Ultra-Low-Cost DIY FPGA Miner - 175MH/s @ $1/MH - page 4.

TheSeven

hero member

Activity: 504

Merit: 500

FPGA Mining LLC

Quote from: Geir on January 18, 2012, 04:15:51 PM

I now have an FPGA up and running Cheesy

Is there a good miner client out there supporting usb Blaster and long polling. I cant find the one from TheSeven

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/23683845/mpbm-0.0.3.zip
But it doesn't support anything except for a trivial RS232 protocol out of the box, you'll have to implement a worker module (using the RS232 one as an example).
If this is related to rph's design, he might have a fitting worker module already.

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: cuz0882 on January 18, 2012, 07:42:48 PM

Quote from: tinman951 on January 15, 2012, 11:22:32 PM

DeepBit: Where are you that you can get $0.03-$0.06 per KwH of electricity?

I pay .0202 a watt in WA state.

Sure you do.

cuz0882

sr. member

Activity: 392

Merit: 250

Quote from: tinman951 on January 15, 2012, 11:22:32 PM

DeepBit: Where are you that you can get $0.03-$0.06 per KwH of electricity?

I pay .0202 a watt in WA state.

sadpandatech

hero member

Activity: 504

Merit: 500

Quote from: Geir on January 18, 2012, 04:15:51 PM

TheSeven

That's a crew I have not seen spoken of in a longgggg time......

Geir

full member

Activity: 546

Merit: 100

I now have an FPGA up and running Cheesy

Is there a good miner client out there supporting usb Blaster and long polling. I cant find the one from TheSeven

rph

full member

Activity: 176

Merit: 100

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on January 16, 2012, 01:00:35 AM

Please explain how if someone added 100 GH/s of new GPU hashing power difficulty would go down and you would profit more?

OK, that was rather poorly worded. Tongue

I'm saying that if the MH/s are going to be added either way - I would rather have
them be GPU powered instead of FPGA powered, because they'll shut down sooner as difficulty rises.

-rph

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: rph on January 16, 2012, 12:58:18 AM

I hope that people continue to build large GPU rigs in low-power-cost areas - means lower difficulty and easier bitcoins for my
FPGAs.

Please explain how if someone added 100 GH/s of new GPU hashing power difficulty would go down and you would profit more?

rph

full member

Activity: 176

Merit: 100

I hope that people continue to build large GPU rigs in low-power-cost areas - means lower difficulty and easier bitcoins for my
FPGAs. But sooner or later I think there are going to be enough FPGAs in low-power-cost areas to completely wipe out the GPUs.

-rph

DeepBit

donator

Activity: 532

Merit: 501

We have cookies

Quote from: tinman951 on January 15, 2012, 11:22:32 PM

DeepBit: Where are you that you can get $0.03-$0.06 per KwH of electricity?

$0.03 was the 2011 price in Khakasia region and Abakan city, most power there is hydroelectric: http://energyfuture.ru/tarify-na-elektroenergiyu-na-2011-god-xakasiya-abakan
(That's for single-tariff meters. With two-tariff meters it's $0.01 at night)

~$0.06 is the average price for 1 kW*h in flats with electric cooking ovens installed and multi-tariff electric meters in Moscow, Russia.
Currently I'm not there, but I know the rates.

Also, I'm sure that there are regions with even cheaper power. And power can be "free" if you can steal it, which is popular is some places.

tinman951

full member

Activity: 149

Merit: 100

DeepBit: Where are you that you can get $0.03-$0.06 per KwH of electricity?

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: DeepBit on January 15, 2012, 09:29:39 PM

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on January 15, 2012, 09:14:37 PM

Quote from: DeepBit on January 15, 2012, 08:36:29 PM

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on January 15, 2012, 12:19:18 PM

Quote from: cuz0882 on January 15, 2012, 01:12:16 AM

Power costs are only at 5% mining on a gpu right now

FAIL. (and BTW i have >10GH/s of GPU and 0 GH/s of FPGA right now)

It's almost not fail. Power cost is less than $0.06 in Russia, down to $0.03 in some other cities/countries with cheap power, so there is still room for effective GPU generation, especially with good USD/BTC rate, even without "stealing" power.
(Fun fact: power cost directly at russian hydroelectric plants is somewhere near $0.0024 per kW*h, but it's hard to get for private buyers)

Well even at $0.03 which is a minority of users power is STILL more than 5%.

