furuknap



Offline



Activity: 294

Merit: 250



http://coin.furuknap.net/







Sr. MemberActivity: 294Merit: 250http://coin.furuknap.net/ Re: [PicoStocks] 100TH/s bitcoin mine [100th] June 19, 2013, 01:20:22 AM #404 Quote from: carnitastaco on June 19, 2013, 01:16:19 AM There is still a market. One of the principals is willing to sell at a certain price. If people think its worth more, they can buy and profit.



No, they cannot, because tytus may and likely will enter the market and take away that profit. It's not about what people think it is worth, it is about what tytus thinks it's worth. That's the entire argument. If he freaks out, like he's done before, then any bad news may lead him to cause people to lose money. If bitfury now says that "damn, there's something wrong, we'll need another two months" then why wouldn't tytus take that out on investors by lowering the price he thinks it's worth?



.b



No, they cannot, because tytus may and likely will enter the market and take away that profit. It's not about what people think it is worth, it is about what tytus thinks it's worth. That's the entire argument. If he freaks out, like he's done before, then any bad news may lead him to cause people to lose money. If bitfury now says that "damn, there's something wrong, we'll need another two months" then why wouldn't tytus take that out on investors by lowering the price he thinks it's worth?.b My Coinblog: http://coin.furuknap.net/

kaerf



Offline



Activity: 631

Merit: 500







Hero MemberActivity: 631Merit: 500 Re: [PicoStocks] 100TH/s bitcoin mine [100th] June 19, 2013, 04:14:16 AM #405 Quote from: bitfury on June 19, 2013, 01:23:56 AM First I would like to say that chip is working. Complete confirmation using test-vectors.



!yVMTTCSA!SFsVTAWeMSnxwUeuRnwR0Wm_d74xVyOdxkL5LEI_LsQ



Here is SPI code to download and test code.



Then - measurements of error rates and real hash rates were performed using 100 first test vectors (as enabled in code), no board cooling (that's pretty impressive - it works on PASSIVE board made by Rene - great thanks BTW - you may use code I provided to perform same tests... Maybe just oscillator should be adjusted - on OUTCLK you'll see clock and you should bring INCLK and OUTMISO to ground while testing).



Results so far



0.596 V, 125 Mhz, 100 tasks sent, 122 solutions got, COP is 0.84 (122/145), Ideal 1.45 GH/s, Real 1.22 Gh/s

0.596 V, 150 Mhz, 100 tasks sent, 19 solutions got, COP is 0.13 (19/145), Ideal 1.74 Gh/s, Real 0.23 Gh/s

0.596 V, 78 Mhz, 0.6 Amps, 0.36 W, 100 tasks sent, 145 solutions got, COP is 1.0, Ideal 0.91 GH/s, Real 0.91 GH/s, 0.39 W/Gh/s

0.596 V, 45 Mhz, 0.39 Amps, 0.23 W, 100 tasks sent, 145 solutions got, COP is 1.0, Ideal 0.52 Gh/s, Real 0.52 Gh/s, 0.44 W / Gh/s

0.596 V, 96 Mhz, 0.725 Amps, 0.43 W, 100 tasks sent, 143 solutions got, COP is 0.986, Ideal 1.12 Gh/s, Real 1.1 Gh/s, 0.39 W / Gh/s



Please note that it seems that 96 Mhz is close to _BEST_ solution... Then I started to increase voltage, while not changing internal oscillator settings - it is not power-stabiized and its oscillation frequency

should follow and grow up. What is most interesting (and this should be confirmed later - this is INTENDED operation) - that oscillating frequency increases, while error rate remains the same as transistor strength in oscillator and interconnect variances within same die are less.



0.7 V 140 Mhz 1.2 Amps 0.84 W 100 tasks, 143 solutions got, COP is 0.986, Ideal 1.63 Gh/s, Real 1.6 Gh/s, 0.52 W / GH/s

0.8 V 180 Mhz 1.87 Amps 1.49 W 100 tasks, 139 solutions got, COP is 0.958, Ideal 2.093 Gh/s, Real 2 Gh/s, 0.75 W / GH/s

0.9 V 214 Mhz 2.62 Amps 2.36 W 100 tasks, 132 solutions got, COP is 0.91, Ideal 2.48 Gh/s, Real 2.26 Gh/s, 1.04 W / Gh/s.



Not tested more... And likely latter was worse due to not enough cooling.



