Bitcoin Forum
July 04, 2024, 09:54:34 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 »
61  Economy / Computer hardware / Re: ASRock BTC2.0 Board, CPU, Graphics Cards... Mining hardware bulk supply/deals on: May 31, 2017, 04:28:34 PM
Hi,
    I read that you will replace the board (warranty) if something happens. Does that mean that if we try to call the manufacturer to get a replacement they will tell us those boards are out of warranty?
Because normally i always do an advanced replacement warranty on them.

Thanks
62  Economy / Computer hardware / Re: [FS] Drop-in bracket to mount 7 GPUs at the front of a Rosewill server chassis on: May 31, 2017, 04:19:19 PM
Anybody care to share pics of their rig using one of our brackets?

-Rich


I have been planning on doing a write up but life been getting in the way

Here are some teaser pics for those interested, the MSI card is about the largest card I would recommend for this setup -- The Sapphire cards fit pretty well -- the Reference Blower style RX480's fit the best.

Note: I cpu mine as well so I had to find a cooler that would fit within the chassis and I got creative with how to mount the HDD using a ssd mounting bracket, this is not included with the kit. I am also in the process of changing out the fans I used for better ones.


From the Pictures you posted I think i am seeing exactly what i want to do. I want to reverse the case so the air comes in throught the front (Which has the PS and Motherboard) then goes to the gpus that pushes the air out directly outside the case thanks to the fans.
Am I right?

If so... Excellent....

Correct, the factory configuration for this chassis sucks air in the front and exhausts out the back. I purchased a custom kit from Spotswood to retain this configuration but it simply pushes too much heat over the PSU and board/cpu for my liking to I reversed everything. Air is intake from the traditional rear of the chassis and exhausted out the front, the board, psu, and CPU all stay very cool in this configuration.

Well this is perfect then If you have 2 of them in stock, I am interested.
Will PM you shortly
63  Economy / Computer hardware / Re: [FS] Drop-in bracket to mount 7 GPUs at the front of a Rosewill server chassis on: May 30, 2017, 09:05:18 PM
Anybody care to share pics of their rig using one of our brackets?

-Rich


I have been planning on doing a write up but life been getting in the way

Here are some teaser pics for those interested, the MSI card is about the largest card I would recommend for this setup -- The Sapphire cards fit pretty well -- the Reference Blower style RX480's fit the best.

Note: I cpu mine as well so I had to find a cooler that would fit within the chassis and I got creative with how to mount the HDD using a ssd mounting bracket, this is not included with the kit. I am also in the process of changing out the fans I used for better ones.







From the Pictures you posted I think i am seeing exactly what i want to do. I want to reverse the case so the air comes in throught the front (Which has the PS and Motherboard) then goes to the gpus that pushes the air out directly outside the case thanks to the fans.
Am I right?

If so... Excellent....
64  Economy / Computer hardware / Re: [FS] Drop-in bracket to mount 7 GPUs at the front of a Rosewill server chassis on: May 30, 2017, 07:58:17 PM
Oh ok because i already have 2 sapphires rx480 4g and got a sapphire R280x that i would like to put in there

Thanks
65  Economy / Computer hardware / Re: [FS] Drop-in bracket to mount 7 GPUs at the front of a Rosewill server chassis on: May 29, 2017, 08:18:25 PM
Ok then do you know what is the maximum length the gpu can be and still have the the middle fans installed?

Thank you
66  Economy / Computer hardware / Re: [FS] Drop-in bracket to mount 7 GPUs at the front of a Rosewill server chassis on: May 29, 2017, 07:51:11 PM
Hi,
    I am interested in 1 as a tryout but wanted to know first of all. In your pictures, i notice that you do not have the second row of fans? Is it to make the picture of the bracket easier to see or do you have to take that part out and cannot be reinserted?

Thank you

67  Bitcoin / Mining support / Re: Low Hash score and wu on S9 on: April 17, 2017, 01:39:18 PM
Pushed receive, will do.  Grin
Thanks
68  Bitcoin / Mining support / Re: Low Hash score and wu on S9 on: April 12, 2017, 08:44:46 PM
Its a pretty simple thing to figure out on your own.

1. Are you under warranty?

2. If not, are you willing to pay like $300+ to fix the board?





Yes i am under warranty but it is worth it of losing 1 month of mining for 1 downed hashboard?
I am more on the yes side of sending it to be repaired but still need a little push XD
69  Bitcoin / Mining support / Re: Low Hash score and wu on S9 on: April 12, 2017, 08:36:46 PM
So i found the defective board and unplugged it. so i save 400watts  Smiley

http://imgur.com/a/aJMnk

But not sure if i should get it repaired or not. Should i just keep it mining or sent it to be repaired?

Thanks

Bump for advise?
70  Economy / Computer hardware / Re: Gauging interest: 6 GPU 19" Backplate with direct connected PSU. on: April 12, 2017, 03:26:55 PM
Hi, did you make a prototype? If so could you post pictures of it? Also just to be sure I understand this. You are trying to make a 6 gpu miner that runs off a rasberry pi instead of a motherboard/cpu/ram combo? If you are and you manage to make it work I think a lot of people would be interested. Also just a small input from me: could you make it so they're are 2 sets of 3 fans (6 total) 3 infront of the gpu and 3 in the back. Or make a setup like the panda miners for closed looped liquid coolers.

Thanks
KuroNeko~

No it works from rgular 6 PCI-e slot mobo if you read carefuly. You can just connect Pi to control all thing.

So it's still gonna need to have a motherboard,cpu etc?
71  Economy / Computer hardware / Re: Gauging interest: 6 GPU 19" Backplate with direct connected PSU. on: April 12, 2017, 12:54:22 PM
Hi, did you make a prototype? If so could you post pictures of it? Also just to be sure I understand this. You are trying to make a 6 gpu miner that runs off a rasberry pi instead of a motherboard/cpu/ram combo? If you are and you manage to make it work I think a lot of people would be interested. Also just a small input from me: could you make it so they're are 2 sets of 3 fans (6 total) 3 infront of the gpu and 3 in the back. Or make a setup like the panda miners for closed looped liquid coolers.

Thanks
KuroNeko~
72  Economy / Computer hardware / Re: Bitmain Antminer S9 + PSU now selling on: April 11, 2017, 05:42:03 PM
Hi,
    can you post screen caps of the miner status page of each miner? As well as a picture of piece of paper with your name and with the miners in the background?

Thanks
73  Bitcoin / Mining support / Re: Low Hash score and wu on S9 on: April 10, 2017, 03:46:54 PM
So i found the defective board and unplugged it. so i save 400watts  Smiley

http://imgur.com/a/aJMnk

But not sure if i should get it repaired or not. Should i just keep it mining or sent it to be repaired?

Thanks
74  Bitcoin / Mining support / Re: Low Hash score and wu on S9 on: April 06, 2017, 06:13:13 PM
Wow i never noticed the 28c  Grin Grin
Well now i know which board to start with.
Thanks
75  Bitcoin / Mining support / Re: Low Hash score and wu on S9 on: April 06, 2017, 02:59:32 PM
Ok will start that when i arrive home tonight. But i though maybe it's a firmware thing or something but will try that.
Thanks
76  Bitcoin / Mining support / Re: Low Hash score and wu on S9 on: April 06, 2017, 02:35:06 PM
Just an FYI the link below shows a different miner running along side it

http://imgur.com/a/Hydsl
77  Bitcoin / Mining support / Low Hash score and wu on S9 on: April 06, 2017, 02:08:06 PM
Hi, well as can be seen in the images linked below.

http://imgur.com/a/qUiNA

The hash rate is at 12.57th/s but the average is almost always below 9th/s. I tried to change the difficulty to a 2048 and 10200 but the problem still persists. When i reboot the miner it hashes perfectly at the 12.5th/s but gradually goes down to the 8.5th/s avg range but the entire time the rt/s is always at 12.5th/s. I read a few threads and they say that it may be because of the HW errors but it is at only at 0.0001%. Here's me hoping there's a simple solutions to this.

Thanks
78  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Fuck: SegWit, LN, Blockstream, Core, Adam Back, and GMazwell on: March 29, 2017, 02:48:32 PM

Now this was the explanation i was looking for. Thanks
Really?  This is the one he said he dumbed down times 10 ;p  Its good for you though?

Not for me... This makes it really simple to explain to other people
you are implying something... i can feel it and i don't like it Grin
79  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Fuck: SegWit, LN, Blockstream, Core, Adam Back, and GMazwell on: March 29, 2017, 02:42:57 PM
I hate the fact that my investment in Bitcoin appears to be getting fucked.

I think you have here revealed the 'core' of your outrage...  My impression is that most (all?) of the members of the 'bigger blocks now, at any cost' crowd are people who ultimately view Bitcoin as their get-rich-quick scheme, and have no real concern at all for the long-term technological success of Bitcoin.

That's fine by me - I have nothing against people striving to promote their own enlightened self-interest - but you should at least be honest about it and quit pretending that your concerns are technical ones.


You sure talk a lot of shit for someone who knows next to nothing about the actual problem, if you do, you wouldn't use 'my impression', you would use actual numbers and basic math.

Here is the technical details on why Blockstream/Core is a bunch of lying fucks, I just fact slapped another shill in another thread, so I'll just copy it here (already translated to layman terms):

The 1MB limit IS causing the spam problem, and Blockstream/Core continue to do nothing about it.

Today Bitcoin tx traffic have already reached 1MB every 10mins, since the blocksize limit is also 1MB and you only get 1 block every 10mins on average, spammers can now easily flood the mempool by generating a small amount of tx.

Once the mempool is flooded, tx takes longer to process, users get impatient, they pay more fees, fees go up, miners process higher fee tx first, all the minimum fee spam stay stuck at the bottom of the mempool, they timeout and get deleted before being processed by miners.

If spammers don't set a minimum fee in their spam, the spam will be dropped by nodes before reaching the mempool, but spammer only pay the fee when the tx is actually processed by miners.

So, once the mempool is full and the fee is high, spammer's spam never get processed, spammer can continue to flood the mempool for days paying zero fee.

Blockstream refused to increase the blocksize, so we get huge 50000tx mempool backlog today, because spammers don't have to pay their fees.

If they increase the blocksize, then for every 1MB blocksize increase, we can fit another 2000 tx per block, at 4MB we can fit 8000tx per block.

If normal traffic is 1M and the limit is 4M, spammer have to pay a very high combined min fee to flood a block (min fee x 8000 per block), then, if they continue to spam, any mishap, such as miners get lucky and mine a few blocks quickly within 10 minutes, 'eating' all the spam, then spammers have to pay the fee for almost the entire 4MB spam block.

At 4MB, it'll be too costly for spammers to spam, until normal traffic reaches 4MB and they can flood without paying fee again.

If we increase the blocksize from 1MB to 2MB or 4MB now, it will give room for Bitcoin to grow as well as reduce spam.

This truth is so simple that's why Blockstream/Core have to create all kinds of red herrings/bullshit excuses/censorships/trolls to justify keeping the blocksize at 1MB. If they stop distracting you from the actual and simple problem for just 1 second, you'll immediately find out they've been lying their asses off for years.

The 1MB limit was added in 2010 because tx fee was 0 at the time, the network was young and was growing slowly, average block size was less than 1k, and Satoshi didn't want to see the blockchain full of 32MB blocks filled with 0 fee spam.

You keep hearing all these fuck face morons talking about how SW/LN will save the day, or that we can't keep increasing the blocksize forever, but at this moment Bitcoin isn't even popular enough for SW/LN, the safety limit is above 4MB, we shouldn't even talk about side chains until we have enough tx to fill 4MB blocks every 10 minutes, or 13tx/sec (we are only at 3tx/sec at the moment).

We are having a tx jam right now, so by not increasing the blocksize limit, Blockstream/Core either have absolutely no idea what they're doing, or they're just pricks blatantly lying their asses off.


Now this was the explanation i was looking for. Thanks
80  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Let's assume I'm a moron...explain Bitcoin unlimited. on: March 24, 2017, 12:45:42 PM
The Tale Of Bitcoin

Once upon a time there was loads of space in blocks. And all the TXNS lived happily being processed quickly.

Then the number of TXNS become so large that the blocks were full.

ETC..


Wow.... wow.... Great job this is the best explanation EVER   Smiley
but it's a little too much "on the nose" but it's ok  Grin
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!