Bitmain Announces the Antminer R4 and APW5 Power Supply, Designed for Silence

[NotFuzzyWarm]

Ah what wonderful timing.... Of course CNY is very soon starting and....

Yesterday got my 1st R4 batch-6 that I ordered last week. Was running perfectly with amazingly smooth hashrate. Emphasis on was... After 22hrs the top board (chain-8) now at best reports 55 chips vs the normal 63 and does not report temps. The 2nd batch-6 I ordered shows as being picked and will prolly ship tomorrow. Hope it fares better...

Still the same amazingly smooth hashrate though, banging around 5-5.7THs of course mostly from the good board (4.4THs) vs bad board of 1-1.4THs. The top 2 with their variance are what I normally see from ALL of my s9's. The start-stops seen are from my testing to verify bad board. Even my R4 batch-4 shows the same spikey throughput as the s9's but the R4 batch-6... scarily smooth.

Lovely time to start the RMA process eh?



To save space, links to screen shots of tests I ran. Tried soft-boot, hard-boot, and swapped data cables between top board (chain-8) and bottom board (chain-7).
Yes I know the logs show the chains as 6 and 7 but whatever. The GUI calls them 7 and 8 and so will I.

http://imgur.com/fd2ukLx
http://imgur.com/OFTZqpt
http://imgur.com/mI0a7JJ
http://imgur.com/jlF0MnZ

 This will of course be part of the info I send Bitmain as will be the interesting Kernel Logs resulting from the tests. All of the logs below are massively snipped to stay under forum size limits. However the full logs show very extensive logging going on - right down to the number of good cores per-chip. along with which core number(s) is bad in each chip(s). Very nice to see that!

After soft boot

Code:

Problem 22hrs after getting it on 1-18-2017: Chain-8 (top board) reporting very low temp and only hashing ~1.4THs vs expected 4.4THs

Kernal log after soft-boot, Chain-8 (top board) reports dead with no chips. Logs are snipped to keep under Forum msg size limits.

<massive snip>
total valid nonce number:16108
total send work number:57456
require valid nonce number:57456
repeated_nonce_num:0
err_nonce_num:8726
last_nonce_num:607
chain[6]: All chip cores are opened OK!
Test Patten on chain[6]: OK!
chain[7]: some chip cores are not opened FAILED!
Test Patten on chain[7]: FAILED!
restartNum = 2 , auto-reinit enabled...
Chain[6] Chip[3] TempTypeID=1a middle offset=-78
Chain[6] Chip[3] local Temp=48
Chain[6] Chip[3] middle Temp=95
Chain[6] Chip[4] TempTypeID=1a middle offset=-67
Chain[6] Chip[4] local Temp=60
Chain[6] Chip[4] middle Temp=102
FAN PWM: 65


Note the absence of 1 board...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

After hard-boot

Code:

Following the results of a soft-boot (chain-8 not hashing at all) did a hard-boot.

Kernal log after hard-boot, at least this has chain-8 back to partially working (@ 1.4THs vs expected >4.4THs):


<massive snip>
chain[6]: All chip cores are opened OK!
Test Patten on chain[6]: OK!
chain[7]: some chip cores are not opened FAILED!
Test Patten on chain[7]: FAILED!
restartNum = 2 , auto-reinit enabled...
Chain[6] Chip[3] TempTypeID=1a middle offset=-79
Chain[6] Chip[3] local Temp=46
Chain[6] Chip[3] middle Temp=83
Chain[6] Chip[4] TempTypeID=1a middle offset=-66
Chain[6] Chip[4] local Temp=59
Chain[6] Chip[4] middle Temp=99
FAN PWM: 64

Chain-8 is partly back running 1.4THs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Data cable swapped between top and bottom boards, hard-boot, problem follows top board

Code:

Kernal log after swapping data cables between boards and hard-boot. As expected reporting followed the bad (top) board. Bad board again running only ~1THs.
<massive snip>
chain[6]: some chip cores are not opened FAILED!
Test Patten on chain[6]: FAILED!
chain[7]: All chip cores are opened OK!
Test Patten on chain[7]: OK!
restartNum = 2 , auto-reinit enabled...
Chain[7] Chip[3] TempTypeID=1a middle offset=-79
Chain[7] Chip[3] local Temp=45
Chain[7] Chip[3] middle Temp=96
Chain[7] Chip[4] TempTypeID=1a middle offset=-65
Chain[7] Chip[4] local Temp=61
Chain[7] Chip[4] middle Temp=104
FAN PWM: 65

---------------------------------
As expected error followed the top board.
Put data cables back as normal, now orginal error back with chain-8 hashing at ~1.4THs, no temps reported for it.

[Moria843]

QUESTION ON RETURN TO BITMAIN

R4 failure 2 days out of the box. Ordered 2 units one working great, the second shows status view and log below.



