Had some difficulties starting up initally: Exception in thread "main" java.lang.RuntimeException: java.lang.reflect.InvocationTargetException
at com.triconemining.board.Ztex$ZtexChip.<init>(Ztex.java:114)
at com.triconemining.board.Ztex$ZtexBoard.<init>(Ztex.java:44)
at com.triconemining.board.Ztex.getBoard(Ztex.java:32)
at com.triconemining.bitcoin.miner.Main.main(Main.java:358)
Caused by: java.lang.reflect.InvocationTargetException
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:39)
at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25)
at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:597)
at com.triconemining.board.Ztex$ZtexChip.<init>(Ztex.java:96)
... 3 more
Caused by: java.lang.IndexOutOfBoundsException: Device number out of range. Valid numbers are 0..-1
at ztex.ZtexScanBus1.device(ZtexScanBus1.java:174)
... 8 more
I then restarted the computer, powered off all boards and tried again. Working nicely now, I get quite many errors, but it's trying to run at crazy frequencies  . I'll leave it to mine for a while and report stats later when in converges to optimal clock rate. I installed some RAM heat sinks on the underside aswell. |
|
|
|
I forgot to tell you that I've just bought 6 Icarus boards last month @ 500$ including shipment and tax! The hypothetical vision makes more sense for me here! If the factual vision makes more sense for you or anyone who is still interested in Icarus, I offer my newly arrived 6 Icarus boards @ 380 USD!
Where are you located? I'll take them. |
|
|
|
It's been running overnight now and looks like it's going to converge to 227ish:  I'll try heatsink + 92b next, but after that I think it needs more power to go higher? Maybe you should try port it to cairnsmore1 next? I think enterpoint has sold over a 100 boards (without a decent bitstream), so there's a market |
|
|
|
Is that on an unmodified 1.15x?
Yes. Only modification is a few VGA coolers stuck to the bottom of the board. Cool! I'll stick some leftover sinks to mine tomorrow aswell. I'm running unmodified 1.15x with 0.92a @ 160,150,144 and getting 3hour avg of 206 with 0.18% stales on eligius.
What is your error rate? At those clock frequencies you should be getting 227MH/s. Also, 0.92b (aka 0.92 official) is preferred; 0.92a has a lot of problems. 0% errors. I might be unlucky (Born under a bad sign). I decided to try a, as b gave me errors on the third ring (2) (I was running it faster tho). I'll try b tomorrow with underside heatsinks installed, but let a run overnight. Might just be my luck. |
|
|
|
At 164/152/146 = 232MH/s we were getting 0.5% errors, so we downclocked to 162/150/146 = 230MH/s and let it run overnight -- 0% errors. Here's the hashrate measured at Eligius: 225MH/s of shares and 2% stales is exactly 230MH/s. We're working on improving the stales to something more like 1%. Power consumption is 10.68W at the 12V input meaning efficiency is 21.17MH/J.
Is that on an unmodified 1.15x? I'm running unmodified 1.15x with 0.92a @ 160,150,144 and getting 3hour avg of 206 with 0.18% stales on eligius. |
|
|
|
Are you planning on contacting TMC (eldentyrell) and providing him with stuff he needs to make his bitstream compatible with Cairnsmore1?
We have had a conversation but it does need some work from our side that would take from our bitstream progression. So it's not likely to get us there much faster that our own approach. so for the moment we continue as we are. I will be very surprised if you will be able to produce a bitstream of 220MHs+ performance in a reasonable timeframe (1-2 weeks). From what I've heard, it's a pain in the neck to work with Spartan-6 in such high performance application. I believe TML would be much faster to implement. I personally would just prefer a 750-800 MH/s firmware to get my boards running. After all that's what I was sold on (double Icarus performance for $640). Any additional work would be icing on the cake. You'd have to be quite a ninja to write a bitstream even of that performance in 2 weeks. |
|
|
|
Are you planning on contacting TMC (eldentyrell) and providing him with stuff he needs to make his bitstream compatible with Cairnsmore1?
We have had a conversation but it does need some work from our side that would take from our bitstream progression. So it's not likely to get us there much faster that our own approach. so for the moment we continue as we are. I will be very surprised if you will be able to produce a bitstream of 220MHs+ performance in a reasonable timeframe (1-2 weeks). From what I've heard, it's a pain in the neck to work with Spartan-6 in such high performance application. I believe TML would be much faster to implement. |
|
|
|
|
I can report 150MHz 0.0% errors with 0.92b. Unmodified 1.15x with standard Xilence heatsink. Temps ~40°C on heatsink, 45°C on underside. 26°C ambient.
|
|
|
|
|
Are you planning on contacting TMC (eldentyrell) and providing him with stuff he needs to make his bitstream compatible with Cairnsmore1?
|
|
|
|
Agreed, I am happy to do anything possible to accelerate this and put BFL out of business. It disgusts me as a business owner that greedy/ignorant miners have allowed them to flourish with completely unethical business practices.
The purpose behind bitcoin was freedom from a centralized financial system. Let's not give in to a system ruled by a few or possibly one hardware manufacturer.
ASIC is great for bitcoin, let's just try to do it in a way that serves as many people's interests as possible with a goal of large scale mining decentralization.
+1 |
|
|
|
|
I'm beginning to suspect that BFL is in fact a pyramide scam. What if they had to pay almost list price for those cyclone III's that they used in singles? What if they need more and more orders just to get the chips paid? That would explain the ridiculously long and ever growing lead times...
|
|
|
|
Lol this is hilarious. This is pretty much exactly the idea I had 4 days ago when trying to figure out how to produce and ASIC by a union of miners.  You beat me to it |
|
|
|
man wat a good run of blocks
word. |
|
|
|
|
PRWeb will publish any crap that is sent there (been there, done that). I'd just take this as 100% FUD until their own website clearly states the numbers and their rep on the forum confirms.
