News New Ethereum Miner Performs Like 32 GeForce RTX 3080 GPUs

Apr 25, 2021
3
3
15
0
The statement, "Linzhi's Phoenix miner sells for between $11,300 and $13,700 ", is false.

Linzhi Phoenix does not exist (yet), apart from a handful of evaluation units. There are several scam websites allegedly selling a 2600 MHash/s ASIC miner in this price range. It would have been an incredibly good deal, since, at the current ETH price and difficulty, the miner would pay for itself in about 2 months. None of them actually have any product to sell. We don't know when it will really be available or how much it would cost.

The only ETH ASIC miner that actually exists and is still capable of mining ETH today is Innosilicon A10 Pro, 500..750 MHash/s, it is sold out by the manufacturer, preowned units tend to go for about $10k a pop on ebay.

Keep in mind that ETH mining is rapidly approaching the end of the line, it'll cease after the PoS switch, which is now expected before the end of 2021, so any ASIC released today would be lucky to last 8 months before becoming an expensive doorstop.
 

sstanic

Honorable
Aug 6, 2016
59
21
10,535
0
The statement, "Linzhi's Phoenix miner sells for between $11,300 and $13,700 ", is false.

Linzhi Phoenix does not exist (yet), apart from a handful of evaluation units. There are several scam websites allegedly selling a 2600 MHash/s ASIC miner in this price range. It would have been an incredibly good deal, since, at the current ETH price and difficulty, the miner would pay for itself in about 2 months. None of them actually have any product to sell. We don't know when it will really be available or how much it would cost.

The only ETH ASIC miner that actually exists and is still capable of mining ETH today is Innosilicon A10 Pro, 500..750 MHash/s, it is sold out by the manufacturer, preowned units tend to go for about $10k a pop on ebay.

Keep in mind that ETH mining is rapidly approaching the end of the line, it'll cease after the PoS switch, which is now expected before the end of 2021, so any ASIC released today would be lucky to last 8 months before becoming an expensive doorstop.
I don't follow crypto at all, and I see that you do. Do you think that GPUs will stabilize to their MSRP and when please?
 

teodoreh

Distinguished
Sep 23, 2007
308
7
18,785
0
For $30.000 you can buy 45 RTX3060Ti and have 2700MH/s.

  • If algorithm changes, you have no problem.
  • If eth2.0 goes exclusively PoS, you can sell those 45 cards and get back a significant amount of money.
The only advantage of this paper-product is power consumption.
 

sstanic

Honorable
Aug 6, 2016
59
21
10,535
0
Well yes, that much I do know. Although I wouldn't say "a few years" but until the next gen GPUs get a clearer performance and launch dates. Which may well be a few years away of course. And I actually support both board partners and retailers raising their prices, because I really don't see why they should let scalpers get away with huge margins with no effort or risk. They should've done it right away IMHO.
 
Apr 25, 2021
3
3
15
0
I don't follow crypto at all, and I see that you do. Do you think that GPUs will stabilize to their MSRP and when please?
It's difficult to make predictions, especially about the future. All I can say, if the current ETH2 timeline holds up, cryptomining purchases of new cards should dry up by September and boatloads of preowned cards should start hitting ebay by Christmas. Don't know if that'll be enough to stabilize the prices. PS5 still sells for double the MSRP 6 months after launch and that has nothing to do with crypto.
 
Reactions: sstanic
Apr 25, 2021
3
3
15
0
For $30.000 you can buy 45 RTX3060Ti and have 2700MH/s.
If you can find them for that price.

Just scrolled through the first page of sold 3060ti listings on eBay, there was one that went for $1200, most were in the $1300-$1500 range.

More realistically, the choice is between buying an ASIC miner for $30K today, using it until the music stops, and then tossing it in the trash; or buying 45 RTX3060Ti's for $60K today, using them for the same period of time, and selling them. You'll need to be able to sell them for $700 each to break even (even ignoring the power consumption).
 

jonathan1683

Distinguished
Jul 15, 2009
409
16
18,815
16
Funny how more ETH ASIC mining becomes available 10 days after update to the latest eth2.0 proof-of-stake validator becomes mandatory for PoS network participants.

Bitmain is a trash company that mine with the equipment before they sell it and provides bad customer support and only accepts crypto payments. These units have probably been mining a while and will fail or become obsolete when 2.0 comes around. You are right in your thinking they are selling their money printers because they will no longer be profitable for them.
 

joeeoj2019

Commendable
Jul 1, 2018
5
0
1,510
0
do you guys think that i should sell my 1080ti and 1660ti now before price drops
asic miners are ruining gpu mining like what happened in 2018
in my country i can sell the 1080ti for 1000$ and the 1660ti for 600$ right now
should i do it and buy a gtx 970 for like 200$ until prices come back to normal ?so i can do a huge upgrade
 

zodiacfml

Distinguished
Oct 2, 2008
1,222
22
19,285
0
too late and notice that they have No pre-orders or delivery dates yet. pricing of their miners is usually around 8-11 months ROI. they can't sell lower or better than this because they mine it themselves and sell to large farms.
 
Not so fast IMHO. Some manufacturers already raised their prices and retailers also become a new scalpers, it will take few years for prices to go down.
The previous crypto craze that caused similar widespread shortages and price hikes during the second half of 2017 and first half of 2018 was largely over within a year from when it started, with cards once again widely available and returning to prices roughly around their MSRPs. So, it's possible that we could see a similar situation this time around as well, with prices getting back closer to their MSRPs around the end of the year. Of course, that's not guaranteed and there's certainly the possibility of it being longer, though a "few years" doesn't really seem likely.

do you guys think that i should sell my 1080ti and 1660ti now before price drops
asic miners are ruining gpu mining like what happened in 2018
in my country i can sell the 1080ti for 1000$ and the 1660ti for 600$ right now
should i do it and buy a gtx 970 for like 200$ until prices come back to normal ?so i can do a huge upgrade
Due to the uncertainty of when prices might recover, it's kind of hard to recommend that. Sure, you might be able to get a "huge upgrade" once prices get back near their MSRPs, but it will likely be many months before that happens, and you would be stuck on considerably lower-performing hardware until then. A GTX 970 performs roughly comparable to a 1060 3GB, or only around 40% of the performance of a 1080 Ti. So, for example, if you get 100fps in a graphically demanding game on your 1080 Ti, a 970 might only be able to push around 40fps at the same settings. That's also only around 2/3 the performance of a 1660 Ti, which might get around 60fps in that hypothetical example.

Another option might just be to sell one card, if you don't really have an immediate need for both of them. Otherwise, there's the possibility that you might potentially be stuck on lower-end hardware for a lot longer than you might be expecting. Again, at the very least, I wouldn't expect prices to recover much before late in the year.

As for ASIC mining hardware, that isn't what caused the mining market to collapse in 2018. ASICs did make mining bitcoin on graphics cards obsolete, but that was the better part of a decade ago, back around 2013. These newer ones are designed specifically to be resistant against ASIC hardware, so we are less likely to see specialized hardware that makes GPU mining completely obsolete in the same way.
 
Reactions: Krotow

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
The previous crypto craze that caused similar widespread shortages and price hikes during the second half of 2017 and first half of 2018 was largely over within a year from when it started, with cards once again widely available and returning to prices roughly around their MSRPs.
Well below MSRPs for AMD's 570-590. At its lowest point, you could buy a 8GB RX580 for $120 and it even had a one free game promo on top.
 

TJ Hooker

Champion
Ambassador
Once Ethereum switches to PoS, mining will be obsolete - ASIC ETH miners will instantly become e-waste.
There are some other coins that use the Ethash algo, such that they could be mined with Eth ASIC miners. Being profitable to mine is another question though. It looks like the next best Ethash coin is only about half as profitable to mine as Eth, and that profitibility would presumably plummet from the massive influx of hashing power coming off Eth once it goes PoS.
 
Well below MSRPs for AMD's 570-590. At its lowest point, you could buy a 8GB RX580 for $120 and it even had a one free game promo on top.
Yep, though I think that was some months later, and probably wouldn't have fit with my "within a year" approximation. And of course, The RX 480/580 hardware was already over two years old at that point, and Nvidia was already starting to roll out a new generation of cards.
 

spongiemaster

Estimable
Dec 12, 2019
1,859
930
3,560
0
Well below MSRPs for AMD's 570-590. At its lowest point, you could buy a 8GB RX580 for $120 and it even had a one free game promo on top.
That's because there was zero demand among gamers for AMD's cards even before the crypto bubble. Crypto basically kept AMD's GPU division alive. At the time AMD's GPU's were better than Nvidia's GPU's at crypto mining. By the time the crypto bubble burst, the 500 series was a 2 year old overclocked 400 series card with worse efficiency. Gamers weren't waiting for those cards to be available again. What Nvidia was offering was better across the board for gaming.
 
