Quote from: Meizirkki on September 20, 2013, 03:58:00 AM

Quote from: Anduck on September 19, 2013, 10:57:18 PM

They will need to have atleast few chips to test the chip itself. They must get a lot data from the actual chip - how can they ship a product to end-user that includes a chip that has only been simulated?
If they don't have chips to test yet, they will be late. Just like Bitfurys chip differed from the simulations kinda lot. Same with BFL. How would it be different with KNC? Really?

Valid point, bad comparison. Bitfury is playing in it's own league, being full custom ASIC. And we all know BFL didn't have realisting expectations for their chips.

Existing standard cell designs:
110nm = 8Gh/W (AM)
65nm = 4Gh/W (BFL)
28nm = ??

KnC sits on the right spot with their estimate of 1.8Gh/W so if only their chips work they should be good

Calling Bitfury an amateur is pretty rude IMO.

BFL was a custom ASIC, and all your figures are wrong.

Avalon/AM 0.133GHs/W
BFL 0.157 GHs/Watt
KNC 0.8GHs/Watt
Bitfury 1GHs/Watt

Obviously if you overclock the figures will drop, and KNC say they have understated their performance, so it should be closer to Bitfury performance.