do you think there was a specific reason the layout of the avalon boards is what it is? ie groups of 10 in larger modules. I would have to wonder about why they didnt go for one big board instead of groups of small boards. Not having the data sheet and limited information on how these chips work, I think it would be pretty perspicuous to think large chip boards are going to be designed and working before the smaller chip count boards.
Im not trying to say one is better then the other, as I honestly have no clue what the "best" design may be. I do hope that there are multiple board designs with different chip counts so a greater number of people can get involved.
Time constraints... pricing as well and that rush to market might be the reason as well as limited chip supply or even the idea how can we get 10 more GH/s out of a machine compared to the competition. Their design parameters were likely based on those sort of issues I think. Could be wrong obviously but given the price point and total hash power... they went that route.
I think BKKcoin has a different objective? Can you talk about your thinking about the Klondike so far BKKcoin? Your plan basically pack as many chips as you can into a small space and make them cheap as possible right? Max gh/s per square cm? If he guesses right and the chips do not have to be arranged as maximum of 10 per board then I think the design of the avalon had different goals than BKKcoins idea.