|
My bet is that the recent announcement of the BM1385 chip (for the S7) will curtail some of the demand for the S5+. Some folks will wait for the S7, currently unkdefined schedule, some folks will just take the S5+ now if they can get it.
The actual announcement of the BM1385 chip, even without an S7 schedule, will likely reduce the overall demand for the S5+.
|
|
|
|
Novak was just comparing this product to our Compac stick. With stock USB power, nine sticks (at $225) will run you about 75GH off about 25W and be dead silent. Or if you crank 'em on a decent hub you could do that with four sticks (at $100) and a light fan for about 30W. And the Compac is probably the worst dollars-per-gigahash miner currently being manufactured, because there's a separate VRM and USB interface and LEDs and oscillator and IO LDOs and heatsink per chip and it's still better than the Mini in every category except "has its own case".
I'd buy one of these boxes if it was about $50, mostly to play with. More'n $200 for it is retarded, when you could buy a pair of S3 with PSU for about the same and get twelve times the hashrate and similar efficiency and noise.
With all due respect to you and Novak, I don't think the Compac has the worst $$$/GH ratio. On holybitoin, NEW Aavalon Nano 3 USB sticks are going for about $30. They are less than 5GH, so I think you are safe for the time being.  |
|
|
|
All i can add to that 1 connector per board thing is that users report running with only 1 connector at stock settings without any problem, as its within the 300w spec per connector i believe.
At least i can say doggie is very vocal about this and if you take a look at the S1 or even S3 to an extent they run at 250w and 220w watt per connector. So an undervolted S5 as per the graph start at that margin and then only go lower.
So unless the connector has some weird mechanic where they don't work because A go up for V to go down, they should be fine since its ultimately lower watt than the max in any case.
My point was that the buck converter that Phillip mention was only capable of 15A. At 12V that would be 180W which fit well within the connector limits. IF however, you need more than 15A for the blade, then you would likely need to employ a 2nd buck, which would most naturally use the 2nd PCIe socket. If one buck can support an entire blade, then no issue. |
|
|
|
I am just being a bit cautious at the moment. Don't want people to blame me if this all comes crashing down. I have another V1.91, without heatsinks coming later Today so will be able to confirm that my first one was not a fluke.
I had first attempt Today at turning down the Volts on one of My Server PSU's an Intel DPS-1200TB A. An excellent Platinum PSU at 12V. No pots to twiddle inside it so I had a go at using the Sense voltage to make an adjustment. Goes up to 13.4V but could only get it down from the standard 12.2V to 12.02V. At that point there seems to a limit built into it.
I feel that to get the best out of the undervolting we are going to have to find a way of adjusting a Server PSU voltage, as any added converter module is going to throw away a lot of the gain. I have a couple of other Server PSU's to try so will see where I get with them?
Rich
yeah the step down bucks came today.. so lets say they work and really do 15 amps at 10 volts and 95% = All best case numbers! that is 15 bucks a pcie cable at least 2 per s-5 costly Putting aside the costs for the moment, I would urge caution in working with the step-down bucks. It seems to me that you'll need to use one buck per PCIe socket. That would only get you 15A for the one socket, and I wonder if that will supply enough current for the blade (i.e. 150W @ 10V). The bigger hazard then might be in thinking that you could use a second buck for the other PCIe socket on the same S5 hashing blade. As I understand the S5 hashing blade, Bitmain cautions you NOT to use two different power supplies (or rails) to the same blade, since it's unlikely they will have exactly the same value on the 12V lines, and the two supplies will "fight" over the result, and it might not end well. If you use two buck's, then you effectively have two different rails going into the same hashing blade, even if they originated from the same power supply. I am NOT an electrical engineer by trade, and it may well be possible to get the buck voltages close enough that it won't matter. I am certain if you need more than one buck per hashing blade it will be important to get them very close in their voltage. If you can get somebody like sidehack to weigh in on this and tell me I am full of sh*t, that would be swell. I just didn't want something to get damaged (e.g. an S5 blade, a buck) without considering the possible ramifications of using adjustable step down buck converters. One thing I have always wondered: Where does the controller get it's power from? One specific hash blade or what? That might also factor into this as well. Best of luck, Phillip! |
|
|
|
|
OK, I'll bite: What "XT thing" are you mentioning? Is this some other alt-coin that uses SHA-256?
|
|
|
|
|
I also want to add that we know absolutely nothing about the S7. We don't know it's price, hashrate, power consumption, size/shape, date for 1st shipment, or chip technology. While I am willing to bet that it will be newer chips than the BM1384 for the S5 and S5+, we should probably not take it for grated it will be "home miner friendly". Every body seems to be assuming it will follow the pattern of the S1/S3/S5 in terms of form factor, and 120V usable power consumption.
I too was assuming that to be the case, though the S5+ makes me wonder. If we had a run a speculative poll of what an S5+ would have looked like back in June, who would have predicted the beast that was delivered? I think it would have been a "kindler, gentler, quieter, more efficient" S5, rather than three S5 frames bolted together with 3 blades per frame and 2x the fans, all at least as loud as the S5, practical only with 220V power.
I hope the S5+ doesn't mark a turn to "data center or farm" mining only. It might though.
|
|
|
|
|
Late Sunday night update from Minnesota:
Bitcoin Difficulty: 52,699,842,409
Estimated Next Difficulty: 53,260,668,527 (+1.06%)
Adjust time: After 747 Blocks, About 5.1 days
Hashrate(?): 366,874,505 GH/s
Block Generation Time(?):
1 block: 9.9 minutes
3 blocks: 29.6 minutes
6 blocks: 59.2 minutes
Updated: 22:5 (6.3 minutes ago)
BTC price: $257 (down a little)
I think the days of 10% difficulty increases are over. It's a daunting task to add 30PH in a two week period, even with new efficient gear. I think it will be more of slow difficulty increase as mining farm replace (and sell) less efficient gear with more efficient gear. Antpool has no interest in increasing the difficulty.
Just my $.02.
|
|
|
|
Now the Avalon 6 release later this year interests me! 2+ Th/s 750 watts at the wall and ultra silent?? I can only hope.
I wouldn't hold my breath. They haven't provided a price for such a device. How would $1250 grab you? I didn't think so....... |
|
|
|
|
I never saw a price attached to "The Imperator", nor payment terms. That's what it made seem so odd as a scam. How do you "steal" money if you never ask for it?
I did see used S5's for sale at $199, and I think those were clearly a scam. I think one member reported that.
|
|
|
|
Don't be in a rush to order, the website currently says Sold Out. Maybe they priced it too low..... Or they made too few....... |
|
|
|
I'm tempted to buy one of these S5+ miners, but my lack of faith in Bitmain firmware is preventing me from doing so. I think I'll wait for the first batch to arrive with guinea pigs customers & see what the feedback is before making up my mind. Hopefully they have finally managed to find someone who knows how to write their firmware properly using the mainline cgminer instead of their terrible fork using crazy settings.
Fair enough as to waiting on the guinea pigs to report back on how these monsters behave in the wild ... though I'd take the notion that bitmain write terrible firmware for their rigs with a pinch of salt (last I checked the so called best ever cgminer never neither increased my earnings nor reduced my electric costs over the bitmain fork ... ever!). I'm just frustrated there is no alternative mining software for their rigs readily available .... and the noise from this beast of-course. ..... and the heat! Don't forget it's a 3000W heater in disguise as a Bitcoin miner.  |
|
|
|
|
The efficiency figure of .08W/GH falls into the "Too Good to be True" category for me. I expect it's a scam.
I'll bet the pre-order is only with BTC, right?
Won't take Paypal or a credit card?
Way out beyond the time limitations for Paypal or Credit Card?
If yes, all big flashing signals of SCAM!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Your late night update from Minnesota:
Bitcoin Difficulty: 52,699,842,409
Estimated Next Difficulty: 54,128,144,551 (+2.71%)
Adjust time: After 1150 Blocks, About 7.7 days
Hashrate(?): 383,059,529 GH/s
Block Generation Time(?):
1 block: 9.7 minutes
3 blocks: 28.9 minutes
6 blocks: 57.9 minutes
Updated: 23:50 (6.0 minutes ago)
BTC price: $261
|
|
|
|
Yes , this really helps , if I use it for S5+ and connect 14PCIE 6pins of them, which ones I should connect , or just choose any 14 of them . thanks
James, the PCIe connectors are all soldered to a common 12V, so any one is fine. I have run the cables/connectors up to and over 300W each with single-cable powered Neptune modules without a problem. Contact J4bberwock directly and he can quote you for a bulk order, if you are in North America and are looking for a small quantity to sample PM me. As I mentioned before though, I would be hesitant to run a full S5+ off a single 2880W PSU for long term as it is over 3100W DC draw. However 2x PSU's for 3x S5+ would work well IMO and still give you better efficiency from the PSU's.I don't understand how if you worry about a single PSU and a single S5+, why THREE S5+ and TWO PSU's would be OK. Did you get things a little reversed here? Maybe you meant 3xPSU and 2xS5+? |
|
|
|
|
The pricing here is roughly on parity with 8-9 Compac USB miners and a hub. This would no doubt be easier to administer, but the $240 price doesn't help that. Compared to a "New Rbox" it's lower power draw, and a lower hashrtae, for roughly twice the price of the R-box.
I am sure I'll pass. Thanks for checking Phillip.
|
|
|
|
Nice  How is the noise level? Speak louder, he didn't hear you  I think that's supposed to be: SPEAK LOUDER. HE CAN'T HEAR YOU OVER THE FAN NOISE. |
|
|
|
may all be a moot point don't know what will be asking price and shipping price of the big one.
Yeah, it could become a rather pricey experiment to conduct (big $$$$). |
|
|
|
I was able to reduce s-5 sound from 75db to 51 db and still over clock to 1300gh. I used multiple fans in a push pull method. This new s-5+/s-6 already has multiple fans in push pull. I would have really like to use just the center piece at my friends office. I wonder if I order a s-5 and an s-5+ on friday from bitmaintech this friday. If I could pull the left right off the s-5+ and use the s-5 controller to run them. Then take the s-5 blades and use them on the s-5+ This would give me a 2550+1150 and a 2550+2550 vs a 7700 and a 1150 I could manage this better One cautionary note: I'd swear that Bitmain has disabled support for more than two blades on the more recent S5 firmware. You'll also need to work out the issues associated with the fact that there are THREE hashing boards within each "s5 like" section of the S5+ miner. I have no idea what the S5+ firmware will do if it doesn't come up with all 9 hashing blades, or if some of them are S5 and not S5+ blades. Things could get ugly right quick since the number of chips per hashing board, and string topology is different between the S5 and S5+. While it would be nice to intermix stuff, it might well not be possible at this time (or ever). |
|
|
|
|
I wonder if perhaps the chip cost of the BM1384 has declined enough that maybe it's more practical to use more "downclocked" parts to get an overall improvement. Give how long the BM1384 has been out, you would think the yields at TSMC (or wherever) would be pretty good by now.
The arrival of the S5+ makes me wonder about how likely a "soon to be released" S7 is, presumably with a BM1386.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
