Quote from: phk on April 21, 2013, 01:58:16 PM

Quote from: lame.duck on April 21, 2013, 09:43:32 AM

These numbers are from bitfury somewhere in the forum here.

Thank you. I found this post: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=98535.msg1081219#msg1081219

It's weird that he would say

Quote

Hmm ... maybe even Litecoin chip would be done before Bitcoin chip, as it seems to be much simpler and uses well-known techniques - less competition :-)

The implementation of scrypt for Litecoin requires you to do the equivalent number of SHA256 hashes to the number of execution of the salsa for loop. If the Litecoin implementation of scrypt includes SHA256 (the algo bitcoin uses) and memory intensive salsa stream cipher rounds, why would it be easier than just implementing SHA256?