okay my first of 3 2980watt platinum psu's arrived. I hooked it up to my 2 avalon sixes and I am using 2000 watts to do 6800gh My 2880 watt psu uses 2124 watts to do 6800gh this is a very fast down and dirty comparison. this is about 72 kwatts a month at 10 cent power 7.20 usd a month so if you find cheap 2980watt psu's buy them I have 2 psu's on order from this seller. If they are are good as the one that arrived today these are a good price. he sold me 2 at 80 each. http://www.ebay.com/itm/161937378976?_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AITnow back to rating the 2880 watt vs the 2980 watt 2000 watts vs 2125 watts if this is a true measurement it is 6% different putting the 2880 watt like a silver and the 2980 watt like a platt. I will do more tests with a lot of photos and proof. One issue with tests is volts provided need to match. ie I know the draw id setup the same two avalons at freq 500 fans at 40%. but if one psu provides 12.22 and one psu provides 12.19 my results would be off. BTW the seller has 8 of the 2980 watt plats left. longer test below 30 min 2880 watt amps 9.1 volts 241 dc 12.20 dc 12.10 dc 12.00 hash 6879 watts 2193 watts per gh 0.3188 Philip, you always find the best deal, last time I checked the lowest price was $150. Thanks for doing this. my pleasure. more results on the 2880 watt 1 hour amps = 9.0 volts = 241 dc = 12.20 at the one un - used pcie cable dc = 12.10 at avalon 1 software reading dc = 12.00 at avalon 2 software reading hash = 6872 watts = 2169 watts per gh = 0.3156 I will give 4 more readings on the 2880w the garage is cold as cold weather has arrived in NJ I will go back and do that same on the 2980 Some caveats the fan packs are a bit different. I have yet to pull the 2980watt fan pack apart. so while I know that the 2880 watt is using 60 watts in its fan pack I do not know that the 2980watter uses 60 watts so while it appears to be 125 watts difference in the early tests I think the difference may be more like 90 to 100 after all tests. And do not forget kilo17's 3x 2880 watt fan mod is kick ass as it should save 150 to 160 watts for 3 psu's Thanks for the early results. Looks like I was right in regards to efficiency. Are the 2980W-ers as loud as the 2880W-ers? Should require less airflow since they're running more efficiently thus less heat waste to inefficiency. |
|
|
|
I tested it last night and now I am going to make a proper plate to mount the fan. I didn't want to waste time cutting one out if the fan wouldn't keep it cool. I did leave a channel between the PSU's by stacking them to aid in cooling although I am not sure if the channel reduces the pressure and limits the flow through the PSU's.  FANTASTIC! I love what you've come up with! I'll surely copy your setup when I need more PSUs and pick up some 2980W-ers. Noise was the biggest limiting factor with these IMO. This should take care of that! I'd definitely remove the gap between each PSU. You want as much air going through the interior casing of those PSUs as possible, going through the channels is wasting cooling potential. Will you be able to load all 3 units to 100% to see if cooling is sufficient? Might be that there isn't enough air flow and they shut down due to over temp protection at full load. |
|
|
|
Sorry to be replying so late, holidays plus a ski trip have mostly kept me away from the forum. I'm going to add my answers in the quote in blue. I'll break this up to make it easier to follow. I'll leave the discussion alone after this post. Fans were not powered externally, and I believe that to be disingenuous since no one will use a second power supply to power the main power supply's fan(s) in the real world. Most server PSU fans I've come across are 5-10w. These PSUs definitely use more juice with their fans. Don't think it's enough to bring efficiency down by any meaningful amount, much less 4.3%. Where did you get that figure? The 2880W PSU uses 3 60x38mm fans that are rated for 1.68A each. At the PSU's typical 12.2V output, that would be maximum of 20.5W each, for a total of 61.5W. @ your 50% load testing of 1440W, that could account for a margin of error up to 4.27% if they were at max load. I don't think following the testing procedures for 80+ should be considered disingenuous if you are going to use their outcome/ratings in your assessment of the PSU. If anything, I think it's disingenuous for you to use their rating label if you are going to ignore their protocol whether you agree with it or not. I'm not here to debate the real-world meaningfulness of Ecova's rating system, that is for the end user to decide for themselves just as EPA ratings on new vehicles (and not real-world fuel economy) are up to the consumer to interpret. What I wouldn't do though is tell the dealer that the EPA rating on my new car is wrong based on my own fuel economy, if I'm not willing to replicate the EPA's testing procedure myself. I do agree that the cooling setup used by the 2880W PSU's is not very efficient, it relies on small diameter high RPM fans to push air through a long narrow tunnel filled with components. Most ATX PSU's use very large single ~0.6A fan (~7W) to cool them, which is why they wouldn't have had near the impact in your testing in the past. Thankfully MarkAZ has nearly finished his acrylic solution to replace the loud stock fans with a single 120mm fan which will reduce noise and wasted power from the 3x screamers. These PSUs do use a very large amount of power for cooling vs typical PSUs. That said, what matters to the end user is efficiency at the wall. The fans being powered needs to be included in that efficiency figure when miners calculate power requirements. Of all the PSUs I've tested, none of