Latest posts of: Sitarow

Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 [113] 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 »

2241

Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: BPMC Launch BF1 USB miner - probably the fastest USB miner in the World

on: September 12, 2013, 12:06:50 PM

Quote from: play on September 12, 2013, 11:54:34 AM You should have realized by now that the community has been learning a lot from the past months. Don't complain about your costs being high... that's your problem. Make better decisions next time. Almost everyone is in this for the money and the ones who are not just got run over by your minimum order. So please, improve your pricing. That may be. Consider that the primary item is over $108 each chip and consider that the price of those asic's are expected to drop for next months orders. However the unit itself is USB based and cgminer supported and you can flash the firmware. Hmm sounds like a great tinkering tool for those who want to see what they can do with Bitfury Chips.

2242

Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: [ANN] US/North American Bitfury sales now open ***full prototype pics***

on: September 12, 2013, 05:01:26 AM

Quote from: superduh on September 12, 2013, 04:51:52 AM let me put it another way - the very LIKELY scenario - anyone who paid for asics using BTC except for batch 1 avalons will likely never ROI in btc this goes for pretty much anything out now and coming about. the miner protection programs are interesting though - at least they kind of guarantee ROI to get your btc back In other words if you like trying out new tech then by all means buy ASIC hardware. However know full well that the BTC quantity you used when ordering will most likely not be returned to you in full when mining with the hardware. At least that is the present pricing model.

2243

Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: [ANN] US/North American Bitfury sales now open ***full prototype pics***

on: September 12, 2013, 03:27:37 AM

Quote from: User705 on September 12, 2013, 03:21:04 AM Quote from: Trongersoll on September 12, 2013, 03:07:35 AM Quote from: User705 on September 12, 2013, 03:01:00 AM Bitfury prices are just as high as AM so I'm not sure who are these fools you speak of. I'm missing something, explain to me how this statement is true. hmm let's see 25gh for $1300 or 2.5 blades for about 10btc. That's current price on website I'm not sure if it was more months ago when you preordered. Wasn't 400Gh $20k which is basically the same as 40 blades or approximately 16-20btc Also I see plenty of people having issues with build quality with bitfury so a 2nd hand BFL unit is probably better. Yes power consumption is better which is probably not a consideration for most miners although it should be in the long run which might be offset by better build quality. Actually these asic's are very robust and the chips can do more than the 1.5gh/s. So you are getting more bang for your buck. Much like the Avalon Gen 1 units. It comes down to the argument Huge risk/Huge reward - No Risk/No Reward. Bitfury/AM The new ASICminer boards do not OC. It is something that should be taken under consideration.

2244

Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: [ANN] US/North American Bitfury sales now open ***full prototype pics***

on: September 12, 2013, 03:05:51 AM

Quote from: User705 on September 12, 2013, 03:01:00 AM Bitfury prices are just as high as AM so I'm not sure who are these fools you speak of. Power consumption is far higher on ASICminer chips vs Bitfury chips and AM does not support stratum only getwork. As far as mining equipment goes, we are now entering the level when the question asked is how many GH/s can I have up and running with the existing Electrical Service.

2245

Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: BPMC Launch BF1 USB miner - probably the fastest USB miner in the World

on: September 12, 2013, 02:42:53 AM

Quote from: Bicknellski on September 12, 2013, 01:24:24 AM Realism is two sided. 1. Cost of production. 2. Density vs. other hub based miners. Obviously you have to do the calculations and do what is best and I mean that for those selling and those buying. We hope to find that razor thin line between profit and ROI. Unfortunately the earlier the BitFury chip the thinner that line comes and given that reality prices have to be minimally worth our time and effort to sell them in all deference to quick ROI timelines and future difficulty. I have previously stated even with the K1 Nanos that we need, as a COOP, to mine them or sell them and that is what will happen here. We will put up a price not to gouge the community rather to make a small profit for us and get product into the marketplace even if it is not the best price it does help push other vendors to lower their costs and that benefits everyone. If that is not possible we will mine the units so please make sure you do your calculations and make that decision carefully but make no mistake we will offer up miners for sale. The marketplace will decide as it should be. We are still up in the air for October BitFury chips and whether it is feasible given the slim margins we might simply move on to a newer generation chip (not USB) and try to get those to market. Alternatively we could help the DIY community by fabricating RedFury's with your chips, but again that is not set in stone and merely on the drawing board and given the margins not profitable for people given the time limits and difficulty jumps. Suffice to say we will do what we can to offer the best price but given the realities I am not sure if we can satisfy everyone. All good options

2246

Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: [ANN] US/North American Bitfury sales now open ***full prototype pics***

on: September 11, 2013, 12:53:34 PM

Quote from: zurg on September 11, 2013, 12:25:05 PM Quote from: americandesi on September 11, 2013, 12:10:36 PM Quote from: americandesi on September 11, 2013, 11:51:13 AM has anyone noticed that the hashrate of the hardware setup as compensation for starter kit buyer has reduced to 508 gh/s from 1600 gh/s @Dave / @JaredR26 - Can you guys have a look at this please. May be the miner needs a restart. Thanks, https://i.imgur.com/9wAuxHA.png FYI. It has been going down sharply. Now it is at 305 gh/s I had to restart mine a few times when my hashrate was dropping rapidly. I have noticed that restarting the proxy solves the issue.