We do not need more just confirmation testing that it works, but we need more extended testing like that. So I'll discuss tomorrow with Leszek and we'll send test chips, and will ask to perform tests and post your results. Also we likely will make some contest for say - best USB-stick (most of hashing power with smallest form-factor), highest hashing rate (real, not ideal, crunching clocks is not a problem), etc.



I would like to note that THIS design thanks to much effort spent in Monte-Carlo sims with flip-flops works really well at low voltages :-) Small error rates and no flip-flop losses like it may happen with logic cells unqualified for low voltages. It scales almost like it should in theory, not like it does in practice when cells are unsuitable and you simply can't go lower because frequency will drop DRAMATICALLY. This enables application of this chip for different kind of heating devices where voltage can be changed in dynamics to adjust produced heat to requirements, etc etc etc.



Also I am preparing to execute payments to all betters, because it is clearly our fault that we failed to meet deadlines. It is too cumbersome to calculate actual bet amount, so I would pay off using averaged multiplication value about 1.86 or so (I don't remember exactly have to look in my calculations).



Thanks that we ordered more wafer count - we now can fulfill say 100 Th/s operations, etc :-) So there's nothing to worry. And we can start planning for further testing and production.



https://mega.co.nz/# !yVMTTCSA!SFsVTAWeMSnxwUeuRnwR0Wm_d74xVyOdxkL5LEI_LsQHere is SPI code to download and test code.Then - measurements of error rates and real hash rates were performed using 100 first test vectors (as enabled in code), no board cooling (that's pretty impressive - it works on PASSIVE board made by Rene - great thanks BTW - you may use code I provided to perform same tests... Maybe just oscillator should be adjusted - on OUTCLK you'll see clock and you should bring INCLK and OUTMISO to ground while testing).Results so far0.596 V, 125 Mhz, 100 tasks sent, 122 solutions got, COP is 0.84 (122/145), Ideal 1.45 GH/s, Real 1.22 Gh/s0.596 V, 150 Mhz, 100 tasks sent, 19 solutions got, COP is 0.13 (19/145), Ideal 1.74 Gh/s, Real 0.23 Gh/s0.596 V, 78 Mhz, 0.6 Amps, 0.36 W, 100 tasks sent, 145 solutions got, COP is 1.0, Ideal 0.91 GH/s, Real 0.91 GH/s, 0.39 W/Gh/s0.596 V, 45 Mhz, 0.39 Amps, 0.23 W, 100 tasks sent, 145 solutions got, COP is 1.0, Ideal 0.52 Gh/s, Real 0.52 Gh/s, 0.44 W / Gh/s0.596 V, 96 Mhz, 0.725 Amps, 0.43 W, 100 tasks sent, 143 solutions got, COP is 0.986, Ideal 1.12 Gh/s, Real 1.1 Gh/s, 0.39 W / Gh/sPlease note that it seems that 96 Mhz is close to _BEST_ solution... Then I started to increase voltage, while not changing internal oscillator settings - it is not power-stabiized and its oscillation frequencyshould follow and grow up. What is most interesting (and this should be confirmed later - this is INTENDED operation) - that oscillating frequency increases, while error rate remains the same as transistor strength in oscillator and interconnect variances within same die are less.0.7 V 140 Mhz 1.2 Amps 0.84 W 100 tasks, 143 solutions got, COP is 0.986, Ideal 1.63 Gh/s, Real 1.6 Gh/s, 0.52 W / GH/s0.8 V 180 Mhz 1.87 Amps 1.49 W 100 tasks, 139 solutions got, COP is 0.958, Ideal 2.093 Gh/s, Real 2 Gh/s, 0.75 W / GH/s0.9 V 214 Mhz 2.62 Amps 2.36 W 100 tasks, 132 solutions got, COP is 0.91, Ideal 2.48 Gh/s, Real 2.26 Gh/s, 1.04 W / Gh/s.Not tested more... And likely latter was worse due to not enough cooling.We do not need more just confirmation testing that it works, but we need more extended testing like that. So I'll discuss tomorrow with Leszek and we'll send test chips, and will ask to perform tests and post your results. Also we likely will make some contest for say - best USB-stick (most of hashing power with smallest form-factor), highest hashing rate (real, not ideal, crunching clocks is not a problem), etc.I would like to note that THIS design thanks to much effort spent in Monte-Carlo sims with flip-flops works really well at low voltages :-) Small error rates and no flip-flop losses like it may happen with logic cells unqualified for low voltages. It scales almost like it should in theory, not like it does in practice when cells are unsuitable and you simply can't go lower because frequency will drop DRAMATICALLY. This enables application of this chip for different kind of heating devices where voltage can be changed in dynamics to adjust produced heat to requirements, etc etc etc.Also I am preparing to execute payments to all betters, because it is clearly our fault that we failed to meet deadlines. It is too cumbersome to calculate actual bet amount, so I would pay off using averaged multiplication value about 1.86 or so (I don't remember exactly have to look in my calculations).And we can start planning for further testing and production.

