Having a small problem here.. one of my miners is stuck on 0.98.1 beta. Regardless of which firmware I flash to, it still says the same thing on the upgrade tab: "Current firmware revision: 0.98-3.3v-workaround-freq" I've tried soft and hard resets to no avail. Anyone had this problem and found a solution? Some help, please.  reset your browser cache...... |
|
|
|
|
ehhh the beta 981 works better than official for me. official made errors go way back up again.
|
|
|
|
trying it also and the thing I notice is total lack of rejects initially, hashrate the same, and hardware error is lower so far, but too early to say for sure yeah i was getting 0% rejects for the first couple hours, then a couple pop up here and there. just for reference, on .98 i was getting just SLIGHTLY lower hash rate and about 7% hw errors and 3% rejected, so this is a huge improvement for me at least. |
|
|
|
|
can anyone walk me through how to change some settings on Eligius? I'm new to this pool and it keeps giving me the signature fail error. not quite sure what I'm doing wrong.
|
|
|
|
Let's see what firmware they come up with Monday, because so far I'm far from impressed or satisfied with the product, not to mention the delay for which I still expect compensation.
Don't want to be nagging daily, but it seems that's the only way with KNC.
Jupiter 1 is hashing with 0.98.1(beta) at stable 564GH/s with 0.9% HW erros - no complaints there. The only thing that can be improved is the power consumption, but no big deal for now.
Jupiter 2 is still averaging 420GH/s with 0.98. The beta firmware did not help and it even reduced the hash speed to around 390-400GH/s. I expect improvements there.
i wouldnt expect any kind of compensation for delays....kind of expected with this type of hardware. we are the guinea pigs! and im ok with that. |
|
|
|
just updated my mercury from .98 to .98.1 and HW errors went from 6.9% to around 1.5%. also, rejected was 3% to 0% now!
definitely a good upgrade. all cores functioning as well. none are off.
UPDATE: been running .98.1 for 30 mins now, hw errors down to 1.1% and dropping. still no duplicate shares!
0.98.1 was intended for those with a dead die; die 0 There is no other difference as far as I know. thats what i thought too man, but its made a big difference for me! Hashrate @ the pool before and after? im on eligius, and only been about an hour so far so too early to report. but ill get back to your in another two hours or so. honestly i didnt think it would make a difference, but it runs so much more stable now. temps are at 47 degrees steady too. |
|
|
|
just updated my mercury from .98 to .98.1 and HW errors went from 6.9% to around 1.5%. also, rejected was 3% to 0% now!
definitely a good upgrade. all cores functioning as well. none are off.
UPDATE: been running .98.1 for 30 mins now, hw errors down to 1.1% and dropping. still no duplicate shares!
0.98.1 was intended for those with a dead die; die 0 There is no other difference as far as I know. thats what i thought too man, but its made a big difference for me! |
|
|
|
|
just updated my mercury from .98 to .98.1 and HW errors went from 6.9% to around 1.5%. also, rejected was 3% to 0% now!
definitely a good upgrade. all cores functioning as well. none are off.
UPDATE: been running .98.1 for 30 mins now, hw errors down to 1.1% and dropping. still no duplicate shares!
|
|
|
|
I have missed a few threads here, I know, but is there a current consensus on the ideal temps for these miners. I have a Mercury. Its pootling along at a steady 142 Gh/s at 39.5 degrees C. Sound ok?
my mercury is running the exact same. take a look at your hw errors and rejected tho, mine are around 7.7% hw and 3% rejected.... :/ If I'm not mistaken, 144 GH/s is the theoretical maximum hash rate for a Mercury (192 cores @ 750 MH/s each), so you are doing very well. oh yeah, its doing great. hw errors bring it down to about 137-138 on the pool...still not bad! |
|
|
|
I have missed a few threads here, I know, but is there a current consensus on the ideal temps for these miners. I have a Mercury. Its pootling along at a steady 142 Gh/s at 39.5 degrees C. Sound ok?
my mercury is running the exact same. take a look at your hw errors and rejected tho, mine are around 7.7% hw and 3% rejected.... :/ |
|
|
|
Hi folks,
I'm new (sorry if this is a dumb question)... but I'm interested in buying the HF Jupiter. But, when I look at calculators like - mining.thegenesisblock - according to their difficulty predictions, it would be lucky to generate a lousy $1k profit in a year (after $6k investment payoff). Am I missing something here, or how is anyone making money off this hobby now? Why is anyone buying these if even the latest/greatest units aren't paying?
Thanks
-Sharky
The Jupiter is sold by KnCminer not Hashfast. It is $5000 for November delivery. It will not ROI in its lifetime. If you buy a mining device you have to do your homework, pick the right company and make sure you order on day 1 to secure "first day shipping." +1 |
|
|
|
And be 400GBP out of pocket just for the fun?
Can't blame KnC for that. Really? On what date? Last few days of Sept when "we are on track for delivery", or maybe Oct 1st when "We're shipping day 1 today and Day 2 tomorrow"..or maybe after Oct 15th when they hadn't delivered as promised and weren't giving refunds unless they fancied it and ALL rigs suddenly became in process on the status even when they weren't?
They NEVER offered refunds, they grudgingly gave some when asked,,,different thing.
What is the term for a smartarse who isn't at all smart?
Not sure what world you are living in (From your posts in the past I assume it's one consumed by hatred of KnC so not sure if this post will get through that mental wall. They offered refunds after the 15th to anyone who wanted one. Everything else you said is pure fiction. are you stupid, or just retarded? they stopped refunds for a long time, please do your fucking research first. |
|
|
|
whoa, 426m! you solved a block! coooool
 Nope. The pool "solved" the block, not him. What he did was to use a machine which generated the SHA-256 number for the pool to "solve" the block. He would only had "solved" the block if he was solo "mining", what is not the case. I don't get the distinction you are making here. It looks to me like he solved a block for the pool in exactly the same way he might have solved a block for himself if he had been solo mining. Augusto just being his crabby, permanent on-his-period self as usual. |
|
|
|
|
both hash fast and coin terra will be at least a month late, so they both fail horribly. MPP, what a crock of shit.
|
|
|
|
whoa, 426m! you solved a block! coooool
Nope. The pool "solved" the block, not him. What he did was to use a machine which generated the SHA-256 number for the pool to "solve" the block. He would only had "solved" the block if he was solo "mining", what is not the case. yes, doofus. i know that, thats what i mean you fucktard. why are you still on this forum? |
|
|
|
whoa, 426m! you solved a block! coooool |
|
|
|
|
oh man, so glad i didnt invest in this "company"
|
|
|
|
|
way to expensive. good luck with selling these to noobs
|
|
|
|
|
just a bit of an update. my mercury is running at 134.4 ghs (from the pool) 141.6 (from cgminer) since .98 firmware. everything is running great except hw errors actually went up for me. its steady at 6.9% and rejected (duplicates mostly) is around 3%. could be worse i guess...
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
