Quote from: itod on September 25, 2013, 12:48:34 PM

Quote from: Bitcoinorama on September 25, 2013, 12:25:02 PM

Quote from: itod on September 25, 2013, 12:13:11 PM

Quote from: crumbs on September 25, 2013, 10:10:22 AM

Quote from: Puppet on September 25, 2013, 09:43:21 AM

Quote from: Bitcoinorama on September 25, 2013, 09:30:12 AM

That said we only KnC's package size, not die size. Large package size, does not necessarily correlate to a large die size.

Ill grant you that, but I havent heard anyone refute hashfast's argument that the minimum estimate of KnC's die size based on the package/underfull dimensions would be on the order of 900mm³. Thats not just a little bit bigger, thats an epic size.
...

I'm sure most here don't care if KNC chips are, indeed, full-custom or standard cell -- as long as the performance is within spec. I know there are some 28nm fetishists around, who think 28nm node = god, but hopefully Bitfury 55nm chips castrated their nanolust.

It's not the 28nm fetish-ing, it's just plain blindness when somebody claim that it is unimportant that your 28nm chip burns 60% more electricity per GH (unmeasured worst case prediction)than your 55nm competitor (measured) and 100% more than the rest of the 28nm camp (expected) (the only thing that is expected is that simulated best case results have never equalled the reality of Bitcoin mining ASICS, have they? So better to be responsible, and err upon the side of caution, as engineering over marketing dictates). Only thing left is to jump to conclusion that everyone else is lying and to ask for Bitfury miner screenshots in disbelief (if that's a dig at me, get your fact's straight. I never once claimed any disbelief, just requested video as the products are in the wild for a baseline comparison of w/Gh/s as people are so keen to draw comparisons once KnC's data is to hand. Again go and check who posted congrats to Punin about three posts after he announced the Bitfury boards were populated and complete; https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=250249.msg2911187#msg2911187 Wink

). Yeah, it will surely be unimportant in march next year when every watt will be counted if your miner is plugged from the wall or not Roll Eyes

(Perhaps, by that point you could always underclock kit, or move on to next gen - nothing lasts forever, especially at the rate at which Bitcoin mining tech is racing towards the smallest feasible die shrink, if the BTC price justifies a worthwhile investment)

If the point of all that red ink you spilled across my post is to make it unreadable - you made it, congratulations. But that does not make your points relevant if you put them in red for some reason, you just look silly since there is not a single argument in these red letters.

I don't want to get into shouting competition with you, I've just wanted to point to an argument. But it's your way to mask the arguments with all kind of noise, be it a wall of text or red letters or something else.

No argument wanted here. All my points added are reasonable rebuttals based upon observation of your assumptions. The red admittedly appears fierce, but that's not how it's intended. i just couldn't be bothered rearranging text, and if I left it black it wouldn't be visable. I'll change it to blue. Also I don't believe in anyway shape of form Hashfast are delivering by the end of October, again ignore their marketing, and read their terms and conditions. Paints a completely different story, remember they have removed ALL accountability and liability along with the ability to refund. KnC, and Cointerra have not.