we all know the price on the website is in usd and converted to btc at whatever rate they determine..
Earnings are based on BTC and you're $400 will fluctuate as the exchange rate moves. Please read the rules. |
|
|
|
A total of six 38mm 4-wire PWM fans, three 140mm at the front and three 120mm at the back in push-pull configuration.
1) You want negative pressure displacement, likely you'll get better performance dropping the fronts to 3x120's or 2x140s and leaving a grill. Ramming in more air than is being released = high pressure internally = lowers airflow significantly. 2) There is also a problem with your sizing, 3x120mm don't actually fit at the back. 3x120mm = 360mm Spacing = 15mm PSUs = 2x44mm = 88mm Material thickness = 2x2mm = 4mm = 467mm Your specified back side is 438mm Two server-grade power supplies, 1U height, probably DPS-1200 or functional equivalent, mounted at the top rear on an internal shelf separating the hashboard volume from the upper chamber containing controls and cabling.
3) 1U = 40mm fan = annoying as hell. (See SP10 and SP3X where the PSU fan was far louder than the actual miner) The board would connect to thermocouples mounted in the airstream in front of the rearmost fans. All six fans would connect to this board, which would use the thermocouple feedback (and a calibration trimpot) to determine fan speeds, individually for each pair of fans.
4) Thermocouples are a shipping hazard as they can come loose and end up in fans and so addd another layer of inspection. They take too long to install and they're also superfluous as you should have already characterised the relationship between ambient intake and chip temps. We checked several other miners for heatsink size comparisons. The S1/3/5 heatsink is 9 inches long; the Avalon2 box and S2 have about ten inch heatsinks. I think the Dragon was more like 8 inches. None of them do quite 300W per heatsinks at stock power either though.
5) Remember that the distance you actually care about is between the outer two mounting holes, not the length of the entire heatsink. The material on the ends doesn't contribute to thermal expansion mounting stress. 6) You've not explicitly specified how many PCBs. 7) 4U should be smaller than 7" if you want stuff to actually fit, even if its shaving off a few mm. |
|
|
|
Wouldnt it be nice to have some kind of standard in the BITMAIN world?
I'm thinking of just changing the blades and the firmware to upgrade an S5 to an S7. It would reduce the prices a bit (lets say 10-15%, its shipping costs, VAT ..) and it would also kinda bond the customer to the company as well.
This was discussed a while ago in design, and the conclusion was that its not actually that desirable for the same reason that S2 upgrade kits never appeared. By the time the next generation appears, the previous generation is still mining away perfectly happily and so you can't immediately replace those hashing boards. Ie if the S5 was modular to the S7, you'd still buy a full S7 because any S5s you had would still be fine to run for the foreseeable future. No one would scrap their S5, they'd simply run both or sell the S5. How about an upgrade for the S1 or the S3 though, which aren't very efficient and aren't profitable any more in most places? Upgrade kits cost not dissimilar to the full miner because: - Have to assemble, test, then disassemble an entire miner
- Cost of the rest of the kit (even the fan) is very minimal
- Usually requires new controller anyway
- Harder to predict batch numbers
- Harder to ship, volume priced shipping costs
- Greater dead loss from shipping damage
tldr, its just easier to give you a new miner. |
|
|
|
What are we guessing?
The release price (in BTC) of BITMAIN's upcoming AntMiner S7.THIS HAS ENDED. SEE HERE FOR WINNERS.
PrizeThe closest answer will receive 0.15BTC and the next closest 3 will receive 0.05BTC. This is paid by me. An additional side prize pool of 0.15BTC and 3x0.05BTC is reserved for Hero and above members.