End of Kernel Log:
total valid nonce number:57456
total send work number:57456
require valid nonce number:57456
repeated_nonce_num:0
err_nonce_num:74779
last_nonce_num:82378
chain[6]: some chip cores are not opened FAILED!
Test Patten on chain[6]: FAILED!
chain[7]: All chip cores are opened OK!
Test Patten on chain[7]: OK!
restartNum = 2 , auto-reinit enabled...
Chain[7] Chip[3] TempTypeID=55 middle offset=-5
Chain[7] Chip[3] local Temp=57
Chain[7] Chip[3] middle Temp=85
Chain[7] Chip[4] TempTypeID=55 middle offset=-6
Chain[7] Chip[4] local Temp=47
Chain[7] Chip[4] middle Temp=68
FAN PWM: 62

I shook unit and listened for loose heat sinks before powering. There were none.

I upgraded to the latest firmware
File System Version   Fri Dec 2 00:35:43 EST 2016
and followed instructions that Bitmain provided to others earlier.

I'm getting the normal "green" LED, have both boards still hooked up and drawing 708W at the wall at the hash rate of 4.3 TH/s.

Reviewing return policy on Bitmain site and notes in this topic are confusing. When I try to put in a support ticket they want the tracking info but I'm not even sure where or what to send.

Do I send the whole R4 in or just the bad board?

Do I ship to China address and does Bitmain pay for shipping or do I?

Help please Bitmain

[OgNasty]

Do I send the whole R4 in or just the bad board?

Do I ship to China address and does Bitmain pay for shipping or do I?

They will most likely ask you to pay shipping to return it.  You have to return the entire machine.  Depending on your shipping quote, you may also consider bitmainwarranty.com, which will probably charge you about $200 for the repair and you will get it back faster...

[wmabern]

QUESTION ON RETURN TO BITMAIN

Do I ship to China address and does Bitmain pay for shipping or do I?

Help please Bitmain

Everything I have had to ship back to China for warranty repair I had to pay the shipping. It was an S9 board and a controller. Shipping was expensive as a MF'r. And that was only a single board and a controller! BM paid the return shipping.

For the R4, I think you are supposed to return the whole unit. I can't imagine what that will cost.
Good luck.

[Moria843]

Bad board, see below



Since it seems I have a bad board, I tried powering one board at a time (with controller powered) to reduce power load but I get no hashing. This was easy to do issue on S7s, but it seems like both boards need to be powered on the R4 to get anything. Is there a way to just power one board and controller to get the same hash as above at a lower power? Is anyone powering just one board?

[OgNasty]

Since it seems I have a bad board, I tried powering one board at a time (with controller powered) to reduce power load but I get no hashing. This was easy to do issue on S7s, but it seems like both boards need to be powered on the R4 to get anything. Is there a way to just power one board and controller to get the same hash as above at a lower power? Is anyone powering just one board?

I ran into the same issue.  This was my first thought as well.  I hooked up a 2nd PSU to the bad board and powered it that way, then once it was on, I just turned the power off on the 2nd PSU.  I found UPS wanted $400 to return the entire unit to China, which made bitmainwarranty.com cheaper, even though you have to pay for the repair.  It was also a very fast turnaround time.

[Moria843]

Thanks all for the help. I finally did get it to hash with the single board by swapping the cables on the controller board and unplugging cable and power from bad board.

[elokk]

I sent an R4 into Bitmain Warranty repair a few weeks ago. Still have not heard back since they received it

Definitely worth spending a little extra money to buy a used R4 that has been verified to hash on both boards and not risk the DOA units from China

[philipma1957]

My older r4. Has dropped a board.

I will need to send it back to china I guess.

My new r4 came today and is working okay.

So I have 3/4 of the boards working.

[NotFuzzyWarm]

Got my other R4 batch-6 today: so far so good, holding a very even 8.7-8.9THs and all temps under 100C

Interesting thing: My 1st batch-6 (which had a board crap out 22hrs after running it) which I got last Tuesday has firmware dated Dec. 2 2016 - same as what Bitmain has up on their site.

This new one firmware date is Dec 9  2016...
Hmm, beta testing on us customers again?  

[philipma1957]

Got my other R4 batch-6 today: so far so good, holding a very even 8.7-8.9THs and all temps under 100C

Interesting thing: My 1st batch-6 (which had a board crap out 22hrs after running it) which I got last Tuesday has firmware dated Dec. 2 2016 - same as what Bitmain has up on their site.

This new one firmware date is Dec 9  2016...
Hmm, beta testing on us customers again?  

let me check my 7.5th version

is this the right spot?