2247

Bitcoin / Mining support / Re: **US** BitFury Setup Guide

on: September 11, 2013, 12:32:51 PM

Quote from: zurg on September 11, 2013, 12:29:41 PM Hey guys, is there anything else I can do for this to go past the chip 25? I got 2 H-Boards with EOL one. 23 AIfDSo 55 1.603 1.945 112 5 0 0 184 [1:6] 122 7 7 7 8 7 7 8 7 7 7 6 7 7 6 7 7 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 24 AIfDSo 55 1.747 1.934 122 9 1 0 183 [1:7] 51 6 8 7 9 7 8 7 8 8 8 7 8 7 8 8 8 2 0 1 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 25 aIfDSo 0 0.000 0.412 0 0 0 0 39 [1:8] 756 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 speed:1320 noncerate[GH/s]:37.252 (1.490/chip) hashrate[GH/s]:41.031 good:2602 errors:177 spi-err:1 miso-err:0 jobs:376 cores:84% good:25 bad:0 off:0 (best[GH/s]:38.784) Wed Sep 11 12:27:28 2013 0: 880 23.408 25.198 1635 126 0 0 16 0 0 (1.463/chip) 86% 1: 440 13.844 15.833 967 51 1 0 9 0 0 (1.538/chip) 80% Thanks Chip number 25 is not turned off. You can tell by the fact that there is still numbers on the line and by the big 0 next to the off. I have found you should set the aifdso to all lower case in order to effectively turn off a chip. You can probably get away with putting ai lowercase. However I use letters lowercase text to disable the chip.

2248

Bitcoin / Mining support / Re: **US** BitFury Setup Guide

on: September 11, 2013, 12:26:51 PM

Quote from: cet on September 11, 2013, 05:57:46 AM

I turned off chip 1 and 57

Code:

