20:06 PM
#91
hmmmmmmmmmmm... I got about 5 grand I am looking to invest in FPGA.  I think this just sold me.  BFL it is.  I will wait the 2 months.  And I disagree that a BFL is 900 dollars since you could make 300 bucks while you wait.  That is just stupid math lmfao

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/cairnsmore1-quad-xc6slx150-board-78239

Add this one to the list. With the introductory pricing it looks amazing and will probably sell quite a few units very fast. They don't seem to have the production issues BFL is plagued with.
sr. member
Activity: 242
Merit: 251
May 02, 2012, 06:45:13 AM
#90
The first post is about numbers of shipped units, not ordered ones. There are people that ordered a single back in february/march and still haven't received them. I do agree though, the first post needs some updating. Ztex recently launched a quad Spartan board and his figures (and x6500's) may need some adjusting. If anyone can give some updates on these figures it would help...
newbie
Activity: 20
Merit: 0
May 01, 2012, 08:25:01 PM
#89
It looked like the first post was a little out of date with regard to BFL Single. Here's a G+ "blog" post about it by me:

https://plus.google.com/u/0/108313527900507320366/posts/2ztAhLnXQKm
sr. member
Activity: 447
Merit: 250
April 06, 2012, 12:54:50 AM
#88
x6500 is king Cheesy
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1003
April 05, 2012, 09:11:27 PM
#87
Hum, why no warranty period is mentioned? Added below.



hmmmmmmmmmmm... I got about 5 grand I am looking to invest in FPGA.  I think this just sold me.  BFL it is.  I will wait the 2 months.  And I disagree that a BFL is 900 dollars since you could make 300 bucks while you wait.  That is just stupid math lmfao

I got fed up of waiting for a BFL so cancelled my order for something else.  Also a BFL would take over eight months to pay for its sell at today's difficulty and exchange rate and the warranty is only six months plus none have been running out in the wild for seven months yet.  BFL may just being doing such a short warranty as they don't expect being able to replace the model for another of the same model or they may be worried of a short life for their boards due to the chips burning out?
member
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
FPGA convert
April 05, 2012, 09:01:42 PM
#86
Hum, why no warranty period is mentioned? Added below.



BFL Single:
  • Excellent price/performance ratio for an FPGA board
  • Temperature sensors
  • Shipped from USA
  • Warranty period: 6 months
  • Very high power consumption and heat dissipation for an FPGA board
  • High lead times
  • Very odd communication protocol, causes quite some inefficiencies
  • Completely unusable with P2Pool (>50% stales)
  • Overheats really easily
  • Not stackable

Icarus:
  • Lots of expansion headers and I/Os routed, thus extensible, and possibly usable for other FPGA projects
  • Probably the most heat robust board
  • Stackable
  • Shipped from China
  • Warranty period: None
  • Uses speed grade 2 FPGA, thus ~20-30MH/s less than the other Spartan6 boards
  • No heatsink mounting holes
  • No temperature sensors
  • Discontinued

X6500 Rev. 3:
  • Spartan 6 Speed grade 3 FPGA
  • Molex power connector (additionally to barrel connector)
  • Standard 3pin molex fan headers
  • Heatsink mounting holes
  • Temperature sensors
  • Fresh batch currently shipping (available at Cablesaurus)
  • Can be cooled by big fans from the side (low noise level)
  • Stackable
  • Shipped from USA
  • Warranty period: None
  • Relatively high miner software CPU load due to interface design issues, will be fixed in future revisions

ZTEX:
  • Spartan 6 Speed grade 3 FPGA
  • Standard 3pin molex fan headers
  • Low lead times
  • Heatsink mounting holes
  • Stackable
  • Warranty period: 2 years
  • Shipped from Germany
  • Only a single FPGA, thus relatively high price, especially at low quantities
  • Relatively high miner software CPU load due to interface design issues
  • No temperature sensors



hmmmmmmmmmmm... I got about 5 grand I am looking to invest in FPGA.  I think this just sold me.  BFL it is.  I will wait the 2 months.  And I disagree that a BFL is 900 dollars since you could make 300 bucks while you wait.  That is just stupid math lmfao
hero member
Activity: 489
Merit: 500
Immersionist
March 30, 2012, 11:28:52 PM
#85
My guess for Lancelot

Here is what I gathered from ngzhang's posts:

- Lancelot is a motherboard
- Has a temperature sensor
- Updatable without JTAG/dev cable
  (my guess is USB or whatever it uses to connect to a host)
- Supports CAN or RS485 specification for chaining
- Uses FTDI UART chip
- MCU friendly config port (?? USB > MCU?)
- Will be designed from ground up for Bitcoin mining
  (Icarus was/is a development board)

My own imagination tells me:

- The motherboard itself doesn't have any FPGA chips
- The motherboards uses standard ATX PSU connectors
- The motherboard supports X daughterboards, which have the FPGA's on them
- The daughterboards may have multiple FPGAs on them
- The daughterboards either support stock CPU coolers and/or
  they are arranged in a way that they can be cooled passively

I am not exactly sure what having an FTDI UART chip on board will allow them to do. Is this just for chaining or also for communicating with the host? Does the FTDI UART chip take care of USB communication or is this usually handled by the USB MCU? Would FTDI UART allow using an ethernet interface to connect to the host?
c_k
donator
Activity: 242
Merit: 100
March 30, 2012, 09:08:54 PM
#84
I wonder what Lancelot is
hero member
Activity: 714
Merit: 500
Psi laju, karavani prolaze.
March 30, 2012, 11:03:23 AM
#83
Hum, why no warranty period is mentioned? Added below.



