How so? I cannot plug it into my computer. Its the network only model.
Install bitcoind on your computer, run it as a server, point your blade to it. |
|
|
|
Can someone tell me why I'm seeing the below hashrate differences for my 400 gh/s kit?
Bitfury admin pages noncerate is 417.51 gh/s. Slush's pool is 2.9 gh/s!
Bitfury admin page 1 (xxx.xxx.x.250)
Noncerate: 45.04GH/s
pool config: stratum.bitcoin.cz, 3333, idxxx.worker1
Bitfury admin page 2 (xxx.xxx.x.251)
Noncerate: 372.474GH/s
pool config: stratum.bitcoin.cz, 3333, idxxx.worker2
Slush's Pool
curr sugg.
login shares score Mhash/s stratum diff.
idxxx.worker1 954 2043.1946 1411.922 yes 32
idxxx.worker2 1009 2129.3236 1493.323 yes 256
Average hashrate in last 10 rounds: 3708 Mhash/s
Unconfirmed reward: 0.01430835 BTC
Confirmed reward: 0.00182180 BTC
These rewards are for about 1 day of mining.
Thank you.
Try EMC or btcguild. You should see the correct rates in 15 min. |
|
|
|
I got some BFL chips order from group buy so if I wanna buy board from here and put them together by myself what kind of soldering machine I need? Prefer something easy to use that I can buy from Ebay.
Please do yourself a favor. Don't do it. You'll screw up at least half of them since you have no experience doing it. |
|
|
|
Congrats Af_newbie -
To get the extra performance, did you manually configure autotune disabled from the problem chips and then set their speed to 0?
Thanks. All of the above plus, a strong AC fan AND pencil mod to bring R02F to 1.23K from 1.3K (on board measurement). The bad chips (not sure if it is the chips or the mounting issue) did not bring anything to the table. Created more errors than actual work. I figured, they might actually slow things down for other chips so I took turned them off. This probably lowers the power draw which should offset the pencil mod. |
|
|
|
Dave,
My chip #2, #10 are only hashing at ~0.25-0.29 GH/s (with very large number of errors, 300% more than other chips)
They show "speed->0" after the last column in .stat.log
They are set as auto "AIfDSo 55" like the others.
Is there anything that can be done to improve their performance?
How are the chips numbered? How to map the IDs in .stat.log to the board?
2 AIfDSo 55 0.243 2.019 17 126 0 0 191 [0:1] 726 0 1 2 2 1 0 0 0 2 0 3 0 4 1 1 0 9 8 7 7 8 9 9 9 7 9 6 8 5 8 8 9 speed->0
10 AIfDSo 55 0.272 1.924 19 110 0 0 182 [0:9] 722 0 2 1 2 2 2 0 2 0 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 8 6 7 6 6 6 8 7 8 7 7 7 6 7 7 7 speed->0
Thanks,
af_newbie
EDIT:
After a while they go to:
2 AiFDso 55 0.014 0.550 1 35 0 0 52 [0:1] 723 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2
10 AiFDso 55 0.072 0.528 5 34 0 0 50 [0:9] 715 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 3 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 3 3 3 3
Ok, I got the card above 30 GH/s, with 14 chips running. pi@bitfury ~ $ cat /run/shm/.stat.log 1 AIfDSo 55 1.632 2.008 114 13 0 0 190 [0:0] 485 8 8 7 5 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 7 8 7 0 0 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 aifdso 0 0.000 0.000 0 0 0 0 0 [0:1] 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 3 AIfDSo 55 2.377 2.135 166 9 0 0 202 [0:2] 440 8 11 8 9 11 10 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 10 3 0 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 AIfDSo 55 2.334 2.251 163 4 0 0 213 [0:3] 425 10 11 10 10 9 10 10 10 10 9 10 11 11 11 11 10 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 AIfDSo 55 2.047 2.220 143 9 0 0 210 [0:4] 423 9 8 8 9 8 8 7 8 10 10 9 10 9 10 10 10 0 1 1 0 1 1 2 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 6 AIfDSo 55 2.033 2.114 142 11 0 0 200 [0:5] 430 10 9 9 9 8 