1       aiFDso	0	0.086	0.476	6	24	0	0	45	[0:0]	733	0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 	2 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 0 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 
2	AIfDSo	55	1.618	1.839	113	1	0	0	174	[0:1]	358	7 8 8 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 6 7 7 	0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 
3	AIfDSo	55	1.603	1.765	112	3	0	0	167	[0:2]	338	6 7 7 6 7 8 8 8 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 6 	1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 
4	AIfDSo	55	1.432	1.681	100	1	0	0	159	[0:3]	371	7 7 7 7 6 6 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 	0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
5	AIfDSo	55	1.589	1.670	111	3	0	0	158	[0:4]	330	7 6 6 7 6 7 8 8 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 	0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
6	AIfDSo	55	1.603	1.744	112	2	0	0	165	[0:5]	335	8 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 6 7 7 7 7 	0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 
7	AIfDSo	55	1.632	1.691	114	1	0	0	160	[0:6]	339	7 7 7 6 7 7 8 8 8 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 	0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
8	AIfDSo	55	1.589	1.617	111	2	0	0	153	[0:7]	375	6 6 8 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 	1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
9	AIfDSo	55	1.174	1.427	82	2	0	0	135	[0:8]	391	5 5 4 5 5 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 	0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
10	AIfDSo	55	1.675	1.903	117	3	0	0	180	[0:9]	355	7 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 7 8 7 6 6 7 7 7 	0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 
11	AIfDSo	55	2.019	1.797	141	0	0	0	170	[0:A]	321	8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 	0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
12	AIfDSo	55	1.618	1.744	113	1	0	0	165	[0:B]	352	7 7 7 7 7 7 6 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 7 7 	0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
13	AIfDSo	55	1.460	1.786	102	6	0	0	169	[0:C]	363	6 6 7 6 7 6 6 6 6 7 7 6 6 7 7 6 	1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 
14	AIfDSo	55	1.747	1.765	122	3	0	0	167	[0:D]	361	8 8 8 8 8 7 7 7 7 8 8 7 7 8 8 8 	0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 
15	AIfDSo	55	1.718	1.702	120	7	0	0	161	[0:E]	359	7 6 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 7 7 7 7 8 7 8 	1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 
16	AIfDSo	55	2.004	1.797	140	2	0	0	170	[0:F]	316	8 9 9 9 8 8 9 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 	1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
17	AIfDSo	55	1.990	1.892	139	3	0	0	179	[1:0]	342	8 7 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 	1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
18	AIfDSo	55	1.489	1.712	104	5	0	0	162	[1:1]	377	6 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 7 6 6 7 7 7 6 	1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 
19	AIfDSo	55	1.976	1.903	138	3	0	0	180	[1:2]	323	8 9 9 9 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 7 8 	0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 
20	AIfDSo	55	1.002	1.733	70	46	0	0	164	[1:3]	501	3 4 7 2 4 2 3 6 5 5 5 4 4 4 7 5 	4 3 0 5 3 5 4 1 2 2 2 3 4 4 1 3 
21	AIfDSo	55	1.761	1.765	123	2	0	0	167	[1:4]	353	8 8 8 8 8 8 7 7 6 8 8 8 7 8 8 8 	0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 
22	AIfDSo	55	1.732	1.807	121	1	0	0	171	[1:5]	340	7 7 7 8 8 8 8 7 8 8 8 8 8 7 7 7 	0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
23	AIfDSo	55	1.618	1.723	113	3	0	0	163	[1:6]	359	8 8 7 6 6 7 7 7 6 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 	0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
24	AIfDSo	55	1.847	1.755	129	0	0	0	166	[1:7]	339	8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 8 8 8 8 8 	0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
25	AIfDSo	55	1.704	1.829	119	7	0	0	173	[1:8]	365	8 6 8 8 4 7 8 8 7 8 8 8 8 7 8 8 	0 2 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 
26	AIfDSo	55	1.661	1.733	116	3	0	0	164	[1:9]	351	7 8 7 7 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 	1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
27	AIfDSo	55	1.646	1.733	115	3	0	0	164	[1:A]	369	8 8 8 8 8 7 6 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 6 8 	0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 
28	AIfDSo	55	1.346	1.490	94	7	0	0	141	[1:B]	403	6 6 6 6 7 6 6 6 6 6 5 5 6 5 6 6 	0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 
29	AIfDSo	55	1.804	1.892	126	5	0	0	179	[1:C]	316	8 8 8 8 7 8 8 7 8 7 8 8 9 9 7 8 	0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 
30	AIfDSo	55	1.961	1.892	137	8	0	0	179	[1:D]	347	9 9 8 7 9 9 9 8 10 8 9 8 9 9 8 8 	0 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 
31	AIfDSo	55	1.976	1.797	138	0	0	0	170	[1:E]	364	9 9 9 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 	0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
32	AIfDSo	55	2.190	1.934	153	2	0	0	183	[1:F]	337	10 10 10 10 8 9 9 9 9 10 10 10 10 10 9 10 	0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 
33	AIfDSo	55	1.761	1.892	123	2	0	0	179	[2:0]	328	7 8 8 8 8 8 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 	1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 
34	AIfDSo	55	1.661	1.786	116	5	0	0	169	[2:1]	330	7 8 7 7 7 6 7 7 6 8 8 7 7 8 8 8 	1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 
35	AIfDSo	55	1.575	1.998	110	0	0	0	189	[2:2]	319	7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 6 6 7 7 7 	0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
36	AIfDSo	55	1.818	1.955	127	1	0	0	185	[2:3]	319	8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 7 8 	0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 
37	AIfDSo	55	1.918	1.966	134	3	0	0	186	[2:4]	307	8 9 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 8 6 8 8 8 8 	0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 
38	AIfDSo	55	1.589	1.765	111	8	0	0	167	[2:5]	340	7 7 8 8 7 8 8 6 6 7 7 7 6 6 7 6 	1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 
39	AIfDSo	55	1.904	1.903	133	6	0	0	180	[2:6]	322	9 9 8 8 9 9 9 8 8 8 7 6 9 8 9 9 	0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 1 0 0 
40	AIfDSo	55	1.933	1.776	135	7	0	0	168	[2:7]	356	8 7 9 9 9 8 9 8 8 9 9 7 8 9 9 9 	1 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 
41	AIfDSo	55	2.105	1.934	147	3	0	0	183	[2:8]	321	10 10 9 9 8 9 8 9 9 8 9 9 10 10 10 10 	0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 
42	AIfDSo	55	2.019	1.977	141	4	0	0	187	[2:9]	305	9 9 9 9 9 9 8 7 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 	0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
43	AIfDSo	55	2.147	1.903	150	3	0	0	180	[2:A]	318	9 9 9 9 10 9 10 10 10 10 10 9 9 9 9 9 	0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 
44	AIfDSo	55	1.818	1.881	127	4	0	0	178	[2:B]	312	7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 8 9 8 8 7 8 7 	1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 
45	AIfDSo	55	1.503	1.871	105	17	0	0	177	[2:C]	383	7 6 8 5 6 7 7 7 6 5 6 8 7 7 6 7 	1 2 0 3 2 0 0 0 1 2 1 0 1 1 2 1 
46	AIfDSo	55	1.961	1.955	137	1	0	0	185	[2:D]	314	9 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 8 9 	0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 
47	AIfDSo	55	0.931	1.755	65	32	0	0	166	[2:E]	543	3 1 6 6 5 4 5 3 4 3 5 4 5 4 3 4 	3 5 0 0 1 2 1 3 2 3 1 2 1 2 4 2 
48	AIfDSo	55	1.861	1.998	130	1	0	0	189	[2:F]	309	8 8 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 8 8 8 8 	0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
49	AIfDSo	55	1.689	1.755	118	4	0	0	166	[3:0]	349	8 8 8 6 8 8 7 7 6 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 	0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
50	AIfDSo	55	1.918	1.850	134	1	0	0	175	[3:1]	318	8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 8 8 7 8 	0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 
51	AIfDSo	55	1.432	1.776	100	0	0	0	168	[3:2]	372	6 7 7 7 7 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 	0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
52	AIfDSo	55	1.518	1.839	106	4	0	0	174	[3:3]	335	7 7 7 6 6 7 7 5 6 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 	0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 
53	AIfDSo	55	1.976	1.966	138	3	0	0	186	[3:4]	297	9 9 8 9 9 8 8 8 9 8 9 8 9 9 9 9 	0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 
54	AIfDSo	55	1.732	1.860	121	10	0	0	176	[3:5]	332	9 8 8 8 7 6 7 8 8 8 7 7 8 6 7 9 	0 0 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 2 0 
55	AIfDSo	55	1.360	1.723	95	4	0	0	163	[3:6]	347	7 7 6 6 6 5 5 5 6 5 6 6 6 6 6 7 	0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 
56	AIfDSo	55	1.804	1.818	126	2	0	0	172	[3:7]	351	8 8 7 8 8 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 	0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
57	aiFDso	0	0.115	0.571	8	25	0	0	54	[3:8]	712	1 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 	1 2 1 2 2 0 2 2 1 2 2 3 1 2 1 1 
58	AIfDSo	55	1.603	1.934	112	25	0	0	183	[3:9]	336	8 7 8 7 8 9 7 6 8 6 5 5 5 8 8 7 	1 2 1 2 1 0 2 3 1 2 3 3 3 0 0 1 
59	AIfDSo	55	1.861	1.966	130	2	0	0	186	[3:A]	312	9 9 9 9 8 8 8 8 8 8 7 8 7 8 8 8 	0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 
60	AIfDSo	55	2.090	1.966	146	2	0	0	186	[3:B]	297	9 9 9 10 10 10 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 8 	0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 
61	AIfDSo	55	1.775	1.670	124	1	0	0	158	[3:C]	379	8 8 8 8 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 7 8 8 8 	0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 
62	AIfDSo	55	1.646	1.744	115	2	0	0	165	[3:D]	361	7 7 7 7 7 8 8 7 8 8 7 7 7 7 6 7 	0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 
63	AIfDSo	55	1.518	1.913	106	8	0	0	181	[3:E]	324	7 7 7 6 7 7 5 6 7 8 7 6 7 7 6 6 	0 0 0 1 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 
64	AIfDSo	55	2.162	1.924	151	1	0	0	182	[3:F]	297	9 9 9 9 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 9 9 9 9 9 	0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
speed:3410 noncerate[GH/s]:106.973 (1.671/chip) hashrate[GH/s]:113.581 good:7472 errors:350 spi-err:0 miso-err:0 jobs:375 cores:53% good:62 bad:2 off:0 (best[GH/s]:107.331) Wed Sep 11 05:39:01 2013
0:	825	24.567	26.403	1716	61	0	0	15	1	0	(1.535/chip)	50%
1:	880	27.703	28.591	1935	98	0	0	16	0	0	(1.731/chip)	52%
2:	880	28.504	30.314	1991	97	0	0	16	0	0	(1.782/chip)	55%
3:	825	26.199	28.274	1830	94	0	0	15	1	0	(1.637/chip)	53%

