Phoenix1969
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 938
Merit: 1000
LIR DEV
|
 |
October 23, 2013, 08:19:52 PM |
|
update...
the slowest saturn, (255)normally, reported earlier as 260, is still inching upward, and now at 262.
The others, are 267 & 280 at present... Thumbs up
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"This isn't the kind of software where we can leave so many unresolved bugs that we need a tracker for them." -- Satoshi
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
Korbman
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1064
Merit: 1001
|
|
October 23, 2013, 08:19:58 PM |
|
Quite a response on the PSU / Miner issue! Had to go back through a 1.5 pages in just a couple hours to catch up  Pretty good advice from folks so far as well. On just the PS with the mb cable jumped - I get 1-4 revs of the PS fan, then nothing. It's like something clicks off in the PS as soon as it ramps up.
That's the issue right there then. Presuming the paperclip is in the right place and securely in the MB connector (no looseness), it may be that the PSU is hitting the 'protection' threshold and powering off. I think was already pointed out, but you could try hooking this one up to a desktop computer (assuming you have one) and see if it makes any difference. |
|
|
|
|
ffernandex
|
|
October 23, 2013, 08:20:27 PM |
|
Hey guys,
I have a Jupiter unit hosted with KnC since the beginning. It was performing really nice, with averages near the 550 GH/s on Bitminter, sometimes even reaching the 600 GH/s
After the firmware update yesterday it has been hashing all day in the 400's range. I'm reading very good feedback about the new firmware, but whatever it was, it really screwed my hashing rates.
Anyone experiencing a similar situation?
Thank you in advance for your feedback,
Best,
|
If you like my posts, feel free to donate!
BTC: 1L1S4wG5TNJZSX9VG3vkk2er76YHihz3Kg
|
|
|
|
FUKT
|
|
October 23, 2013, 08:26:52 PM |
|
update...
the slowest saturn, (255)normally, reported earlier as 260, is still inching upward, and now at 262.
The others, are 267 & 280 at present... Thumbs up
Who fucking cares! Are you trying to break a forum speed record for the most of inane/autistic posts per hour. |
|
|
|
|
|
bobsmoke
|
|
October 23, 2013, 08:29:38 PM |
|
I also noticed a decrease in the past 24h but it seems is recovering in the last rounds.
|
|
|
|
|
Phoenix1969
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 938
Merit: 1000
LIR DEV
|
|
October 23, 2013, 08:31:06 PM |
|
update...
the slowest saturn, (255)normally, reported earlier as 260, is still inching upward, and now at 262.
The others, are 267 & 280 at present... Thumbs up
Who fucking cares! Are you trying to break a forum speed record for the most of inane/autistic posts per hour. some of us are sharing information as it unfolds... you obviously don't get what "Sharing information" is about... get lost... on another note...  hope it makes someone smile! |
|
|
|
RoadStress
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1007
|
|
October 23, 2013, 08:34:34 PM |
|
Firmware 0.97 is better than 0.96 which is better than 0.95 and so on. Good job KnC!
|
|
|
|
|
FUKT
|
|
October 23, 2013, 08:37:36 PM |
|
update...
the slowest saturn, (255)normally, reported earlier as 260, is still inching upward, and now at 262.
The others, are 267 & 280 at present... Thumbs up
Who fucking cares! Are you trying to break a forum speed record for the most of inane/autistic posts per hour. Maybe everyone who has a Saturn and is debating whether to update or not? Stop being such an ass. Your autism is showing. Ignore. |
|
|
|
|
soy
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1428
Merit: 1013
|
|
October 23, 2013, 08:42:02 PM |
|
update...
the slowest saturn, (255)normally, reported earlier as 260, is still inching upward, and now at 262.
The others, are 267 & 280 at present... Thumbs up
Who fucking cares! Are you trying to break a forum speed record for the most of inane/autistic posts per hour. Maybe everyone who has a Saturn and is debating whether to update or not? Stop being such an ass. Absolutely. Mashed the ignore. |
|
|
|
|
Phoenix1969
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 938
Merit: 1000
LIR DEV
|
|
October 23, 2013, 08:47:31 PM
Last edit: October 23, 2013, 08:59:43 PM by Phoenix1969 |
|
Question for the group..... This is my friend's Jupiter...  It came from factory using 0.95 The circled area is where we attempted to load 0.96... tried opencores, yes... We since flashed back to 0.95, and you see that it's ok again... So, the Q is: Should we try 0.97? I know it will stop the "Flushwork" issue but we are hesitant to load 0.97 since what 0.96 did...? The downward spikes were internet connection problems he had... (Evidently, his Son downloading videos & stuff unbeknownst to him...).... cgminer had values listed on the RF field every round. upgrading the connection to a bit faster dsl... |
|
|
|
|
timmmers
|
|
October 23, 2013, 08:55:15 PM |
|
update...
the slowest saturn, (255)normally, reported earlier as 260, is still inching upward, and now at 262.
The others, are 267 & 280 at present... Thumbs up
Who fucking cares! Are you trying to break a forum speed record for the most of inane/autistic posts per hour. some of us are sharing information as it unfolds... you obviously don't get what "Sharing information" is about... get lost... on another note... hope it makes someone smile! IT does with leverage trading  Been making me smile all week lol |
|
|
|
|
Bitcoinorama
|
|
October 23, 2013, 09:09:02 PM |
|
I see network hashrate that was 3.25PH/s when I looked late yesterday was a moment ago only 2.72 and now is 2.9. I wonder if it's KnC miner users shutting down and restarting with the new firmware.
KNC Pool ( https://portal.kncminer.com/) speed already 70 +TH/s (from about 25 TH/s for 24 hrs ). What it mean? The firmware worked in the datacentre. It was tested on the hosting facility last night, then released today as it was deemed stable. Hi, Bitcoinorama! While we have you here and since you mention the hosting facility. Any news from there? Any fires or other disasters preventing new units from being added to it? Only my and several other people's orders are skipped, while later non-hosted orders are being shipped. You said earlier that the queue was sacred... The responses I got from support were non-commital, along the lines of "we know there are problems with the data centre, our engineers are working on it." I haven't heard any single existing hosted customer reporting any problems with their equipment that is already running there. Any specific information would be welcome. Thank you. Yes, Bitcoinorama, please enlighten us! Have they run out of power/space or something? What is going on I have no idea about the datacentre. I know there were API issues before I left for Berlin. I've been with the Life on Bitcoin guys since. The only thing I know about the datacentre was that 0.97 was meant to add a huge boost to performance, as for the most case has been reported and reflected in the hashrate. I'm not cust serv, but I'll ask when I get a chance with someone involved, and hit you back. I've said words to that effect in the PM you sent me earlier. |
Make my day! Say thanks if you found me helpful BTC Address ---> 1487ThaKjezGA6SiE8fvGcxbgJJu6XWtZp |
|
|
|
crumbs
|
|
October 23, 2013, 09:10:54 PM |
|
...with my proprietary triple clipboard & cardboard cooling baffle, producing 32.0C and 31.5C VRM temps. /sperg off. I don't know how you hosted guys can stand not being able to ghetto mod your stuff, I would be in modding withdrawls.
