|
Hey, Olympus, don't sell these machines to "customers", keep them and mine with them for yourself. You will earn more in just a few "mounts".
And no one "customer" will regret sending bitcoins to you. (Of course there is no Paypal.)
|
|
|
|
It's official: 500 TH/s reached. https://picostocks.com/docs/view/85We have reached 500TH/s. We will try to keep this hashrate as long as the hardware lasts. We will not deduct running costs as long as these remain marginal (below 10% of revenues). |
|
|
|
|
This 24-port TP-link switch recognizes and handles both cable types automatically.
|
|
|
|
|
They pretend to be UK company, yet they set the countdown to the middle of the dark night (1am)...
|
|
|
|
Again: PCI-e connector CAN supply 300 W. 6-pin version is rated 75 W, but 8-pin version is rated quite higher. Additional two pins (both are ground) are used not for supply, but to let the receiver (usually a graphic card) to recognize if this PCI-e connector is able to supply more. Still they don't need to be connected. Worse thing is with cooling. Let's read HF's own announcement: https://hashfast.com/baby-jet-thermal-testing/Baby Jet thermal testing
Posted on September 23, 2013
by Simon Barber
in Baby Jet, Development, Rig Assembly
Our liquid cooling solution supplier has the results from some real world testing of the solution we will be using in the Baby Jet. The HashFast GN ASIC was designed around a nominal operating point of 400GH/s, which it achieves consuming 250W at the chip. Due to manufacturing variations in the silicon some chips will consume slightly more, and others less. We chose this 250W operating point because that is what overclocked CPUs are routinely run at, so we knew common off the shelf cooling solutions would be able to handle this. We asked our cooling solution provider to do some thermal simulations of the system, and they confirmed that it should be able to handle 350W of heat. We have now got the results from a real system test. Using the exact final chassis that the Baby Jet is using, together with the final cooling solution. A small heating element, the same size as our chip was ordered, and attached to the cooler. The experimental results showed that the chip’s case temperature could be maintained at an acceptable level while the cooler dissipates 400W of heat. This means that our chip should have a *lot* of room for overclocking above it’s nominal 400GH/s.
|
|
|
|
|
They have got two dies to achieve 250 GH/s using 300 W.
It seems their PR simply multiplied the speed by two to make great announcement but forgot to think about power requirements.
Now the technicians are still trying to find a way to supply 600 W (for which two PCI-e could be enough, yet near the limit, depending on the PSU used)
and dissipate it (which can be quite hard as the cooling system is, as I remember, projected for less power),
and the chip has to withstand all this power going through it.
|
|
|
|
|
I confirm. My experience with it is near identical like lenny_'s.
What's more, October Jupiter has around 4% HW with main servers, while 2.4% HW with dev machine and 1.9% HW with bitminter.
|
|
|
|
|
Icebreaker advising to bet on ice?
Freud would say he subconsciously discloses his own falseness...
We all would agree with such a diagnosis, wouldn't we?
|
|
|
|
The spill? They could carefully pour a water to form the spill each morning, to have an excuse why the machine is not working.  However they forgot it made people think "if I order from them, will I get it in similar state?". |
|
|
|
|
If all December customers changed their orders to January, Cointerra would not be late.
|
|
|
|
I switched to ghash.io, and immediately my HW errors dropped below 1.5% on all machines and have stayed there. Bye bye eligius I suppose!
Anyone have a good starting point for the difficulty setting with ghash? I'm at 256 right now.
I confirm that. Switching to other pools changes hardware error rates shown by cgminer from 14% to 1.6%. I've performed a long test with Eligius, writing down all cores numbers turned off and on. The turning off starts not immediately but after a dozen of minutes. The cores turned off are purely random. Then cgminer turns them on (one by one). They are still randomly turned off. (Experimental "tuning" version of cgminer 3.8.2 is no better.) It looks like something (a config string or data sent from Eligius) causes something wrong (like buffer overrun) with November miners, making cgminer working erroneously, especially spoiling random nonces (what in effect degrades effective hashing rate and causes cgminer to turn off good cores gradually). (It doesn't always happen - maybe it depends on which server at Eligius it connects, I guess.) |
|
|
|
This site is not up to date (the prices are old too). The first estimation of speed had been 64 GH/s, then BA made more simulations and changed it to 100 GH/s. |
|
|
|
Not sure why they would post a video of the assembly failing, knocks a capacitor over.
