Bitcoin Forum
November 18, 2017, 06:26:54 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 [1035] 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 ... 2138 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Swedish ASIC miner company kncminer.com  (Read 3006867 times)
texaslabrat
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56


View Profile
November 11, 2013, 04:34:09 PM
 #20681



Umm, that's cool, but I can assure you not that's clearly not he case on all units. I have pictures of the one I took to Atlanta using a Kill-A-Watt, and there were enough witnesses that were present, including members of this forum (Bargraphics, Phin Gage), and representatives from competing companies that saw this for their own eyes. Also there's plenty in this thread amongst the first recipients to verify otherwise.

And I'd be willing to bet a few satoshi's that the unit you took to Atlanta did not have the same firmware as those units that were subsequently shipped out to Day 1 customers onwards...and that the voltage was tweaked upwards in the interim thus increasing the power requirements (in the name of increasing performance/stability, I'm sure).  Couple the fact that the actual physical design of the product was changed quite substantially (8 VRMs to 4 VRMs) and it's not exactly apples-to-apples Smiley

No, you are wrong. It was a standard unit I made when at the manufacturing facility. By that point I had not seen my hotel for a week, and certainly no one had had anytime or were confident enough to tweak a unit. Literally decided on going. Booked a flight at 11pm, the night before, for an 11am take-off. Then searched for a hotel, made a device, drove several hours back to Stockholm, washed, packed and made my way to the airport. Thing is no way was a clocked machine risked that early. We had only seen the chips 5 days earlier and just had to have something that worked. Why if something performed well, would it not be given to customers. Austin and Beccy Craig from Life on Bitcoin have had it in their possession since that Atlanta conference. Can we please stop this 8/4 VRM nonsense. The additional 4 vrms were surplus to reaching spec. They were in place in the beginning in case they were needed to achieve the spec. They weren't so they aren't.

Well that is surprising given the results that later cropped up with overcurrent PSU's and exploding capacitors..do you have a link to those kill-a-watt photos from Atlanta?  I don't remember the values you saw there versus what was in the youtube video in Sweden.  And just to clarify..when I said "tweaked" I meant subsequent production machines, not the one you took to Atlanta.  In other words, my assumption was that the initial "beta" firmware or whatever you had then was running at say .8V and then when you guys decided on the production values for the boxes that were going to start shipping it was bumped to .9V for the added stability/speed benefits that brings.  I wasn't suggesting that you custom-tuned the Atlanta box.  But however it worked out in the order of events...there were definitely some growing pains in relation to power at the PSU and the power through the VRMs that had to be ironed out, as I know you are extremely familiar with Smiley

As for the 8/4 thing...well, you keep saying it didn't matter when the facts showed that it did.  There was a material difference in how those things ran before/after the change which had to be accounted for in new firmware.  Again, I don't think it was some malicious conspiracy or anything..but I do think it was a reckless change that was done without adequate testing which caused issues that had to be addressed further down the road.

Sure, as below, pretty sure I posted one of these before as I took a few for that reason. It was hard to balance the non-backlit LCD screen, with the bright Macbook Air Screen. This is with the Screen brightness turned down to it's lowest, so sorry there is two. Again there were a coupe of hundred people at the conference that witnessed the device's performance on the day.



So getting to the bottom of the 4/8 VRM thing, it was just brought up within an interview for a new engineer, which was cool as I have an answer from Marcus and it was definitely not a cost saving issue. The reason; KnC bought the entire world's supply from General Electric of those VRMs and could not get anymore without a month's wait, meaning a lot of people would have been without their kit if every board required them. They were indeed a margin and as you can see not necessary to reach the promised spec. GE could not supply more for any money, and there was actually a scary period where it was believed 8 may be necessary, in which case then there would have been a problem fulfilling all orders.