Wait 'till you discover aluminum foil duct tape -- there'll be no stopping you (no workbench is complete without it  ) |
|
|
|
|
RoadStress
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1007
|
|
October 23, 2013, 09:15:12 PM |
|
Question for the group..... This is my friend's Jupiter... It came from factory using 0.95 The circled area is where we attempted to load 0.96... tried opencores, yes... We since flashed back to 0.95, and you see that it's ok again... So, the Q is: Should we try 0.97? I know it will stop the "Flushwork" issue but we are hesitant to load 0.97 since what 0.96 did...? The downward spikes were internet connection problems he had... (Evidently, his Son downloading videos & stuff unbeknownst to him...).... cgminer had values listed on the RF field every round. upgrading the connection to a bit faster dsl... Definitely try 0.97. Best one till now. |
|
|
|
|
sbfree
|
|
October 23, 2013, 09:34:36 PM |
|
Has anyone seen or heard of a performance gain when changing the Asic board to a different slot on the controller board?
|
|
|
|
|
|
FiatKiller
|
|
October 23, 2013, 09:38:03 PM |
|
Kudos for the idea. I also thought of that, but was afraid that Saturns had to be in certains slots, etc.
Wasn't really willing to risk experimenting that far. lol
|
|
|
|
|
FiatKiller
|
|
October 23, 2013, 09:40:52 PM |
|
Well, after running 9.7 FM all day, my WU is still 150 higher on my Saturn. Hashrate still seems up because at this time of day when it is warmer out if should be maybe 3-5 lower.
|
|
|
|
soy
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1428
Merit: 1013
|
|
October 23, 2013, 09:42:30 PM |
|
Just back from 7 miles with my dog and found my miners down. Must have been cable work nearby.
So, here's what I think. If an ASIC module has one or more dies showing high cores being disabled, shut down the system, let sit a minute before unplugging cables from the module. Remove the module's heatsink, remove the board from the unit. Then with some gentle support under 1 VRM at a time, exert pressure down on the flat metal top. Continue with each VRM supporting under that module as you do so. Reassemble the unit. Run enablecores.bin and if you see improvement it's not that the VRMs are providing improved power but that the VRMs are losing more heat from their top rather than there bottom. When they lose heat from the bottom the heat travels by way of the PCB to the nearby ASIC module and the nearest die will come up with errors. That one reason the lower the fans to the deck method works so effectively - it passes air between the VRMs and ASIC module.
You all are welcome. I know this is helping my competition but then I've never been an overachiever.
And if it works, the tops of the VRMs may have been jogged away from the underlying components when the fans got knocked free in transit or struck by a bouncing fan in transit. If those tops do just snap on/off I wouldn't go just using any old heatsink compound. I had noticed earlier this year when I built a heatsink for a USB Block Erupter, the heatsink contacting both the CP2102 and the ASIC, if the compound came in contact with the ASIC pins the hashrate suffered. The stuff is suppose to be non-conductive but who knows. If you remember the mid-west miner company, they chose the wrong FETs, the problem then wasn't so much the FETs but that the buck-converter got hot and I bet it was the ASIC closest to the overheating buck converter that got most often populated. I can't understand when the buck converter datasheet clearly stated it will overheat if the wrong fets. Then that most often populated ASIC would have high errors and they perhaps wondered why. Nope, I am wrong. I've had an expensive replacement fan for the Jalapeno sitting here from well before the jalapeno arrived. I hadn't opened the Jalapeno until just now. And no, they aren't populating the ASIC space closest to the buck converter in the Jalapeno. I was wrong. |
|
|
|
|
|
xstr8guy
|
|
October 23, 2013, 09:43:38 PM |
|
.97 provided a nice little boost for my Mercury. Went from 125-130GB/s to 135-140GB/s on pool stats (BTCG). And hardware errors went from ~10% to ~6%.
|
|
|
|
|
|
trepex
|
|
October 23, 2013, 09:44:19 PM |
|
... if you see improvement it's not that the VRMs are providing improved power but that the VRMs are losing more heat from their top rather than there bottom. When they lose heat from the bottom the heat travels by way of the PCB to the nearby ASIC module and the nearest die will come up with errors. That one reason the lower the fans to the deck method works so effectively - it passes air between the VRMs and ASIC module.
Wow! What a perfect explanation. I always had been wondering why some changes I made had an effect on the number of disabled cores. Now it all makes sense! Thanks! |
|
|
|
|