Thank you and congratulations, Bitfury, Tytus, et al!



Thank you and congratulations, Bitfury, Tytus, et al!

silvermario



Offline



Activity: 96

Merit: 10







MemberActivity: 96Merit: 10 Re: [PicoStocks] 100TH/s bitcoin mine [100th] June 19, 2013, 08:20:31 AM #406 Quote from: furuknap on June 19, 2013, 01:20:22 AM Quote from: carnitastaco on June 19, 2013, 01:16:19 AM There is still a market. One of the principals is willing to sell at a certain price. If people think its worth more, they can buy and profit.



No, they cannot, because tytus may and likely will enter the market and take away that profit. It's not about what people think it is worth, it is about what tytus thinks it's worth. That's the entire argument. If he freaks out, like he's done before, then any bad news may lead him to cause people to lose money. If bitfury now says that "damn, there's something wrong, we'll need another two months" then why wouldn't tytus take that out on investors by lowering the price he thinks it's worth?



.b





No, they cannot, because tytus may and likely will enter the market and take away that profit. It's not about what people think it is worth, it is about what tytus thinks it's worth. That's the entire argument., then any bad news may lead him to cause people to lose money. If bitfury now says that "damn, there's something wrong, we'll need another two months" then why wouldn't tytus take that out on investors by lowering the price he thinks it's worth?.b

Please don't spread FUD and lies. The only one who freaked out was you, not Tytys. There was a good market information and all what Tytus did was throwing some shares of his own on the market to increase liquidity and prevent panic buy.



You should go back to your silly bond thread where you try to sell a

You are a hypocrite by pretending that you care for investors and all you really want is profit from newbies, suckers and "greater fools". Please don't spread FUD and lies. The only one who freaked out was you, not Tytys. There was a good market information and all what Tytus did was throwing some shares of his own on the market to increase liquidity and prevent panic buy.You should go back to your silly bond thread where you try to sell a 20BTC Metabank 120GHz ASIC for 400 BTC You are a hypocrite by pretending that you care for investors and all you really want is profit from newbies, suckers and "greater fools".

kaerf



Offline



Activity: 631

Merit: 500







Hero MemberActivity: 631Merit: 500 Re: [PicoStocks] 100TH/s bitcoin mine [100th] June 21, 2013, 01:30:11 AM #411 Quote from: tytus on March 25, 2013, 07:27:04 PM 18 wafers (more than 200TH/s). 1/2 goes for the mine. 1/4 is already sold as chips to undisclosed manufacturers. They will use them to produce hardware for customers [but who knows when this will be ready]. Rest goes for own development.



I saw bitfury post that there was 400TH (based on original estimates) ordered...I guess that is "more than 200TH", but if you're willing to share, I'm curious how much you over bought (luckily you did!)...e.g. how many total chips. or did you order multiple batches? I saw bitfury post that there was 400TH (based on original estimates) ordered...I guess that is "more than 200TH", but if you're willing to share, I'm curious how much you over bought (luckily you did!)...e.g. how many total chips. or did you order multiple batches?

grimholt



Offline



Activity: 104

Merit: 10









MemberActivity: 104Merit: 10 Re: [PicoStocks] 100TH/s bitcoin mine [100th] June 21, 2013, 11:04:35 AM

Last edit: June 26, 2013, 12:44:25 PM by grimholt #412 Quote from: https://picostocks.com/docs/view/59 on June 21st, 2013, 01:11:15 AM Chip results are successful. This was the most important and risky milestone of the project. Preliminary test results were posted on Bitcointalk by Bitfury (

Unfortunately the chip does not perform as planned. We optimistically assumed a hashrate of 3.5GH/s at 0.6V. The chip is 2 times slower and if overclocked can run at 2GH/s. Further overclocking would be to expensive in terms of hardware prices (power supply).