8 7 9 8 9 9 8 10 9 10 10 0 1 0 0 1 1 2 0 1 1 1 2 0 1 0 0 7 AIfDSo 55 2.119 2.315 148 9 0 0 219 [0:6] 428 9 9 10 10 10 9 10 9 9 7 8 10 10 10 8 10 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 0 0 2 0 8 AIfDSo 55 2.090 2.251 146 12 0 0 213 [0:7] 437 10 10 10 9 10 10 10 9 7 8 10 8 9 9 8 9 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 1 1 2 1 9 AIfDSo 55 2.591 2.368 181 7 0 0 224 [0:8] 404 11 10 11 12 12 10 10 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 11 11 0 1 1 0 0 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 aifdso 0 0.000 0.000 0 0 0 0 0 [0:9] 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 11 AIfDSo 55 1.961 2.146 137 15 0 0 203 [0:A] 458 9 10 10 10 10 8 7 8 7 8 9 7 8 9 8 9 1 0 0 0 0 2 2 1 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 12 AIfDSo 55 2.147 2.230 150 10 0 0 211 [0:B] 439 9 10 9 8 10 10 10 10 10 9 9 10 9 10 9 8 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 2 13 AIfDSo 55 2.348 2.325 164 8 0 0 220 [0:C] 392 10 10 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 9 9 10 10 9 11 9 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 0 2 14 AIfDSo 55 1.589 2.114 111 11 0 0 200 [0:D] 480 6 6 7 8 7 7 7 7 7 7 8 6 7 7 7 7 1 2 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 15 AIfDSo 55 2.663 2.177 186 15 0 0 206 [0:E] 407 13 11 12 13 12 11 11 11 11 11 10 12 11 11 13 13 0 2 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 0 0 16 AIfDSo 55 2.405 2.389 168 9 0 0 226 [0:F] 408 11 10 11 11 11 11 10 11 9 10 11 11 11 10 10 10 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 2 0 0 0 1 1 1 speed:770 noncerate[GH/s]:30.337 (1.896/chip) hashrate[GH/s]:31.043 good:2119 errors:142 spi-err:0 miso-err:0 jobs:292 cores:37% good:14 bad:0 off :2 (best[GH/s]:29.893) Mon Sep 9 02:50:05 2013 0: 770 30.337 31.043 2119 142 0 0 14 0 2 (1.896/chip) 37% pi@bitfury ~ $ |
|
|
|
I have installed ftdi driver,but my laptop just detected com3,4,5,6,7,,,,,,,there's com0,1,2 missing,
what should I do,thanks in advance!
ps:how to start that shitty linux 7,do I need open the case and press the power button?
Check the hub inside. Or better yet install the one that works  minis are really 8 singles in a box hooked up to a usb hub. |
|
|
|
Anybody knows what "speed->0" at the end of the .stat.log line actually mean?
2 AIfDSo 55 0.243 2.019 17 126 0 0 191 [0:1] 726 0 1 2 2 1 0 0 0 2 0 3 0 4 1 1 0 9 8 7 7 8 9 9 9 7 9 6 8 5 8 8 9 speed->0
10 AIfDSo 55 0.272 1.924 19 110 0 0 182 [0:9] 722 0 2 1 2 2 2 0 2 0 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 8 6 7 6 6 6 8 7 8 7 7 7 6 7 7 7 speed->0
#2 and #10 chips are not doing what they suppose to. I'm not sure if it is assembly or my configuration.
EDIT:
After a while the rates drop completely:
2 AiFDso 55 0.014 0.550 1 35 0 0 52 [0:1] 723 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2
10 AiFDso 55 0.072 0.528 5 34 0 0 50 [0:9] 715 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 3 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 3 3 3 3
thats the tuning mod that was used for this cycle ... each cycle it will use a autotuning mod depending on the errors u got .... as long you got no errors it will speed up the clock +1 ... 13. Autoclock
- shut down = Chip will be shutdown and unavailable (Aifdso)
- speed->0 = If still more errors than correct nonces -> shut down
- speed up = If you have 0 errors
- speed down = If you have >5 errors clock down Thanks, that makes sense now. I turned off auto (aIfDSo) at 52, but the nonce rates are 0.35 GH on those chips. Do you know how are chips numbered on the board, i.e which are #2 and #10 (for visual inspection). |
|
|
|
|
Anybody knows what "speed->0" at the end of the .stat.log line actually mean?
