28 nm isn't a magical thing.
If your chip is a copy-paste of a FPGA, it's not going to be very good, 28 nm or not.
For example, BitFury's chips, at 55 nm, might be better.
And then there's the cost of production.
Vbs mentions that eAsic's 28 nm is "mature". Yet no one claimed it isn't. Classical fallacy: criticize what isn't the opinion of your opponents, to appear right.
If your chip is a copy-paste of a FPGA, it's not going to be very good, 28 nm or not.
For example, BitFury's chips, at 55 nm, might be better.
And then there's the cost of production.
Vbs mentions that eAsic's 28 nm is "mature". Yet no one claimed it isn't. Classical fallacy: criticize what isn't the opinion of your opponents, to appear right.
Copy/paste of an FPGA? LOL! You should try to understand first how are ASICs designed!
Sure, eAsic doesn't want to disclose much about it's 28nm technology. Probably because it's not very mature. For all we know, it might not work that well yet.
But whatever. The NDA shouldn't prevent anyone from talking about PCBs, pin-outs for the chip, packaging, facilities, and all the other thing that are going to be needed to get these systems up and hashing.
But whatever. The NDA shouldn't prevent anyone from talking about PCBs, pin-outs for the chip, packaging, facilities, and all the other thing that are going to be needed to get these systems up and hashing.
I see that after a week out the thread didn't move much!
eAsic's 28nm not very mature? Lol! eAsic has been working on 28nm at least since 2010. Also, Seagate just announced their investment with them on the 28nm tech, but of course, what would Seagate know, right?
Classical reading comprehension fail.