I do have a fan on the boards. Is there a better way to turn off a chip than setting autotune to 'a' and speed to 0?

does the best.conf file get overwritten if I put new boards onto the m-board? I'm not sure how tweeking a couple of chips in the first 4 boards would change things so much that it would allow me to put more h-boards on without generating all the errors that I saw in earlier runs - is it that significant?

/cet

1 aiFDso 0 0.086 0.476 6 24 0 0 45 [0:0] 733 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 0 1 2 1 2 1 1 2

Change the aiFDSo to the example below and what it will look like when its off.

1 aifdso 0 0.000 0.000 0 0 0 0 0 [0:0] 756 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

To turn them off you have to set it to aifdso the number beside it i normally leave it at 55 or for reference points 50

2249

Bitcoin / Mining speculation / Re: Skipping 50 million and 70 million

on: September 11, 2013, 12:12:42 PM

Quote from: smoothie on September 10, 2013, 03:36:56 AM Looks like this is on track ...breaking 100 million estimate. Likely going to be around ~110,000,000 is my guess. 180m by the end of october is just 20% annual average increase.

2250

Bitcoin / Mining support / Re: **US** BitFury Setup Guide

on: September 11, 2013, 04:31:17 AM

I would start by turning of chip 1 and 57. Then see what results you get after 30 mins. and the question is do you have fans on the unit? If you do thats good as I notice that if they get hot they autotune lower because of the increased error rate.

