- Nov 16, 2006
- But anything soaking up GPUs to meet crypto demand can certainly benefit more from FPGA's right? Bitcoin is past both GPUs and FPGAs so its not really contributing to the current state of affairs in GPU availability, but stuff like ETH is.AMD just bought Xillinx who are a major player in the FPGA area. Hell, they're one the companies (along with Altera) that pretty much pioneered the technology.
However most of the bitcoin mining is done on ASICs which are dedicated hardware and will always have an advantage over an FPGA for any dedicated task like that. An FPGA would be better in that it could be configured to mine different types of cryptocurrencies depending on shifts in valuation, but I don't know if there's enough valuation shift in the currencies to account for the performance uplift that an ASIC will grant, especially when process improvements will obsolete hardware faster than just about anything else.
Bitcoin is big enough that someone can probably afford the prices of the cutting edge wafers, so even though a company like Xillinx could use a cutting edge process just by virtue of having so much volume and flexibility with an FPGA, they still won't be able to achieve the an economic edge over an ASIC.
Companies like AMD could take some of the mining pressure off their GPU division by pumping out either drastically cheaper FPGAs that matched performance or equally priced FPGAs that exceed the performance of equivalent GPUs.