Just got these in today - I have several hundred of the 24" cables a (which turned out better than imagined!)
24" LEADS
6-pin PCI-e connector (black)
120cm (24"), 16AWG wires (yellow and black)
stripped ends on wire (0.5cm)
These are solid connectors and far superior to the garbage 18AWG connectors found on ebay. I have yet to test them on hardware, but there should be absolutely no problem carrying 250W or more (potentially upwards of 350W) through these leads. (In comparison, I have seen other cheap 18awg wiring melt or burn at over 150W)
6" Y-SPLITTERS
(M-F-M) connection, with each branch of the y being 6" (15cm) long. perfect for devices like the antminer with a little bit of slack to spare.
18awg - should handle 150W without issues, and possibly over 200W. Please use discretion though, if the cable gets too hot it may not be suitable to your application
Just a heads up. 120cm is NOT 24". 60cm is approximately 24". Or perhaps they are 120cm long in which case they are approximately 48". Large price difference. Oops you are right, 60cm/24". Not sure how that slipped in there. The new batch is at DHL on hold for pickup this afternoon  |
|
|
|
To be honest, after wasting lots of time today i find voltage setting is the utterly most useless. This is why i asked SP-T and got the same answer (loweing voltage.....) You are lowering your max voltage too right? Because I don't see how it's useless. As I stated just a few posts ago I found out that optimal settings are min voltage 0.612 and max voltage 0.616 (or 0.618) and I get 1Th/s at 700W. You want better than that? Edit: Also the 77c reading means <=77 degrees, it's not actual 77. Uhhh how did you measure your power consumption? at 0.60-0.61 setting, i got ~760w from the stats page. I was told thats DC, so AC would be like 900w. Thats terrible isnt it? Im not sure the exact efficiency of the PSU, but 90% efficiency is probably a good guess if operating at 240V. for 760W DC thats about 845W at the wall. 85% efficiency would be 895W at the wall |
|
|
|
NOOOOPE Because of your prejudice for a bankrupted company with a new management and dozens of lawyers' eyes double checking everyone of their moves? Or because you already speculate to know the specs of this other product to be non-competitive? Because neither one of them make any sense to me. yes, i have a prejudice against: a) a bankrupted company b) a company with a terrible history of non-delivery c) pre-orders when you combine all of the above to create the new hashfast - its more unappealing than ever. the price and efficiency is okay - but there is not a chance in hell that i would trust them with a pre-order, especially of such mainitude. This is not a company that anybody should be trusting half a million dollars to on a pre-order. now, if someone wants to fund this, and sell boards that are in stock today, I would be interested. But right now hell is still hot and I am not giving any money to hashfast. I am pretty sure his answer is based on the old phrase: "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me."
I wasnt fooled the first time as I watched others struggle and complain - and I dont plan to be fooled this time until theres proof that boards work and are shipping |
|
|
|
I already have the 1300, I can always use another power supply I guess. I don't have any small power supplies, only 1000W+ which are in use. hmm, I will have to think... The one thing people are suggestion is to use eight 8 Pin PCI-E cables. Not many power supplies have that many cables. I have EVGA 1300, but I believe it has only 6 cables.
why not simply run 2 less powerful PSUs with 4 pin PCI-E each? could even be cheaper i believe. I sell some good quality splitters in my signature thread, that ive tested to be able to handle up to 150W per male (300W at the female end) without getting hot. |
|
|
|
You really wanna go there? Ok. Watch and learn.
1x ztex: $1355 for 850 MH/s in Apr 2012. $1.6/MH
2x Icarus: $1138 for 760 MH/s in Feb 2012. $1.5/MH
Icarus boards were cheaper and started mining months in advance of ztex. Ztex was overpriced and late. Hmm, just like HF now. No wonder you like ztex.
PS: A ztex board would have mined about 100 btc over its life. Had you purchased bitcoins instead you would have had over 200 btc. ztex again was the loser.
PPS: GPUs were getting double the performance for the same price with plenty of resell value afterwards. That's who got all the bitcoins back then.
You do a fantastic job of using FUD to make 'perfect' and 'best' the mortal enemy of 'good enough.' Any mining back then was well worth it. You can snivel about how your baby was the cutest, but the point is that we may still be in that situation, so you could well be wrong about HF being a "horrible" choice. you are an idiot. he just laid out in very clear terms why his post about FPGAs (which you dragged up from 2 years ago to prove an incorrect point) was correct, and that FPGAs at the time of his post were not actually a good idea. I can back that up, because the GPU values stayed, and FPGAs all went to worthlessness the second ASICs arrived. point is that hashfast has a terrible reputation, and a poor price. Bitmain ships on time. You are shilling like crazy for godknowswhy |
|
|
|
How much do you think the actual markup is? $260 is pretty cheap. 2000 x 260 = $520,000.00 HF has got to be making at least 30% margins. $156,000 is probably not enough to cover their customers. I think it to be way less than 30%, and CEO, CTO, CRO are still being paid a total of around $50k a month in salaries, there will be priority claims, lawyer expenses, etc, before coming down to standard claims. So basically I won't be seeing even a billionth of that amount. So it's not about giving money to HF creditors, since that it's not gonna happen. In the best case scenario it is about building trust so that HF can take another round of preorder in the future when their rev4/rev5 will be ready. We have paid them to work on it for months, but naturally they won't give us status updates. NOOOOPE |
|
|
|
Update:
I think i fixed the issue with dead chips, however i still need SP Tech to confirm the the power consumption is actually accurate.
Common sense told me that the reason for chips to become dead is due to low voltage. Some chips dont have the same tolerance as others.
I decided to raise the voltage up to 0.62, hoping this will give the bad chips more headroom. At the same time i lower the Maximum power consumption (to somewhat the same with what the stats told me when my voltage was set at 0.6)
After 30mins, i check the ASIC stats and no dead chips!. Power consumption state at what i set.
Can SP confirm the setting of power consumption indeed work? and the reading is accurate? I dont have wattage reader at the moment (since i use 240v plug )
accurate power consumption at the wall should employ a kill-a-watt. the SP readings are only as accurate as the PSU provides, whcih likely has a +/-5% range. If low temps are an issue, why not reduce fan speed to make the unit a bit hotter internally? |
|
|
|
hi guys! Great theme, cp2102 works fine with a single blade a lot of HW
The board overheating without a heat sink causes it. After lowering the voltage to 0.82V the blade stays cold, but I still screwed it to a piece of the monitor as a heat sink)
The best string that I’ve found is --bitmain-options 115200: 1: 8: 1: 200: 5002 gives the minimum number of errors and gives 38Gh on pool. It’s possible to change frequency with cgminer 4.7.0 with --anu-freq string, it recognizes the blade but it works like a single chip. Frequency greater than 250 dramatically increases the number of errors due to undervolting. At the frequency of 270 it consistently shows 43Gh on the pool. I sometimes managed to achieve speed about 80Gh on the pool with voltage turned to 1.1V. The main problem is the old version of cgminer, I will try to compile a bimain version and describe the results here
[img]http://s020.radikal.ru/i700/1410/b8/2acae425e183.jpg[/im
put the fans blowing on the back side of the PCB - it wil be a lot more effective than trying to cool the outer side of the chips |
|
|
|
So the big question (and since it is early in the morning and I am skimming through these posts and I may have probably missed it........so all apologies) - what type of PSU should be used for the C1 and how much wattage should it have? I have seen all of the other details, but unlike Bitmain's other offerings, they aren't crystal clear on the C1's PSU requirements. Talk to me like I'm completely stupid and have just crawled out from under a rock
About 780w for the miner, 50W for the watercooling, requires 8 PCI-E. Still recommended to get a 1000W PSU though to get the best efficiency. with a decent PSU, particularly with 16awg wires, you can use only 4 PCIe cables. Most of my S3 units (even those overclocked to 500GH) have only 2 PCIe cables (1 per board) without issue. |
|
|
|
According to "Bitmain employee of the Year" dogie in his updated "no conflict of interest here" manufacturer trustworthiness guide - these are classed as "minor" problems, so obviously they are not too bothered about it. Their "please wait patiently" phrase is one of their favourites, ask any S2 owner, they've been "waiting patiently" for 9 weeks now......and still nothing  dogie is an employee of Bitmain and there is a conflict of interest in conscious or unconscious level. So, dogie statement should be considered as Bitmain's even if he is not agreeing that there is no conflict of interest. It's already evident in his messages. Wrong thread. Wrong thread. Its hard to properly rate a company that is paying you |
|
|
|
Surely $600 is coming before $200 b/c it is NOT too likely that we are gonna see below $350 again in this round of BTC price movements, absent some very catastrophic and unforeseen negative news.