Thanks!  I think you did post them but I couldn't remember if it was in this thread or somewhere else..but thank you for indulging me Smiley  And that's quite different from the reading in Sweden @ 850-ish watts, so I think one can safely say that there was something different between those two, and by extension what eventually made it out for customers.  And thanks for the background on the VRMs...very interesting and makes perfect sense in the timing of it and why it was rolled out without extensive testing. I withdraw my "reckless" statement and replace it with "unfortunately timed".
1510986414
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1510986414

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1510986414
Reply with quote  #2

1510986414
Report to moderator
A blockchain platform for effective freelancing
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1510986414
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1510986414

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1510986414
Reply with quote  #2

1510986414
Report to moderator
1510986414
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1510986414

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1510986414
Reply with quote  #2

1510986414
Report to moderator
elasticband
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036


Nighty Night Don't Let The Trolls Bite Nom Nom Nom


View Profile
November 11, 2013, 04:34:33 PM
 #20682

Does anyone know if it is OK to connect 2 of my modules from Jupiter 1 to Jupiter 2. I will move just the ribbon data cables over, so Jupiter 2 has 6 modules connected to it, but 2 of these are still powered by Jupiter 1 PSU.

Anyone?

I am sure you'll eventually try it, so let us know how it goes!  I am suprised you have a board that actually supports 6 connections, my day 1 jup only has 4.

I just did. 6 boards using all 6 connection, using 1 V850 PSU.

that is really handy to know! considering I am a PSU short but have 4 Wink
CYPER
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714



View Profile
November 11, 2013, 04:35:13 PM
 #20683

Does anyone know if it is OK to connect 2 of my modules from Jupiter 1 to Jupiter 2. I will move just the ribbon data cables over, so Jupiter 2 has 6 modules connected to it, but 2 of these are still powered by Jupiter 1 PSU.

Anyone?

I am sure you'll eventually try it, so let us know how it goes!  I am suprised you have a board that actually supports 6 connections, my day 1 jup only has 4.

I just did. 6 boards using all 6 connection, using 1 V850 PSU.


me too, it can work like that

Probably, but I am just testing my under-performing boards from my other Jupiter.
I also just shut it down and connected another PSU just to be on the safe side.

If this post helped you and you feel generous you know what to do: 1P9tXFy9bVgzrfPGeV7F8np26ZtFdCCWvz
CYPER
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714



View Profile
November 11, 2013, 04:41:19 PM
 #20684

Does anyone know if it is OK to connect 2 of my modules from Jupiter 1 to Jupiter 2. I will move just the ribbon data cables over, so Jupiter 2 has 6 modules connected to it, but 2 of these are still powered by Jupiter 1 PSU.

Anyone?

I am sure you'll eventually try it, so let us know how it goes!  I am suprised you have a board that actually supports 6 connections, my day 1 jup only has 4.

I just did. 6 boards using all 6 connection, using 1 V850 PSU.

Good to know. Thanks for testing. I asked KnC support if it was possible and they said the firmware did not support 6 modules  Huh
What's the hashrate for 6 modules ?

Well it is currently increasing.
The 4 boards together were hashing at 565GH/s stable. I added 2 more from my under-performing miner (420GH/s with 3 hashing at around 107GH/s and 1 at around 100GH/s)
So I expect the 6 boards to reach around 770GH/s which might not happen, because:
Jupiter 1 (the good one) was using 0.98.1 Beta provided by Bitcoinorama = 565GH/s
Jupiter 2 (the bad one) was using 0.98 = 420GH/s. It was even less with any other firmware.

If this post helped you and you feel generous you know what to do: 1P9tXFy9bVgzrfPGeV7F8np26ZtFdCCWvz
sickpig
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


View Profile
November 11, 2013, 04:50:10 PM
 #20685

Does anyone know if it is OK to connect 2 of my modules from Jupiter 1 to Jupiter 2. I will move just the ribbon data cables over, so Jupiter 2 has 6 modules connected to it, but 2 of these are still powered by Jupiter 1 PSU.

Anyone?

I am sure you'll eventually try it, so let us know how it goes!  I am suprised you have a board that actually supports 6 connections, my day 1 jup only has 4.

