considering 12624 servers with 32GB Ran, 480Gb Storage and 2x8c-16t, we have more of everything. Public price Dell R350 20850€ each is 8M€, lets assume 2x for a 4 sockets version (really conservative) you get $20M max considering 352 servers with 768GB Ram, >16TB Storage and 2x16t, we have less CPU but Flux is VCPU. My estimate of cost of a such infrastructure using Dell servers bare-metal is about $20M-$50M. The locked stacking is about $158M (132M FLUX) and this is about 3x to 5x more than what you need to create an equivalent computing power. So FLUX is basically equivalent to a room in a standard Datacenter. This indicator is the most important as the RAM can’t really be over-allocated and you can estimate the equivalent of physical server it correspond to: this is about 352 servers as they are commonly configured in a data-center. The good news is higher the token is and slower the number of nodes (and the service offering) is growing.Ĭurrently there are 14.000 nodes mainly cumulus with a total of RAM of 271TB RAM. The Reward APY is decreasing with the number of node. The size of available capacity is also limited by the reward distribution going down with the number of node deployed. The APY is in my point of view really low compared to the risk taken by stacking $48k, many project are offering better APY with a lower complexity to be supported. This one depends on the token price, I’ve taken the current price ($1.2). You have a running cost for the server so you have a REAL APY. The current FLUX per day is given in the following analytics. So the real reward APY depend on the number of nodes. The Rewards are not based on your stacking but based on the overall rewards per blocs. so depends on the number of active nodes you will need to wait a way long for your reward. The reward are given to one of the node on every block, per type of node. You need to stake a lot of token to add an instance on the network, the size of the machine you can add to the network is related to the amount you stack. This is a good way to reduce the available token supply and also maintain the token value. The other 50% are distributed to the one providing the hardware with a proof-of-stake approach. Clearly this is the useless idiot part of the tribe: they burn energy in mining and this gives a value to the token, it basically protect the token value and that’s it, all other operation running the chain can be made with a PoS and run on the Flux computers themself, creating a usage. I assume that GPU miners are happy but this is getting no benefit to any distributing computing. Why do I say this ? The way the token distribution is made is quite strange: you have a proof-of-work mining for 50% of the distributed token. Flux, the more trendy but less making senseįlux is a really strong project with the larger size, this project seem in my point of view being successful thanks to all the artifact in place to make it a profitable project for mining but in the same time, it just not good for what it has been done: delivering computing power. As there are many different solutions and it has been a bit long to test all and publish them in a single blog post, this will be split into different one. In this blog post, I’ll review some of the projects and explain how to be part and use the one that seems the more reliable. This layer is a IaaS or CaaS layer like we can find on Azure, Aws, GCP, Ovh… This layer is an important piece of a decentralized cloud in construction in the web3. The principle is to be able to deploy a workload on someone else computed to serve a reliable web service. Many different crypto projects are running decentralized computing as it’s a good piece to complete the distributed storage or messaging I previously documented.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |