|
Title: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: raskul on December 23, 2014, 07:32:09 AM I have some serious reservations about how Bitmain have gone about creating their newest miner, the S5.
After seeing the magazine adverts and watching the speculation build, it would seem, to me at least, that they are designing a miner which has a good chance of failure due to the risky design. Bitmain have done a private batch of S3++ using the chain design on an entirely new chip, in preparation to sell the S5 en-mass. S3++ hasn't been released to the public, so we can only presume that there are a few large farms, with vested interest, mining large scale, across the world on a private batch of S3++ miners. The string design is a very bad method to use, after so many experienced the troubles with the Prisma from AM... and... AM had to recall an entire batch. Sure the S5 is BMT's most efficient miner to date but it's quite late to the party, the SP20 can reach this efficiency and below with proven dc2dc stable design and... without what seems to be, by Bitmain, a risky cost cutting exercise. I can't help but think something is not quite right here... presuming that there were problems with the chips, or the boards on the S5's for them to appear this late after advertising... having an open-top design of the casing, surely won't allow enough airflow, either? I can't get my head around what Bitmain are trying to accomplish here, so I'm putting it out there... it's a product which has high chance of failure and I can foresee many RMA'd units. :-\ Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: Melty Melty on December 23, 2014, 08:03:24 AM It's a nice idea in that you save a hell of a lot of copper, I just don't know if anybody is actually able to pull it off. There's a lot of hints here that the Antminer chips use the same masks as the Bitfury ones, the specs of the Bitfury 1 and Antminer's first chips are almost identical other than the choice of package. It's suggested elsewhere that Bitfury would be making a new chip, what if this is it re-badged? I'd have a lot more faith in it working if the design is a third generation Bitfury rather than a third generation Antminer.
Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: smilingloki on December 23, 2014, 08:14:18 AM I have to say it looks a lot like the S3 as Raskul says it looks like an S3++ and frankly after the performance of my 18 x s3's - I have to say.
If it walks like a duck, looks like a duck and smells like a duck..........................its probably a duck. I wouldnt invest my money in these. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: raskul on December 23, 2014, 08:18:16 AM I have to say it looks a lot like the S3 as Raskul says it looks like an S3++ and frankly after the performance of my 18 x s3's - I have to say. If it walks like a duck, looks like a duck and smells like a duck..........................its probably a duck. I wouldnt invest my money in these. i never buy batch1 of any miner anyway so i'm reserving my full judgement until we can read some proper unbiased reviews. from reading your post in the S3 thread it does indeed seem like Bitmain had actually sent you refurbished units from prior batches, rather than new stock... I can only presume that the S5's which don't go up in smoke will be subject to the same. And initially, I thought the open top idea was quite a novel way of dissipating the heat from the chips, but I was a bit drunk at the time. quack-quack. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: raskul on December 23, 2014, 10:09:02 AM to be fair it's not just me with apprehension... cross-quoting these here as I've noted some of my own posts being deleted from the S5 thread:
Another thing that really worries me is the chained design. Does it mean if one chip fails, the whole board fails? So instead of getting 00XX0X00 we get -----------------? Please tell me I'm wrong. Hi, there will be two kinds of possible fails. Both are possible. But string design makes the PCB very simple, which left far more less possible reasons for the hardware to go wrong. That is what we have seen in the S3++, a private batch which use chained design with BM1382 chip. Thank you for your reply. But like you said, there is still a chance of failure. With the current S4 for example. Even if one chip is completely dead. I can still use it. But with the chained design if one chip goes silent, that's it. End of story. I like the power efficiency but your price tag.. and the chance of having one miner out of action just because of 1 single chip... I don't know, it's nagging me in my head... Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: raskul on December 23, 2014, 10:11:52 AM this.
Interesting product. A lot will depend on pricing, but at similar pricing and efficiency I think you'd have to give the nod to the SP20 due to many of the reasons other people have listed here (established product, ease of changing settings), but also due to the potential risks inherent in the chained design. Bitmain saves significantly on costs by eliminating the VRMs and should get a small efficiency boost from it as well, but so did AM and everyone saw how the Prismas turned out. This wouldn't be a product I'd be investing a lot of money into until the first batch is field tested for awhile. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: raskul on December 23, 2014, 10:12:58 AM but they are very prepared for your RMA. caveat emptor
S5 will open sales VERY SOON!!!! Noise wise, we will post DB level reading like it was done in S3 and S4 in the past Happy Shopping! ;D PS: Limited 90-Day Warranty The manufacturer warrants this product to be free from defects in workmanship and materials, under normal use and conditions, for a period of 90 days from the date of original purchase. Shipping and handling fees to be paid by the customer. The manufacturer agrees, at its option during the warranty period, to repair any defect in material or workmanship or to furnish a repaired or refurbished product of equal value in exchange without charge (except for a fee for shipping, handling, packing, return postage, and insurance which will be incurred by the customer). Such repair or replacement is subject to verification of the defect or malfunction and proof of purchase as confirmed by showing the model number on original dated sales receipt. IMPORTANT: DO NOT RETURN THIS UNIT TO THE RETAIL STORE FOR SERVICE. INSTEAD, CALL 1-844-248-6246 FOR ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS WARRANTY OR PRODUCT This warranty does not cover: • Any product which has been subject to damage due to an act of God, misuse, neglect, accident, abuse, commercial use, or modification of, or to, any part of the product, including the antenna. • Damage due to improper operation or maintenance, connection to improper voltage supply, or attempted repair by anyone other than the Manufacturer. • Re-manufactured units, product sold AS IS or closeout product. • The cost of shipping this product to the Service Center and its return to the owner, if the product was determined to be free of defect or out of warranty period. Under no circumstances shall the Manufacturer be liable for any loss (direct, indirect, incidental, foreseen, unforeseen, special or consequential) or for any damage arising out of, or in connection with, the use of this product. This warranty is valid only in the United States and Canada and grants specific legal rights, it does not extend to owners of the product other than to the original owner. You may also have other rights which vary from state to state. Products out of warranty requiring service will be reviewed individually along with the fees associated. Warranty is subject to change; please visit our website at http://www. bitmaintech.com for the most up to date version. IMPORTANT: FOR INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO RETURN YOUR PRODUCT CALL 1-844-248-6248 Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: Tupsu on December 23, 2014, 11:57:38 AM Today I bought 12 pieces Antminer S5
I trust them today more than SP20 , especially after seeing this picture. Because they have 4 PCI-E slot, For 600W. SP20 has 4 PCI-E slot for 1200W (Max) I have 3 x SP20 and 6pc SP20 purchased by December 17, to get my hands probably 29.12 I also have a 5pc KNC Neptune, with no burnt PCI-E slot. The rest are all Bitmaintech production. (37x S3, 6x C1, 2x S4 ) It would be seen that picture before, then I would not have ordered more SP20. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: raskul on December 23, 2014, 12:11:00 PM Today I bought 12 pieces Antminer S5 https://i.imgur.com/3NeiVUI.jpg I have 3 x SP20 [imghttps://i.imgur.com/3NeiVUI.jpg[/img] modules and controller is fine, will it still cover in warranty if I replace the sockets my self? How did that happen? I know that smell ;D PSUs ok? What cable gauge? What PSU model? Cables came with the PSU? PSU:Super Flower Leadex Platinum 1200W Issue might be caused due to: 1. loose connectivity between the wire and the pin. 2. dis-connectivity of some of the wires causing over current on the connected wires. 3. over powering the PSU causing heat on wires to melt the connectors - can be for example due to wrong AWG or connectors that are not suitable for high power. 4. home made cables with long wires and unsuitable connector/wires. Can you reply the following: 1. what was the power limit per each of the 4 inputs? (this is defined at the GUI) 2. did you use the ATX original cables? 3. what is the cable AWG? 4. what was the ambient temperature? We'll check the PSU model you were using. Please contact support for RMA, don't attempt to fix yourself. We kindly ask that you'll the PSU and cables for us for further testing. Guy 2.no (but cable that of the picture is) 3.I cant tell, maybe 10AWG or 9AWG 4.32C report from another working SP20 i don't wanna go RMA because i think the problem is on my plugs, if you give me a new one that is really not fair to you, i just want to keep this miner cover in warranty after i replaced the socket myself. you can see the problem. the user put the wrong cables. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: Guy Corem on December 23, 2014, 01:12:23 PM ... Thank you for the double post.It would be seen that picture before, then I would not have ordered more SP20. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=902305.msg9924332#msg9924332 Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: GoRDoN-ChoU on December 23, 2014, 03:18:34 PM Today I bought 12 pieces Antminer S5 THIS IS MY BADI trust them today more than SP20 , especially after seeing this picture. Because they have 4 PCI-E slot, For 600W. SP20 has 4 PCI-E slot for 1200W (Max) I have 3 x SP20 and 6pc SP20 purchased by December 17, to get my hands probably 29.12 I also have a 5pc KNC Neptune, with no burnt PCI-E slot. The rest are all Bitmaintech production. (37x S3, 6x C1, 2x S4 ) It would be seen that picture before, then I would not have ordered more SP20. spondoolies is so kind that give me a new one just for free!! Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: raskul on December 23, 2014, 03:20:09 PM ...and so endeth the lesson in customer service...
;D Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: Guy Corem on December 23, 2014, 03:22:05 PM ... But please use good cables this time...spondoolies is so kind that give me a new one just for free!! Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: GoRDoN-ChoU on December 23, 2014, 03:49:22 PM ... But please use good cables this time...spondoolies is so kind that give me a new one just for free!! Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: SychoPhant on December 23, 2014, 03:50:03 PM I have some serious reservations about how Bitmain have gone about creating their newest miner, the S5. After seeing the magazine adverts and watching the speculation build, it would seem, to me at least, that they are designing a miner which has a good chance of failure due to the risky design. Bitmain have done a private batch of S3++ using the chain design on an entirely new chip, in preparation to sell the S5 en-mass. S3++ hasn't been released to the public, so we can only presume that there are a few large farms, with vested interest, mining large scale, across the world on a private batch of S3++ miners. The string design is a very bad method to use, after so many experienced the troubles with the Prisma from AM... and... AM had to recall an entire batch. Sure the S5 is BMT's most efficient miner to date but it's quite late to the party, the SP20 can reach this efficiency and below with proven dc2dc stable design and... without what seems to be, by Bitmain, a risky cost cutting exercise. I can't help but think something is not quite right here... presuming that there were problems with the chips, or the boards on the S5's for them to appear this late after advertising... having an open-top design of the casing, surely won't allow enough airflow, either? I can't get my head around what Bitmain are trying to accomplish here, so I'm putting it out there... it's a product which has high chance of failure and I can foresee many RMA'd units. :-\ Seems serious old boy.... Is there any evidence of localized heating or hot spots on the boards? How about in the Bui, any sign of uneven cooling? Are you running at 12v or 9? What guage cables are you running from the PSU and is there any sign of excess heating? One wouldn't want to invest in something which has design problems. Do you have much experience in asic or electronic design yourself? I'll put my bulk order of 52 on hold till I hear back from you old chap. Have a tidy profit from those nice chaps at GAW I'm looking to re invest and these look like just the ticket. Toodle pip for now.... Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: raskul on December 23, 2014, 04:01:48 PM Code: [quote author=raskul link=topic=903102.msg9922620#msg9922620 date=1419319929] Seems serious old boy.... Is there any evidence of localized heating or hot spots on the boards? How about in the Bui, any sign of uneven cooling? Are you running at 12v or 9? What guage cables are you running from the PSU and is there any sign of excess heating? I have no evidence as units are yet to ship, simply from what I see on the announcement thread, makes me irk towards something not quite right about the design. :-\ One wouldn't want to invest in something which has design problems. Do you have much experience in asic or electronic design yourself? I never buy batch 1 miners for the specific reason that you just can't be sure and I only have experience in these fields from my home mining endeavours. It's a serious gamble to lay out vast amounts of money on something which has not gone through proper independent testing. I'd preferred to see a few independent reviews before any miner goes on sale, not just BMT. I'll put my bulk order of 52 on hold till I hear back from you old chap. I cannot make decisions for you, you should weigh up the facts for yourself and decide accordingly. I'd just like to see any initial bumps evened out before anyone puts their money into it. Toodle pip for now.... all the best to you and yours this festive season. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: Photon939 on December 23, 2014, 05:56:12 PM My main concern with the S5 is why does it cost so much?
The C1 is $325 and has FOUR hashing boards. The C1 boards also have a DC/DC converter for every two chips IIRC. The buck controller ICs probably cost more per unit than their custom silicon. There is a major BOM cost reduction going to the chained design. The controller looks the same (cost reduced beaglebone black), the new chips of course have an NRE that needs to be recouped so they're probably just milking the first batch of people who are gonna buy it just because it's new. Not even considering the possibility of instability or catastrophic failure due to the chain design, I'm gonna sit on my hands for a while. I'm willing to bet the first few price drops will be pretty good. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: dogie on December 23, 2014, 06:49:36 PM My main concern with the S5 is why does it cost so much? The C1 is $325 and has FOUR hashing boards. The C1 boards also have a DC/DC converter for every two chips IIRC. The buck controller ICs probably cost more per unit than their custom silicon. There is a major BOM cost reduction going to the chained design. The controller looks the same (cost reduced beaglebone black), the new chips of course have an NRE that needs to be recouped so they're probably just milking the first batch of people who are gonna buy it just because it's new. Not even considering the possibility of instability or catastrophic failure due to the chain design, I'm gonna sit on my hands for a while. I'm willing to bet the first few price drops will be pretty good. Who said they aren't losing $100s on the C1 at that price? You don't know. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: philipma1957 on December 23, 2014, 09:34:26 PM here is my take on this.
we don't know if gear works well until the first adapters use it test it and post on it. Asic Miner 1)Usb sticks pretty solid worked pretty well 2)Blades pretty solid worked pretty well 3)49 port usb hub issues with the stock fuse many melted. most of us used a lessor fuse problem solved 4) cubes many batches had issues and burned or melted fuses 5)little tubes had issues some melted some popped caps 6) prismas worse then the tubes I owned all of the above. I only felt safe with the usb sticks and the blades Bitmaintech S-1 pretty safe a few but not many issues S-3 very safe a few but not many issues S-2 shipped poorly lots of psu issues S-4 better then the s-2 by far C-1 some water pump issues Spondoolies sp10 worked well not many burnups Sp20 I have 8 they work great at 1500gh or under If I owned the company I would have called them 1500gh miners sp30 Some psu issues underpreformed a bit. spondoolies paid comp money sp31 a few psu issues sp35 a few psu issues. For the sake of argument I am using the 3 companies above. I would fear Asic Miners new build based on the last 4 things they sold. but I will buy one and test it. I am getting an S-5 as a test demo... I will test the shit out of it would I fear to buy it no. Would I buy 100 from the first batch no. Sp20E do I fear it no would I buy more yes. BUT I drive my Kia Forte at 70mph max or about 115KPH max. I clock my Sp20E at 1400gh or 1430gh max I do not even attempt to think 1600 or 1700gh. So when I get the S-5 I will test the shit out of it and report back. Until then I won't fear the design. PS I will power it with my 760 watt seasonic platinum for the first set of tests. why is that the seasonic has short and surge protection. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: notlist3d on December 23, 2014, 10:55:06 PM My main concern with the S5 is why does it cost so much? The C1 is $325 and has FOUR hashing boards. The C1 boards also have a DC/DC converter for every two chips IIRC. The buck controller ICs probably cost more per unit than their custom silicon. There is a major BOM cost reduction going to the chained design. The controller looks the same (cost reduced beaglebone black), the new chips of course have an NRE that needs to be recouped so they're probably just milking the first batch of people who are gonna buy it just because it's new. Not even considering the possibility of instability or catastrophic failure due to the chain design, I'm gonna sit on my hands for a while. I'm willing to bet the first few price drops will be pretty good. Who said they aren't losing $100s on the C1 at that price? You don't know. I think them doing a batch 2 proves it. But I don't have the info you do so I could be wrong. I think they would have stopped after batch one, or stopped it completely like L1's. For what it is worth I think we will see SP and Bitmain continue to battle it out. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: DevonMiner on December 23, 2014, 11:06:19 PM For what it is worth I think we will see SP and Bitmain continue to battle it out. Yes, that is where the market is at the moment ... interesting times ... Bitmain celebrating 12 months ... Sponds yet to do that. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: dmeter on December 24, 2014, 06:06:46 AM Today I bought 12 pieces Antminer S5 THIS IS MY BADI trust them today more than SP20 , especially after seeing this picture. Because they have 4 PCI-E slot, For 600W. SP20 has 4 PCI-E slot for 1200W (Max) I have 3 x SP20 and 6pc SP20 purchased by December 17, to get my hands probably 29.12 I also have a 5pc KNC Neptune, with no burnt PCI-E slot. The rest are all Bitmaintech production. (37x S3, 6x C1, 2x S4 ) It would be seen that picture before, then I would not have ordered more SP20. spondoolies is so kind that give me a new one just for free!! http://www.ebay.com/itm/Single-Seasonic-power-supply-modular-cable-/321608923301?pt=US_Power_Cables_Connectors&hash=item4ae162b8a5 after the experience with mining ati r9 290 all this noname chinese shit PSU is simple shit. only premium PSU have adequate cable. I burn a lot of cable until I realized Seasonic PSU is, other PSU is Simpley lottery When you baying seasonic cable check is seller official seasonic dealer,because lot bad chinese copy is available.I do not understand how the noname Chinese think that if Avg 17 cable can haul 25A. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: el_rlee on December 24, 2014, 06:58:19 AM I made really good experiences with Antminers so far (except the big ones S2 and S4)
Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: raskul on December 24, 2014, 07:45:14 AM My main concern with the S5 is why does it cost so much? The C1 is $325 and has FOUR hashing boards. The C1 boards also have a DC/DC converter for every two chips IIRC. The buck controller ICs probably cost more per unit than their custom silicon. There is a major BOM cost reduction going to the chained design. The controller looks the same (cost reduced beaglebone black), the new chips of course have an NRE that needs to be recouped so they're probably just milking the first batch of people who are gonna buy it just because it's new. Not even considering the possibility of instability or catastrophic failure due to the chain design, I'm gonna sit on my hands for a while. I'm willing to bet the first few price drops will be pretty good. Who said they aren't losing $100s on the C1 at that price? You don't know. I think them doing a batch 2 proves it. But I don't have the info you do so I could be wrong. I think they would have stopped after batch one, or stopped it completely like L1's. For what it is worth I think we will see SP and Bitmain continue to battle it out. Batches are artificiality created as a marketing tactic. For all we know the first batch might be few tens of S5 to test the product on live customers. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: GoRDoN-ChoU on December 24, 2014, 10:57:42 AM Today I bought 12 pieces Antminer S5 THIS IS MY BADI trust them today more than SP20 , especially after seeing this picture. Because they have 4 PCI-E slot, For 600W. SP20 has 4 PCI-E slot for 1200W (Max) I have 3 x SP20 and 6pc SP20 purchased by December 17, to get my hands probably 29.12 I also have a 5pc KNC Neptune, with no burnt PCI-E slot. The rest are all Bitmaintech production. (37x S3, 6x C1, 2x S4 ) It would be seen that picture before, then I would not have ordered more SP20. spondoolies is so kind that give me a new one just for free!! http://www.ebay.com/itm/Single-Seasonic-power-supply-modular-cable-/321608923301?pt=US_Power_Cables_Connectors&hash=item4ae162b8a5 after the experience with mining ati r9 290 all this noname chinese shit PSU is simple shit. only premium PSU have adequate cable. I burn a lot of cable until I realized Seasonic PSU is, other PSU is Simpley lottery When you baying seasonic cable check is seller official seasonic dealer,because lot bad chinese copy is available.I do not understand how the noname Chinese think that if Avg 17 cable can haul 25A. But shitty PSU that you said is come from CHINA surely, not from TAIWAN, we were all called as chinese but there is a BIG difference between us. I use super flower's PSU since I started mining, high C/P and realible! 90% load and no anyone fault so far https://i.imgur.com/QhI8Nih.jpg Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: notlist3d on December 24, 2014, 01:18:20 PM My main concern with the S5 is why does it cost so much? The C1 is $325 and has FOUR hashing boards. The C1 boards also have a DC/DC converter for every two chips IIRC. The buck controller ICs probably cost more per unit than their custom silicon. There is a major BOM cost reduction going to the chained design. The controller looks the same (cost reduced beaglebone black), the new chips of course have an NRE that needs to be recouped so they're probably just milking the first batch of people who are gonna buy it just because it's new. Not even considering the possibility of instability or catastrophic failure due to the chain design, I'm gonna sit on my hands for a while. I'm willing to bet the first few price drops will be pretty good. Who said they aren't losing $100s on the C1 at that price? You don't know. I think them doing a batch 2 proves it. But I don't have the info you do so I could be wrong. I think they would have stopped after batch one, or stopped it completely like L1's. For what it is worth I think we will see SP and Bitmain continue to battle it out. Batches are artificiality created as a marketing tactic. For all we know the first batch might be few tens of S5 to test the product on live customers. They were out of stock of C1's for a bit that makes me think they did run out to stop selling. But again I could be wrong I have no proof either way. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: RoadStress on December 29, 2014, 08:10:39 PM First S5 in the wild: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=902305.msg9977426#msg9977426
raskul you missed your 15 minutes of glory! Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: raskul on December 29, 2014, 08:45:42 PM First S5 in the wild: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=902305.msg9977426#msg9977426 raskul you missed your 15 minutes of glory! I'm reserving judgement until i test my own unit. I intend to draw a circle on the floor and surround it with candles to keep away evil spirits and unwanted outside influences. Teehee 😜 Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: philipma1957 on December 29, 2014, 08:53:32 PM First S5 in the wild: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=902305.msg9977426#msg9977426 raskul you missed your 15 minutes of glory! I'm reserving judgement until i test my own unit. I intend to draw a circle on the floor and surround it with candles to keep away evil spirits and unwanted outside influences. Teehee 😜 let it sit in the home and warm a bit first. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: Tupsu on January 11, 2015, 01:12:10 PM Spondoolies --- Sp20 I have 8 they work great at 1500gh or under If I owned the company I would have called them 1500gh miners --- I clock my Sp20E at 1400gh or 1430gh max I do not even attempt to think 1600 or 1700gh. --- I agree. All buy, but no one sees that SP20 is still underperformed 1.7 TH/s ± 10% Based on my 11x SP20 I only see 11 x 1.7 TH/s - 5% Only my very first SP20 was 1720TH/s of normal room temperature. Even that only have one day to the first software updates. I look forward to software that would allow me back 1.7 TH/s + Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: raskul on January 11, 2015, 01:37:30 PM Spondoolies --- Sp20 I have 8 they work great at 1500gh or under If I owned the company I would have called them 1500gh miners --- I clock my Sp20E at 1400gh or 1430gh max I do not even attempt to think 1600 or 1700gh. --- I agree. All buy, but no one sees that SP20 is still underperformed 1.7 TH/s ± 10% Based on my 11x SP20 I only see 11 x 1.7 TH/s - 5% Only my very first SP20 was 1720TH/s of normal room temperature. Even that only have one day to the first software updates. I look forward to software that would allow me back 1.7 TH/s + get better cables :) my SP20's are all perfectly capable of 1.7TH/s i run them ~1.5. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: mavericklm on January 11, 2015, 02:15:21 PM take out the 288watt cap or the voltage limit of 0.790 and we can hit 1.8th/s
Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: Tupsu on January 11, 2015, 07:30:04 PM take out the 288watt cap or the voltage limit of 0.790 and we can hit 1.8th/s +1 get better cables :) my SP20's are all perfectly capable of 1.7TH/s i run them ~1.5. I have 11x EVGA G2 1300W This is not about cables, but the software limit. My second and third SP20 worked 1720GH/s and 1735GH/s if they are accidentally have after update SP10 software. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: Xian01 on January 12, 2015, 07:33:35 AM take out the 288watt cap or the voltage limit of 0.790 and we can hit 1.8th/s What do you mean by "take out the 288watt cap" ? Blank out the field ? Set it to 0 ? Set it to a high number like 350 ?Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: mavericklm on January 12, 2015, 07:50:56 AM You can't really punch something above 288, because the webgui puts back 288 in that field that you tried to put higher setting!
I did somehow, and don't remember how, put 1350w in there. But we still got the 0.79v limit... I mean someone with programming knowledge, maybe even SPtech... They don't give it out because they don't want higher rates of returning machines; and they still have them on stock plus another 3month after that.... Or maybe the settings are hard written inside and can't be taken out! Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: raskul on January 12, 2015, 11:26:08 AM take out the 288watt cap or the voltage limit of 0.790 and we can hit 1.8th/s +1 get better cables :) my SP20's are all perfectly capable of 1.7TH/s i run them ~1.5. I have 11x EVGA G2 1300W This is not about cables, but the software limit. My second and third SP20 worked 1720GH/s and 1735GH/s if they are accidentally have after update SP10 software. I had a 1600 EVGA which was only running one SP20... it went up in a puff of smoke... Sp20 is more about getting the settings right... I have three SP20 and each of them are able to go to 1.7TH/s Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: mavericklm on January 12, 2015, 06:29:23 PM Did you burn the evga? :o
I did reach 1.7 too, with fan at 100%, max setings on voltage and wattage, and air at 0c..... Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: BTCish on January 12, 2015, 08:49:18 PM So is it safe to oc S5 ?
Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: Tupsu on January 13, 2015, 12:14:50 AM I had a 1600 EVGA which was only running one SP20... it went up in a puff of smoke... Sp20 is more about getting the settings right... I have three SP20 and each of them are able to go to 1.7TH/s https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=920699.0 I have 2 x 750's on one SP20, 1 x AX1200i on another and 2 x 650's on another all running ~1.4TH/s. settings on each: Fan Speed 20 Start Voltage 0.69 / 0.69 / 0.69 / 0.69 Max Voltage 0.695 Max Watts 250 / 250 / 250 / 250 So is it safe to oc S5 ? No. Only if you have a good fire alarm system and own guardian angel 24/7 S5 is in my opinion the fire hazard in this open air case. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: raskul on January 13, 2015, 11:25:44 AM I had a 1600 EVGA which was only running one SP20... it went up in a puff of smoke... Sp20 is more about getting the settings right... I have three SP20 and each of them are able to go to 1.7TH/s here is it now: http://www.rgspix.com/heater3.jpg I read here something else https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=920699.0 i think i recall responding to that one. I have 2 x 750's on one SP20, 1 x AX1200i on another and 2 x 650's on another all running ~1.4TH/s. settings on each: Fan Speed 20 Start Voltage 0.69 / 0.69 / 0.69 / 0.69 Max Voltage 0.695 Max Watts 250 / 250 / 250 / 250 So is it safe to oc S5 ? No. Only if you have a good fire alarm system and own guardian angel 24/7 S5 is in my opinion the fire hazard in this open air case. totally agree with that, i'm afraid. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: kopam on January 14, 2015, 03:19:53 PM So i just got 5 S5's
tbh i never had a bitcoin ASIC miner till now, i have been only mining with GPU's ( altcoins ) SO about the S5, after reading this thread i am kinda afraid to even start it :) If i do not oc the miners, are they safe ? And all here are talking from experience i guess ( they also have S5's ? ) Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: philipma1957 on January 14, 2015, 06:19:02 PM there is not a lot of evidence of an s-5 burning up .