Entry formatPlease make sure you use the below format for an entry. Feel free to discuss but do so in a separate post to your entry.Entry Format: "username" "amount in BTC" "BTC address" Example: dogie 3.2 12q7Vu6Gtmpi9mGJdb1xNCj84B8YGAZDwg
Full rules- One entry per person
- Only member and above accounts can enter the main prize (to reduce the impact of shills)
- Only hero member and above accounts can enter the side prize, and are also eligible for the main prize
- In the event of a tie, the answer offered first will win
- If there are lots of close answers, I might add some additional smaller prizes
- The competition will end when Bitmain announces a price, or when a price is leaked
- I reserve the right to reject entries if they look suspicious
- Entries not in the correct format may be rejected
- Entries in $ or $ and BTC will be rejected. You must only guess in BTC
Sponsored by:Dogie's Miner Setup Guides:
tldr for getting started:Guess how much the S7 will cost on release in BTC. Entry Format: "username" "amount in BTC" "BTC address" Example: dogie 3.2 12q7Vu6Gtmpi9mGJdb1xNCj84B8YGAZDwg |
|
|
|
Wouldnt it be nice to have some kind of standard in the BITMAIN world?
I'm thinking of just changing the blades and the firmware to upgrade an S5 to an S7. It would reduce the prices a bit (lets say 10-15%, its shipping costs, VAT ..) and it would also kinda bond the customer to the company as well.
This was discussed a while ago in design, and the conclusion was that its not actually that desirable for the same reason that S2 upgrade kits never appeared. By the time the next generation appears, the previous generation is still mining away perfectly happily and so you can't immediately replace those hashing boards. Ie if the S5 was modular to the S7, you'd still buy a full S7 because any S5s you had would still be fine to run for the foreseeable future. No one would scrap their S5, they'd simply run both or sell the S5. So did you know for sure about the S2 uprade kits not being produced and held back a response? They only failed do to Bitmain not following through on not one but both announcements. It's a shame to let a good case and design that's accomodating and easily upgradeable die. No I didn't know, that was a management decision. The S2 design wasn't very good and was subsequently never repeated. It required a motherboard, slots that often broke, large areas of dead space for cooling and is probably the only Bitmain miner that was susceptible to shipping issues. And an included non server grade PSU which liked to die after a year. |
|
|
|
Hello, is replacing the fans in this units with 4x Silverstone FHP-141 possible and a benefit to cooling/dB ratio?
I would be willing to bet that those fans (140mm with 120mm mounts) are too big and will not fit in the S4. with max RPMs being 2000 I also dont think they will move enough air to cool them appropriately. I don't think they are really larger. Is the 120mm such a tight fit it barely fit itself? Yes. Are you certain? It has the same CFM as the stock fans. The only portion i'm not sure is the impact of its static pressure value. [/quote] Its not just about CFM, its about CFM at a given static pressure which on the stock fans is infinitely higher. The best you can do for noise is to replace the front 2 fans with Corsair SP120s but even that won't do much. |
|
|
|
Wouldnt it be nice to have some kind of standard in the BITMAIN world?
I'm thinking of just changing the blades and the firmware to upgrade an S5 to an S7. It would reduce the prices a bit (lets say 10-15%, its shipping costs, VAT ..) and it would also kinda bond the customer to the company as well.
This was discussed a while ago in design, and the conclusion was that its not actually that desirable for the same reason that S2 upgrade kits never appeared. By the time the next generation appears, the previous generation is still mining away perfectly happily and so you can't immediately replace those hashing boards. Ie if the S5 was modular to the S7, you'd still buy a full S7 because any S5s you had would still be fine to run for the foreseeable future. No one would scrap their S5, they'd simply run both or sell the S5. |
|
|
|
|
I can't tell if your trolling or not but I don't see any death threats there, and this definitely isn't something you should be crying wolf about nor should it be in meta if its a joke.
|
|
|
|
Before anyone gets too excited over this development I would wait until you know what the die size is and the operating frequency at quoted power consumption.
I am surprised that they say that full custom poses a higher 'risk' - that's only true for very complex chips like cpu's, not for the very simple (and I mean very simple) functions found in SHA256.
Good luck to them though, anything that puts a spanner in the works of KNC or 21 has to be welcomed.
