A4 Dominator - Pre-Order Group Buy - 280mh, roughly 1000w, $1800 + shipping

[Longsnowsm]

So the behavior is a lot more unstable depending on the pool.

See my note above about stability being pool dependent.
i compared nicehash and litecoinpool and found my hashrates on nicehash were down around 240 compared to 270+ on litecoinpool. However, the "computed: BTC payout from litecoinpool is about 4% less than nicehash.
After I actually get the LTC converted to BTC I would expect to see further underperformance due to all the exchange fees.
Ill post details on how much BTC I got from each tomorrow.

WOW, 270+ on litecoinpool?  My average is 250mhs on Litecoinpool.  Prohashing seems to be working somewhat acceptably for some people, but not me.  I don't understand the difference.  I posted on the forum over on Prohashing and found I needed to set an option, but even that isn't working.  Just had one miner drop a board and required hard power cycle to get it back.  So I am about to punt out of Prohashing with these miners unless someone comes up with an idea why mine are behaving this way and others seem to work.

I may have to give nicehash a try.

[Eyedol-X]

So the behavior is a lot more unstable depending on the pool.

See my note above about stability being pool dependent.
i compared nicehash and litecoinpool and found my hashrates on nicehash were down around 240 compared to 270+ on litecoinpool. However, the "computed: BTC payout from litecoinpool is about 4% less than nicehash.
After I actually get the LTC converted to BTC I would expect to see further underperformance due to all the exchange fees.
Ill post details on how much BTC I got from each tomorrow.

WOW, 270+ on litecoinpool?  My average is 250mhs on Litecoinpool.  Prohashing seems to be working somewhat acceptably for some people, but not me.  I don't understand the difference.  I posted on the forum over on Prohashing and found I needed to set an option, but even that isn't working.  Just had one miner drop a board and required hard power cycle to get it back.  So I am about to punt out of Prohashing with these miners unless someone comes up with an idea why mine are behaving this way and others seem to work.

I may have to give nicehash a try.

I have nicehash as my secondary and prohash as my primary. However, PH has dropped several times over this last few weeks causing me to mine a little on NH.

I really like prohash but may consider switching to NH as my primary until software updates fix these things.

[citronick]

So the behavior is a lot more unstable depending on the pool.

See my note above about stability being pool dependent.
i compared nicehash and litecoinpool and found my hashrates on nicehash were down around 240 compared to 270+ on litecoinpool. However, the "computed: BTC payout from litecoinpool is about 4% less than nicehash.
After I actually get the LTC converted to BTC I would expect to see further underperformance due to all the exchange fees.
Ill post details on how much BTC I got from each tomorrow.

WOW, 270+ on litecoinpool?  My average is 250mhs on Litecoinpool.  Prohashing seems to be working somewhat acceptably for some people, but not me.  I don't understand the difference.  I posted on the forum over on Prohashing and found I needed to set an option, but even that isn't working.  Just had one miner drop a board and required hard power cycle to get it back.  So I am about to punt out of Prohashing with these miners unless someone comes up with an idea why mine are behaving this way and others seem to work.

I may have to give nicehash a try.

has anyone tried setting the diff level manually?

I recall that KNC had issues like these before (correct me if I am wrong) and we have to set diff level manually to work on ceratin pools.

[Eyedol-X]

So the behavior is a lot more unstable depending on the pool.

See my note above about stability being pool dependent.
i compared nicehash and litecoinpool and found my hashrates on nicehash were down around 240 compared to 270+ on litecoinpool. However, the "computed: BTC payout from litecoinpool is about 4% less than nicehash.
After I actually get the LTC converted to BTC I would expect to see further underperformance due to all the exchange fees.
Ill post details on how much BTC I got from each tomorrow.

WOW, 270+ on litecoinpool?  My average is 250mhs on Litecoinpool.  Prohashing seems to be working somewhat acceptably for some people, but not me.  I don't understand the difference.  I posted on the forum over on Prohashing and found I needed to set an option, but even that isn't working.  Just had one miner drop a board and required hard power cycle to get it back.  So I am about to punt out of Prohashing with these miners unless someone comes up with an idea why mine are behaving this way and others seem to work.

I may have to give nicehash a try.

has anyone tried setting the diff level manually?

I recall that KNC had issues like these before (correct me if I am wrong) and we have to set diff level manually to work on ceratin pools.

I do it on PH with the password arguments, it has no effect permanent effect. I believe it helps so I include it but it doesn't 100% eliminate the issue.

[citronick]

So the behavior is a lot more unstable depending on the pool.

See my note above about stability being pool dependent.
i compared nicehash and litecoinpool and found my hashrates on nicehash were down around 240 compared to 270+ on litecoinpool. However, the "computed: BTC payout from litecoinpool is about 4% less than nicehash.
After I actually get the LTC converted to BTC I would expect to see further underperformance due to all the exchange fees.
Ill post details on how much BTC I got from each tomorrow.

WOW, 270+ on litecoinpool?  My average is 250mhs on Litecoinpool.  Prohashing seems to be working somewhat acceptably for some people, but not me.  I don't understand the difference.  I posted on the forum over on Prohashing and found I needed to set an option, but even that isn't working.  Just had one miner drop a board and required hard power cycle to get it back.  So I am about to punt out of Prohashing with these miners unless someone comes up with an idea why mine are behaving this way and others seem to work.

I may have to give nicehash a try.

has anyone tried setting the diff level manually?

I recall that KNC had issues like these before (correct me if I am wrong) and we have to set diff level manually to work on ceratin pools.

I do it on PH with the password arguments, it has no effect permanent effect. I believe it helps so I include it but it doesn't 100% eliminate the issue.

Perhaps Chris@PH can tweak a dedicated port for A4s ....

[wheelz1200]

So at what point is someone going to call bullshit on inno?  If this was knc people would be going nuts right now.  Has anyone gotten any word from inno about all of this and their plan to fix this?

[Searing]

So at what point is someone going to call bullshit on inno?  If this was knc people would be going nuts right now.  Has anyone gotten any word from inno about all of this and their plan to fix this?

What I'm curous about is the big surge in LTC difficulty. That can't be due to the mall amount of the group buy and 2nd batch consumer product. So the alternative is the IPO folks
that got their equipment for the profit/at cost million buck investment MUST be behind this jump imho. So the question arises .... ARE they haveing the same firmware issues and
being taken care of on their data hall stuff (assuming it is different then consumer product)?

I can't for the life of me believe this is not so. Because when KNC had issues of this sort on their firmware and launch of Titans a lot of 'big boys' were in the swedish asic miner thread
demanding action in the form of 20-50 posts a half day (there is a reason that thread is so damn large on posts)

I don't see that action on this thread or the main thread for the A4's ...thus wtf..... the only other solution would be another scrypt miner dark data equipment / farm maker

which is unlikely

So I can't see the large IPO investors that may be shooting up the LTC difficulty putting up with these firmware issues without some or most being on the two A4 threads on here
bitching or looking for solutions also. In that I am not seeing this it raises my suspicions that any firmware fixes are going to them first and you guys are on the ass end on the
consumer product.

Also I see not a lot of talk on open source anymore by innsilicon....

not looking too good...at least with KNC all the big and little guys were on the same page to push for firmware fixes the first 3 months..not seeing that here

ASSUMING I am correct (who knows) that the reason for the big LTC difficulty rise IS the IPO folk on the A4 IPO investment getting their data hall equipment up

Just seems fishy as hell...it is TOO guiet if all the A4 customers are in the same boat imho

(then again I am a scar'd refugee from the KNC no support wars..so am likely biased)

Anyway it is troubling to me from the sidelines and I don't even have an A4! (but all so familar from the KNC firmware/support wars)

[bclcjunkie]

i've been emailing Chloe but getting bullshit "we are looking into this" answers. nothing concrete. at this sloppy customer service rate there'll be no progress until our miners run out of warranty and then probably everyone who kept quiet all the while will have a wake up call.

So at what point is someone going to call bullshit on inno?  If this was knc people would be going nuts right now.  Has anyone gotten any word from inno about all of this and their plan to fix this?

What I'm curous about is the big surge in LTC difficulty. That can't be due to the mall amount of the group buy and 2nd batch consumer product. So the alternative is the IPO folks
that got their equipment for the profit/at cost million buck investment MUST be behind this jump imho. So the question arises .... ARE they haveing the same firmware issues and
being taken care of on their data hall stuff (assuming it is different then consumer product)?

I can't for the life of me believe this is not so. Because when KNC had issues of this sort on their firmware and launch of Titans a lot of 'big boys' were in the swedish asic miner thread
demanding action in the form of 20-50 posts a half day (there is a reason that thread is so damn large on posts)

I don't see that action on this thread or the main thread for the A4's ...thus wtf..... the only other solution would be another scrypt miner dark data equipment / farm maker

which is unlikely

So I can't see the large IPO investors that may be shooting up the LTC difficulty putting up with these firmware issues without some or most being on the two A4 threads on here
bitching or looking for solutions also. In that I am not seeing this it raises my suspicions that any firmware fixes are going to them first and you guys are on the ass end on the
consumer product.

Also I see not a lot of talk on open source anymore by innsilicon....

not looking too good...at least with KNC all the big and little guys were on the same page to push for firmware fixes the first 3 months..not seeing that here

ASSUMING I am correct (who knows) that the reason for the big LTC difficulty rise IS the IPO folk on the A4 IPO investment getting their data hall equipment up

Just seems fishy as hell...it is TOO guiet if all the A4 customers are in the same boat imho

(then again I am a scar'd refugee from the KNC no support wars..so am likely biased)

Anyway it is troubling to me from the sidelines and I don't even have an A4! (but all so familar from the KNC firmware/support wars)

[FryguyUK]

anyone who has latest firmware running and producing some hash

please let me know the software you used to mount it, think its causing mine to bug out.

[toni_maroni]

In that I am not seeing this it raises my suspicions that any firmware fixes are going to them first and you guys are on the ass end on the
consumer product.

today i see a screenshot from a chinese vendor with v2.01
i cant find any post from inno to download such a version for customers

[firehawk71]

anyone who has latest firmware running and producing some hash

please let me know the software you used to mount it, think its causing mine to bug out.

I have the latest batch one V0.0.3 and batch two V1.0.3
They are both hashing. To create the image I used a program for Macs called Apple-Pi-Baker
On windows sorry I do not know what to use..

[Longsnowsm]

v.2.0.1 is probably for the batch 3 miners.  Just a guess.

[FryguyUK]

anyone who has latest firmware running and producing some hash

please let me know the software you used to mount it, think its causing mine to bug out.

I have the latest batch one V0.0.3 and batch two V1.0.3
They are both hashing. To create the image I used a program for Macs called Apple-Pi-Baker
On windows sorry I do not know what to use..

thanks anyways, gave it another re-write using Rufus, thing i used it last time though middle of the night >.<

[firehawk71]

v.2.0.1 is probably for the batch 3 miners.  Just a guess.

Yes I can confirm this.. Ver 2.0.1 will not be compatible. This is what I was told from a reliable source
Anyone want to buy my set up? I am done with this. Send me PM if interested..

[Searing]

v.2.0.1 is probably for the batch 3 miners.  Just a guess.

Yes I can confirm this.. Ver 2.0.1 will not be compatible. This is what I was told from a reliable source
Anyone want to buy my set up? I am done with this. Send me PM if interested..

Heck sorry for you guys. But seems to be following the KNC guidebook on how to screw consumers. The catch is KNC originally had a 90 day warranty
(but they forgot to change web page for previous btc units so they had to make it a year after a month of this kinda stuff). When it was 90 days (or so they thought) there was NOT a
lot of firmware action ...with this 45 day warranty ...you guys may be frigging out of luck....

Also whatever happened to the +10%/-10% hash rate they claimed (at one time anyway) on the speed of their units 250mh is below that..also the 'open source' which at LEAST
would have allowed someone a shot to fix this...

But I mean really IF 3rd batch has a WORKING version of 2.01 that is NOT compatible with previous versions ...for the BIG difference in price of a 35 buck discount over
group buy prices (Thanksgiving sale)..I would be ..well beyond pissed off....

Looks like a different train going down the same track ...with the bridge gone.....what a cluster.....

Are you guys sure that Innsilicon did not just hire a bunch of KNC former folk after the bankruptcy? I mean the crap is almost identical!

By the way I've heard rumors that Innsilicon has more then a few shady ties in China....also a guy in the states that made prototype chps claims he sent them
to China to fab and the A2 chips were identical ..ie he got ripped off..kinda think this MAY be true from the cases and other server psu's he has dumped since his
bankruptcy because of such....but again hear say....but then again....got a lot of server psu's (new) out of this story to mod my titans....but again this is 3rd hand

Someone who is in China and speaks the language could probably give us more ..if such dirt is true

Anyway a moot point.....their actions seem to speak for themselves....(Damn glad I just acted as a free escrow on this...damn near bought one..)

Good luck

[Longsnowsm]

For those using Nicehash can you tell me if you are using any options or settings?  Are you manually setting difficulty or anything to help stablize the miners?  So far my miners are not stable on Nicehash either.  Lots of restarts, and lots of dropped boards. 

[Eyedol-X]

I just dropped mine back to 1100mhz and 815mv in an effort to see if underclocking them will help.

Going to go all the way back to 800mhz if necessary to see where it stops. I know I can run them with 800mv at <1000mhz because mine came setup with 800mhz as default

[Eyedol-X]

I just dropped mine back to 1100mhz and 815mv in an effort to see if underclocking them will help.

Going to go all the way back to 800mhz if necessary to see where it stops. I know I can run them with 800mv at <1000mhz because mine came setup with 800mhz as default

1100mhz @ 815mv -- Dropped Card

Now trying 1000mhz @ 810mv

[FryguyUK]

Still 0 mh/s using the 1.0.3 software updated

anyone have any ideas, I can see the interface, everything's correct, just no work being produced. Other miners are working as usual (albeit the drop problems).

http://imgur.com/a/YeJmQ

[lightfoot]

Hm. What do you see when you ssh into the Pi and run screen -r? What kind of errors is the cgminer saying, and is there a specific build they're using for the specific device? In fact what the hell devices are they using to talk to this thing over the SPI bus?

C