The reasons may be different: a) To explain why it is still not hashing. b) It was posted by a mistake (it was not the best one).. c) It was the best of all made (only two capacitors misplaced), yet they promised a video. ... |
|
|
|
Yes, that's what happened. Nobody is arguing that all reservations would be converted into paid orders. That's not the point. The matter of fact is that they did NOT warn/email on payment due to be able to act on reservation (as they PROMISED they would) BEFORE canceling it. Now they are childishly saying "oh, sorry, we are full" .. Well, Bitmine, that's your f*ing problem. Now, do what you have to do and just honor your own statements to give December reservations option to order for that batch. Oh, Bitmine, and don't try to sneak around and start canceling reservations. As of just yesterday, my December reservation still was showing in green as if I had still the option to pay!
It's strange that you waited till now for notification and even to pay the order to secure your queue. I kept checking My Account every week and it kept showing reservation in green and I kept waiting for that famous email that never arrived on payment due. I'd have gladly paid whenever they said it was time. The only "strange" conspiracy or whatever shit here is their fuck up. It was advertised here: http://bitmine.ch/?p=1920 (25th September!) and was sent as a newsletter by e-mail two days later. You didn't pay attention to the news page, did you? They wrote the reservation queue quickly exceeded the whole production capacity: As we are writing this newsletter, the shipping queue of confirmed orders has already reached very substantial levels, while the reservation queue already exceeded our maximum production capability and had to be closed. Starting from tomorrow, we will start removing a significant number of reservations every day from the end of the queue (which means, the latest to have registered will be the first involved in the clearing process) to make slots available for paying customers. If you are one of the affected users, you will receive an e-mail giving you the opportunity to upgrade to the pre-order queue or abandon your reservation. Yet they still were to e-mail each one who made a reservation. It seems part of the e-mails got lost. |
|
|
|
There is something wrong with this power supply. 1) 500 A times 12 V gives 6 kW, not 10 kW as advertised. Or it would have horrible 60% efficiency but without a way to cool it down it seems to be just bad advertising. 2) Its input specification is: 432 V - 528 VAC (there is '4' for sure at the photo, not '1') - quite strange voltage range, like in some railway trains. |
|
|
|
Yes, heat is going to be substantial, but 50W is not too crazy for a chip with a large heatsink. Pictures of testing heatsinks have been posted as Carlton is mentioning.
On the first question - you probably haven't looked at the specs. (...) As for the heatsink - I'm not talking about what they plan to put in their retail products. The question is specifically to the chip's packaging. The final product design is a consequence of the chip design. If the chip has exposed silicon - they you'll see heatsinks on top of the chip (e.g. like BFL). If the chip is meant the send all the heat via the PCB - then you'll see a large heatsink on the back of the PCB (e.g. like Avalon and Bitfury). So - the question is which of the two options have they picked (and if that's been decided already). You know very well they use FCBGA packaging. You specifically asked them if they could switch to QFN: After taking a quick look at the specs - I have some questions (and recommendations) for the development team:
Do you HAVE TO use a FCBGA and 700 pins? That's quite a pain for troubleshooting and not to mention much more expensive for in the manufacturing process.
If it isn't too late - could you consider a QFN (or[T]QFP or something else non-BGA)?
Do not ask to switch to QFN packaging just before tapeout and for a 50W chip. Such a proposition clearly shows you either have quite small knowledge about chips or you try to troll the topic. |
|
|
|
you gotta be kidding me!
no encrypted wallet? no cold storage?
(...)
The art of reading with understanding is rare lately. PicoStocks is down for a while and will remain like this for sure over the weekend.
Funds from our hot wallet and cold wallet account have been stolen
(...)
There is no sign of an intrusion into the systems. Both wallets were located on different computers. We suspect that these have been copied by people who had access to the system in the past and decrypted.
This is of course a serious loss for the company, but we expect no losses for the users. the funds collected on user account will be returned.
We will have to create a new hot wallet and we will change all PicoStocks addresses for all users, but the rest will remain as it was. We will open the system when we have positively reviewed the security and collected the funds for the users :-( Maybe in 1 week from now :-(
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