Reactions: Krotow

Krotow

Estimable
RX 480/580 when they appeared indeed was a choice of poor and zealots. Hot and noisy. Crypto very much saved AMD GPUs at mid 2010-ies. Quite ironic that now they cost more than at launch.
 
That's because there was zero demand among gamers for AMD's cards even before the crypto bubble. Crypto basically kept AMD's GPU division alive. At the time AMD's GPU's were better than Nvidia's GPU's at crypto mining. By the time the crypto bubble burst, the 500 series was a 2 year old overclocked 400 series card with worse efficiency. Gamers weren't waiting for those cards to be available again. What Nvidia was offering was better across the board for gaming.
I don't think that's actually accurate. There were initially a lot of people buying RX 480/580 cards for gaming, and they tended to be highly recommended by tech sites for mid-range gaming systems. Performance was similar to Nvidia's 1060 cards at a somewhat lower price point, which made them a fairly attractive option for those building systems to a budget, where spending several hundred dollars or more for something faster wasn't an option. The only 500-series card that I would say was poorly received at launch was the RX 590, which was overpriced for being essentially another refresh of a 2.5 year old card, but that didn't come out until after the crypto-market had already crashed, and at a time when Nvidia had already started releasing some of their higher-end 20-series cards (which were also poorly received, but at least promised some new features down the line).

What I think actually happened was that since AMD's cards were largely out of stock due to the mining market for months prior to the supply of Nvidia's cards being significantly affected, it became really hard to recommend them at that point. Even after the supply of Nvidia's cards also dried up, resellers were charging more for AMD's cards, since they knew miners would pay a premium for them. So, for roughly a year or so there, AMD's cards didn't really make sense for anyone but miners to buy, since they lost the value advantage they had been offering over the competition, and actually cost substantially more for a given level of gaming performance. Vega was likewise DOA for the gaming market from launch, since it was released during the height of the mining rush, making the cards nearly impossible to buy for a reasonable price.

So, once the mining market did crash, a disproportionately large portion of AMD cards got dropped back onto the secondhand market, since they had been nearly all going to miners for the prior year. And since only miners had been buying the cards since their prices skyrocketed, AMD likely lost some momentum in the gaming market during that time. And of course, at that point, people were already wanting to see what the next generation of cards would offer. Combined, all that made it harder to sell cards at retail, hence the relatively large price cuts and incentives that needed to be thrown in to help clear inventory.
 
Reactions: Krotow

spongiemaster

Estimable
Dec 12, 2019
1,859
930
3,560
0
I don't think that's actually accurate. There were initially a lot of people buying RX 480/580 cards for gaming, and they tended to be highly recommended by tech sites for mid-range gaming systems. Performance was similar to Nvidia's 1060 cards at a somewhat lower price point, which made them a fairly attractive option for those building systems to a budget, where spending several hundred dollars or more for something faster wasn't an option. The only 500-series card that I would say was poorly received at launch was the RX 590, which was overpriced for being essentially another refresh of a 2.5 year old card, but that didn't come out until after the crypto-market had already crashed, and at a time when Nvidia had already started releasing some of their higher-end 20-series cards (which were also poorly received, but at least promised some new features down the line).

What I think actually happened was that since AMD's cards were largely out of stock due to the mining market for months prior to the supply of Nvidia's cards being significantly affected, it became really hard to recommend them at that point. Even after the supply of Nvidia's cards also dried up, resellers were charging more for AMD's cards, since they knew miners would pay a premium for them. So, for roughly a year or so there, AMD's cards didn't really make sense for anyone but miners to buy, since they lost the value advantage they had been offering over the competition, and actually cost substantially more for a given level of gaming performance. Vega was likewise DOA for the gaming market from launch, since it was released during the height of the mining rush, making the cards nearly impossible to buy for a reasonable price.