them were measurably affected by their fan's power consumption vs the ecova testing results. I know this case is special considering the 3 screamers, but it is what it is.I've already described my testing methods to you. 20-25c ambient, Watts Up? Pro .net AC meter, $300 AC/DC amp clamp to measure DC amperage and multiply it by voltage measured at the load end of wires to account for vdroop. Some simple math then gives us efficiency numbers. IF you don't want to accept my methodology, I'm very open to suggestions to improve my process. It has proven to be very accurate when used with PSUs that have results posted by ecova, even when taking the fan into consideration. Furthermore, a 1500GH/s SP20E has consistently used less power at the wall using an actual platinum PSU vs the 2880W-er by a large enough amount. I do consider that a little unfair since 1 SP20E won't hit 50% load on the 2880w, but on the other hand the other PSU was close to 100% load which lowers it's efficiency. Where do you put the DC amp clamp to measure the DC load by the miners, do you have to take 1 strand of a PCIe cable or can you group them all in together? I'm honestly curious about that, seems interesting as a way to compare miner efficiency vs manufacturers published specs. And to see if for example the SP20e's DC Watts are accurate from the GUI. SP20 @ 1500 GH/s is only 900W DC IIRC? So your 87% efficiency was measured at that load or at true 50% load? This is the stuff I'm mainly interested in about your testing method (and I apologize if you've already posted about it) all I read was that you tested 87% efficiency at 50% load, which would have included fan draw of up to 60.5W of that. However, if it was the SP20E @ 1500GH/s, load would be a fair amount less than 50%. Also, depending on what the fans were drawing and the DC load, the fans could make up more than the 4.27% figure of the energy consumption if it was less the 1440W load I thought it was. I'm very interested if you managed to test it at different loads to see if it was consistent? The real-world impact of this is that fans in general would make up a significantly lower portion of the wasted power (reflected as inefficiency in your test) at 100% load than they would at 20% load. This would also skew the results when comparing the efficiency of a PSU @ 100% load to a larger PSU @ 30% load, which is what I interpreted you as saying. If you are open to suggestions, what I would love to see is a straight AC draw comparison vs a known similar 80+ platinum PSU at 50% and 100% DC load. I have 2x 2980W PSU's coming and would be happy to lend one to you, along with another 2880W PSU for redundancy to test and show your results here. If you have enough mining power to load it up that is. Since it's impossible for anyone to make a definitive conclusion without actually following Ecova's guidelines, I think a comparison vs a near identical and known tested 80+ platinum PSU like the 2980W would be as close as one could get. The amp clamp goes as close to the miner's connectors as possible with all 12v strands bundled together.
My SP20E testing goes back at least 6 months, so I can't remember exactly and as I said I've lost my documentation of the results unfortunately. I do plan on testing another SP20E soon enough, though, to compare 2 smaller platinum server PSUs I'm using. I'll get back to you with SP20E figures then. I'd be happy to test your PSUs, but after taking a quick glance through the thread before replying I think Phil has that covered. What you call overnight is actually a 5 to 6 year difference in engineering and manufacturing, a new (better) OEM, not to mention the adoption of PSU efficiency measures to reduce global power consumption of data centers and consumer IT and a shift to ever more efficient PSUs to meet those goals. The 2880w came before all of that. Don't see why you have such difficulty believing that it's possible. You'll have to forgive me for not taking your word that it's platinum when there is absolutely no proof of that anywhere to be found. I've only seen that it's platinum being parroted on this forum. I hope you'll do your own tests and post the results. Until then, the burden of proof is on you to prove it is platinum and not bronze. What you're saying about the timeline makes sense and could absolutely be right, it just didn't seem to me like much was changed through the years with the 2880W PSU's. And if it had, that it wouldn't have happened all at once with a new model. All I am interested in is the truth of this. And what you've showntold me is not exactly compelling, just that you tested the PSU @ 50% (or possibly 30% load if it was a single SP20, which i'm hoping you can clarify) and claim Bronze-level efficiency. But you didn't follow 80+'s guidelines to determine that, and are now arguing that those guidelines are disingenuous... The 2880w has nothing to do with the 2980w. The only thing they have in common are their exteriors and interfacing connector. IBM commissioned Delta to make an updated, slightly more powerful, and significantly more efficient power supply than Astec was providing them with in regards to the 2880w. Changes made to the 2880w PSU between the first revision and the last have absolutely no bearing on what has been done with the 2980w, especially since it's not the same company manufacturing them.I hope you aren't taking this as a knock on you or j4bber. It is anything but. You guys sell what I consider to be the best server equipment for mining, and I know that you both believed the PSUs to be platinum rated. I know you wouldn't have sold them as platinum power supplies without believing that they were, and no one in their right mind will think that.
Edit: With the exception of S4, what I've seen is a constant load from miners on the power supply. Never seen it move more than 0.1A while mining on S7, for example.
I realize I may be coming off as abrasive, and for that I apologize. The truth is I'm not taking this personally, I'm just learning now about how they actually rate PSU's, and learned how much wasted energy the fan packs on the 2880's could be burning (which makes me hopeful to test out and offer MarkAZ's alternate acrylic panel to mount a single 120mm fan instead). Now what I would like to know is if these PSU's would actually meet the ratings that I was under the impression they met, and I believe the best way to do that (if you are willing) would be to have you compare the 2880W to the near identical and tested platinum 2980W PSU, to take your methods/equipment out of the equation (even if the method/equipment isn't perfect, it should be consistent enough to show a difference as significant as this). If they do not match, I will be more than happy to change the wording in my threads. The last thing I or J4bberwock are trying to do is to deceive anybody. I started selling the product because I believed it was the best solution on the market, and still believe that today. I have a bunch of server PSU's I could lend you for your PSU efficiency thread you mentioned too, DPS 2000's, DPS 750's, 800 GBA's, etc. I'm absolutely willing to test both the 2880w vs the 2980w for you if you want. I'm 99% sure the 2980W-er will pull about 6-7% less than the 2880W-er at the wall, which is the only thing that counts IMHO. I have the means to load both PSUs anywhere from 20%-100%. Using a single 120mm fan will definitely help the 2880w PSU to consume less at the wall, but the same is true of the 2980w.
Thanks for the offer on the PSUs, but I already have quite a few units to test which might take a while depending on my work load. I'm not looking to become the next jonnyguru or anything, nor do I have the necessary skills, equipment, or knowledge to do so. I may consider taking requests for reviews of specific units that I don't have on hand eventually, but the unit would have to be provided by the requester if I don't have it on hand. Doubt that will happen, though. |
|
|
|
|
I think the stock fan is actually 250CFM. The Kaze wouldn't be good enough unless ambient is fairly low.
|
|
|
|
LONG WAIT! Now it is there: Congrats to 1LjZmRdMV7Mk88bx7oMMWgKWaFF8yG1qtp for the Block solve!  Woot, got a lucky S7!! Congrats again! How long was your S7 chugging away? |
|
|
|
Sweet, morning block! Good job BTCWoman. Here are my stats for the hell of it, from Montreal Canada: PING kano.is (104.194.28.196): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 104.194.28.196: seq=0 ttl=54 time=70.707 ms
64 bytes from 104.194.28.196: seq=1 ttl=54 time=70.431 ms
64 bytes from 104.194.28.196: seq=2 ttl=54 time=70.908 ms
64 bytes from 104.194.28.196: seq=3 ttl=54 time=70.495 ms
64 bytes from 104.194.28.196: seq=4 ttl=54 time=69.929 ms
--- kano.is ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 5 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max = 69.929/70.494/70.908 ms PING de.kano.is (139.162.143.142): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 139.162.143.142: seq=0 ttl=53 time=92.864 ms
64 bytes from 139.162.143.142: seq=1 ttl=53 time=93.255 ms
64 bytes from 139.162.143.142: seq=2 ttl=53 time=92.791 ms
64 bytes from 139.162.143.142: seq=3 ttl=53 time=92.392 ms
64 bytes from 139.162.143.142: seq=4 ttl=53 time=92.902 ms
--- de.kano.is ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 5 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max = 92.392/92.840/93.255 ms PING sg.kano.is (139.162.5.112): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 139.162.5.112: seq=0 ttl=52 time=264.407 ms
64 bytes from 139.162.5.112: seq=1 ttl=52 time=263.256 ms
64 bytes from 139.162.5.112: seq=2 ttl=52 time=262.469 ms
64 bytes from 139.162.5.112: seq=3 ttl=52 time=263.428 ms
64 bytes from 139.162.5.112: seq=4 ttl=52 time=262.611 ms
--- sg.kano.is ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 5 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max = 262.469/263.234/264.407 ms Any chance we'll ever see an east coast server, kano? Or perhaps relocate the NA server to somewhere more centrally located so that everyone in NA has the best ping possible? Not that 70ms is all that bad for east coasters, mind you. |
|
|
|
Anyone?
I am located in Washington state. I have a batch 2 and 7 I might be willing to part with. Let me know. thanks! PMed you a few days ago but haven't gotten a response? Anyone else? |
|
|
|
Reloadevery works perfectly for me, I set it to 15 minutes and I never get logged out. |
|
|
|
Ok, thanks. A quick observation, if I may; the luck column in the dashboard should be left renamed to difficulty, no? A 30 second block shows as something like 4% luck.
If we find a block after 30 seconds we're pretty lucky, so 4% seems ok for me, I cannot find a wrong column after first sight. I've had some requests for adding more proxies to the pool, i'll do that, but all those "stratum"-proxy are no real "stratum" proxys since ethminer doesn't support stratum. Its just snakeoil and IMHO sammy's proxy looks/works best. 4% would be OK if the colum was called difficulty. IE it was only 4% of expected difficulty, we were really lucky. To me: 25% luck = I only found 1 block when statistically I should have found 4 50% luck = I only found 1 block when statistically I should have found 2 100% luck = I found 1 block and statistically I should have found 1 200% luck = I found 2 blocks when statistically I should have only found 1 |
|
|
|
|
Thanks for posting that info, yslyung.
|
|
|
|
|
It seems B8 S7 is the worst to date, with many failures reported. We can expect B9 to be the same since bitmain indicated B8 was the final design, which leads me to believe that B9 = B8 with a later shipping date.
I personally have 1 dead B8 board, board #3 and it died within 2 weeks of powering it on. I think we'll find that most people with a failure will also be board #3.
Bitmain has, to date, been very slow to respond to my RMA request. I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt right now due to the holidays.
If you've had a failure in another batch, you can indicate that by voting for the last option. In that case, I kindly request that you don't cast a second vote to indicate which board # failed, but instead post those details manually in this thread. That will allow us to gather details specifically for B8 in the poll.
|
|
|
|
Miners should never buy ATX PSUs blindly. Always refer to jonnyguru. If it's not reviewed there, it's an unknown quality and I'd avoid it. There's only 1 company I trust to do no wrong, and that's Seasonic. Everything else is up in the air. |
|
|
|
i see only: CKPool: 8,383.89THs
it's bad luck all around the blockchain, last block was 1h ago
and the last 6blocks were done in 3h!!!
Kano will only let us grow so large before he stops allowing new miners (if I recall his goal is 10% of the network). Really? |
|
|
|
|
Really sucks since you weren't expecting the bill, but holy shit you've got it good. An S7 import into Canada is ~$300 and never free. You guys have it customs free 99% of the time, and when it isn't it's a pittance.
Hope you can get it resolved with the appropriate entity none the less!
|
|
|
|
Wow, nice job mxnsch! If I had an A1 I'd definitely buy you a round or 2! Any chance you could improve A2 Terminator firmware also? That, I do have.  |
|
|
|
I would hate to see this pool get too big. Sure you get more blocks but payouts are smaller and it all balances out.
I was with GHash when they would solve a block every few minutes (boring). I left them when they got too big.
I was with Slush for a long time when they were less than 5 Ph, but they got too big.
I was with BTC Guild until they started having problems and had to shut down. I was sorry to see them go down.
I wish there was some way the Bitcoin protocol could encourage more small pools by somehow rewarding them for increasing the spread of the network so that we don't end up with a few pools that control all.
If any pool deserves to get big, it's this one. I don't see an issue. |
|
|
|
Solo gamble was a wash. Bringing the boys back home, which ought to push us over 8PH.  |
|
|
|
You really are better off buying brand new directly from Bitmain. You will at least get 90 days warranty.
I'm definitely considering both options. |
|
|
|
Ok, thanks. A quick observation, if I may; the luck column in the dashboard should be renamed to difficulty, no? A 30 second block shows as something like 4% luck.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