Well when you're considering laying down nearly 8 figure sums without seeing the chip work first, you better be damn sure its going to work. Oh, and 'nearly eight figures'  ? If Bitmain spend really nearly $10,000,000 NRE for this 28nm ASIC they either have very well paid designers or were completely robbed by TSMC for the masks.  I'm talking about smaller process nodes and in huge batches. Ie its a safer bet to get not quite as good 28nm performance then risk a lot on trying something new will full custom. |
|
|
|
|
Yes for a period their trust rating would be lower if you clear all ratings and readd one. I don't think its a problem to have multiple ratings for different trades, the comments are valid and the score only counts once. Its also nice to keep the timestamp for the original rating.
|
|
|
|
Before anyone gets too excited over this development I would wait until you know what the die size is and the operating frequency at quoted power consumption.
I am surprised that they say that full custom poses a higher 'risk' - that's only true for very complex chips like cpu's, not for the very simple (and I mean very simple) functions found in SHA256.
Good luck to them though, anything that puts a spanner in the works of KNC or 21 has to be welcomed.
Well when you're considering laying down nearly 8 figure sums without seeing the chip work first, you better be damn sure its going to work. |
|
|
|
I would have purchased a 1/3 size unit. I do think this would have been nice gear.
I'll bet this was a "Marketing decision" and not a technical one. Who knows, after they have gotten all the folks that will pay for a 3-module version, they could start marketing a 1-module version . Of course the BM1385 and S7 might render that possibility moot. Just speculation on my part. If marketing includes market appetite then probably yeah. People that complain about a 10btc S5+ will complain harder about a 4btc S5++. |
|
|
|
ALL the 3 PCIE connectors are needed to be connected to power supply on each hash board .... since it is based on serial power solution and there is no DC/DC inside the miner.
Those two statements are unconnected and don't make sense as a justification. If each board can still only be powered by one PSU due to cross-loading, then each board's 3 PCI-E connectors are still connected. While we don't have any high res images to see if we can see tracks, each of the PCI-Es is still in-line and *appears* to be powering the same plain. That agrees with the cross-loading argument which would mean that each PCI-E is the same as the next, meaning the only limitation is maximum load and not because it doesn't have DC/DC. i tend to agree with this. if each board is drawing <400W you could provide that with only 2 cables. my guess is that it does two things: 1) prevents people from burning up cheap 18awg cables (that are limited around 150W) 2) slightly better balance of power distribution so the connector or copper traces dont fail I absolutely understand that the official line will always be use all 3, however the technical explanation as to why you must use all 3 didn't really make sense. |
|
|
|
I can't imagine there would be any more efficiency to gain from under-clocking than an S5, which is slim to none without undervolting.
As a guess I would assume it has a little bit of possibilities. But Bitmain gear really always shinned on the amount of overclocking you could do vs the underclock. I am also still working with my PDU. I'm hoping to get the networking working on it where I can monitor stats easy on watts used, but it is second hand gear so I'm not even sure network port works. If its anything like the S5 then graph of power consumption was almost perfectly linear vs frequency, and efficiency remained constant within the range of the chips (both up and down). |
|
|
|
How is the noise level? Is it comparable to the SP20 or lot more than it?
Comparable to a few S5s, which are comparable to a few SP20s although a much less annoying quality of noise. It sounds like you do not have one on hand. Are you giving advice based on hear-say or do you have one in your possession? Sometimes it seems that you just like the sound of your own...fingers typing... Its the same fans as on the S5 which is the same as the S4+ which is the same as the S4, of which I've had up to 15 running in the same room at once. So no I don't have an S5+ on hand, yes I can still comment on its noise levels. |
|
|
|
How is the noise level? Is it comparable to the SP20 or lot more than it?
Comparable to a few S5s, which are comparable to a few SP20s although a much less annoying quality of noise. |
|
|
|
They'll soon get bored otherwise.
Sometimes. Others are professional trolls. |
|
|
|
ALL the 3 PCIE connectors are needed to be connected to power supply on each hash board .... since it is based on serial power solution and there is no DC/DC inside the miner.
Those two statements are unconnected and don't make sense as a justification. If each board can still only be powered by one PSU due to cross-loading, then each board's 3 PCI-E connectors are still connected. While we don't have any high res images to see if we can see tracks, each of the PCI-Es is still in-line and *appears* to be powering the same plain. That agrees with the cross-loading argument which would mean that each PCI-E is the same as the next, meaning the only limitation is maximum load and not because it doesn't have DC/DC. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
