Innosilicon Grin Miner G32 Preliminary Specification

G32-Mini 21.5G 140W $788

G32-500 100G 520W $2888

G32-1800 328G 1800W $9388

G32 achieves full compatibility of Cuckatoo31+ and Cuckatoo32+ algorithm ( Cuckatoo29/30 also backwards compatible) in the same hardware.

Link is here:

1 Like

I didn’t find the yield data. How many G32 do you plan to offer? or where to track the pre-order numbers?

Delivering two months before Obelisk. Very interesting. Some other interesting factors:

You are eligible for full refund if our final G32 spec after actual product testing fails to meet the above Performance Target by Sept 30th this year.

G32-Mini PCIe Card - Easy installation like a GPU card

full compatibility of Cuckatoo31+ and Cuckatoo32+ algorithm ( Cuckatoo29/30 also backwards compatible) in the same hardware .

Exciting to see these ASICs are four months away! Also important to note that Obelisk is 31 compatible while Innosilicon is 31 and 32 compatible.

Their promised date to offer a refund is September 30th. That’s only 1 month before Obelisk. Obelisk is currently on track to ship units as early as August, however we’ve learned to put some buffer days in because things can go wrong during manufacturing. This may just be a case of Innosilicon being less conservative with the number of buffer days they are using.

The Innosilicon machines make a 2.5x TMTO in order to support CC32. That means that their machine will be able to produce more weight per second on CC31 until May 2020. That gives any competition over a year to come up with a superior CC32 miner, and that competition has an automatic advantage because they will likely not need a TMTO.

In my appraisal, Innosilicon’s CC32 functionality does not add any practical value, especially because the TMTO is so heavy.

Also worth noting that because the ASIC-friendly rewards are ramping up, that first month is the least valuable month of mining.


[Innosilicon] Estimated delivery time if you pre-order now starts in August 2019.

[Obelisk] Shipping estimated for October.

No offense but Obelisk has a track record of delivering nothing on time. First to market has a huge advantage. If both companies ship on time and Innosilicon delivers 10,000-20,000 units, what’s the ROI look like for an Obelisk miner two months later?

If Innosilicon delivers 10,000 units, every single Innosilicon unit will lose money even if Obelisk doesn’t ship at all. This is why Innosilicon’s lack of commitment to a production volume should be an extremely large red flag. You have no idea how many miners are coming, but if it’s more than 3,000, there is no opportunity for those miners to make their money back.

Innosilicon has never made a sustainable number of miners for a small altcoin like Grin. If their sale is successful, I believe it’s reasonable to expect that every single one of their customers will lose money, even if they have the only miner on the market.

My question was in regards to how it effects YOUR product. The only place you potentially addressed that was this line. Are you cancelling your Obelisk grin coin miners?

It’s truly unfortunate how much you criticize your competitor without offering solutions for your customers. Your official Obelisk twitter was even mocking their renderings yesterday.

If Innosilicon makes 10,000 units, then the GRN1 will not be profitable.

Obelisk is offering transparency around production volumes, is offering conservative shipping dates, and is offering conservative specifications. Obelisk is also offering official audits to reassure customers of our process and that our claimed specs and architectures are accurate.

We are doing everything we can to assure our customers, if you think that there is more we could be doing, we are open to suggestions.

Then stop publicly mocking your competitor (who is on schedule to beat you to market yet again).

You can be the most transparent company in the world but acting like a child and mocking your competition can only hurt your reputation. IMO, being beat to market on a third ASIC may demonstrate that you guys should go back to decentralized storage. I, like many people, have lost interest in Siacoin because of the Obelisk scandals/distractions.

Obelisk is putting out 420 GPS * 2500 effective units ~ 1,000,000 GPS

You can expect Inno do make at least 5000 effective units of G32-1800 doing 328 GPS each, hence ~ 1,640,000 GPS.

Assuming Inno is out by 15th August, and Obelisk is out by 1st Oct, and calculating up to Aug 2020 phaseout of C31, $3 per grin value:

G32-1800 will make - $6624 vs a cost of $9388
GRIN1 will make - $8842 vs a cost of $10000

And this does not take into account electricity.

And most likely there will more effective C32 units later, so Inno C32 may make peanuts effectively.

So both are in a loss.

Even worse, if Inno were to make 10,000 units, then:

G32-1800 will make - $4115 vs a cost of $9388
GRIN1 will make - $5269 vs a cost of $10000

An actual disaster at the current costs of both Inno and Obelisk units.

1 Like

We are raising awareness about their deceptive and predatory business practices. We have seen through many of their products in the past that they will act and produce in a way that is toxic and damaging to their customers. We see bad things happening and we feel that the right thing to do is to call them out on it.

Why do you think we can expect Inno to make at least 5,000 G32-1800 units? That’s $45 million spent to capture a total block reward of $30 million. Whoever funds that production is strictly losing money.

If both come to market, both are at a loss, yes.

I have no idea about production costs. Inno’s revenue on selling 5000 would be ~$23 million. Are you saying that they would produce lower number and would be profitable only on sales?

I am assuming that they will put out at least 1,000,000 hashes which give them at least the same market share as Obelisk.

At 2500 units, the return figures would $9500 for G32 vs $12202 for GRIN1. So lessor the miner’s Inno produces, the more profitable GRIN1 becomes. Would’nt you doubt that that would their strategy?

At 1000 units, it would be $12000 vs $16000. A winning number for both sides. But will that happen and would Inno make any money?

So by that logic Obelisk should cease selling unprofitable “toxic” preorders that will ultimately damage their customers? Or should a free market be allowed to be a free market? You can’t fork your way out of getting beat to market this time.

1 Like

According to Obelisk API, only 113 GRN1 have been ordered thusfar so perhaps that’ll influence things somewhat.

I hope so. Both sides have seemingly priced their units on inflated future values.

I would imagine its far better to self-mine then sell units in depressed market. So price the units high enough that you make good money on sales if they sell, and self mine as backup in case they don’e find buyers… I suppose that’s what will happen, unsold units will go to self-mining. Until the price recovers.

The GRN32 mini looks cute. I really like to buy one, even when I lose on it.

1 Like

You are right on the notion of potential self-mining.

Manipulation of peoples’ perception and the overall market is problematic in this unregulated space.

-wash-trading to create an artificial volume,
-paper tigers to inject FUD or mis-direction… until it is too late
-emergence of “new” member IDs and posts.
-secret-mining and then dumping of those very same miners to customers

Perhaps, this Grin ASIC rollout has validated one thing. There must be something of real value here to create this food fight between the players.

Someone will come out on-top. Will it be the dirtiest player? Or will there be space for more than one player?

We are talking to a number of larger buyers, I would not assume that the GRN1 sales count will stay at 113.

You stated above:

Wouldn’t you agree that selling preorders for Obelisk miners that you admit will not ROI is “toxic and damaging to their customers”? The very same critique that you have of Innosilicon practices. Are you no better than Innosilicon now?