Because of the lower hash rate we will have problems to deliver the full 104TH/s performance in the next weeks. Only 35296 chips are expected to be available for the mine next week. This corresponds to only 70TH/s. We are still waiting for the other packaging company to provide us with the estimation of the date for the completion of packaging.

We expect a delay of 1-2 weeks in launching the mine. We assume the initial launch will include only 70TH/s and few days later additional 34TH/s will be installed.

This was the most important and risky milestone of the project. Preliminary test results were posted on Bitcointalk by Bitfury ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=228677.msg2515472#msg2515472 ).Unfortunately the chip does not perform as planned. We optimistically assumed a hashrate of 3.5GH/s at 0.6V. The chip is 2 times slower and if overclocked can run at 2GH/s. Further overclocking would be to expensive in terms of hardware prices (power supply).Because of the lower hash rate we will have problems to deliver the full 104TH/s performance in the next weeks. Only 35296 chips are expected to be available for the mine next week. This corresponds to only 70TH/s. We are still waiting for the other packaging company to provide us with the estimation of the date for the completion of packaging.. We assume the initial launch will include only 70TH/s and few days later additional 34TH/s will be installed.



Does the 1-2 week delay mean you expect to launch the mine around mid July instead of July 1st that was originally intended? First of all, congratulations to all involved in the 100TH project, this is amazing news!Does the 1-2 week delay mean you expect to launch the mine around mid July instead of July 1st that was originally intended?

Free Distribution! YinCoin YangCoin ☯☯First Ever POS/POW Alternator! Multipool! ☯ ☯ http://yinyangpool.com/ Free Distribution! https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=623937

Dexter770221



Offline



Activity: 1029

Merit: 1000







LegendaryActivity: 1029Merit: 1000 Re: [PicoStocks] 100TH/s bitcoin mine [100th] June 24, 2013, 07:58:52 PM #414 Quote the google translation is awesome though. You mean this:

http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fhabrahabr.ru%2Fpost%2F184506%2F

? You mean this: Under development Modular UPGRADEABLE Miner (MUM). Looking for investors.

Changing one PCB with screwdriver and you have brand new miner in hand... Plug&Play, scalable from one module to thousands.

bitfury



Offline



Activity: 266

Merit: 250







Sr. MemberActivity: 266Merit: 250 Re: [PicoStocks] 100TH/s bitcoin mine [100th] June 26, 2013, 06:35:31 PM #415 http://zeptobars.ru/en/read/bitfury-bitcoin-mining-chip



Easier to read english



I'll leak a bit more info - there will be less total Th/s (Edited: not in 100 th/s mine though, I meant overall), also tytus is doing nice move using chip at LOWER voltage rating (getting less hashes per chip, but increasing DENSITY of setup and decreasing PCB count) :-) That allows him to use simple board and relaxes complexity for Dave to do assembly. So overall chances that 100 th/s mine will be done faster than say our hashers that we aim for higher power consumption is highly likely :-) Nice move actually. But to make it happen they still have to do everything right and in tight well-planned way. But - right now I am quite impressed with speed how it moves :-) I had worse estimations before :-) Easier to read englishI'll leak a bit more info - there will be less total Th/s (Edited: not in 100 th/s mine though, I meant overall), also tytus is doing nice move using chip at LOWER voltage rating (getting less hashes per chip, but increasing DENSITY of setup and decreasing PCB count) :-) That allows him to use simple board and relaxes complexity for Dave to do assembly. So overall chances that 100 th/s mine will be done faster than say our hashers that we aim for higher power consumption is highly likely :-) Nice move actually. But to make it happen they still have to do everything right and in tight well-planned way. But - right now I am quite impressed with speed how it moves :-) I had worse estimations before :-)

kaerf



Offline



Activity: 631

Merit: 500







Hero MemberActivity: 631Merit: 500 Re: [PicoStocks] 100TH/s bitcoin mine [100th] June 26, 2013, 10:21:09 PM #416 Quote from: bitfury on June 26, 2013, 06:35:31 PM http://zeptobars.ru/en/read/bitfury-bitcoin-mining-chip



Easier to read english



I'll leak a bit more info - there will be less total Th/s (Edited: not in 100 th/s mine though, I meant overall), also tytus is doing nice move using chip at LOWER voltage rating (getting less hashes per chip, but increasing DENSITY of setup and decreasing PCB count) :-) That allows him to use simple board and relaxes complexity for Dave to do assembly. So overall chances that 100 th/s mine will be done faster than say our hashers that we aim for higher power consumption is highly likely :-) Nice move actually. But to make it happen they still have to do everything right and in tight well-planned way. But - right now I am quite impressed with speed how it moves :-) I had worse estimations before :-)

Easier to read englishI'll leak a bit more info -(Edited: not in 100 th/s mine though, I meant overall), also tytus is doing nice move using chip at LOWER voltage rating (getting less hashes per chip, but increasing DENSITY of setup and decreasing PCB count) :-) That allows him to use simple board and relaxes complexity for Dave to do assembly. So overall chances that 100 th/s mine will be done faster than say our hashers that we aim for higher power consumption is highly likely :-) Nice move actually. But to make it happen they still have to do everything right and in tight well-planned way. But - right now I am quite impressed with speed how it moves :-) I had worse estimations before :-)

Thanks for the info, Bitfury. I'm still a little confused on how many total TH there was supposed to be. Was it 400TH or 200TH (and now less)? Thanks for the info, Bitfury. I'm still a little confused on how many total TH there was supposed to be. Was it 400TH or 200TH (and now less)?

tytus



Offline



Activity: 250

Merit: 250







Sr. MemberActivity: 250Merit: 250 Re: [PicoStocks] 100TH/s bitcoin mine [100th] June 26, 2013, 11:27:53 PM #418 Quote from: kaerf on June 26, 2013, 10:21:49 PM Is there an estimate on when Dave will start receiving hardware?



The total hashing power in chips (1.5GH/s per chip) allocated to the mine that are currently being packaged exceeds 104TH/s. We don't know the yield, but we expect no problems with the chips. We have to collect the chips from 2 packaging companies though. We will either assemble everything in USA or 50% in USA and the rest in EU depending on the offers we get from PCB assembling plants. Chips will arrive after the 7th of July from one company and beginning of July ( ) from the other. PCBs will be ready before that. The assembly of PCBs can take more than a week though :-( So we may start mining in the 3rd week of July. The installation of the assembled PCBs will be fast (1-2 days) and the data center(s) will be prepared for this.

We hope to have a prototype version of the mining device beginning of next week (>1TH/s). This device will be assembled using the small amount of chips we got in advance. We will use it to tune the mining system. We plan solo mining.



We made a big mistake assuming that the packaging of chips will not introduce substantial delays. Instead of preparing the boards in advance based on simulated (guessed) parameters of the chips we have focused this month on implementation of contingency plans for the packaging delays. We hope the investors will be satisfied anyway with the results, due to lower than estimated competition (network hash rate).



however our installation costs are substantially higher than expected due to many express production contracts (expedited packaging, PCB production or assembly is many times more expensive than if prepared in advance).



=> we will sell shares next week (at market price) to get funds for additional expenses. I have no idea how many but most likely not more than 5000 shares.



We have also no plans yet for future exploitation of the chips. We will work on the plans when the mine is deployed.

The total hashing power in chips (1.5GH/s per chip) allocated to the mine that are currently being packaged exceeds 104TH/s. We don't know the yield, but we expect no problems with the chips. We have to collect the chips from 2 packaging companies though. We will either assemble everything in USA or 50% in USA and the rest in EU depending on the offers we get from PCB assembling plants. Chips will arrive after the 7th of July from one company and beginning of July () from the other. PCBs will be ready before that. The assembly of PCBs can take more than a week though :-( So we may start mining in the 3rd week of July. The installation of the assembled PCBs will be fast (1-2 days) and the data center(s) will be prepared for this.We hope to have a prototype version of the mining device beginning of next week (>1TH/s). This device will be assembled using the small amount of chips we got in advance. We will use it to tune the mining system. We plan solo mining.We made a big mistake assuming that the packaging of chips will not introduce substantial delays. Instead of preparing the boards in advance based on simulated (guessed) parameters of the chips we have focused this month on implementation of contingency plans for the packaging delays. We hope the investors will be satisfied anyway with the results, due to lower than estimated competition (network hash rate).however our installation costs are substantially higher than expected due to many express production contracts (expedited packaging, PCB production or assembly is many times more expensive than if prepared in advance).=> we will sell shares next week (at market price) to get funds for additional expenses. I have no idea how many but most likely not more than 5000 shares.We have also no plans yet for future exploitation of the chips. We will work on the plans when the mine is deployed.