BFL Single:
  • Excellent price/performance ratio for an FPGA board
  • Temperature sensors
  • Shipped from USA
  • Warranty period: 6 months
  • Very high power consumption and heat dissipation for an FPGA board
  • High lead times
  • Very odd communication protocol, causes quite some inefficiencies
  • Completely unusable with P2Pool (>50% stales)
  • Overheats really easily
  • Not stackable

Icarus:
  • Lots of expansion headers and I/Os routed, thus extensible, and possibly usable for other FPGA projects
  • Probably the most heat robust board
  • Stackable
  • Shipped from China
  • Warranty period: None
  • Uses speed grade 2 FPGA, thus ~20-30MH/s less than the other Spartan6 boards
  • No heatsink mounting holes
  • No temperature sensors
  • Discontinued

X6500 Rev. 3:
  • Spartan 6 Speed grade 3 FPGA
  • Molex power connector (additionally to barrel connector)
  • Standard 3pin molex fan headers
  • Heatsink mounting holes
  • Temperature sensors
  • Fresh batch currently shipping (available at Cablesaurus)
  • Can be cooled by big fans from the side (low noise level)
  • Stackable
  • Shipped from USA
  • Warranty period: None
  • Relatively high miner software CPU load due to interface design issues, will be fixed in future revisions

ZTEX:
  • Spartan 6 Speed grade 3 FPGA
  • Standard 3pin molex fan headers
  • Low lead times
  • Heatsink mounting holes
  • Stackable
  • Warranty period: 2 years
  • Shipped from Germany
  • Only a single FPGA, thus relatively high price, especially at low quantities
  • Relatively high miner software CPU load due to interface design issues
  • No temperature sensors
hero member
Activity: 504
Merit: 500
FPGA Mining LLC
March 24, 2012, 06:30:40 AM
#82
I think that was at the wall, including PSU losses, extra fans, ... and probably measured with an inaccurate killawatt. The 16.4W is measured on the 12V rail, directly at the board, using accurate DMMs
rjk
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
1ngldh
March 23, 2012, 09:16:50 PM
#81
The only other thing I can think of is that Ztex seems to have far lower power use than any of the others. Isn't it like 8 watts for a single chip at 200Mhash? If you double that for 2 chips that makes 16 watts, which is still lower than x6500 iirc.

Well yeah, half the power for half the hashes...

fizzisist beat me to posting the x6500 numbers, but the ztex is told to be 9.4W for 190-230MH/s.

So there isn't really all that much difference among the FPGA boards in general, except for BFL  Roll Eyes
OK, I thought last time I looked that x6500 was closer to 25 watts. I was not correct obviously.
hero member
Activity: 504
Merit: 500
FPGA Mining LLC
March 23, 2012, 02:16:17 PM
#80
The only other thing I can think of is that Ztex seems to have far lower power use than any of the others. Isn't it like 8 watts for a single chip at 200Mhash? If you double that for 2 chips that makes 16 watts, which is still lower than x6500 iirc.

Well yeah, half the power for half the hashes...

fizzisist beat me to posting the x6500 numbers, but the ztex is told to be 9.4W for 190-230MH/s.

So there isn't really all that much difference among the FPGA boards in general, except for BFL  Roll Eyes
hero member
Activity: 720
Merit: 525
March 23, 2012, 02:09:39 PM
#79
Actually I asked several people if they could name any more cons, because I feared exactly this would happen. They couldn't come up with any either.
Hm, now that I think of it, "not supported by cgminer" might be another one...

Can you name some more cons? I'd very happily listen to that. Everyone learns from their mistakes, and the JTAG-based protocol definitely was one.
Some of the cons that I listed for the other boards were present on the x6500 rev. 2 as well, but have been fixed in rev. 3.

I'd really appreciate it if some more experts on this area (whether affiliated with one of the board vendors or not) could chime in and make a better (and neutral) comparison chart. This whould probably be taken to some wiki (http://wiki.btcfpga.com/?) though.
The only other thing I can think of is that Ztex seems to have far lower power use than any of the others. Isn't it like 8 watts for a single chip at 200Mhash? If you double that for 2 chips that makes 16 watts, which is still lower than x6500 iirc.

Actually, we have some power measurements here (albeit on just one board right now, so the sample size is pretty small): http://fpgamining.com/documentation/hardware/power-measurements

Turns out we're in the same ballpark: 16.4 W at 400 MH/s.
legendary
Activity: 1795
Merit: 1198
This is not OK.
March 23, 2012, 01:17:00 PM
#78
We are very happy to see that based on FPGA mining LLCs research,
it turns out that their products is the best that there is on the market Smiley


Good Luck,
Pages:
Jump to: