Laugh all you want. It does work.... and better than the stock one :p




... provided you only have 1 per rig lol.

Pending an RMA, and limited in my abilities to properly fix it by warranty seals on the screws that hold the cooler, I decided to keep my dead-fan 5870 mining until I get an RMA number:

I would have, if I had one. I considered a hairdryer too!

So what do you do when a 5870 fan fails, when the card is still under warranty, when there are warranty seals on the screws and you havent gotten an RMA number yet?

Simple, take a fan, a hot glue gun and fix it!

Except, one fan didnt do it. The original broken fan is still in there, and its not moving and blocking the airflow. So it overheated. Badly.

So you take a second fan. Better but still not good enough.

So you do the obvious thing and find whatever fans you have of roughly the right size and you end up with this beauty:





Now its back to 60C .

Meh. You get pissed off too easily. While bitminter server was having trouble, I temporarily moved to eclipse. My first full block there was 8M shares and in the next few blocks, there were 3 more 5-6+M share blocks without a single truly lucky one.
https://eclipsemc.com/block_stats.php (Ii started at their block 446).

I just did. My fan really jammed, unplanned lol.
And yes, as already said by everyone else, it wont cut off if auto-gpu is not enabled. Fortunately its freezing seriously here now, and I suspect AMDs protection still works (throtteling the card), but it was 93C.

IN may difficulty was roughly 1/10th what it is now. You were extremely lucky then, youd have to be extraordinary lucky now.

+10 !

I just had a fan failure and my card was cooking. I mistakenly assumed it would cut off at cut off temp, but I had not set dynamic clocks, so to my great surprise, it did not shut down  

Since this has little to do with piracy (other than the link with the pirate party, which itself also has little to do with piracy), may I humbly suggest a different name: "Private Linux" ?

Welcome to our new king of the hill

1   michaelmclees   33,117

33GH, thats some serious hashing power!

As Im preparing to switch to submerged oil cooling, I will soon have no more need for my Spitfire and and R5 combo

The GPU cooler is compatible with most (single)  AMD gpu's. The VRM cooler afaik only with reference 5850s and 5870s. Beware, if you have a different card, you will need something to cool the VRMs!  



This cooler is simply amazing.



As you can see, with my 5870 @ 1 GHz it cools the the GPU to 34C (room is like 21C) with a slow, utterly silent 120mm fan (not included)
VRM temps are around 50C with the R5 using a silent 80mm fan (also not included, and frankly, completely unnecessary).

Beware, this cooler is MASSIVE. You will need a big case if you turn the cooler to face down, otherwise it will clash with your PSU. You can turn it up as well, but in that case you need a fairly low profile CPU cooler so it fits underneath the spitfire. Stock coolers will work fine, most tower coolers will not fit under it.

Everything is included, there are brackets to support the coolers weight (they attach to the motherboard screws), clips for 120 and 140mm fans. I will include the ram heatsinks as well, but you will need new adhesive tape or glue. Or glue them with hot glue.  I also have spare unused ram/vrm heatsinks I can throw in, but I am not sure they will fit underneath the heatpipes. Then again, for bitcoin mining you really dont need any ram coolers at all.

I should have the original boxes. Somewhere.

Im open to offers, I accept BTC and paypal. Shipping from Belgium.

But how do you know something represents 40-50% of the hashpower? AFAIK, the only way of knowing is solving blocks.

its used to run on botnets. Its old news, most AVs have been warning about most miner apps for some time now, for this reason. The better AVs give a correct warning, stating the app is potentially unwanted (which would be the case if your machine was infected by a trojan and running a miner without your knowledge). Unfortunately most just call it malware or a trojan, even though cgminer by itself demonstrably is not.

Unlike human body chemistry,  the basic science behind green house effect is so simple a  6 year old can understand it. There is no debate about that.
Modeling that in to accurate simulations with all the interactions is of course, an enormously complex task. Which is why despite all the efforts, most predictions still have relatively large error margins. But turning that in to "we dont know what is cause and effect, so we have no clue" is simply untrue.

We do not understand all the interactions, but to use a Rumsfeld; these are known unknowns, ie, we know what we dont know and can and do account for that. Their impact is modeled as statistical uncertainty. The chances of those unknowns reversing the conclusions made so far is statistically irrelevant. We are heating up the earth and the broad lines of the results of that, are known. We may not be able to predict with certainty if it will be 0.6C or 0.8C in x years, but I fail to see how thats a reason to just pretend there is no evidence.

If you want to draw any parallels with medicine, consider the planet a patient. If despite some statistical uncertainty all specialists in the world state with very high confidence the patient is ill with some specific poisoning and they all universally agree on the most likely cause and cure; do you wait until they agree if the patient has 5 or 7 months to live,  until its determined if his fever will spike to 40C or 41C, if the poisoning will cause rashes on his left or right arm first?  Do you wait until he dies, or do you take action based upon the best available science? Even if the treatment may be uncomfortable, and the cure may not be 100% guaranteed.

BTW, the patient in this analogy, is your son. Because its dubious climate change will impact us terribly,  at least the older ones among us. The effects will be felt mostly by our children and grandchildren. I find it disgusting enough that they will inherit a planet thats mostly devoid of one of nature's most versatile and useful products, namely oil, because we carelessly burned it; burned unspeakable amounts, like some cavemen burning Van Gogh paintings to keep warm.

There is no scientific consensus on that happening or, afaik,  even being possible. I do not claim it, the IPCC doesnt, very few scientists do.
If thats your point, or flipro's, well clearly there is no convincing scientific proof we are about to render the earth in to a Venus like planet, or that there is even such a possibility, so im not going to argue for or against that. I dont think it has been convincingly ruled out either, but thats besides the point.

What there is ample evidence for however, to me is reason enough to consider serious measures regardless of the potential for a truly cataclysmic run away greenhouse effect, and I find the shallow attempts to discredit the extremely thorough science on the matter, particularly by politically or religiously motivated non scientists appalling.

The discussion on whether or not earth may become inhabitable because of our carbon emissions  is not something I want to debate, so if that is the point I missed, carry on.

Another great point; clearly not a single climate scientist ever thought of that or there wouldnt even have been an IPCC report.
Do tell them, Im sure they will revisit the whole idea once they realize their complete folly.


Some people dont.
http://theflatearthsociety.org/cms/

No one knows 100% for sure. No one knows anything 100% for sure. Ever.  Maybe we live in the Matrix?
So if you jump out of a plane, you may not fall to your death. No one knows. Maybe God will catch you. Maybe Newton was wrong.  So why dont you?
Rational humans dont jump out of planes without a parachute because they make decisions based upon the best available science and knowledge. If you jump out of a plane without parachute there is a near certainty you will die. The chances of us changing our climate are about the same. But yeah, "no one knows!".
What a stupid argument.

I think thats far more useful and practical than a thermostat on his AC

Well.. doh, in some case appealing to authority kinda makes sense, doesnt it? Particularly when the authority is not just a scientist or group of scientists, but a worldwide effort by the entire scientific community to formulate a consensus. IOW, something they can ALL agree on. There are lots of issues, projections and theories related to AGW where there is no such consensus, there lots of the questions to be answered,  but what is in the IPCC reports is something  every (or every minus one) world renowned expert in the field agrees on; who the f* then are you (not personally, but anyone questioning the science) to disagree with that, seriously?

I might chuckle a bit if some forum poster here argues against Dawkings theories on gravitational singularities and thinks he know better, but arguing against the authority that the IPCC represents is simply way way beyond that. There hasnt been a scientific publication with that kind of authority ever in the history of science. If you think Im exaggerating, name one.


Good, as there is no reason for them, unless they are experts in the field or just curious.


You mean the cloud stuff? Honestly, you think you stumbled across something the IPCC has not looked at? You think its likely you will stumble upon ANY issue related to AGW that has not been studied in depth by people far more qualified than you, and that their science is not taken in to account by the IPCC? You do understand how the IPCC works, right? If not, I suggest you start reading up on that first before wasting too much time.

Anyway, if I understand correctly you are paraphrasing a theory by Lindzen. A theory Lindzen himself apparently no longer stands by. As per my previous link:

An internal document (pdf) of the Global Climate Coalition (GCC) -- an industry front group that disbanded in 2002 -- reviewed some of the "contrarian" arguments used by Lindzen and other climate change skeptics that they later discarded. The document, which was obtained as part of a court action against the automobile industry[10].

...

In conclusion the GCC's science advisers was that "Lindzen's hypothesis that any warming would create more rain which would cool and dry the upper troposphere did offer a mechanism for balancing the effect of increased greenhouse gases. However, the data supporting this hypothesis is weak, and even Lindzen has stopped presenting it as an alternative to the conventional model of climate change."[12]

I did not, and dont intend to, unless you can demonstrate the science on it is vetted by a peer review process thats at least marginally as thorough as the IPCC's.


Define catastrophic.

There are two separate issues here; on one hand, there is the public and media "debate" on whether or not the science behind AGW is sound. The simple answer is: it is. The scientific community is about as certain on this than they are on anything, so lets stop debating on conspiracy theories and quoting a handful members of the flat earth society and face the scientific facts . The comet is heading to your house,  or at least it is with 99% certainty.

The other debate is what, if anything,  to do about it. Thats a hugely complex debate that involves among others politics, economics and morals. Ill not pretend I, or anyone for that matter, has a conclusive answer to that. Its an important debate, so we must do it, but for the love of God, leave it to scientists to discuss the science and do not pervert it with political ideas just because its conclusions clash with your politics.  Doing so is as asinine as dismissing the science because of religious believes.  Some people still say the earth is flat and men walked with dinosaurs. Dont be as foolish when it comes to something as important as the future of our planet.