2 AIfDSo 55 0.243 2.019 17 126 0 0 191 [0:1] 726 0 1 2 2 1 0 0 0 2 0 3 0 4 1 1 0 9 8 7 7 8 9 9 9 7 9 6 8 5 8 8 9 speed->0
10 AIfDSo 55 0.272 1.924 19 110 0 0 182 [0:9] 722 0 2 1 2 2 2 0 2 0 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 8 6 7 6 6 6 8 7 8 7 7 7 6 7 7 7 speed->0
#2 and #10 chips are not doing what they suppose to. I'm not sure if it is assembly or my configuration.
EDIT:
After a while the rates drop completely:
2 AiFDso 55 0.014 0.550 1 35 0 0 52 [0:1] 723 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2
10 AiFDso 55 0.072 0.528 5 34 0 0 50 [0:9] 715 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 3 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 3 3 3 3
|
|
|
|
|
Dave,
My chip #2, #10 are only hashing at ~0.25-0.29 GH/s (with very large number of errors, 300% more than other chips)
They show "speed->0" after the last column in .stat.log
They are set as auto "AIfDSo 55" like the others.
Is there anything that can be done to improve their performance?
How are the chips numbered? How to map the IDs in .stat.log to the board?
2 AIfDSo 55 0.243 2.019 17 126 0 0 191 [0:1] 726 0 1 2 2 1 0 0 0 2 0 3 0 4 1 1 0 9 8 7 7 8 9 9 9 7 9 6 8 5 8 8 9 speed->0
10 AIfDSo 55 0.272 1.924 19 110 0 0 182 [0:9] 722 0 2 1 2 2 2 0 2 0 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 8 6 7 6 6 6 8 7 8 7 7 7 6 7 7 7 speed->0
Thanks,
af_newbie
EDIT:
After a while they go to:
2 AiFDso 55 0.014 0.550 1 35 0 0 52 [0:1] 723 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2
10 AiFDso 55 0.072 0.528 5 34 0 0 50 [0:9] 715 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 3 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 3 3 3 3
|
|
|
|
Alright guys, got some good news, here's the two big ones.
1. chips from wednesday arrived just fine, they are being split/packaged for shipment.
2. we are going to open refund for all orders, not just june 1st/15th or what not.
expect more detailed update via newsletter later tonight.
Yifu, When are you going to finish adding trade-ins to store accounts and invoicing and shipping? ~5 months later...still nothing. I've opened over 17 tickets, texted, called, emailed you, pm'd you and posted on forum. No direct answers for months now. Sir Trade-Ins Missing from Store Account #1541 Created on Thu, Sep 5 at 10:48 AM BEING PROCESSED TRADE-IN NOT IN STORE YET #1540 Created on Thu, Sep 5 at 10:48 AM BEING PROCESSED Trade-ins Signed by Mr. Chen Still not in store account. #1530 Created on Sat, Aug 31 at 2:14 PM BEING PROCESSED TRADE-IN NOT IN STORE YET #1508 Created on Mon, Aug 26 at 12:20 PM BEING PROCESSED TRADE-INS SIGNED BY MR. CHEN; NOT POSTED IN AVALON STORE ACCOUNT #1495 Created on Wed, Aug 21 at 4:09 AM BEING PROCESSED Order is still not in Store Account #1487 Created on Sun, Aug 18 at 10:42 PM BEING PROCESSED Trade-ins Please Sir ADD to Store Account #1476 Created on Tue, Aug 13 at 10:15 AM BEING PROCESSED Sir Please Add Trade-In to Store #1454 Created on Tue, Aug 6 at 12:21 PM BEING PROCESSED TRADE-IN NOT IN STORE YET #1453 Created on Tue, Aug 6 at 12:20 PM BEING PROCESSED TRADE-IN NOT IN STORE YET #1452 Created on Tue, Aug 6 at 12:20 PM TRADE-IN NOT IN STORE YET #1451 Created on Tue, Aug 6 at 12:19 PM BEING PROCESSED TRADE-IN NOT IN STORE YET #1450 Created on Tue, Aug 6 at 12:18 PM BEING PROCESSED Sir Please Add Trade-In to Store #1424 Created on Tue, Jul 30 at 2:50 PM BEING PROCESSED TRADE-IN NOT IN STORE YET #1409 Created on Wed, Jul 24 at 11:53 AM BEING PROCESSED TRADE-IN NOT IN STORE YET #1408 Created on Wed, Jul 24 at 11:51 AM BEING PROCESSED Hello Sir, Please add my trade-in to my store account. #1351 Created on Mon, Jul 15 at 11:01 AM BEING PROCESSED Sir Please help with Avalon Trade-In #1235 Created on Tue, Jul 2 at 11:29 AM +1 Yeah, Yifu. What's up with that? I opened tickets, emailed and PMed you. First ticket #961. Do you care to answer? What happened to our trade-ins? |
