then eth fork and you are naked like a worm or who knows how reliable this things are... I have no idea.

the difficulty is just to have it optimized for some many algos... anyway at the end it will resort as always at proof of trust...

I dont see how this can work because FPGA is more costly than asic, yes? This reminds me of how baikal miners are always more expensive than bitmains.


Compare 50 different asics that mine 5 different coins

With

50 FPGAs that can mine the 5 coins and switch to each coin, I believe the FPGAs are clear cut more expensive yes?

For the 50 FPGAs, u can maybe buy maybe 60-150 asics? And it wont matter if u can switch because when the asics mine 3 of those 5 coins, all FPGAs/GPUs will go to the last 2 coins and try to mine them. Problem is that will increase difficulty of those 2 coins so much that u will earn little anyways.


Furthermore, new asics will be designed economically and manufactured via economies of scale cheaply. I dont see how that can be more economical against a retail user buying an FPGA card from a manufacturer peacemeal. U are paying higher for the switching capability and lack of scale.


Perhaps calculate how much an FPGA that mine an existing asic algo would cost on a per MH/TH basis against one of the asics already out there to get an idea of the gap?


Just my 2 cents speculation

the point is not to compete with asics... as we have seen recently any coin with a large marketcap is going to have an asic implemented after some time. the point is that an asic will only ever work for that algorithm. an fpga can do <within reason> many many kinds of algorithms, you just need to program it. i assume the people who know fpga's can look at a coins algorithm and whip up a miner similar to how people cook up gpu miners for cpu only coins. your gravy would be any algo that you could implement efficiently onto an fpga that no one is going to make an asic for.

ill ask again because people seem to not have understood me.

where
is
claymore-fpga
miner/ ?

I am saying it makes no financial sense. The major GPU coins already have asics, with ETH being the biggest. And those coins that have no asic on it will have asics on it before the FPGA will come close to ever breaking even.


And everytime an asic takes over an alternate coin, all the GPUs and FPGAs that were mining that coin will go to a non-asic coin. That means the remaining non-asic coins will have difficulty skyrocket and guess wat, that means your GPUs and FPGAs mining make less money. Everytime a new asic comes out, the FPGAs make less money. So, there is no niche. There is a limited amount to be earned from mining u see. If the asics keep appearing to take some of it, the switchers (FPGAs/GPUs) will have less and less.


Why not u calculate how much it would cost to make an FPGA that can do the equivalent of mining 504mh like the L3+ or 14TH like the S9.
Run your numbers and see the gap. While I dont have the numbers, I dont think it can work.

Anyways, good luck in your endeavors. Maybe I am wrong.


Just my 2 cents

Sounds like you should probably just stick to GPUs and ASICs, leave the real profits to the people who understand this stuff.

While your point of view is true in general, there are a couple of exceptions: mainly space and power constraints. Let’s be very specific in our comparison to avoid meaningless comparisons, XCVU9P ($4,000 FPGA) vs GTX 1080 Ti ($800 GPU).

Now let’s take the Phi1612 algorithm and give the FPGA a more realistic 5x performance advantage against the GPU at a power consumption rate of 150 watts (0.150 kWh). I would rather run a 100 FPGA farm (17.5 kWh) vs a 500 GPU farm (87.5 kWh) any day and here’s why. Lower overall costs if you believe the 5x advantage ascribed to the FPGA.

4x FPGAs and components approx. ($16K + $1.2K) in server chassis and add 100 watts for overhead.
4x GPUs and components approx. ($3.2K + $0.65K) in frame and add 100 watts for overhead.

$430K 100 FPGA farm vs $481.25K 500 GPU farm. Can you at least agree that this makes financial sense?

Please don't take the power usage here, let's consider only the hash power and the cost between XCVU9P ($4,000 FPGA) vs GTX 1080 Ti ($800 GPU)

The difference in cost is 5x, does it apply to the hashpower or not?

How quickly does FPGA programming adapt to new algos or the change of old algos?