Quote from: RoadStress on July 29, 2014, 10:29:05 PM

Still better than an over 300% miss for AM gen3 chips.

Why do you always tell a complete pack of lies about AM?

Quote from: friedcat on January 29, 2014, 12:20:29 PM

Declaration: Before physical chips are out and fully tested, all specs/dates/data are for reference only and subject to change.

Specification
Process node: 40nm
Package type: QFN64 8mmx8mm (with another option of QFN64 7mmx7mm possible)
I/O: Standard SPI protocol with clk, in, out and cs.
Rated Hashrate: 12.8GHash/s per chip, with a wide range of overclock/downclock options
Rated Voltage: 0.72V, recommended voltage range is 0.55V-1V
Power Consumption: 0.2J/GHash low voltage, 0.35J/GHash rated voltage

As you can clearly see AM didn't promise anything.

Quote from: friedcat on June 05, 2014, 01:46:38 PM

Brief Answers to Shareholder Questions

Quote from: bitcoin.newsfeed on June 01, 2014, 10:01:17 AM

5) What is the status of gen 3.1 (shipping to customers, I think?)? How much does it help with energy usage -- do we have final chip performance numbers yet?

All shipped chips are gen 3.0 ones. What we had chosen for 3.1 helps with energy usage at 10% range and has some performance degrades. The final chip performance number is about 0.7W/G at 0.78V and 320MHz. Below that voltage we have less power draw and less speed.

0.35 J/Gh * 300% = 1.05 J/Gh.
If you can't tell the truth or do basic maths, why should anyone trust you?