So, once the mining market did crash, a disproportionately large portion of AMD cards got dropped back onto the secondhand market, since they had been nearly all going to miners for the prior year. And since only miners had been buying the cards since their prices skyrocketed, AMD likely lost some momentum in the gaming market during that time. And of course, at that point, people were already wanting to see what the next generation of cards would offer. Combined, all that made it harder to sell cards at retail, hence the relatively large price cuts and incentives that needed to be thrown in to help clear inventory.
The market share numbers say otherwise. There was no major shift in market share when AMD released the RX400 despite them claiming they were targeting the mass market (when in reality they were incapable of competing at the topend with Nvidia) while Nvidia releases at the top end first. So AMD releases cards from $109 to $240 to compete with Nvidia releasing cards from $470 to $700. If you're targeting the mass market and your new cards are 1/4 to 1/3 the cost of the competition, you would expect more than a 4% market gain. Thanks to the crypto bubble being labeled on this chart we can see AMD market share surges only when mining takes hold. Then it absolutely craters when the bubble burst as no one wanted any of those cards at that point. While the 20 series was released in Q3 of 2018, it was only the 2080 at $800 (sept 20) and the 2080ti (Sept 27) at $1200+ in the last couple of weeks of the quarter so that clearly wasn't the driving force in the 7% market shift that quarter especially if you remember how poorly the series was received, and almost everyone recommending the 1080Ti over the 2080. The surge by Nvidia was gamers picking up slightly discounted Pascal cards, while no one wanted heavily discounted AMD cards. The announcement of the $800 2080 actually kept the prices of the 1080Ti higher than they probably should have been. They never dropped below $600, which was not that far below the $700 MSRP, because that was a bargain compared to the similarly performing $800 2080.
 
The market share numbers say otherwise. There was no major shift in market share when AMD released the RX400 despite them claiming they were targeting the mass market (when in reality they were incapable of competing at the topend with Nvidia) while Nvidia releases at the top end first. So AMD releases cards from $109 to $240 to compete with Nvidia releasing cards from $470 to $700. If you're targeting the mass market and your new cards are 1/4 to 1/3 the cost of the competition, you would expect more than a 4% market gain. Thanks to the crypto bubble being labeled on this chart we can see AMD market share surges only when mining takes hold. Then it absolutely craters when the bubble burst as no one wanted any of those cards at that point. While the 20 series was released in Q3 of 2018, it was only the 2080 at $800 (sept 20) and the 2080ti (Sept 27) at $1200+ in the last couple of weeks of the quarter so that clearly wasn't the driving force in the 7% market shift that quarter especially if you remember how poorly the series was received, and almost everyone recommending the 1080Ti over the 2080. The surge by Nvidia was gamers picking up slightly discounted Pascal cards, while no one wanted heavily discounted AMD cards. The announcement of the $800 2080 actually kept the prices of the 1080Ti higher than they probably should have been. They never dropped below $600, which was not that far below the $700 MSRP, because that was a bargain compared to the similarly performing $800 2080.
AMD wasn't trying to compete with Nvidia's $400+ enthusiast lineup with the RX 480. And Nvidia also had cards directly competing with AMD's lineup, with the GTX 1060 launching just a few weeks after the RX 480, so it wasn't like AMD was targeting that market unopposed. Both cards were very attractive mid-range options at the time of their launch, each offering a huge performance uplift over previous offerings in the mainstream segment, so both the cards from AMD and Nvidia sold really well in that range. Certainly Nvidia sold more cards, but that's because they already held most of the gaming market prior to the 400-series launch, and had more manufacturing capacity available as a result.

And as the chart you posted helpfully indicates, AMD went from losing significant market share with the 200 and 300-series, to clawing a good chunk of it back with the 400-series, despite only covering a portion of the product range, and not having anything for sale above $250. It absolutely doesn't show "zero demand for AMD cards" as you suggested, but rather that AMD was gaining market share back as a result of their solid mid-range lineup at the time.

And while we see a dip in sales relative to Nvidia after the mining market crashed, keep in mind these are relative percentages, and Nvidia had a new generation of cards launching at the time, while AMD mostly just had the same cards that they had launched a couple years prior. Nvidia's new high-end lineup combined with a glut of existing cards on the secondhand market meant that they had the advantage as far as new hardware sales were concerned. But again, this chart only show the relative portion of sales going to each company, and not the total number of sales. Nvidia's new hardware sales didn't see a big surge after the mining market collapsed, but rather they too dropped off substantially, so the total market size was smaller. As a result, Nvidia's new lineup was able to make a larger difference relative to AMD, even if the total sales during that period weren't particularly high. Since the chart only shows the total market normalized to 100%, it doesn't really give a clear picture of what the actual hardware sales were like at any given point in time.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY