Bitcoin Forum
October 28, 2020, 08:35:54 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.20.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 »
321  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: GekkoScience BM1384 Project Development Discussion on: June 20, 2015, 02:01:35 AM
Yeah but now it's going to be really embarassing if we actually can't make per-board tuning work.

Let's look at this objectively.
IMHO:

  • You've reversed engineered another companies board (no small feat),
  • you've dramatically improved on their design,
  • you've standardized a design/interface,
  • all the while maintaining a competitive price point,
  • and accomplished these herculean tasks in record time,
  • on a shoestring RD&D budget.

If for whatever reason autotune, either in firmware or S/W, isn't implemented I see no reason for embarrassment.
You're already a league ahead of the competition, implementing autotune makes you the "only game in town" and puts you a light year ahead of the nearest competitor.
Autotune, if implemented in firmware, extends that competitive advantage dramatically.
If you guys were to even do a patent applied for you could non-exclusively license that tech to whomever.
You could receive a licensing fee, or include it in an agreement to buy chips.

I just want to see you guys "get ahead" whatever that means to you'all.
So let me paint a picture, you could exclusively license the tech to a chip manufacturer (who may be a competitor, not naming any names here) for an agreement in writing for current and future chip availability and pricing.

Or maybe the above AND a smaller fee (so you have the resources to buy chips).

Have no doubt you can make autotune happen, however you decide to.
But autotune and self-healing is a serious game changer in my mind.

Just sayin'
322  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: GekkoScience BM1384 Project Development Discussion on: June 19, 2015, 03:51:00 PM
"You can't say cgminer will optimize all boards to the same point until you know what driver code we end up writing."
Absolutely correct, as I'm not privy to the "behind the scenes" thinking going on.

I can however make a reasonably correct statement based on the existing state of cgminer, et. al.
Which is what I think I did.
323  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: GekkoScience BM1384 Project Development Discussion on: June 19, 2015, 03:41:28 PM
I also prefer carburetors to EFI.

I'm surprised, EFI is way more tunable and customizable than carbs, especially when you get into writing your own engine management programs like I have.  I've contributed much of the tune to my Mustang, including stuff other than the usual air/fuel and timing, such as the mass air meter tables and transmission shift graphs/algorithms.  Way more fun than turning screws on a carb!  Tongue

I'm with Mikestang here even though I really love my early 1940's vintage Ford 9N for it's reliability, dependability, simplicity, and ease of maintenance.
My 3/4 ton GMC DuraMax crew cab long box w/ EFI live, an 8500 lb truck, will get 34 mpg on a flat road cruise set @ 55 in eco mode, but will turn a mid 11 second quarter mile in it's top setting (550+HP/1100+ft/lbs torque). And yeah I've seriously tweaked the fuel maps, boost maps, injection timing maps, shift points, etc. for each of the 5 available engine settings. Which can be changed on the fly, engine running, with the simple turn of a 5 position switch. I love blowing off kids in tuner cars leaving them in a black cloud of Prius repellent at the light. LOL.

My tools over the last 50 years have become more sophisticated (screw driver versus laptop) as technology has advanced.
324  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: GekkoScience BM1384 Project Development Discussion on: June 19, 2015, 03:16:10 PM
I seem to remember the Avalon4 has an optimizer built in, where you can give it a hashrate and it'll iteratively drop the power until it finds the lowest stable point? We'll probably integrate an autotuning feature like that into it. If we can write an autotuning driver that can tune per board will be pretty great too.

I'm not sure if we're gonna have an input power measurement on there or not. Shunt measurements to take away from system efficiency - sure it's maybe a quarter percent of waste, but... yeah that's actually probably okay.

I think trying to find an optimal operating point based on power efficiency will pretty much always end you up at the top stable clock of the bottom possible voltage? If your only parameters are operating cost and hashrate you'll always end up finding the highest clock available at the highest efficiency voltage setpoint available. Being able to say "get me the most hashrate for this maximum power" or "get me the least power for this desired hashrate" are going to be different problems, but not difficult to solve.

Unfamiliar with the Avalon4, so I have no comment on it.

My follow on comments apply to the BM1382 (S3's and C1's) as I haven't started my testing on the BM1384's (S5's) which I'm more than willing to share when completed, if desired.
S3 hash boards are usually always stable @ .65 CoreV but not at clock rates approaching 150MHz. The limiting of clock rate limits profitability.
S3's @ .68 CoreV and 150MHz +- one clock setting seems to be the "sweet spot" from a electrical cost versus revenue standpoint.
I'm guessing this is due to a number of factors:
  • board manufacturing tolerances due to variances in discreet passive components, resistor/cap tolerances, circuit trace tolerances, intertrace variances in capacitance, ground plane capacitance, etc . . . . .
  • the CoveV/hashrate is not, necessarily, a smooth linear or exponential curve
  • and active component (hash chip, LDO, etc.) manufacturing tolerances due to variances in a plethora of things at the wafer level

Having said the above there can be anomalous CoreV/clock rate combinations that provide, on a hash board by hash board basis, above "normal" net profits due to "quirks" in board/chip combinations.
This is why I would favor the calculations happening at the board level versus the driver level, cuz' each board is different (as is every hash chip chain on a particular board for that matter).
I also lean towards doing this at the board level to obviate the need for a special or "one off" branch in the cgminer/bfgminer source.
I was thinking more of the ability to set a flag (autooptimize=1/0, true or false ?) at cgminer/bfgminer run time if the appropriate hardware was detected after hotplug detection.
Implementing this flag architecture would allow the user to let the board figure it out or let the user "force" settings per their whims.

I think that the majority of the time the "optimal operating point based on power efficiency will pretty much always end you up at the top stable clock of the bottom possible voltage" is a true statement at the machine level, but on a fairly frequent basis there will be odd anomalous and/or deviant CoreV/MHz combinations at the board level/chip chain level that provide more optimal profits/performance.

With multiple boards in a machine there is a high likelihood that some boards/chip chains are going to be high performers and some not so much. If CoveV/MHz optimization is done at the driver level then all the boards running off that instantiation of cgminer/bfgminer will run at the least common denominator. If one board in many deteriorates faster than the others the entire machine's performance will suffer needlessly.

Over time components (active and passive) will deteriorate/change values. By definition, the interaction of those component deteriorations will cause a shift in the optimal CoreV/MHz operating point. Because one does not know which components are deteriorating, at what rate, and their effects on circuit performance a "self-healing" design reduces human interaction and assures optimal device operation in real time.

Just thinking "out loud".
325  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: GekkoScience BM1384 Project Development Discussion on: June 18, 2015, 07:29:54 AM
Does this make more sense?


326  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: GekkoScience BM1384 Project Development Discussion on: June 18, 2015, 07:16:12 AM
philipma1957

Horizontal axis on chart is C1 clock rate not USD/BTC.

Not label well, sorry for the confusion.

We're up late, burnin' the midnite oil?
327  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: GekkoScience BM1384 Project Development Discussion on: June 18, 2015, 06:39:10 AM
Just a thought. . . .

If an MCU is going to be used to program/set CoreV (that has multiple A/D GPIO's) . . .
and if there was a current shunt on the incoming power connector (a circuit trace of a known length with infinitesimal resistance ) . . .
One would be able to calculate (or approximate) real-time power consumption (P=I*V in a DC circuit).

By knowing real-time power consumption, hashing rate, and a little coding, in theory, the device could have an "auto" mode that after a few iterations and time select the most cost effective clock and CoreV values. Precisely calculating and setting optimum W/GH/s.

Like stealing a page from the solar charge controller world, MPPT.
MPPT = Maximum Power Point Tracking.
OHPT = Optimum Hash Point Tracking.

If the MCU selected had a small amount of internal NVRAM, those values (CoreV and Clock Rate) could be stored to minimize the calculations after a power cycle.
After determining the optimum W/GH/s settings (saved to NVRAM), a count down timer could be used to set the periodicity for re-evaluation (say once an hour initially). This value and the std deviation/running average could also be used to "fine tune", stored in NVRAM, the periodicity of re-evaluation. This capability would help account for manufacturing tolerances and make the device aging optimized. The longer the chip has been operated the "smarter" it would become.

Creating a "smart" hashing board/device is/would be another feature set other products lack.

Probably not a cost effective solution on a stickminer, but on an 18+ chip version . . . .
That tech may be patentable, the MCU micro code is definitely copyrightable.
And may be worth something to a larger volume board manufacturer (Bitmain, Spondoolie, Avalon, etc.) or not and maintain a competitive advantage.

Just sayin' . . .

This thought line comes from a recent rather exhaustive (and ongoing) evaluation of Bitmain C1 operating parameters with a focus on the most profitable operating parameters.
Quite revealing with some of the conclusions being of the non-intuitive nature.



"Why Waltz when you can Rock'N'Roll." -- Unknown
328  Bitcoin / Mining support / Re: undervolt antminer s3 on: June 16, 2015, 03:16:39 PM
success undervolt ant s3+ 0.63j/gh  .68v on my digital tester

305 gh
freq 150
config voltage 065
new firmware

hw .003 30ment. idle

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=671189.new#new

Has anyone else tried this and had the same success?

antminer s3+ undervolt

here is the better result

update new firmware
310gh
freq. 150
adv. config voltage 065
HW .003 20 ment. idle

how to drop voltage

parallel 2.2k resistor on VFB to Vout resistor

.68 for 2.2k
.75 for 6.8k

https://i.imgur.com/mxxI2t6.png
https://i.imgur.com/Zw3El3U.png
https://i.imgur.com/VL9AGvu.png
https://i.imgur.com/5oGshqw.png

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=671189.msg10214088#msg10214088
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=671189.msg10222598#msg10222598

I was able to duplicate these results on 2 units by paralleling a 2.2k across the resistor between VFB and Vout for each TPS53355 switcher (8 per board). That's all I did, I didn't upgrade my firmware or change voltage settings in firmware (not available in mine and read that the setting doesn't do anything anyway). I tested efficiency at different frequencies and the best results I achieved are:

Unit 1: 0.645 J/Gh @ 193 MHz
Unit 2: 0.625 J/Gh @ 175 MHz

At $0.13/kWh and current BTC price I'm profitable again, but just barely.

I have 3 more S3+ units to convert and did notice that one of the boards is a different (newer) version. I don't see the TPS53355 switcher on it or a voltage divider circuit that I can modify to change the hashing chips voltage. Any info on the newer board appreciated. I can post pictures of mod and detailed drawing if anyone is interested.

I've got a dozen (12) S3's and a similar amount of C1's.
Need to do this mod on all of them.
I have strong electronics and soldering skills.
So soldering in a 2.2K 1% 1/8W metal film resistor across the 2.088K SMD resistor isn't an issue. A time consuming PITA, but easily doable.
Understand everything (and the theory behind it) in the post except the "HW .003 20 ment. idle".
Is that a S/W configuration thingy?

WTF over? LOL.

Thanks in advance.
329  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: GekkoScience BM1384 Project Development Discussion on: June 16, 2015, 03:50:44 AM
Sorry about your loss.
May you have fair winds and following seas on your journeys.

If you need something shout.
330  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: GekkoScience BM1384 Project Development Discussion on: June 11, 2015, 07:35:10 PM
"But if people are willing to pay $20 for a 3GH stickminer with fixed voltage, would people still pay $25 for an 8GH stickminer that can be adjusted to 15GH and still come in at more power-efficient than any miner you can actually buy anytime in at least the next month?"

I say HELL YES!!

A fixed V 3GH stickminer @ $20 = $6.67/GH/s
An variable V 8GH/s stickminer @ $25 = $3.13/GH/s
A tweaked variable V stickminer tweaked to 15GH/s @ $25 = $1.67/GH/s

Remembering that a stickminer is not a commercial product (one is not going to build a 1-2 PH/s mining farm with them) that is, IMHO, a very competitive price.

I'll send ya' .2173 BTC for 2 right now if that's you're price point.
Ship'em whenever you get them built.
331  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: GekkoScience BM1384 Project Development Discussion on: June 11, 2015, 07:19:54 PM
Well, no, because if I didn't have to take time to do everything else ever I'd have probably finalized the Compac in May. I had a full two weeks where I didn't touch the thing, and then the first day I came back to it I had it up and working within about four hours. There have been a lot of wait times for PCBs and such, but considering other losses (and especially that first failed regulator, which honestly would probably have been good enough if we had the right driver software) we're pretty far behind schedule.

I think we already have pretty good people, and a pretty good plan, but the resources part has always been the limiting factor for us. But we're solving that problem.

Speaking of resources, I just got word from Bitmain that the chips I'll be wanting are in stock and they can sell them to me. I'm wondering if I shouldn't buy more than 1000 (I also asked about 2000), partly so I have more to test with for bigger boards, and partly because I could probably sell more than 1000 chips worth of Compac and Amita sticks. I've been talking a bit with a guy in Europe that wants to license the design (once I know it's good enough) for manufacture and sales over there, which would be pretty good for Eurocustomers that don't want to pay more for international shipping and import taxes than the thing actually costs, but that means he'll also need some chips so I could probably pick up a larger pile and share them out. It's been suggested that I make up my mind in the next couple days, which if that means they want me to pay down on chips in the next couple days we're gonna be in a tight spot because 1000 chips shipped would be about 14.5BTC and I sorta don't have that available. I'm hoping I can reserve stock, because as has been stated since the beginning, I'm not willing to take in money on these until they're tested and verified, and I won't have the final PCBs until next week so the final version product won't be in the hands of testers for a week after that. I could base things off the reports from the four guys getting modified pre-final prototypes (three of which sticks should be delivered today), but that's not really the same thing.

Opinions?

"Opinions are like butts, everybody's got one and they all stink." -- Unknown
So here's my stinky.

USB Stickminers are, by definition, not a commercial product. They're a novelty item. As such their price needn't be tied to an economic equation.
IMHO, can one sell 1,000 Stickminers, probably, given enough time. And there's the rub, it's called the time/value of money.
Example: When I obligated for 2-3 stickminers (as I consider posting the same here a contract to purchase) I am and remain unconcerned with unit cost.
Obviously, one could do like other manufacturers of H/W do and mine with them till sold to the end consumer ("burn in testing") to defray the cost of ownership/inventory.

Assuming one had a viable 18 chip board designed and all of the 1K of chips were dedicated to that manufacturing endeavor. That's enough chips for 55 boards. If those boards hash @ ~270GH/s @ .3W/GH/s they're more than competitive with the Bitmain S5 offering and could be priced @ $85-$100 each. Given that the chip cost is $60.03 that doesn't leave a lot of room for board and tertiary component cost and a margin to make it worthwhile to sell. Seems like a slim margin to me, given I'm unaware of the rest of the cost structure . . .

Thinking about the 1K chip order. Many manufacturers will obligate for a total quantity of parts in a phased delivery schedule. Say 250 chips per week and pay for them on that periodic basis. This splits up the total cost of the order and makes it manageable and creates some cash flow for the next week's order. Given that these are last generation chips and they're sitting in inventory (doing nothing and targeted to do nothing) Bitmain may be open to this kind of arrangement. You'd actually be doing them a favor by cleaning out their old, soon to be useless, virtually un-saleable stock.

I think if it were me, I'd obligate for 1K chips total, size the "down payment" for the 1st weeks shipment (250 chips), and agree to purchase 250/week for the next 3 weeks. I would also ask them to disclose their inventory size so that I could estimate the "legs" of this endeavor. I'd also see if they're willing to shave the $3.335 cost per chip given the chip's antiquated design and a willingness to maybe purchase more than 1K total. i.e. the first 1K @ $3.335, the next 1K @ a lesser cost, etc. . . . . . Or maybe cost breaks at the 5K, 10K total order size, assuming their inventory is that large.

Hope that stench wasn't too bad.
332  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: GekkoScience BM1384 Project Development Discussion on: June 11, 2015, 01:39:13 PM
I've actually been slacking lately. Novak's putting in some long hours, but today we cut out early to play baseball instead of build stuff. As for rarely having a life, that's been my general state for years now and I'm pretty used to it.

Don't compliment how much I get done in a short time in a thread for a project that's over a month behind expectations. I was hoping to have a functional TypeZero board by now, and I don't even have Compac final-version PCBs in hand yet. Though really if I had passed on doing a stickminer and went straight into dev for the TypeZero it probably would be done already; I lost a buttload of time making those sticks work. Never would have guessed the regulator would have been that much problem, but to solve it I ended up finding a pretty sexy buck driver that I'll be using in a couple other things - including a new project we may be talking about next week if I can get enough materials together to get a plan ironed out, codenamed "aardwolf" for no real reason other than it's a pretty cool name.

"With the best plan, the best people, and the best resources, the best you can do is break even."
I'm paraphrasing, but this is what Rear Admiral "Amazing Grace" Hopper once told me.

So I suspect that only being a month behind schedule is far less than would be expected in a project plan with the people and resources available.

Amazing work.
333  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: GekkoScience BM1384 Project Development Discussion on: June 11, 2015, 03:49:52 AM
Yeah maybe one of these days some of these projects can be team efforts. Between Novak and I, we've basically got three or four active design projects going, and all the manufacturing tasks, and all the hosting and maintenance and packing and inventory and consulting. So things don't always get done as quickly as folks might like.

... and posting in the thread and answering PM's and rarely having a life and eating a burger occasionally and . . .

What you get accomplished in as short a time as you do. The 2 of you guys are amazing.
334  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: GekkoScience BM1384 Project Development Discussion on: June 11, 2015, 03:26:31 AM
Well, the first step will be a successful test of my 18-chip board. The next step will be a successful test of the regulator circuitry. The next step will be programming a microcontroller for voltage adjustment, fan control and temperature sensing and writing driver software to make it all work right. Then integrating all of that hardware onto a finalized 18-chip board, prototyping and testing. And probably by that point it'll be time to redesign it for a different chip because we're into the next generation already. And then test that new design. And then start gathering money to get a big fat batch of chips and a couple thousand PCBs. After that, it's pretty much coasting.

LOL!!!

Ahhhh, The Readers Digest condensed version of board design.
335  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: GekkoScience BM1384 Project Development Discussion on: June 11, 2015, 03:14:58 AM
In our experience, the heat absorption capability of these waterblocks is dependent on flow rate and coolant composition. We like and use a 50/50 mix of water and automotive green antifreeze (Walmart brand). But pure (de-ionized) water has better thermal capabilities. I might add that all the tubing we use is of the oxygen barrier type (metal, PEX, etc. . .).
50/50 in your miner. Go pure de-ionized water with a corrosion inhibitor. I use a product (super coolant don't remeber the name) 1/20 mix to prevent corrosion.

We never string more than 2 waterblocks in series, as the coolant temps can become excessive feed to the last waterblock in the chain. This is due to the flow capability of a 3/8" pipe at less than 5psi differential pressure.
I run 2 C1 in series (4 waterblocks - 8 boards). Each waterblock is about 3C hotter than the previous one. So if the first waterblock is at 30C the fourth will run at 39C.

  • Our system capacity is larger than a few ounces, so the cost of plant fluids and chemicals is a consideration
  • Our heat dump loops are 100' of 3/4 buried PEX, it gets to -30F here in the winter
  • automotive antifreeze has corrosion inhibitors and a bezillion other useful additives
  • automotive antifreeze helps lubricate the circulators
  • a colored fluid makes hunting down leaks easier
  • a scented fluid makes hunting down leaks easier

We like closer temperature tolerances from machine to machine and set alarms to notify us when things start to get outta' hand.
Am familiar with the advantages of de-ionized water w/plant chemicals from my days in the nuclear power generation.

Hope that clarifies things a bit and why I made the statements I did.
336  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: GekkoScience BM1384 Project Development Discussion on: June 10, 2015, 06:05:43 PM
At 0.4W/GH board-level you could be seeing closer to 15GH per chip and 110W per board. 8.2GH per chip you should expect about 0.3W/GH and under 50W per board. That's at what I hope to be a low estimate for regulator efficiency. If you ran them up to 15GH per chip you'd see 272GH per board, so almost 2.2TH and 900W from an 8-board waterblocked system. Which if those waterblocks can handle 4x S5 boards (~1200W) they can surely handle a 900W load.

Top end for the chips would be about the same as an S5, estimated 22GH (400MHz) at hopefully 10.5W board-level per chip. The overall system efficiency for top clock would actually be between 5% and 10% worse than an S5 (hopefully closer to 5%), but the overall benefit of having adjustable voltage gives you access to a lot lower efficiency ranges than the S5 is capable of doing - same as with undervolting an S1 to get from 2W/GH down to 0.8-1W/GH board-level - which greatly increases the service life of the machine without requiring hardware modification to reach the low end.

In my estimate I was "worst casing" it.

The S3/S5 bolt pattern compatibility is addressed here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=914354.0

and here

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=947254.msg11464031;topicseen#msg11464031

In our experience, the heat absorption capability of these waterblocks is dependent on flow rate and coolant composition. We like and use a 50/50 mix of water and automotive green antifreeze (Walmart brand). But pure (de-ionized) water has better thermal capabilities. I might add that all the tubing we use is of the oxygen barrier type (metal, PEX, etc. . .).

We never string more than 2 waterblocks in series, as the coolant temps can become excessive feed to the last waterblock in the chain. This is due to the flow capability of a 3/8" pipe at less than 5psi differential pressure.

We've found that each pair of waterblocks need just under 2 gpm (~450L/hr) flow.
All things being the same, 4 3/8" pipes = 1 3/4" pipe and 4 3/4" pipes = 1 1.5" pipe, from a flow rate standpoint.
So 1 1.5" pipe, manifolded down to 3/8", will service 16 pairs of waterblocks (64 boards).
So on the circulating pumps/circulators we run 1.5" in and out pump manifolds.
And use the Taco 0010 w/IFC (http://www.supplyhouse.com/Taco-0010-F3-1IFC-0010-Cast-Iron-Circulator-with-Integral-Flow-Check-1-8-HP-3778000-p) w/ 1.5" manifolds (http://www.supplyhouse.com/Taco-110-254F-1-1-2-Taco-Iron-Freedom-Flange-Pair-1976000-p).

Another thing that bears mentioning is that these "pumps" are really not pumps in the purest sense of the definition. They're circulators, as they are designed not to build pressure and as such have a reduced capability to "pump" into a head. So the maximum distance between the high point and the low points in the system is restricted.

Didn't mean to hijack the thread so I'll shut the F* up.
337  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: GekkoScience BM1384 Project Development Discussion on: June 10, 2015, 04:36:58 PM
Yeah, I hadn't even thought about using those waterblocks to build a double system. That'll be pretty dense.


Just to state the obvious.

If the S1 replacement board has 18 chips and each chip hashes @ 8.2 GH/s then each board = 147.6 GH/s.
Assuming an overall efficiency of .4W/GH/s each board draws 59.04 watts.
Eight boards in that liquid cooled case results in ~472.32 watts (1488 BTU) total consumption and hashes @ 1180.8 GH/s.
Three of these would be easily powered by one DPS-2000, keeping the DPS-2000 in it's peak efficiency band with power to spare.

Interesting.
338  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: GekkoScience BM1384 Project Development Discussion on: June 10, 2015, 02:16:52 PM
For those individuals that are considering upgrading their old S1's to the GekkoScience board (I'm one also):
I believe the "bolt pattern" on the hash boards is the same for S1's, S3's, and S5's.

Syscooling sells the waterblocks for the S3 hash boards here:
http://shop.syscooling.com/goods.php?id=47

They also sell an S5 water cooling upgrade kit here:
http://shop.syscooling.com/goods.php?id=51

And the radiators, pump, tubing, manifolds, clamps, etc. . . . here:
http://shop.syscooling.com/goods.php?id=46

In theory, this would accommodate 8 of the GekkoScience hash boards and make for one punchy quiet machine.

When we do this we'll use the Arctic MX-4 Thermal paste.
Which can be found here:
http://www.amazon.com/Performance-Thermal-Compound-Coolers-ORACO-MX40001-BL/dp/B0045JCFLY/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1433945322&sr=8-2&keywords=mx-4+thermal+paste+20+grams

and here:

www.amazon.com/ARCTIC-MX-4-Thermal-Compound-Non-Electricity/dp/B004ULZITS/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1433945489&sr=8-1&keywords=mx-4+thermal+paste+20+grams&pebp=1433945440932&perid=EBFED3F391BF4AAAB463

We prefer this thermal compound due to it's non-electrical conductivity and improved thermal transfer properties over the Arctic 5 Silver.

Likely we'll not plumb the waterblocks into little radiators but instead into our existing liquid cooling system.
Which capture the "waste" heat for building comfort heating in our notoriously cold MN winters.

Just some food for thought, hope this helps.


339  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: GekkoScience BM1384 Project Development Discussion on: June 08, 2015, 03:50:23 PM
Bitmain just let me know they're checking stock on chips, so hopefully they have enough that we can move forward on the build. Novak's talking to a new US-based proto-etch place we'd like to have run out the next Compac PCB, but in the meantime I reckon I'll be working on getting the last batch assembled and modified, if only to have something to play with. That and all the other stuff Novak and I have to do will be keeping us pretty busy.

We'll take a couple, either proto or production.
Please indicate how much and where to send the BTC.
Thanks.
340  Economy / Securities / Re: ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It on: June 07, 2015, 04:22:30 PM
So I just came back to see what's going on after about a year...
It seems that all AsicMiner shares are now worthless and this turned into a scam?

Yes. AM is dead.

So if AM is dead, who has the IP rights for the BE300?

Re-vitalizing that development effort would be something we'd be interested in.

I know more than one board designer that would get a serious woody given a couple of prototypes.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!