What comes to hardware, I have reason to believe this will be Altera IV hardcopy. And no way it's going to be powered by USB only. Huge upfront costs too, so they need to sell a lot of those singles and mini rigs. I beginning to think BFL's business conduct is downright outrageous. They are using FUD to scare miners into buying their equipment to get a monopoly of BTC mining. This development can kill bitcoin unless the developers will make a clear stance on this (ie. algo change or not). I have an idea I'm working on to counter this situation, stay tuned.
|
|
|
|
The main batch of heatsinks has arrived today so will be aiming now to raise our production levels.
Are these the ones that are lower in height? What would be the optimal stacking spacing with these heatsinks(with fan installed)? Could you estimate when you'll begin shipping pre-orders of more than 1 unit? |
|
|
|
|
Too many connections. Positive problem, but I'm getting tired of regular downtime...
|
|
|
|
I'd like to see an opportunity for bitcoiners to invest in your project directly. Create a stock sale with legitimate stock restriction contracts and allow people to buy stock in the company and/or bonds. Maybe those who have interest in mining could participate in a hybrid pre-order/stock purchase.
For example:
Someone who wants to simply invest: They can purchase shares at a sort of IPO for people who support bitcoin. Don't initially allow people to buy more than X number of shares for a specific time period, say 30 days. Maybe you issue 10000 shares at $100.
So in the initial thirty day phase you only allow individuals or mining companies to purchase 10 shares. After the thirty day period you allow existing investors to have a first crack at whatever shares are left, then open it to anyone if there are any shares leftover. These shares of course pay dividends also.
This would allow you to raise capital of $1M to develop the ASIC. It would hopefully allow small time and big time bitcoiners to participate in the project. Ideally 1000 people buy ten shares in the initial thirty days, if not, well people had their chance.
Then create another stock purchase which includes one unit as part of the deal. So say these shares are preferred stock subject to dividends and you release 1000 shares at initial ASIC purchase price. These folks get to hedge against future units being sold at lower rates by knowing they will profit from these shares. If these units sell at $1000 you have raised an additional $1M.
I am a client of one of the top 50 law firms in the world and they have an office in Beijing. I would love to be involved in this project directly or as an advisor. I am a successful small business owner and I am currently two years into an MBA program.
PM me if you have interest in direct involvement or I will certainly try to contribute ideas through this thread.
My purpose would be to help spread ASIC technology in the bitcoin community in a way that does not consolidate mining power while also providing a reasonable profit for the ASIC producer.
+1 I would love to see the distributed model continue. I think the healthiest model is for the users and miners of bitcoin to invest together in ASIC development and own the company that produces them, as it secures our interests if done correctly. It could be a private company that issues an IPO for the development (most income from IPO to be held in escrow for payment for masks), or a co-op, or maybe even kickstart? Finland has many successful co-op models, where everyone can join, and they get a share of the company, if they agree to the rules of the co-op. The share could be 200$ or so, and would entitle you to one ASIC miner (depending on the price) or a good discount on purchases, when the board is done. Whatever the model, I'd like to see it form as owned by the core community, not some privately held company with a track record of dodgy business conduct. |
|
|
|
jjshabadoo, how is any of this different from CPU, GPU and FPGA generations, except in magnitude?
I think P4man answered your question pretty well:
A spartan 6 price is not affected by bitcoin difficulty. Just like with cpus and gpus, demand for such chips comes from non bitcoin applications, if bitcoin difficulty goes x100 tomorrow, spartan 6 prices will remain unaffected, as will gpu and cpu prices. Its market prices of these chips that largely determine bitcoin difficulty, not the other way around. If xilinx would start seling spartan 6s for $10 you would see a huge increase in bitcoin difficulty, but a huge increase in difficulty will have close to zero impact on xilinx prices.
But for a bitcoin asic, its market value is 100% determined by (future) bitcoin difficulty. If difficulty goes up x100, its market value will drop by ~100x, causing even higher difficulty. There is no such feedback effect for cpus, gpus, or fpgas.
.. Although I would add this is not a catastrophe for anyone except the early adopters of ASIC, as they will unlikely get their investment back. I'd rather see a large rollout of ASIC, where thousands of ASIC units will be mass-produced and shipped to willing early adopters, who have deposited payments to an escrow service. |
|
|
|
It's sexy and it was the cheapest Btw, system had crashed during night's test run. When I disconnected the power from Pi, all the LEDs kept shining, thus indicating power from USB port being drawn into the Pi(?!). I'll keep investigating.. |
|
|
|
There is no directory /dev/usb I've found out a couple of things... First, the hub I'm using is listed as a problem hub here: http://elinux.org/RPi_VerifiedPeripherals#Problem_USB_HubsOn a whim I modified a USB cable to cut the +5V power wire between the RasPi and the hub. According to some forums even powered hubs can draw too much current from the RasPi. When I did that, the hub was no longer recognized by debian. I stopped testing at that point. From the same verified hw website it looks like the LogiLink UA0096 10 port USB hub works. After a brief search it appears that this brand/hub is only available in the EU. After a brief search I found one that looks just like at at Meritline: http://www.meritline.com/10-ports-usb-hub---p-40830.aspx so I bought one. When it comes I'll update this thread. Until then I'll mine with my PC as the host. I can report http://www.dealextreme.com/p/high-speed-usb2-0-1-1-10-port-usb-hub-pink-39715 works fine with additional 5V power running 10 Ztex 1.15x's. Without the power I had 4 ports underpowered. I'm feeding my pi through Nokia N9 power supply. I'm mining with cgminer 2.4.2 on EclipseMC. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