clock it to freq 325 with a decent psu . you should be safe. I think the one that burned up for raskul is the only documented one burning out. In contrast the asic miner prisma had at least 5 or 6 photoed burnouts posted on this site. In general Antminer gear has been pretty good for most of us. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: raskul on January 14, 2015, 07:50:30 PM there is not a lot of evidence of an s-5 burning up . just mine :-\ i asked Yoshi if I could mine on antpool with my SP20's and he said yes. what's the difference between solo. and p2p. on antpool? Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: RoadStress on January 14, 2015, 08:36:20 PM there is not a lot of evidence of an s-5 burning up . just mine :-\ i asked Yoshi if I could mine on antpool with my SP20's and he said yes. what's the difference between solo. and p2p. on antpool? On solo you get 25 BTC when you find a block. p2p antpool is a regular pool. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: raskul on January 14, 2015, 08:38:49 PM there is not a lot of evidence of an s-5 burning up . just mine :-\ i asked Yoshi if I could mine on antpool with my SP20's and he said yes. what's the difference between solo. and p2p. on antpool? On solo you get 25 BTC when you find a block. p2p antpool is a regular pool. meh. i reckon it'd take me about 3 months to get up to 40bill Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: sololoop on January 15, 2015, 02:15:17 AM there is not a lot of evidence of an s-5 burning up . just mine :-\ i asked Yoshi if I could mine on antpool with my SP20's and he said yes. what's the difference between solo. and p2p. on antpool? On solo you get 25 BTC when you find a block. p2p antpool is a regular pool. meh. i reckon it'd take me about 3 months to get up to 40bill solo.antpool.com should be antpool solo with 35-42ph. All my sp20 mining there. (switch from ghash) p2p antpool not going well, many of us complain not getting share in few days. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: el_rlee on February 03, 2015, 04:51:01 PM if the time comes, and S5's need to be undervolted, can one -instead of changing the PSU to 9V- run 3 Antminers on 2 PSU's so 24V/3=8V per S5?
Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: philipma1957 on February 03, 2015, 05:27:50 PM if the time comes, and S5's need to be undervolted, can one -instead of changing the PSU to 9V- run 3 Antminers on 2 PSU's so 24V/3=8V per S5? no. biggest reason is testing shows the s-5's don't want to go lower then 9.5 volts I believe MR Teal was able to go no lower. second reason is I have no idea how 2x 12 volt psu's would down volt to 8 volts. what would happen is each machine would get 12 volts and a share of the available watts the 2 psu's can provide. assuming you plugged the gear in correctly. in order to down volt the power from a psu a big version of this is needed. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00OT58TL4/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o02_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1 plug in psu pcie 's and crank the volts down to 10 volts or so. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: sidehack on February 04, 2015, 03:05:53 AM I think he means stack two PSUs in series for 24V, and then put three S5 in series below it for 1/3 voltage each. It'd be about the same as people have suggested using 3x PSUs and 4x S5 for 9V each. That'd only work if the current draw per S5 is the same; likely you'll need to tweak clocking on a per-machine basis, possibly recursively, to get a series chain of miners to run stable.
Also, we should have a test PCB for a big ol' regulator on Thursday, and probably some efficiency and reliability data next week (I'm working on a good conversion efficiency measurement toolchain tomorrow). Just throwing that out there. I should really pick up an S5 to play with. Also, raskul, don't lose hope. One of the prismas in my hosting threw a 31G share over the weekend, after throwing a 3.9G share the day before, after not working very well all week. Success is pretty random. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: TheAnalogKid on February 04, 2015, 03:40:30 AM I'm not a big fan of the "chain" design on the S5's. I'm down 3 S5's in under 2 weeks because of it. When one chip goes, the whole hashboard is toast (not physically), 30X's. At least with the S1/S3 you could blow a chip here and there and the rest of the board would still hash fine, albeit slightly slower. Now, you lose the whole damn thing and are down half a miner in one shot.
One of them burnt up immediately after turning on, the fan didn't spin and we didn't catch it in time, the smell alerted us to something wrong. I'm not sure if it would have physically burnt, but it was certainly too hot to touch right after powering it off. The open air design itself shouldn't be a fire hazard, however, unless you've got metal on metal and an open wire hits it. Most of them do reliably overclock to 387.5, resulting in roughly 1.25TH. Some are decently stable at 412.5 @ 1.35TH. Some are unstable at the stock speed. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: sidehack on February 04, 2015, 04:08:18 AM I'd really like to see individually fused chips and a backup parallel current path (like the FETs on Prismas) so if one chip starts to roast it takes itself out of the circuit before catching fire and the parallel path kicks on to keep the string's current flowing. As long as the parallel doesn't smoke out (as it'd be dropping the same power as one of the hashing chips) the thing should keep running at (N-1) hashrate.