BitLicense is weighing on BTC into December, like a foot on a bean sprout. If Lawsky gets what he wants in its current form, we could easily be back in the 200's. no way - the rest of the world is moving forwards, including the rest of the USA, and if the bitlicense ends up being bothersome many will simply avoid operating in New York State, or skip reporting to the IRS in general. hard not to be bullish when you look at the bitcoin environment only ~12 months ago when it was at $100. A 4x growth in technicals seems like a bare minimum to me. |
|
|
|
No need for experimenting noob, Fluid dynamic dictates since all C1 are equal in restriction, all of them will have equal flowrate.... gee you assume that all three C1 waterblocks are equal. Theres a high chance that there could be slight machining diferences, or slight barbs from the machining, that could cause slightly higher resistance in some units. Its not particularly likely, but it is still possible. (easy way to adjust for this if it was an issue is to put a small vavle on each loop of the coolant to compensate any flow differences |
|
|
|
See the power switch on the PSU? Yep, that's the one. Flip it. Device now shut down.
lol... i know that but i just wanted to confirm that its ok with direct switch off the power. But thanks any way.. Any information about why we getting "-" on Asic status ? flipping the power switch is fine. usually if asics are showing as '-' or 'o' it means you should reboot. try a software reboot first, and if that doesnt work, a PSU reboot. It can also be caused if you push a cheap PSU near its limits and it provides sub-par 12V power (such as 11.8V at high load). You should use a 550W+ PSU to be sure, and check that it has 450W+ on the 12V rail |
|
|
|
maybe there will soon be a C2 at 2Gh and 800watts?
0.4w/GH? unlikely. More likely is an S2-style miner that packs 4TH/3kW into a 4U case, with 4 separate coolant loops. |
|
|
|
I bought 12 S3s b7s with PSUs from someone locally a month ago. Has worked out for me just fine. My advice is if it comes from a vendor that deals in used hardware, check the fine print. If they dont have fine print, then they opened themselves up to all sorts of legal trouble. There are laws in the US at least on how to handle second hand hardware and advertise it.
fine print generally isnt needed if its a local and/or small-size transaction. common sense is a huge part of the law, and if the seller states that the units are working and problem-free, then that is sufficient to be considered at least a DOA warranty. |
|
|
|
Do think a 850w gold power supply rated at 70A on 12v will be able to handle the C1? I know it will run at 100% capacity but I have no use for it otherwise.
cutting it REALLY close - good chance you'll have to underclock in order to run stable, especially if the coolant pump draws an extra ~20w. IMO get a 1000W PSU and youll be fine, and your efficiency will be a bit better (most gold PSUs are ~91% efficient at 80% load, but only ~85% efficient at 100% load) |
|
|
|
 not long to wait now, then upto $490 before consolidation to about $430, and then slow growth picking up pace over the next few months towards the next megabubble. Just how i see it at the moment. these types of intersections are so open to interpretation though. If you created the same model about a week ago, it would show that we fell below the cross and thus right now should be bearish. IMO long-term we are going up, but short-term its volatility until something happens to change that - either the coins distribute from big holders to dedicated smaller HODLers, or wall street gets involved and opens up bitcoin use to investors |
|
|
|
Bitfury full kit has been a fantastic failure for me (if i turn it on it can manage to get me 130 GH or so but should be able to get 400).
I've heard about issues with terraminers also being total piece-o-crap worthy.
I have a couple block erupters that died out but the bulk of them are probably still okay if I ran them.
6/7 boards on my bitfury are still running fine for me, but the unit is very sensitive to vibrations. do a power cycle, and then back away quickly so its not disturbed when running |
|
|
|
|
buy antminer S3 units, or if you can get them for cheap enough, get r3-box units from rockminer (less energy-efficient, but i think they are cheaper per GH)
also, make sure the electricity cost you pay is what you think. often theres the base fee + delivery fees + debt reduction fees + admin fees, and it can add up. I pay 5-7c/kwh depending on time of day, but a consistent ~8c/kwh worth of extra costs, making it average at $0.14/kwh
|
|
|
|
Sanding them down to an almost mirror finish helps quite a bit with better contact and therefore better temperatures in the chips themselves. Any reason why no manufacturer does this?
...
Seems like it would be simpler to just have the excess heat drawn upwards into the heatsink using the liquid closed in the pipes and have it cooled out. It is used with great effect on PC hardware, this is also high performance hardware that generates intense heat.
Because 1) its not required, no ASIC chip is heat limited, 2) it would increase unit costs by $5-15 a heatsink for which you already complain about prices enough. Well I dont mind the premium if it gets more performance out of the hardware, thats just me...not to say I would not like cheaper either but I get the pragmatism as well behind cheaper heatsinks. But again with cooling being such a factor, also factory overclocks would be a nice win and an extension of shelf life of some of this hardware if it can be pushed a bit harder. most of the limits on the hardware are not just heat, but the amperage. DC/DC regulators are semi-pricy, and at 0.75V on a lot of asics, you get very high amperage draws when you have hundreds of watts of power draw. you could charge $20 more for a 10% better heatsink, but youd likely see only 2-3% extra overclocking space, and likely more powerdraw/GH doing so. not worth it. cheap components are the best ROI |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