I just did. 6 boards using all 6 connection, using 1 V850 PSU.

Good to know. Thanks for testing. I asked KnC support if it was possible and they said the firmware did not support 6 modules  Huh
What's the hashrate for 6 modules ?

Strange... I clearly remember hno (OrSoC engineer) saying, on irc, that as long as the control board has 6 plugs the miners should work.

Bitcoin is a participatory system which ought to respect the right of self determinism of all of its users - Gregory Maxwell.
DPoS
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 462



View Profile
November 11, 2013, 05:04:01 PM
 #20686



So getting to the bottom of the 4/8 VRM thing, it was just brought up within an interview for a new engineer, which was cool as I have an answer from Marcus and it was definitely not a cost saving issue. The reason; KnC bought the entire world's supply from General Electric of those VRMs and could not get anymore without a month's wait, meaning a lot of people would have been without their kit if every board required them. They were indeed a margin and as you can see not necessary to reach the promised spec. GE could not supply more for any money, and there was actually a scary period where it was believed 8 may be necessary, in which case then there would have been a problem fulfilling all orders.

Thanks!  I think you did post them but I couldn't remember if it was in this thread or somewhere else..but thank you for indulging me Smiley  And that's quite different from the reading in Sweden @ 850-ish watts, so I think one can safely say that there was something different between those two, and by extension what eventually made it out for customers.  And thanks for the background on the VRMs...very interesting and makes perfect sense in the timing of it and why it was rolled out without extensive testing. I withdraw my "reckless" statement and replace it with "unfortunately timed".

And finally we have an answer. Not the endless ignorant mocking of orama about this issue.  (planking anyone?)

KNC just had to own up and say, "guys, we are low on VRMs but good news we can still power the chip fine with 4.  But, there is a power issue we are working to fix with firmware ASAP so please use a higher than 850W PSU to be safe or just wait until we get the firmware fixed before running your miner.  We know you can't wait, so please keep the VRMs cool just in case. (they are running 30% over spec in regard to amps out)  Heat on the chip will stay safely in spec, no worries there."


As I said all along, just own up to it.  Thanks finally





~~BTC~~GAMBIT~~BTC~~Play Boardgames for Bitcoins!!~~BTC~~GAMBIT~~BTC~~ Something I say help? Donate BTC! 1KN1K1xStzsgfYxdArSX4PEjFfcLEuYhid
ElGabo
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 636


View Profile
November 11, 2013, 05:30:20 PM
 #20687

(...)

Yep, I understood... In this way you are correct.

But if you make a revision for the new machines and boards and you can increase the hash speed with better quality components there will be a lot of bitching from the early customers (investors) if you sell it for the non investors. (For example who payed in the 7 days.)

So you have to make a good decision how to solve this without hurt your investors (such as me).

I think you know what I mean. I won't be bitching for compensate or something but give a better product from "our" money wouldn't be correct.

I know, I paid for 400, i got 560. That's nice but I (we) took risk, the new buyers not.

Still no offense, just talk. (As you know now why I'm took the question how many box per day when you were at the open day)

I do not get your point.

Improvements take place in many steps, this is one of them.
You want KnC not to improve the hw any further ? Really ??

I can understand your point of view "I payed for initial funding, now the late comers have no risk and better products", but it misses the important aspect  that some 1st batch customers already have reached break-even.

Difficulty increases, so improved hardware is an advantage for yourself in case you consider buying again.
And I highly doubt that a Nov Jupiter will return same amount of coins as an October one; some GH/s for batch#2 more will not change it.


Still no offense... I don't like trolls and offensive talking.

Improvements has to be done if any options for it. That's for sure.

As we paid for initial funding, we paid the risk, we invested into a no name company. After that we got prototypes. For me it was not a problem, I got a good one, I like to play it but there were a lot of guys with no technical skill to do the same.

I understand why they sent the boxes early without fine tuning. It was really better to hash away and play with it and not to wait a month until they tune them.

We paid for the the 2nd batch buyers with money and experience.

Personally I don't care about the improved gen1 cause I won't buy. I'll wait for gen2. But if someone from the early investors wish to buy from the improved gen1, a SMALL discount could be appriciated.

And yes, some of the batch 1 customers had broke even (me too) but don't forget why this happened.... 

" I'm waiting for my punishment, I know it's on my way
  So cut, cut, cut me up and fuck, fuck, fuck me up"
btc_uzr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 434


let's have some fun


View Profile
November 11, 2013, 05:46:29 PM
 #20688

agreed, you're right

I did not consider the bad situation for those with a <400GH/s miner taking a certain risk and now there are the ones coming late, have no risk and get working devices with >550GH/s.

I think, too, a discount would have been appropriate.
Still hoping for one on gen2...let's see.

!! File Complaints Against KnCMiner NOW !!
..and Thou shalt spread the coin in the name of cryptography for eternity
RoadStress
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1624


View Profile
November 11, 2013, 05:47:44 PM
 #20689

Knc miners

Sold out

Let's hope their next batch will be available in March and it will be a better version of their 28nm chip! Or at least wait until January.

iCEBREAKER is a troll! He and cypherdoc helped HashFast scam 50 Million $ from its customers !
H/w Hosting Directory & Reputation - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=622998.0
btc_uzr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 434


let's have some fun


View Profile
November 11, 2013, 06:06:57 PM
 #20690



So getting to the bottom of the 4/8 VRM thing, it was just brought up within an interview for a new engineer, which was cool as I have an answer from Marcus and it was definitely not a cost saving issue. The reason; KnC bought the entire world's supply from General Electric of those VRMs and could not get anymore without a month's wait, meaning a lot of people would have been without their kit if every board required them. They were indeed a margin and as you can see not necessary to reach the promised spec. GE could not supply more for any money, and there was actually a scary period where it was believed 8 may be necessary, in which case then there would have been a problem fulfilling all orders.

Thanks!  I think you did post them but I couldn't remember if it was in this thread or somewhere else..but thank you for indulging me Smiley  And that's quite different from the reading in Sweden @ 850-ish watts, so I think one can safely say that there was something different between those two, and by extension what eventually made it out for customers.  And thanks for the background on the VRMs...very interesting and makes perfect sense in the timing of it and why it was rolled out without extensive testing. I withdraw my "reckless" statement and replace it with "unfortunately timed".

And finally we have an answer. Not the endless ignorant mocking of orama about this issue.  (planking anyone?)

KNC just had to own up and say, "guys, we are low on VRMs but good news we can still power the chip fine with 4.  But, there is a power issue we are working to fix with firmware ASAP so please use a higher than 850W PSU to be safe or just wait until we get the firmware fixed before running your miner.  We know you can't wait, so please keep the VRMs cool just in case. (they are running 30% over spec in regard to amps out)  Heat on the chip will stay safely in spec, no worries there."


As I said all along, just own up to it.  Thanks finally


Nice to get some background info about the VRMs thing.
Thanks!


These guys have been pulling allnighters. I hate you all. By the way, there is a reason as to why there was a slight delay. Rem I said Marcus is a perfectionist, and Sam is the one cracking whip about delivery being the greater priority. Well some middle ground was reached somewhere in between which I can't talk about. I'll let Sam take the honour there. Wink

I'm still curious what else took place in September..
More background stories would be really appreciated as it helps to understand better what KnC actually achieved and under which conditions..


edit:
If Sam would have some time left (not realistic I assume), he should write a book about it or even record an audio book together with all original characters involved - including O'rama (on open day & at last weekend of September chapter)
I'd even preorder one in hope BFL doesn't ship one earlier --with approx. same page-size, number of word per page and all those relevant specs-- as it might give me a better ROI (return on invested-time [fore reading])
"BFL: Preorders - The Golden Cash Cow!" - hey Josh if you read this and want to go for it, hereby I claim the copyright on this title  Wink

I mean it has potential to become part of history if Bitcoin will become relevant to the masses at some point in time.
And better they capture reality themselves than some smug making up a deformed story for profit only several years later..