2251

Bitcoin / Mining support / Re: **US** BitFury Setup Guide

on: September 10, 2013, 09:46:27 PM

There are other tools you can use as well that auto run to help debug potential problems Just attach to any screen sessions that are disconnected. If you have 3 entry's into the proxy pools then you will have 3 screens running in the background. typing sudo screen -r will give you a list of screen sessions. if their is only 1 it will automaticly connect. If their are more then 1 it will show you a list of numbers. to connect your session to that screen just type sudo screen -r #### the number of the screen session goes where the # signs are. example sudo screen -r 2115 Here are 4 active sessions the top two screens are bitfury2 details. The bottom two screens are bitfury1 details. This is the test results on 50btc.com As you can see there are two avalon units one oc'ed and one not. Bitfury1 400+ 16 Card Bitfury Bitfury2 55+ 2 Card Bitfury

2252

Bitcoin / Mining support / Re: **US** BitFury Setup Guide

on: September 10, 2013, 08:58:41 PM

Quote from: jimrome on September 10, 2013, 08:52:36 PM Quote from: cet on September 10, 2013, 07:14:18 PM Has anyone had any luck getting more than 4 h-boards running on the same m-board? My rig is stable with all boards running at above 25gh/s when I have 4 h-boards. When I add the next 4 h-boards they seem to auto tune down in speed to the point where the output on an 8 h-board rig is no faster than a 4 h-board rig. Anyone have any hints? /cet What are you seeing when you look at /run/shm/.stat.log? Details Posted here. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=250249.msg3103697#msg3103697 And I did these steps to order and insert the cards with least amount of slow/bad chips at the start and the bad boards at the back. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=288109.msg3119313#msg3119313

2253

Bitcoin / Mining support / Re: **US** BitFury Setup Guide

on: September 10, 2013, 08:49:52 PM

Quote from: cet on September 10, 2013, 07:14:18 PM Has anyone had any luck getting more than 4 h-boards running on the same m-board? My rig is stable with all boards running at above 25gh/s when I have 4 h-boards. When I add the next 4 h-boards they seem to auto tune down in speed to the point where the output on an 8 h-board rig is no faster than a 4 h-board rig. Anyone have any hints? /cet I have 16 on an mboard v1 and have fans on them. pulls between 350 and 370watts.

2254

Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: [ANN] US/North American Bitfury sales now open ***full prototype pics***

on: September 10, 2013, 02:16:00 PM

Quote from: Mobius on September 10, 2013, 01:51:47 PM Quote from: Sitarow on September 10, 2013, 01:49:06 PM Quote from: Mobius on September 10, 2013, 01:46:59 PM Quote from: tarmi on September 10, 2013, 01:43:58 PM Quote from: Mobius on September 10, 2013, 01:40:42 PM I paid for my August order! Which currently sits in Dave's Datacenter hashing away. good for you! Funny how you make an accusation and fail to apologize when you are wrong! The real pain is having my BFL order that was placed 14 months ago finally get shipped today only fulfilling 1/3 of the order. OUCH! What does that have to do with anything in this discussion? I'm still waiting for 2 more orders from BFL and got piss poor performing units from them. Dave's choice to host devices for those that have yet to receive their order for free is not the best choice in your opinion. Factor that he is using btc guild and that it may not be the best use of the hardware has also been expressed. I can see your point of view. Indeed it may seem the simple choice would be to deliver those devices and be done with it. However I think what Dave is doing is attempting to appease both the customer you/me and the shareholders for who this hardware was originally intended. I would not be surprised if those that still have not gotten their equipment will not get extra ontop of the BTC that is being mined via Dave's free hosting ~~option.~~ dictated solution. I think his choice to point that hardware at btcguild.com was the best option as they have the best support network 24/7, I would like to note that I am also pointing my units at btc guild and have gained 18% more bitcoin doing so the last 24 hours then normal) The reason is simple. It gives the most accurate reading and has by far managed the private anti DOS network to maximize the uptime of that hardware. Finally as to the issue with cgminer and this particular use of the bit fury chips. I have spoken with ckolivas and informed him that I would provide access to one of the units for his testing. However he mentioned that at this time the GPIO is not conducive to the uniformity and standardization that cgminer is about. At this time it seems best to wait until punin or others incorporates a usb controller of sorts for this product so we can bypass the raspberry pi. Again I am sure that Dave will do everything possible to make sure we get the best ROI given the situation at hand. From past experiences in other emergency situations like this, when you are in the thick of the issue expending all your energy and time to resolve problems day in and day out, you are bound to make choices that may not seem to be the best solution from an onlooker not on the ground. It may very well be a bad choice in customer relations while attempting to please the shareholder. However given the track record I would not be surprised those with late orders get further compensation in one form or another. Edit: In the spirit of disclosure I do not hold any investments with any public centralized mining operations at this time. This includes, and not limited to, 100TH, ASICminer, and LabRat data processing.

2255

Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: [ANN] US/North American Bitfury sales now open ***full prototype pics***

on: September 10, 2013, 01:49:06 PM

Quote from: Mobius on September 10, 2013, 01:46:59 PM Quote from: tarmi on September 10, 2013, 01:43:58 PM Quote from: Mobius on September 10, 2013, 01:40:42 PM I paid for my August order! Which currently sits in Dave's Datacenter hashing away. good for you! Funny how you make an accusation and fail to apologize when you are wrong! The real pain is having my BFL order that was placed 14 months ago finally get shipped today only fulfilling 1/3 of the order. OUCH!

2256

Bitcoin / Mining support / Re: **US** BitFury Setup Guide

on: September 10, 2013, 04:03:14 AM

Quote from: jddebug on September 10, 2013, 03:21:43 AM Quote from: Sitarow on September 10, 2013, 02:38:16 AM Quote from: jddebug on September 10, 2013, 01:48:08 AM Quote from: Sitarow on September 09, 2013, 11:52:45 PM Quote from: dracore on September 09, 2013, 11:43:44 PM Quote from: Sitarow on September 09, 2013, 10:38:17 PM check what your /opt/bitfury/proxy_pools.conf is set too. I would consider also restarting the stratum server first before restarting the miner. Yup I did all that and found that it didn't help. I think there's a problem with the card. Sometimes it hashes at regular rates, other times it stops hashing for some time. It's like sometimes the chips are partially failing... check also that the cards are properly seated in the socket. Also if you get any chips that are operating at sub 1.0 speed then set it to disabled and see if that helps. type this in ssh console nano /run/shm/.stat.log scroll to the bottom by pressing page down and see if you have any bad or off chips that may have been detected by autotune. If you do i start by disabling them to get the board working good. Sitarow, This is what mine displays. Looks like 5 bad and one off? What would I look for now and how to disable? speed:6710 noncerate[GH/s]:220.432 (1.722/chip) hashrate[GH/s]:237.606 good:15397 errors:860 spi-err:5 miso-err:0 jobs:322 cores:95% good:122 bad:5 off:1 (best[GH/s]:229.165) Tue Sep 10 01:42:09 2013 0: 825 29.936 31.836 2091 100 0 0 15 1 0 (1.871/chip) 95% 1: 880 31.081 33.083 2171 101 0 0 16 0 0 (1.943/chip) 100% 2: 880 28.146 30.821 1966 35 0 0 16 0 0 (1.759/chip) 98% 3: 770 26.285 29.690 1836 193 1 0 14 2 0 (1.643/chip) 86% 4: 770 25.641 28.031 1791 145 1 0 14 2 0 (1.603/chip) 92% 5: 825 29.664 31.286 2072 85 1 0 15 0 1 (1.854/chip) 93% 6: 880 21.289 22.873 1487 94 1 0 16 0 0 (1.331/chip) 97% 7: 880 28.390 29.986 1983 107 1 0 16 0 0 (1.774/chip) 99% My other looks worse: speed:7260 noncerate[GH/s]:203.467 (1.413/chip) hashrate[GH/s]:224.172 good:14212 errors:749 spi-err:6 miso-err:0 jobs:323 cores:89% good:132 bad:8 off:4 (best[GH/s]:212.257) Tue Sep 10 01:47:15 2013 First move the boards with 880 to the front of the line then the 825 ones and the 770 to the back. so I would start with Move 7 to 0 and put 0 on 4 and put 4 to 6 Move 6 to 7 as I think that one has chips that auto tune is still having troubles with. Move 5 to 3 and 3 to 5. After you do that then wait about 30 minutes, then run nano /run/shm/.stat.log If you notice any chips pushing 0.600 or below turn them off by replacing AIfDSo to aifdso on the same line number as the chip. This is important because auto tuning will keep working with them if it can causing errors that may throw off some pools. Note: I would only consider turning off auto tuning if I am in a temperature controlled environment where the ambient temperature is constant. OR if I am not as aggresive on my speed settings of the chips. Below is an example of an "EOL" board that was included with my kit. I have simply turned off those chips but will be later cleaning the board with isopropyl alcohol to see if i can clear up some potential issues. 240 aifdso 50 0.000 0.000 0 0 0 0 0 [E:F] 756 241 AIfDSo 55 1.432 1.871 100 4 0 0 177 [F:0] 36 242 AIfDSo 55 1.632 1.807 114 3 0 0 171 [F:1] 72 243 aifdso 51 0.000 0.000 0 0 0 0 0 [F:2] 756 244 AIfDSo 55 1.761 1.575 123 4 0 0 149 [F:3] 0 245 AIfDSo 55 1.775 1.733 124 0 0 0 164 [F:4] 42 246 AIfDSo 55 1.933 1.881 135 2 0 0 178 [F:5] 0 247 AIfDSo 55 1.847 1.892 129 2 0 0 179 [F:6] 21 248 AIfDSo 55 1.747 1.797 122 1 0 0 170 [F:7] 0 249 aifdso 50 0.000 0.000 0 0 0 0 0 [F:8] 756 250 AIfDSo 55 1.904 1.924 133 2 0 0 182 [F:9] 0 251 AIfDSo 55 1.675 1.786 117 2 0 0 169 [F:A] 0 252 AIfDSo 55 1.432 1.776 100 5 1 0 168 [F:B] 72 253 aifdso 50 0.000 0.000 0 0 0 0 0 [F:C] 756 254 AIfDSo 55 2.090 1.860 146 1 0 0 176 [F:D] 0 255 AIfDSo 55 1.689 1.934 118 3 0 0 183 [F:E] 72 256 AIfDSo 55 1.804 1.913 126 0 0 0 181 [F:F] 36 F: 715 23.179 23.739 1619 26 0 0 13 0 3 (1.449/chip) 78% I used the CPU speed as a marker for my personal notes for later review. The chips I set to aifdso 50 is the first wave of disabled chips that showed obvious problems. The ones set with 51 are for me to note my second wave of disabled chips. Remember to only tweak the file after you have moved the cards to the more appropriate slots. Remember to save the file to /opt/bitfury/best.cnf so that it will keep the changes you made to the file. Sitarow, thank you. That as a very detailed reply that I was able to actually follow. I'll be working on it tomorrow. Question: why move the boards position? I'm just curious. Not sure if it helps with power distribution and potentially moving noisy bad chips away from good chips. However one thing I know for sure it makes it easy to detect problems as they will stand out and be more obvious. Also later on if you do happen to get better boards you can add them in place of the poor performing ones.

2257

Bitcoin / Mining support / Re: **US** BitFury Setup Guide

on: September 10, 2013, 02:38:16 AM

Quote from: jddebug on September 10, 2013, 01:48:08 AM Quote from: Sitarow on September 09, 2013, 11:52:45 PM Quote from: dracore on September 09, 2013, 11:43:44 PM Quote from: Sitarow on September 09, 2013, 10:38:17 PM check what your /opt/bitfury/proxy_pools.conf is set too. I would consider also restarting the stratum server first before restarting the miner. Yup I did all that and found that it didn't help. I think there's a problem with the card. Sometimes it hashes at regular rates, other times it stops hashing for some time. It's like sometimes the chips are partially failing... check also that the cards are properly seated in the socket. Also if you get any chips that are operating at sub 1.0 speed then set it to disabled and see if that helps. type this in ssh console nano /run/shm/.stat.log scroll to the bottom by pressing page down and see if you have any bad or off chips that may have been detected by autotune. If you do i start by disabling them to get the board working good. Sitarow, This is what mine displays. Looks like 5 bad and one off? What would I look for now and how to disable? speed:6710 noncerate[GH/s]:220.432 (1.722/chip) hashrate[GH/s]:237.606 good:15397 errors:860 spi-err:5 miso-err:0 jobs:322 cores:95% good:122 bad:5 off:1 (best[GH/s]:229.165) Tue Sep 10 01:42:09 2013 0: 825 29.936 31.836 2091 100 0 0 15 1 0 (1.871/chip) 95% 1: 880 31.081 33.083 2171 101 0 0 16 0 0 (1.943/chip) 100% 2: 880 28.146 30.821 1966 35 0 0 16 0 0 (1.759/chip) 98% 3: 770 26.285 29.690 1836 193 1 0 14 2 0 (1.643/chip) 86% 4: 770 25.641 28.031 1791 145 1 0 14 2 0 (1.603/chip) 92% 5: 825 29.664 31.286 2072 85 1 0 15 0 1 (1.854/chip) 93% 6: 880 21.289 22.873 1487 94 1 0 16 0 0 (1.331/chip) 97% 7: 880 28.390 29.986 1983 107 1 0 16 0 0 (1.774/chip) 99% My other looks worse: speed:7260 noncerate[GH/s]:203.467 (1.413/chip) hashrate[GH/s]:224.172 good:14212 errors:749 spi-err:6 miso-err:0 jobs:323 cores:89% good:132 bad:8 off:4 (best[GH/s]:212.257) Tue Sep 10 01:47:15 2013 First move the boards with 880 to the front of the line then the 825 ones and the 770 to the back. so I would start with Move 7 to 0 and put 0 on 4 and put 4 to 6 Move 6 to 7 as I think that one has chips that auto tune is still having troubles with. Move 5 to 3 and 3 to 5. After you do that then wait about 30 minutes, then run nano /run/shm/.stat.log If you notice any chips pushing 0.600 or below turn them off by replacing AIfDSo to aifdso on the same line number as the chip. This is important because auto tuning will keep working with them if it can causing errors that may throw off some pools. Note: I would only consider turning off auto tuning if I am in a temperature controlled environment where the ambient temperature is constant. OR if I am not as aggresive on my speed settings of the chips. Below is an example of an "EOL" board that was included with my kit. I have simply turned off those chips but will be later cleaning the board with isopropyl alcohol to see if i can clear up some potential issues. 240 aifdso 50 0.000 0.000 0 0 0 0 0 [E:F] 756 241 AIfDSo 55 1.432 1.871 100 4 0 0 177 [F:0] 36 242 AIfDSo 55 1.632 1.807 114 3 0 0 171 [F:1] 72 243 aifdso 51 0.000 0.000 0 0 0 0 0 [F:2] 756 244 AIfDSo 55 1.761 1.575 123 4 0 0 149 [F:3] 0 245 AIfDSo 55 1.775 1.733 124 0 0 0 164 [F:4] 42 246 AIfDSo 55 1.933 1.881 135 2 0 0 178 [F:5] 0 247 AIfDSo 55 1.847 1.892 129 2 0 0 179 [F:6] 21 248 AIfDSo 55 1.747 1.797 122 1 0 0 170 [F:7] 0 249 aifdso 50 0.000 0.000 0 0 0 0 0 [F:8] 756 250 AIfDSo 55 1.904 1.924 133 2 0 0 182 [F:9] 0 251 AIfDSo 55 1.675 1.786 117 2 0 0 169 [F:A] 0 252 AIfDSo 55 1.432 1.776 100 5 1 0 168 [F:B] 72 253 aifdso 50 0.000 0.000 0 0 0 0 0 [F:C] 756 254 AIfDSo 55 2.090 1.860 146 1 0 0 176 [F:D] 0 255 AIfDSo 55 1.689 1.934 118 3 0 0 183 [F:E] 72 256 AIfDSo 55 1.804 1.913 126 0 0 0 181 [F:F] 36 F: 715 23.179 23.739 1619 26 0 0 13 0 3 (1.449/chip) 78% I used the CPU speed as a marker for my personal notes for later review. The chips I set to aifdso 50 is the first wave of disabled chips that showed obvious problems. The ones set with 51 are for me to note my second wave of disabled chips. Remember to only tweak the file after you have moved the cards to the more appropriate slots. Remember to save the file to /opt/bitfury/best.cnf so that it will keep the changes you made to the file.