The string design does open up a lot of efficiency headroom, but fluctuating series loads will always cause room for concern. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: philipma1957 on February 04, 2015, 05:08:09 AM I think he means stack two PSUs in series for 24V, and then put three S5 in series below it for 1/3 voltage each. It'd be about the same as people have suggested using 3x PSUs and 4x S5 for 9V each. That'd only work if the current draw per S5 is the same; likely you'll need to tweak clocking on a per-machine basis, possibly recursively, to get a series chain of miners to run stable. Also, we should have a test PCB for a big ol' regulator on Thursday, and probably some efficiency and reliability data next week (I'm working on a good conversion efficiency measurement toolchain tomorrow). Just throwing that out there. I should really pick up an S5 to play with. Also, raskul, don't lose hope. One of the prismas in my hosting threw a 31G share over the weekend, after throwing a 3.9G share the day before, after not working very well all week. Success is pretty random. atx psu 's 2 or 3 can do series to boost voltage live and learn. makes sense I just never tried it. did it lots of times with batteries. and when the batteries charge balancing the charge them is hard. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: sidehack on February 04, 2015, 02:17:15 PM With PSUs the thing to worry about is isolation. Make sure the ground on the output is isolated from mains neutral or they'll trip out and/or smoke when you try to turn them on in series. DO NOT connect load-balancing pins on server supplies in series. It shouldn't be needed anyway.
Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: philipma1957 on February 04, 2015, 02:32:09 PM With PSUs the thing to worry about is isolation. Make sure the ground on the output is isolated from mains neutral or they'll trip out and/or smoke when you try to turn them on in series. DO NOT connect load-balancing pins on server supplies in series. It shouldn't be needed anyway. I recall something on anandtech someone ran 2 separate 12 volt rails from 1 psu and got 24 volts. but that was a while back and I did not really check it out. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: MrTeal on February 04, 2015, 03:04:28 PM With PSUs the thing to worry about is isolation. Make sure the ground on the output is isolated from mains neutral or they'll trip out and/or smoke when you try to turn them on in series. DO NOT connect load-balancing pins on server supplies in series. It shouldn't be needed anyway. I recall something on anandtech someone ran 2 separate 12 volt rails from 1 psu and got 24 volts. but that was a while back and I did not really check it out. *The following is not to be considered professional advice. An modern ATX PSU has the mains lines (hot and neutral, or hot/hot) isolated from the output and from ground. Besides being a safety thing, it's a requirement of being able to run 240V into them in places like NA where 240V is two legs that are 120V w.r.t. ground. The chassis of the supply is of course connected to the ground pin on the incoming mains cable. That is a safety thing and should not be tampered with. In and of itself, that would not cause an issue with stacking PSUs. However, ATX PSUs also have the 0V output connected to the chassis and therefore the earth ground. You would not be able to stack PSUs without shorting out the bottom PSU because of this. There are quite a few pages out there where people have converted two server or ATX PSUs into a large 24V supply for charging LiPo batteries or the like, but it involves opening up the case and removing or isolating the supply, so it is a risky "do it wrong and kill someone" kind of project. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: sidehack on February 04, 2015, 03:14:24 PM When I said "isolated from neutral" what I meant to say was "isolated from ground" (chassis/earth ground). I've been doing more panel wiring than device-side wiring lately, where neutral is ALWAYS neutral and tied to ground. Thanks for the correction and clarification.
A lot of times the thing required to isolate a server PSU is insulated washers between the board and case standoffs. Depending on how ground planes are run, insulated (usually plastic) screws might be required as well. But yes, everything MrTeal just said is correct - if you do it wrong, the best case is the supply trips out; the worst case is it burns your house down and/or kills you so be careful. Title: Re: Is the S5 string design safe and was it really tested properly? Post by: philipma1957 on February 04, 2015, 06:21:32 PM yeah I recall a few people tried doing the 24volt 2x series wiring 2 or 3 years ago with mixed results.
While I tinker quite a bit with electronics I am self taught and I am colorblind. (which is why I am self taught) Really fucking annoying to have colorblind issues when I like to do electrical projects. I have reach the age of 58 without burning down my house or some friends homes (knock on a lot of wood) here is why : If the wires are many and the colors are tough I call the wife with 'honey' purple or blue/ orange or red/ green or brown ? So far so good. |