Take 5970. $300 capital cost
250W over 3 years = 250/1000 *24 * 365 * 3 = 6570 kWh
@ $0.03 per kWh = $197.10
Thus even @ 3 cents per kWh and an efficient card electricity is more like 40%.

Under any more "normal" scenario (less efficient card and higher electrical rate) electricity makes up a greater %.

Why calculate power cost as part of the device ?
Let's try other way:
5970 is generating somewhere near 0.52+ BTC daily, ~16 BTC per month, which is $111.5
If it's eating 250W, then it's 183 kW*h per month, $5.49 at 0.03 or $10.98 at 0.06
So it's 4.9% to 9.8% of income, exactly like he said.

Where is my mistake ?

No you are right. I was thinking of electricity is x% of MINING COSTS. You are thinking of electricity is x% of revenue.

A more generalized formula would be:
d = current difficulty (in millions)
r = electrical rate (USD per kWh)
b = block reward amount (in BTC)
e = efficiency (in MH/W)
x = exchange rate (USD:BTC)

megahashes per block = d*(2^32)
megahashes per BTC = d*(2^32)/b
kwh per BTC = (d/(b*e*60*60*1000)*(2^32)
electrical cost (USD) per BTC = (d*r)/(b*e)*(2^32) / (60*60*1000)
electrical cost (USD) per BTC = (d*r)/(1193*b*e)

electrical cost (USD) per BTC = (d*r)/(1193*b*e)
electrical cost (USD) per BTC = (1.25*0.03)(1193*50*2.5)
electrical cost (USD) per BTC = $0.34

$0.34 / $6.95 = ~5%

DeepBit

donator

Activity: 532

Merit: 501

We have cookies

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on January 15, 2012, 09:14:37 PM

Quote from: DeepBit on January 15, 2012, 08:36:29 PM

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on January 15, 2012, 12:19:18 PM

Quote from: cuz0882 on January 15, 2012, 01:12:16 AM

Power costs are only at 5% mining on a gpu right now

FAIL. (and BTW i have >10GH/s of GPU and 0 GH/s of FPGA right now)

It's almost not fail. Power cost is less than $0.06 in Russia, down to $0.03 in some other cities/countries with cheap power, so there is still room for effective GPU generation, especially with good USD/BTC rate, even without "stealing" power.
(Fun fact: power cost directly at russian hydroelectric plants is somewhere near $0.0024 per kW*h, but it's hard to get for private buyers)

Well even at $0.03 which is a minority of users power is STILL more than 5%.

Take 5970. $300 capital cost
250W over 3 years = 250/1000 *24 * 365 * 3 = 6570 kWh
@ $0.03 per kWh = $197.10
Thus even @ 3 cents per kWh and an efficient card electricity is more like 40%.

Under any more "normal" scenario (less efficient card and higher electrical rate) electricity makes up a greater %.

Why calculate power cost as part of the device ?
Let's try other way:
5970 is generating somewhere near 0.52+ BTC daily, ~16 BTC per month, which is $111.5
If it's eating 250W, then it's 183 kW*h per month, $5.49 at 0.03 or $10.98 at 0.06
So it's 4.9% to 9.8% of income, exactly like he said.

Where is my mistake ?

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: DeepBit on January 15, 2012, 08:36:29 PM

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on January 15, 2012, 12:19:18 PM

Quote from: cuz0882 on January 15, 2012, 01:12:16 AM

Power costs are only at 5% mining on a gpu right now

FAIL. (and BTW i have >10GH/s of GPU and 0 GH/s of FPGA right now)

It's almost not fail. Power cost is less than $0.06 in Russia, down to $0.03 in some other cities/countries with cheap power, so there is still room for effective GPU generation, especially with good USD/BTC rate, even without "stealing" power.

(Fun fact: power cost directly at russian hydroelectric plants is somewhere near $0.0024 per kW*h, but it's hard to get for private buyers)

Well even at $0.03 which is a minority of users power is STILL more than 5%.

Take 5970. $300 capital cost
250W over 3 years = 250/1000 *24 * 365 * 3 = 6570 kWh
@ $0.03 per kWh = $197.10
Thus even @ 3 cents per kWh and an efficient card electricity is more like 40%.

Under any more "normal" scenario (less efficient card and higher electrical rate) electricity makes up a greater %.