|
|
|
Hmm. If Extranonce1 is assigned by the pool, having more miners would distribute the work better as each miner would get its own version of Extranonce1, no? Not sure I understand the question. Distributing the work "better" is useless - all that matters is that nobody overlaps. You are probably right. It is like searching many haystacks (extranonce2) only 10%, instead of one at 80% before going to the next field of haystacks (new block). Either way, finding that needle (hash) is a game of chance. |
|
|
|
|
I got my kit today. Thanks Dave!!!
When I first started it the nonce rate as reported by admin page was 25.5GH/s
After few hours, the rate dropped to 23.5-24.5. Not sure why, but I'll let it run overnight to see if it stabilizes.
Pool rates with btcguild/emc are 22-23 GH/s
Not bad for a little fury...
|
|
|
|
I was wondering how stratum pool distributes work to miners. Does it split extranonce1,2 ranges among miners?
On the miner side, if you have 10 devices attached to one PC, is bfgminer splitting work and distributes ranges to individual devices.
And finally do devices split work to individual chips and engines? Extranonce1 is assigned by the pool, unique to each connection. Extranonce2 is what the miner is free to do whatever they want with. BFGMiner currently just increments extranonce2 to create unique block headers for the drivers. Someday ASICs might get fast enough that they need to do the their own header production, in which case drivers will be able to get a stratum-like job for them. Some devices are already in development to work this way, but it's a risky thing to do because it can negatively impact Bitcoin scalability if they have unreasonable limits on how quickly they can produce headers internally. Is it better to have many miners or few more powerful miners. Say in case of mini rig, would it be better to run 24 miners each 60GH/s or one 1440 GH/s miner? A single 1.4 Th/s miner (eg, 3 minirigs) would make more sense. Hmm. If Extranonce1 is assigned by the pool, having more miners would distribute the work better as each miner would get its own version of Extranonce1, no? So miner can create new merkleroots/work jobs as it iterates through Extranonce2. Each new/generated work would need 1 sec@4GH/s to do a full nonce scan? 16TH to do a full Extranonce2 scan? And 256 PH to have any block solved in 1 second, by hashing all Extranonce1,2 and nonce all at once (assuming the miner can iterate through Extranonce1)? Is that how it works? |
|
|
|
Hello guys. What is the highest order # shipped so far?
#96 was delivered few hours ago (order from Canada), picked up by Fedex yesterday. I'm officially impressed with Dave & his team. Fedex is definitely the way to go. Dave, I know a guy who needs to get some experience shipping stuff. His name is YoFoo. I think he is looking for work. |
|
|
|
Would that still need to solider/short some of those pins or that's meant to just flip the switch and that's it?? Put 24 pin connector from PSU into this board, and flip the switch. No soldering. It has standby and power up LEDs. Very clean install, IMHO. |
|
|
|
|
No signs of trade-ins either.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
