Bitcoin Forum
June 23, 2024, 09:00:12 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 [3]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: s9 > batch 16 and Auto-Tune Issues  (Read 5414 times)
NotFuzzyWarm (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3668
Merit: 2604


Evil beware: We have waffles!


View Profile
October 21, 2016, 03:25:12 PM
 #41

I compared pics of a s9 b11 hash board to the b17 and the Vcore regulator sections look identical.

- For bitcoin to succeed the community must police itself -    My info useful? Donations welcome!  3NtFuzyWREGoDHWeMczeJzxFZpiLAFJXYr
 -Sole remaining active Primary developer of cgminer, Kano's repo is here
-Support Sidehacks miner development. Donations to:   1BURGERAXHH6Yi6LRybRJK7ybEm5m5HwTr
Gnome504
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3
Merit: 0


View Profile
October 22, 2016, 10:39:46 PM
 #42

I can confirm it's both batch 16 and 17 that shipped with this auto-freq update.

Can someone please tell me if it is possible to flash to an older firmware version on batch 16 and 17 S9's, because the fan setting is not configurable any longer!  Nor can you over/under clock...

Does anyone have a copy of the 600 and 650mhz older firmware versions and could you post it on a free download site, preferably one in English.  There is another post on here where someone posted it on a polish download site but the codes do not work and I can not figure it out even with google translate.

Thank you!
Eshendia
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 11
Merit: 0


View Profile
February 26, 2017, 10:01:28 PM
 #43

a little update.

after 18 hours it started hashing with no intervention from me, but was showing all temps as 0 and fans going crazy, but hashrate seems ok.

hope bitmain can get back to me with a earlier firmware


Did you solve the problem? I have the same code, and situation, please help
NotFuzzyWarm (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3668
Merit: 2604


Evil beware: We have waffles!


View Profile
March 15, 2017, 10:31:21 PM
Last edit: March 15, 2017, 11:41:59 PM by NotFuzzyWarm
 #44

Bumping this up due to a virulent STD (Serious Topic Deviation) has sprung up on the main Bitmain s9 thread re: Auto-tune and Bitmain disabling any 'Eco-mode" fiddling.

To be continued...

- For bitcoin to succeed the community must police itself -    My info useful? Donations welcome!  3NtFuzyWREGoDHWeMczeJzxFZpiLAFJXYr
 -Sole remaining active Primary developer of cgminer, Kano's repo is here
-Support Sidehacks miner development. Donations to:   1BURGERAXHH6Yi6LRybRJK7ybEm5m5HwTr
NotFuzzyWarm (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3668
Merit: 2604


Evil beware: We have waffles!


View Profile
March 15, 2017, 10:51:21 PM
Last edit: March 16, 2017, 01:14:19 PM by NotFuzzyWarm
 #45

Steering here posted. Now to see if works....

For those late to the party, my humble opinion as to Why Bitmain has forced Auto-tune factory speed only. No chance to underclock if desired. Let's call that Eco-modes.

In short the reason is Bitmain being able to use all possible chips produced using the 16nm Fin FET process. As ALL makers of 16/14nm node chips know - including the likes of Intel and IBM - that node is very unforgiving. Last I saw reported was that current initially 'usable' chips yield is ~70% for more complex but physically more spread out GPU's CPU's, Network Fabric switches and such. Note the word initially. Users of 14/16nm CPU's and GPU cards are reporting far higher time related failures as in a couple months when it happens.

BTW: That 70% yield is only because CPU's and GPU's can be easily binned per their performance and priced accordingly. Great ones costing more $$, meh ones $. Bitmain also bins to some extent but have a far narrower range as to what is usable while meeting advertised power usage. Ergo, I'd put their chip yield around 50-60% at best. BitFury, BW.com, Canaan, and others chose to sacrifice power efff for more stable operation by using higher Vcore. Odds are Bitmain's T9 are the same - higher Vcore, screw lowest on the planet eff.

Point is, Bitmain can populate hash boards with different 'speed' chips, test/bin the boards for several 'speed-grades' then build miners that reach the +/- 10% advertised rate and be done with it. Their firmware sorts out as-sold Target total hash rate needed, tests each board to see what they can do, and then sets them to give target speed.

Summary to date done.STD info starts.

Downside is, they threw out the baby with the bathwater. They allow no changes to what the miner decides is Best.

From Bitmains POV I can understand their reasoning: To get better chip yield we need Auto-tune. It solves problem of a miner performing poorly if Optimum (for that particular miner) is changed. Given that in all probability most large farms will not be changing things until much later in the product life cycle. Makes sense. I also bet that later on we WILL see Eco-modes from Bitmain in Firmware updates to come...

Auto-tune and it's 'why' should have no bearing on under clocking/volting the miners (and in turn fan speed would drop as well) if a user wants to do that. The testing part of Auto-tune already gathers extensive data on each hash board and the chips on it. Give users the option of reducing hash rate/power and apply as an offset to the miner hash rate. Consult performance data to new target hash rate and apply. Retest if desired and tweak as needed. Done.

Should be easy-peasy with very very minimal coding... Full tilt Factory as Default, Eco for those who don't care.

- For bitcoin to succeed the community must police itself -    My info useful? Donations welcome!  3NtFuzyWREGoDHWeMczeJzxFZpiLAFJXYr
 -Sole remaining active Primary developer of cgminer, Kano's repo is here
-Support Sidehacks miner development. Donations to:   1BURGERAXHH6Yi6LRybRJK7ybEm5m5HwTr
NotFuzzyWarm (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3668
Merit: 2604


Evil beware: We have waffles!


View Profile
March 16, 2017, 08:42:42 PM
 #46

Ja. And to those who say it's more work for Bitmain's coders so Bitmain won't do it: Um, they just changed from using the Xilinx SOC to using one from Altera - pretty safe bet that the hardware change required significant re-coding of at a minimum the FPGA portion of it. Since the Cyclone-V still uses the same ARM-9 CPU as the Xilinx SOC did at least that bit would be mostly the same.

Implementing Eco modes is nothing compared to that Wink

- For bitcoin to succeed the community must police itself -    My info useful? Donations welcome!  3NtFuzyWREGoDHWeMczeJzxFZpiLAFJXYr
 -Sole remaining active Primary developer of cgminer, Kano's repo is here
-Support Sidehacks miner development. Donations to:   1BURGERAXHH6Yi6LRybRJK7ybEm5m5HwTr
Dibblah
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56
Merit: 0


View Profile
March 21, 2017, 11:07:54 AM
 #47

Ja. And to those who say it's more work for Bitmain's coders so Bitmain won't do it: Um, they just changed from using the Xilinx SOC to using one from Altera - pretty safe bet that the hardware change required significant re-coding of at a minimum the FPGA portion of it. Since the Cyclone-V still uses the same ARM-9 CPU as the Xilinx SOC did at least that bit would be mostly the same.

Implementing Eco modes is nothing compared to that Wink

Maybe, but their target market is the "from new, stick it in a rack until it dies" people. They don't care about hobby miners too much, since that's not where their profit is (R4 excluded).

I find it quite interesting that they don't in fact appear to do any per-chip or per-board even tuning per-boot - it's just making sure that each board is as-shipped from factory, setting the ASIC speeds and expected core count, then trying all the boards.

There is no variance in the picked speeds at all, as far as I can see - it just validates that everything is within expected ranges.

When you do a new 'apply settings', it does some additional checks, but again, none of these appear to change the hashrate significantly.

Cheers,

Allan.
Pages: « 1 2 [3]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!