DeepBit

donator

Activity: 532

Merit: 501

We have cookies

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on January 15, 2012, 12:19:18 PM

Quote from: cuz0882 on January 15, 2012, 01:12:16 AM

Power costs are only at 5% mining on a gpu right now

FAIL. (and BTW i have >10GH/s of GPU and 0 GH/s of FPGA right now)

It's almost not fail. Power cost is less than $0.06 in Russia, down to $0.03 in some other cities/countries with cheap power, so there is still room for effective GPU generation, especially with good USD/BTC rate, even without "stealing" power.

(Fun fact: power cost directly at russian hydroelectric plants is somewhere near $0.0024 per kW*h, but it's hard to get for private buyers)

ngzhang

hero member

Activity: 592

Merit: 501

We will stand and fight.

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on January 15, 2012, 12:19:18 PM

Quote from: cuz0882 on January 15, 2012, 01:12:16 AM

Power costs are only at 5% mining on a gpu right now

FAIL. (and BTW i have >10GH/s of GPU and 0 GH/s of FPGA right now)

another reason is FPGA mining system has smaller size and heat.
here in Beijing, China, the housing price (flat) is about 4500$/m^2 . (*2~*3 for house).
a 5G GPU mining system can take over 1 room with no difficulty. that means wast your 40,000$(for a 8 m^2 room).
and a same hashing speed FPGA system can easily deploy next to your desk with <300w power consuming.

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: cuz0882 on January 15, 2012, 01:12:16 AM

Power costs are only at 5% mining on a gpu right now

FAIL. (and BTW i have >10GH/s of GPU and 0 GH/s of FPGA right now)

cuz0882

sr. member

Activity: 392

Merit: 250

Quote from: rph on January 13, 2012, 05:03:35 AM

Quote from: tf101 on January 09, 2012, 10:27:52 PM

just look at what Butterfly Labs is offering....

BFL has less than half the MH/W of a 45nm FPGA design today so basically - if they take over the network
and start driving difficulty, almost every Spartan6 FPGA will continue to be profitable, while the
BFL units will make themselves barely profitable like 45nm GPUs are today (only usable in areas with very low power costs)
BFL units in areas like socal will go straight to eBay.

If 45nm (or 28nm) FPGAs take over - the BFL units will begin losing money every day due to their lower efficiency.
Buying something with a higher MH/$ but a much worse MH/W is betting that nobody else will invest significantly in the more
expensive, but more efficient technology. That is like the penny betting against the steamroller: a good way to get crushed.

-rph

BFL is a scam. Just because its posted it on a cheesy website does not make it so.The specs don't even match up or make sense. Power costs are only at 5% mining on a gpu right now, and you can actually sell them if bitcoin goes belly up. FPGA's will only lower the value of bitcoins and greatly increase the investment risks.

rph

full member

Activity: 176

Merit: 100

Quote from: tf101 on January 09, 2012, 10:27:52 PM

just look at what Butterfly Labs is offering....

BFL has less than half the MH/W of a 45nm FPGA design today so basically - if they take over the network
and start driving difficulty, almost every Spartan6 FPGA will continue to be profitable, while the
BFL units will make themselves barely profitable like 45nm GPUs are today (only usable in areas with very low power costs)
BFL units in areas like socal will go straight to eBay.

If 45nm (or 28nm) FPGAs take over - the BFL units will begin losing money every day due to their lower efficiency.
Buying something with a higher MH/$ but a much worse MH/W is betting that nobody else will invest significantly in the more
expensive, but more efficient technology. That is like the penny betting against the steamroller: a good way to get crushed.

-rph

rph

full member

Activity: 176

Merit: 100

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on January 10, 2012, 07:29:16 PM

ASICs aren't on the way. Not in 2012 likely not in 2020. If Bitcoin gets as big as Paypal there may be ASICs but you won't see them. Initial runs will be used by private mining consortium to rack up incredible ROI% before releasing them to the general public.

I have to disagree on the last point - if you build an ASIC you are probably going to do everything you can to sell as many as possible
as early as possible to recover the massive one-time engineering costs. No matter how many you want for private mining -
you can always sell more by also selling to others. Of course you rate limit it at first to avoid spiking difficulty and
to allow people to re-buy the exact same silicon, increasingly unlocked, over 4-5 generations

-rph

rupy

hero member

Activity: 725

Merit: 500

You are right! Edit 2015: NOT Wink

Topic: Ultra-Low-Cost DIY FPGA Miner - 175MH/s @ $1/MH - page 4. (Read 125848 times)