S9 Beagle Black controller physical mod questions.

[WhyFhy]

I've recently aquired a C5 Beagle Black controller (S9) 4x connectors on io board
It appears that I could reflow up to 16 additional connectors (I read somewhere up to 9 hash boards on this controller can actually be used?)
What are the odd's of me achieving more then the 4 ports provided and formatting these in something 3u
there's also additional fan room on the controller.

What about mixing and matching, like 5 s9 hashboards and 4 t9+ hashboards (sounds like a CF) just curious though
any one have a V9 theyve played with? they are cheap on ebay

[WhyFhy]

Um, unless BM has radically changed things, the BeagleBone was used only on the S5 & S7 miners. As such, no it cannot run anything from S9 on up as it is an entirely different controller and embedded operating system. The s9 has always used either Xylinx or Altera SoC controllers.

You might be right sir? I'm a little lost and did not want to necropost.
I recently aquired these as s9 controllers from Phillip

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5155023.0

No biggie if it is s7

I have a few XILINX with additional ports as well would the function if additional ports are added?
this is for fun no real goal. make something cool?

[philipma1957]

Um, unless BM has radically changed things, the BeagleBone was used only on the S5 & S7 miners. As such, no it cannot run anything from S9 on up as it is an entirely different controller and embedded operating system. The s9 has always used either Xylinx or Altera SoC controllers.

It is the batch 1 s9 controller it has two pieces and will run s9 hash boards.

I have one more left and it does work on s9s.

It is circa April 2016 or May 2016

It was mining s9 boards as late as May 2019.

[WhyFhy]

Think I can reflow these puppies*?

[philipma1957]

Test and see if it reads all four boards as it used to do so.

The problem may be if you get six vs four the software needs changing.

The s-7 controller had six possible connections for board and I did get one control to do six boards.

As the s7 firmware on the board do allow six boards.

S9s have so much different firmware I don’t know if any would work.

That board would not let me flash newer firmware to it.

It has like batch 4 firmware upgrade done in say August 2016.

[WhyFhy]

Ill do some trial and error here either way i have enough things now to test it out without stressing bricking/toasting.

[NotFuzzyWarm]

It is the batch 1 s9 controller it has two pieces and will run s9 hash boards...

By Jove yer right. Post deleted. I just looked at some of the s9's I have off line, 1 is a batch-1 another is batch-3 and it looks like BM used the BeagleBone up to at least batch-3.

In that case it just becomes a matter of the impact of additional coms will have on the performance of the controller. As with the Avalons pretty sure there will be a point of diminishing returns as miners are added to the controller.

[WhyFhy]

I planned on underclocking lpm and trying out the delta fans in a 3u and placing it in a server cabinet with a decent exaust out .im trying to mine indoors laughable but im going to try
do you think they will decay underclocked ? and do you mean overall decay or a slow decay?.  like start losing xxx gh/s untill it falls on some terribly low hashrate?

[NotFuzzyWarm]

With the Avalons hash rate scales just fine but the number of invalid shares goes up as you increase the number of miners per-port. Specifically it is the number of stale shares that goes up, most likely because of the time it takes for the increased number of data xfrs between the hash boards and controller. Odds are same thing will happen with the BM miners.

[WhyFhy]

So your saying these things can bottleneck?

[NotFuzzyWarm]

Yes. It is because there is a fixed bandwidth between the controller and hash boards. Rather like a family all trying to use their WiFi to stream videos all at the same time - eventually you run out of bandwidth from your connection. No idea what speed the BM miners use but Avalons have their internal controller to/from hash board com links running at 150kbps.

[philipma1957]

By Jove yer right. Post deleted. I just looked at some of the s9's I have off line, 1 is a batch-1 another is batch-3 and it looks like BM used the BeagleBone up to at least batch-3.

In that case it just becomes a matter of the impact of additional coms will have on the performance of the controller. As with the Avalons pretty sure there will be a point of diminishing returns as miners are added to the controller.

When I did six with the s7  controller  it did 8.9 to 9.1 th

when I ran  three with the s7 controller it did 4.6 and 4.7  or 9.3

but those were my first 2 s7's  and one was unreal  way better then the other.

So I suspect  when are six boards were in play  the gear dropped to the lower quality 3 board hash level.

If you programmed with brains  six board could all have different levels.  would be a nice project.

@ op

I will be sending you this psu to run it

https://www.ebay.com/itm/FusionSilicon-X7-Miner-Power-Supply-2400-Watt-Delta-200-240V-PSU-Platinum-Rated/233180745188?

[WhyFhy]

Thanks phil,
 

I got the xilinx xc7z010 for comparason
https://www.xilinx.com/support/documentation/data_sheets/ds190-Zynq-7000-Overview.pdf
the beagleboneblack is much much more capable then the soc listed (from other s9)
we are talking kb/mb  to  mb/gb differences i dont mind testing it out xilinx it does its job but next to this BBB its junk lol

[NotFuzzyWarm]

... i dont mind testing it out xilinx it does its job but next to this BBB its junk lol

Or as an embedded system designer, one would say that the BBB is a more expensive gross overkill for the application.