Quote from: jimmothy on October 22, 2014, 07:35:07 AM

You mean Bitfurys track record of failed 40nm, 28nm, and 20nm ASICs? I would bet a few satoshis on them missing their target again.

Don't forget that when Bitfury says 0.2 w/gh they mean underclocked to the best possible efficiency. They will most likely fill the DC with ~0.5 w/gh hardware until it makes sense to underclock.

Quote from: Puppet on October 22, 2014, 07:59:21 AM

Keep dreaming Jimmy. Bitfury already manages 0.62J/GH at the wall on 55nm with their very first design. And it can do 0.5J/GH when underclocked. There never was a failed 40, 28 let alone 20nm BF design.

There were some failed chip projects, but that still leave BitFury the strong arm in mining jimmothy, but even with those failed projects they are still on top. AM had 2 failed chips too and now they have vanished.

All I see is BitFury doing stuff while AM is doing nothing. I see BitFury here http://organofcorti.blogspot.co.il/2014/10/october-19th-2014-weekly-bitcoin.html and I see it here http://vimeo.com/104009961

Where is AM in the mining scene comparing to BitFury?

Quote from: hdbuck on October 22, 2014, 10:09:28 AM

If there is one thing i've learn regarding ASIC manufacturers.. Is that they never spot on their target.
There is always a difference between the announcement and actually delivering said specs, whether with spondo, bitmain, BF, and AM..
You guys should chillax. Party is just getting started.

BitFury was on time. Maybe not for customers, but for him the chips were on time.