Miner Type   Antminer R4
Hostname   antMiner
Model   GNU/Linux
Hardware Version   4.8.1.3
Kernel Version   Linux 3.14.0-xilinx-gf387dab-dirty #38 SMP PREEMPT Fri Jun 17 20:02:51 CST 2016
File System Version   Fri Nov 25 21:20:07 EST 2016
BMminer Version   2.0.0
Uptime   4:19
Load Average   0.14, 0.21, 0.21

[NotFuzzyWarm]

Yep, right spot. Yours is dated Nov 25, 2016

Just as with my 1st batch-6 (with bad board after 22hrs so is 1/2 speed, Dec 2 firmware), this latest batch-6 has eerily smooth hashrate compared to the s9's.
ref:

I wonder if it has to do with this bit of code the log spits out and the miner is per-chip tweaking to give advertised spec?

Code:

miner total rate=8898GH/s fixed rate=8700GH/s

The R4 Batch-4 in my main farm at work is just as rugged looking as those s9's are. Hmm...

[MyRig]

@elokk,

Please check the reported tracking number.  Techs will manually handle your repair request but tracking number you reported may be wrong and there may have been internal mix up due to the information not matching up.

Internal data, it shows, it was received on the 9th but the tracking you provided shows, it was delivered in another state on the 11th.

chances are your R4 is ready to go out to you since the the 10th or the 11th this month but may have mismatch identifier (tracking) and sitting in the owner response required que.

P.S: (GENERAL ANNOUNCEMENT) please help us by using 1 same Ticket Number for support request on the same item.  Also, communication from 1 email address or one account is also very appreciated for expediting the process.   Burnt PCB is highly unlikely attain successful repair.

I sent an R4 into Bitmain Warranty repair a few weeks ago. Still have not heard back since they received it

Definitely worth spending a little extra money to buy a used R4 that has been verified to hash on both boards and not risk the DOA units from China

[agentcash]

Yep, right spot. Yours is dated Nov 25, 2016

Just as with my 1st batch-6 (with bad board after 22hrs so is 1/2 speed, Dec 2 firmware), this latest batch-6 has eerily smooth hashrate compared to the s9's.
ref:
https://i.imgur.com/3KOtxkDl.png
I wonder if it has to do with this bit of code the log spits out and the miner is per-chip tweaking to give advertised spec?

Code:

miner total rate=8898GH/s fixed rate=8700GH/s

My R4 Batch-4 in my main farm at work is just as rugged looking as those s9's are. Hmm...

That graph looks more like the R4's are being logged on low difficulty shares and the S9's logging higher diff shares showing more variance. My R4's show similar spikes as my S7's & S9's.

[bit2255]

I just received my 2nd R4 today and it is up and running - albeit a little hot!

My 1st R4 has temperature monitoring on two (2) chips, generally between the 70-mid 90 degree ranges.

This new R4 (my 2nd) only has one of its chips monitored, and is (so far) running around 110-115 degree range.

I guess my 1st concern is why is only one chip being monitored (both boards are at 100+% Th/s) and the 2nd concern, is 100 degree plus OK?

[Longsnowsm]

I just received my 2nd R4 today and it is up and running - albeit a little hot!

My 1st R4 has temperature monitoring on two (2) chips, generally between the 70-mid 90 degree ranges.

This new R4 (my 2nd) only has one of its chips monitored, and is (so far) running around 110-115 degree range.

I guess my 1st concern is why is only one chip being monitored (both boards are at 100+% Th/s) and the 2nd concern, is 100 degree plus OK?

Update to the latest firmware release and you will get the monitoring for both chips and it will help bring your temps down a little. 

[bit2255]

Great - Thanks!

BTW - How do I see what the current release and/or firmware I have? The system/overview info for both R4s appear to be identical....

Thanks again (sorry for the newbie questions)

[NotFuzzyWarm]

Great - Thanks!
BTW - How do I see what the current release and/or firmware I have? The system/overview info for both R4s appear to be identical....
Thanks again (sorry for the newbie questions)

System > Overview, look at the date after File System Version. That is actually the firmware version. For Bitmains downloads the date is given in YR-MO-DAY-24hr time format eg. 201612020035 is 2016 Dec 2 00:35 Eastern Time

[Moria843]

I just received my 2nd R4 today and it is up and running - albeit a little hot!

My 1st R4 has temperature monitoring on two (2) chips, generally between the 70-mid 90 degree ranges.

This new R4 (my 2nd) only has one of its chips monitored, and is (so far) running around 110-115 degree range.

I guess my 1st concern is why is only one chip being monitored (both boards are at 100+% Th/s) and the 2nd concern, is 100 degree plus OK?

Update to the latest firmware release and you will get the monitoring for both chips and it will help bring your temps down a little. 

I had a similar unit with one board reporting temps above 100 C. After 2 days the board stopped working. I hope you have better luck. Keep us updated.

[Moria843]

Decided not to go the slow boat to China route, even though unit just a few days old, and just shipped my R4 with bad board to BitmainWarranty in Colorado for repair. I'm hoping for the best. We'll see what happens.