Client Stories
Testimonials
The audit showed our "110 TH/s" row was actually delivering 94 TH/s because of inlet temperatures. Filecypressfield's phased plan let us swap the worst eight units first while keeping cash flow steady. Scheduling took an extra week we had not budgeted, but the report was thorough.
— Min-jae K., 180-unit farm, Seongnam
We were about to pre-order a batch from a broker in Shenzhen. Their procurement review caught mismatched power supplies and a voided warranty clause. Saved us roughly ₩48 million in hardware we would have had to RMA immediately.
— Hye-jin L., hosting operator, Incheon
Dae-won told us to delay Phase 2 by two months because our landlord had not approved the PDU upgrade yet. That honesty cost them a follow-on fee in the short term, but we kept the lease. The Phase 1 report alone was enough to show the landlord our plan was serious.
— Tae-woo R., 65-unit private farm, Suwon
Clear writing. The hash-rate audit flagged three S17 units with failing fans before they took down the whole rack. I would have liked same-week scheduling, but their earliest slot was ten days out during the summer rush.
— Yuna P., co-location tenant, Busan
Case Note: Three-Phase Rollout in Gyeonggi
A hosting client operating 142 mixed units asked us to plan retirement of sub-0.05 TH/s efficient models while maintaining slot occupancy for their tenants.
Phase 1 (Month 1–2): Retired 28 highest-wattage units. Listed on secondary market through client’s broker. Recovered 62% of replacement budget.
Phase 2 (Month 4–5): Installed 34 new units at 0.08 TH/s average after procurement review cleared two vendor options.
Phase 3 (Month 8–9): Final swap of remaining legacy row. Cooling baffle adjustments documented in audit prevented repeat throttling.
Total downtime per phase: under 6 hours per row. The client used our reports to justify a revised electricity deposit with their landlord.
Testimonials
The audit showed our "110 TH/s" row was actually delivering 94 TH/s because of inlet temperatures. Filecypressfield's phased plan let us swap the worst eight units first while keeping cash flow steady. Scheduling took an extra week we had not budgeted, but the report was thorough.
— Min-jae K., 180-unit farm, Seongnam
We were about to pre-order a batch from a broker in Shenzhen. Their procurement review caught mismatched power supplies and a voided warranty clause. Saved us roughly ₩48 million in hardware we would have had to RMA immediately.
— Hye-jin L., hosting operator, Incheon
Dae-won told us to delay Phase 2 by two months because our landlord had not approved the PDU upgrade yet. That honesty cost them a follow-on fee in the short term, but we kept the lease. The Phase 1 report alone was enough to show the landlord our plan was serious.
— Tae-woo R., 65-unit private farm, Suwon
Clear writing. The hash-rate audit flagged three S17 units with failing fans before they took down the whole rack. I would have liked same-week scheduling, but their earliest slot was ten days out during the summer rush.
— Yuna P., co-location tenant, Busan
Case Note: Three-Phase Rollout in Gyeonggi
A hosting client operating 142 mixed units asked us to plan retirement of sub-0.05 TH/s efficient models while maintaining slot occupancy for their tenants.
Phase 1 (Month 1–2): Retired 28 highest-wattage units. Listed on secondary market through client’s broker. Recovered 62% of replacement budget.
Phase 2 (Month 4–5): Installed 34 new units at 0.08 TH/s average after procurement review cleared two vendor options.
Phase 3 (Month 8–9): Final swap of remaining legacy row. Cooling baffle adjustments documented in audit prevented repeat throttling.
Total downtime per phase: under 6 hours per row. The client used our reports to justify a revised electricity deposit with their landlord.