2258

Alternate cryptocurrencies / Mining (Altcoins) / Re: Swedish ASIC miner company kncminer.com

on: September 10, 2013, 01:49:52 AM

Quote from: btc_uzr on September 10, 2013, 12:43:59 AM Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on September 10, 2013, 12:23:30 AM (...) One thing to watch out for is that KNC for some reason decided to use 4 PCIe connectors instead of EPS12V connector + 3 PCIe connectors. On the 860 Corsair 2 of the PCIe connectors are on the same PSU connector (i.e. single set of wires with 1 PSU connector on one end and 2x PCIe connector on other end). (...) it has 6 separate PCIe according to the specification and the picture http://cwsmgmt.corsair.com/media/catalog/product/a/x/ax860i_psu_sideview_a.png or did I misunderstand sth. ? Maybe this might help. Voltage Regulation and Efficiency Measurements http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Corsair/AX860i/5.html

2259

Alternate cryptocurrencies / Mining (Altcoins) / Re: Swedish ASIC miner company kncminer.com

on: September 10, 2013, 12:26:30 AM

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on September 10, 2013, 12:23:30 AM Quote from: btc_uzr on September 09, 2013, 11:14:18 PM For the same money I'd have preferred the corsair's digital platinum PSU with 7years warranty and 92% efficiency in worst case http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139041 Platinum doesn't mean 92% efficiency "in worst case". More like 89% to 92% depending on load. Still a very good PSU. http://www.plugloadsolutions.com/psu_reports/CORSAIR_75-001305_860W_ECOS%203323_Report.pdf One thing to watch out for is that KNC for some reason decided to use 4 PCIe connectors instead of EPS12V connector + 3 PCIe connectors. On the 860 Corsair 2 of the PCIe connectors are on the same PSU connector (i.e. single set of wires with 1 PSU connector on one end and 2x PCIe connector on other end). There is no way to know for sure what the overcurrent limit is set for on that connector. By the PCIe standard it only needs to handle 300W (2x 150W connector) which is 12.5A @ 12VDC. The PSU likely can deliver MORE but without testing there is no way to be sure. If the PSU is designed to limit on that connector/wire to 15A and the Jupiter pulls more than 7.5A per connector then it could trip despite the PSU having more power to run a Jupiter. This could have been avoided if KNC had used EPS12V connector plus PCIE connectors instead. I use the 860i myself and will probably upgrade to 1200i.

2260

Bitcoin / Mining support / Re: **US** BitFury Setup Guide

on: September 10, 2013, 12:04:01 AM

Quote from: dracore on September 09, 2013, 11:56:21 PM Quote from: Sitarow on September 09, 2013, 11:52:45 PM check also that the cards are properly seated in the socket. Also if you get any chips that are operating at sub 1.0 speed then set it to disabled and see if that helps. type this in ssh console nano /run/shm/.stat.log scroll to the bottom by pressing page down and see if you have any bad or off chips that may have been detected by autotune. If you do i start by disabling them to get the board working good. Thanks. Where can I find out what each column represents? http://punin.com/README_BFSB_v0.1.txt

Pages: « 1 ... 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 [113] 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 »