!! File Complaints Against KnCMiner NOW !!
..and Thou shalt spread the coin in the name of cryptography for eternity
CYPER
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714



View Profile
November 11, 2013, 06:47:53 PM
 #20691

News Update:

http://us4.campaign-archive1.com/?u=6d9133088733c220dff716f59&id=e4c910f077&e=276eecccbc

If this post helped you and you feel generous you know what to do: 1P9tXFy9bVgzrfPGeV7F8np26ZtFdCCWvz
Paladin69
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784


View Profile
November 11, 2013, 06:51:00 PM
 #20692

Kinda lame that the extra $950 modules are BTC only.  Also pricey for 137GH-150GH
WastedLTC
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 552



View Profile
November 11, 2013, 06:52:04 PM
 #20693


I wonder if Hosted units can upgrade?
CYPER
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714



View Profile
November 11, 2013, 06:53:03 PM
 #20694

Kinda lame that the extra $950 modules are BTC only.

2.65BTC for a 140GH/s module.

Can you mine 2.65BTC back?

Also do they come with the heatsinks and everything?

If this post helped you and you feel generous you know what to do: 1P9tXFy9bVgzrfPGeV7F8np26ZtFdCCWvz
Paladin69
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784


View Profile
November 11, 2013, 06:54:22 PM
 #20695

Kinda lame that the extra $950 modules are BTC only.

2.65BTC for a 140GH/s module.

Can you mine 2.65BTC back?

No you can't.

0.13 btc/day at the current diff, and after knc blows their November load that gets even worse.
seanrarey
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168


BuyAnythingWithBitcoin.com


View Profile WWW
November 11, 2013, 06:55:18 PM
 #20696


Good stuff.  Looking forward to seeing what is changed on the new units.

Smiley

Biffa
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1344



View Profile
November 11, 2013, 07:03:46 PM
 #20697

Quote
For November boxes there is good news though we have had time to revise our product further including a redesign of the PCBs, We can confirm that our November customers should expect a performance increase.

 Cheesy Grin

WastedLTC
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 552



View Profile
November 11, 2013, 07:03:55 PM
 #20698

Kinda lame that the extra $950 modules are BTC only.

2.65BTC for a 140GH/s module.

Can you mine 2.65BTC back?

No you can't.

0.13 btc/day at the current diff, and after knc blows their November load that gets even worse.

What are you talking about.   Of course you'll be able to mine 2.65.   I'd say you will break even after 1 month (BTC in/out).  This is a very fair price and would like to hear about how they recommend connecting 6 chips to a single Jupiter.     My units are hosted so I may be out of luck but if we can upgrade Hosted Jupiters, I'd love to. We still have 6 months of hosting to use up and its not like I'm paying for power!



Biffa
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1344



View Profile
November 11, 2013, 07:04:39 PM
 #20699

Kinda lame that the extra $950 modules are BTC only.

2.65BTC for a 140GH/s module.

Can you mine 2.65BTC back?

No you can't.

0.13 btc/day at the current diff, and after knc blows their November load that gets even worse.

What are you talking about.   Of course you'll be able to mine 2.65.   I'd say you will break even after 1 month (BTC in/out).  This is a very fair price and would like to hear about how they recommend connecting 6 chips to a single Jupiter.     My units are hosted so I may be out of luck but if we can upgrade Hosted Jupiters, I'd love to. We still have 6 months of hosting to use up and its not like I'm paying for power!

I think they are really designed for Mercury and Saturn owners rather than Jupiter owners.

I imagine Phoenix1969 is probably a little interested in these Smiley

Paladin69
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784


View Profile
November 11, 2013, 07:06:36 PM
 #20700

People may want to get more than 1000w PSU's to be safe.
Pages: « 1 ... 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 [1035] 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 ... 2138 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!