Yep.  I'm in this camp too.  I am going to predict right now that each board has 8 chips (twice the mini) for 24 chips total.  At 40k sols that's 1.6k sols per chip.  Right now my mini gets 16.5k with 12 chips so 1.3k per chip.  And the limiting factor seems to be voltage.  Getting 1.6k per chip seems pretty realistic when you can already get 1.3 on the mini. 

If the double size board added just a couple extra chips for a total of 10 chips per board then you would get 30 chips doing 40k sols or 1.3k per chip exactly which is right where my mini tops out in OC.  Either way that doesn't leave much room of OC.

Given that the board is only twice as big as the mini it's pretty hard to suspect that there would be room for much more than twice as many chips.

The biggest advantage I can see is that you could get by with one large PSU and fewer PCIe power connections.  The full size Z9 says it has 7 connectors.  Four minis would be 16 connectors.

Even though I bought some S1's and was around when bitmain first came on the scene I don't recall exactly the sequence of things.  But I do know this, I bought my S1's very soon after people on the forum started showing pics of theirs and it was definitely confirmed they existed.  Also, they had a website with a domain even back then.  And even though their website sucked for a very long time, it had a shopping cart and would provide individual BTC payment addresses and everything.

I'm not sure what it looked like in terms of scam risk for the very first bitmain buyers, but at a minimum they looked more legit than this dwarf dude just because they had a domain and dedicated website. 

It is forking specifically to make ASIC miners like the Z9 not work to mine it.  So as soon as it forks you will not be able to mine with anything but a GPU again (assuming people have made the necessary changes to the GPU mining software - I don't follow this coin so I have no idea).

https://enforum.bitmain.com/bbs/topics/3957

The first two options should work on all antminers and the third will very likely work on all newer devices.  I know you have basically already said you tried the second one but have you tried the first one?  That has been the most successful for me when I have had weird issues.

So I have mined 1 ZEC at almost exactly a week of mining.  Based on prices I can say that 11 ZEC would definitely put me over 100% ROI so 10 more weeks.  I know it won't actually be 10 weeks, it'll certainly be longer, but that looks pretty good right now.  Reminds me of the old days of the early antminers when you could actually make a profit in the long run and ROI was under 6 months.

My first thought is that if multiple ones did it at the same time it's network related.  I think considering the pool is also a good suspect but it sounds like you have eliminated that.  Swap a switch or something.

EDIT: One thing that just occurred to me, verify that whatever they are using for DNS can resolve the pool(s) you have configured.  Maybe they can't find the pool.

I am guessing this info applies for Z9: https://enforum.bitmain.com/bbs/topics/3957

What method did you use for reset?  I have found on BTC antminers that sometimes the gui reset did not do a real reset whereas using the button and rebooting it did.

This is good to know!

7% is kind of a lot but since they are stale it's hard to say if that's your issue or not.  Stale means they would have been valid but they arrived late, so why did they arrive late?  If your miner isn't changing work when the pool sends a work update then the issue is with the miner, if it is something else then it's not the miner.  Like maybe the internet between you and the pool?

I notice that my Z9 goes through phases of high rejects but the pool I am on does not break down types of rejected shares so I don't know what the reason is.  But if I reboot the miner it stops for a while (like hours).  But I am inclined to think my issue is related to the fact that I have it overclocked as high as I can get it to go and be stable.  If I overclock higher (which I certainly did while testing what worked) I get a lot of rejects and lower hashrate.  I found the clock freq that seems to offer the highest stable hashrate and I have left it there, but as I say, it seems to want restarts every now and again to remain stable.  I may lower my freq again if it happens too often.  Your freq seems like it must be quite a bit lower though because you are the in 14k range while I have mine up in the 16k range.



Maybe try a different pool and see what happens?

I would advise against exposing your miner directly to the internet.  People have had their miners hijacked before.  Better to put teamviewer on a PC inside the network and remote to the PC.

I'm not terribly vested in either ASICs or GPUs somehow winning in a contest of primacy.  I own both, I just go where the mining winds take me so to speak.  But it appears to me that true ASIC resistance is just not realistic.  Whoever has the ASIC working on cryptonight V7 is not likely to reveal it and try and sell it.  In fact, the previous ones were basically all unknown until monero announced a fork and then suddenly multiple companies had cryptonight ASICs for sale.  Monero forking every 6 months is really just going to mean that the people who have the resources and ability to make the ASICs will control the mining and in the long term, also the coin supply.  They may be prevented from marketing their miners but they won't be prevented from using them.  So all of the people who are arguing that ASIC resistance and restricting it to GPU only is the real path to decentralization will be wrong.  The hidden ASICs will dominate and control the coin, but it won't be so out in the open which arguably is even worse.

Maybe someone can geek out a way to really prevent ASICs but as long as the coin is profitable to mine, there will be incentive to figure out how to out geek around the ASIC resistance.  Plus I am inclined to think that if it can be mined on a GPU then an ASIC can be created to do it better no matter what.  It's just a matter of solving the technical issues.

Long term I have been saying for years that BTC will eventually give way to something else.  At this point there are literally more than a hundred alt coins that are technically superior.  But I would have expected it to start happening more than it actually has.  In fact it still appears that long term success of every alt coin is still overwhelmingly dependent on long term success of bitcoin which is unfortunate in my opinion.  I think a big factor in that is that to people who don't really know much about cryptocurrency in general, they are all just a nebulous "bitcoin" and the technical differences and advantages of one vs is another is completely lost on them.  And long term, the success of any cryptocurrency will require more of the general populace to adopt it and use it.

These miners haven't been around long enough to know what is too much for them but historically I have run bitmain BTC miners as hot as 103 as reported in the GUI without a problem.  I will point out that when I have seen them that high it is usually because the building cooling system is not working or functioning properly and I downclock when I see anything that extreme until the building HVAC issues are dealt with.  I regularly run my S9s in the 90's during summer though.

My highest temp on these Z9's so far is 74 in the afternoon.  I have it OC'd almost as high as it can stand, I found that slightly under the highest it can take provides a little better hashrate than the absolute highest.

ASICs are really only disruptive when the mining machine hashrate is very large relative to the overall network hashrate.  If you look at something like the S9, when it was first released it was a very small spec of hashrate compared to the whole network.  So it took a very large number of S9s to begin to have a noticeable effect on the overall profitability of BTC mining.  X11 and Equihash and Ethash do not have several generations of ASICs in their history.  When the limiting factor on the mining machine becomes the die size of the chips as it has with BTC ASICs, and the speed of the machines relative to the overall network hashrate is small, then ASICs will be far less disruptive.

At this point, it appears that cryptonight V7 ASICs probably already exist, a mere two months after the network forked to get rid of ASICs.  With this in mind, it seems like the smarter move would be for coins to either stay on algorithms that have widespread ASICs or move to them.  The BTC network is pretty well secured in terms of hashrate distribution despite the massive advantage that bitmain and antpool have there.  Other algorithms will look more like that when successive generations of miners are built for them.

I think the only 100% effective way to escape ASICs is going to be to go full POS.

X11 is technically 11 algorithms chained and they are: blake, bmw, groestl, jh, keccak, skein, luffa, cubehash, shavite, simd, and echo.   So it seems likely that the miner could do any of those individually.  I would have also thought it could do them each at the same speed as it can do X11 (10Gh/s) at a minimum, but that seems maybe not to be true since it only does skein at 5Gh/s.  I believe you would win that 1 LTC bet if you had any takers.

Well that was my first 24 hours on viabtc but my second 24 hours was already much less, around .165 ZEC.  I moved over to MPH to test the waters there but I have a feeling we are going to see pretty serious and regular profit decreases in the near term here.  Hopefully it will level off a bit with bitmain not delivering anything (maybe they are building out their own mine though) and innosilicon maybe or maybe not having a lot of inventory at the moment.

They addressed this specifically on twitter: https://twitter.com/Antminer_main
All batch 1 so far.

I bought a batch two with the coupon.  My paid date\time is 2018-06-05 23:52:57 which would have placed it inside the dates on that last list of shipped miners.  So if they were really shipping batch two, I would have been in that list and I wasn't (sounds like you would have been too).  My specific date\time is not in the list and I didn't get any email saying it had shipped.  Whatever the reason those people had such delayed paid date\time I think we can be pretty certain they are all still batch 1 orders.

I'm not sure what results you are getting but if I can sell my mined ZEC at .025 (lower than current price) then based on how much ZEC I mined in the last 24 hours (0.17894627) I only need 50 days to make back the 0.21924398 BTC that the miner cost.  I know all of those variables will look worse over time but starting at a 50 day ROI is pretty spectacular in today's hardware market.  I strongly suspect that even a very pessimistic view of prices and hashrate increase should still yield at least a break even.