[Work in progess] Burnins Avalon Chip to mining board service

[tiros]

-watching
I hope you will make it happen burnin

[burnin]

@burnin: werden die "hardcode DIY" Miner mit allen Bauteilen(Controller, Widerstände, Kühler usw.) geliefert?

Beinhaltet nur die Platine.
Der Kühlkörper kann einzeln bestellt werden.
Es ist also kein Bausatz.

-watching
I hope you will make it happen burnin

Of course I will!

There are no updates because i don't have any important news at the moment.
I am working 90% on the hardware/firmware at the moment.
The website is ready to launch, but I have to wait for a tax registration number from the Finanzamt.
My Company can be found in the Handelsregister Hamburg now.
Full Name:
"Burnin Electronics UG (Haftungsbeschränkt)"

[crochetg]

Very very interested in this!
I'm thinking about doing 6X 20chip boards and arranging them (stacked three tall) side by side in the neat assembly you have pictured on page 1

If I were to receive the chips required for this in about 3 weeks and get them to you with around 2-4 day shipping, are things still on track enough that we might be able to receive products by mid July?

[arklan]

correct me if i'm wrong - but do i understand correctly that we can, when the sites live, simply order from burnin, and don't need to order chips separately?

[Fizban]

No, you need the chips.

You can only buy boards and assembly from burning, for now anyway.

[Bicknellski]

@burnin: werden die "hardcode DIY" Miner mit allen Bauteilen(Controller, Widerstände, Kühler usw.) geliefert?

Beinhaltet nur die Platine.
Der Kühlkörper kann einzeln bestellt werden.
Es ist also kein Bausatz.

-watching
I hope you will make it happen burnin

Of course I will!

There are no updates because i don't have any important news at the moment.
I am working 90% on the hardware/firmware at the moment.
The website is ready to launch, but I have to wait for a tax registration number from the Finanzamt.
My Company can be found in the Handelsregister Hamburg now.
Full Name:
"Burnin Electronics UG (Haftungsbeschränkt)"

BEUG!

Which mining software are you going to work with when burning in your units and testing? Something you make or revised existing GNU types?

[robix]

Which mining software are you going to work with when burning in your units and testing? Something you make or revised existing GNU types?

Please read OP.

Mining Software will be cgminer.

[burnin]

As i am finishing the hardware design a question popped up i'd like some feedback on:

Would you guys like software controlled over/under-volting?
I am thinking about providing 1.1/1.2/1.3V core voltage selection.

A per-module setting with automatic overclocking by the host software would require
huge changes to the protocol i can't provide in the given time.
But a per-cluster setting with manual overclocking would sure be do-able.
And as the Firmware is user-upgradeable more enhancements could be delivered later in deployment.

[Foofighter]

As i am finishing the hardware design a question popped up i'd like some feedback on:

Would you guys like software controlled over/under-volting?
I am thinking about providing 1.1/1.2/1.3V core voltage selection.

A per-module setting with automatic overclocking by the host software would require
huge changes to the protocol i can't provide in the given time.
But a per-cluster setting with manual overclocking would sure be do-able.
And as the Firmware is user-upgradeable more enhancements could be delivered later in deployment.

Hi burnin,

Sound nice!
I think you already answered the question yourself.

I think its more important to do the things which fit in the time table and as you said the Firmware could be upgraded be the user later on.

[Sophokles]

As i am finishing the hardware design a question popped up i'd like some feedback on:

Would you guys like software controlled over/under-volting?
I am thinking about providing 1.1/1.2/1.3V core voltage selection.

A per-module setting with automatic overclocking by the host software would require
huge changes to the protocol i can't provide in the given time.
But a per-cluster setting with manual overclocking would sure be do-able.
And as the Firmware is user-upgradeable more enhancements could be delivered later in deployment.

Yes, please! Like in Asicminer Blades. That would be a cool feature.

[Xialla]

Would you guys like software controlled over/under-volting?

sounds great.) +1

[pedromtorres]

I think that would be cool, but we also want our boards as soon as possible :p

As i am finishing the hardware design a question popped up i'd like some feedback on:

Would you guys like software controlled over/under-volting?
I am thinking about providing 1.1/1.2/1.3V core voltage selection.

A per-module setting with automatic overclocking by the host software would require
huge changes to the protocol i can't provide in the given time.
But a per-cluster setting with manual overclocking would sure be do-able.
And as the Firmware is user-upgradeable more enhancements could be delivered later in deployment.

Yes, please! Like in Asicminer Blades. That would be a cool feature.

[pitchbend]

I think he asks because he should have enough time to implement it before the chips are shipped (if they are shipped in time by AVALON that is)...

I'd love to have the possibility to overclock my modules.

I think that would be cool, but we also want our boards as soon as possible :p

As i am finishing the hardware design a question popped up i'd like some feedback on:

Would you guys like software controlled over/under-volting?
I am thinking about providing 1.1/1.2/1.3V core voltage selection.

A per-module setting with automatic overclocking by the host software would require
huge changes to the protocol i can't provide in the given time.
But a per-cluster setting with manual overclocking would sure be do-able.
And as the Firmware is user-upgradeable more enhancements could be delivered later in deployment.

Yes, please! Like in Asicminer Blades. That would be a cool feature.

[pedromtorres]

if so good! whatever is easier for burnin!

I think he asks because he should have enough time to implement it before the chips are shipped (if they are shipped in time by AVALON that is)...

I'd love to have the possibility to overclock my modules.

I think that would be cool, but we also want our boards as soon as possible :p

As i am finishing the hardware design a question popped up i'd like some feedback on:

Would you guys like software controlled over/under-volting?
I am thinking about providing 1.1/1.2/1.3V core voltage selection.

A per-module setting with automatic overclocking by the host software would require
huge changes to the protocol i can't provide in the given time.
But a per-cluster setting with manual overclocking would sure be do-able.
And as the Firmware is user-upgradeable more enhancements could be delivered later in deployment.

Yes, please! Like in Asicminer Blades. That would be a cool feature.

[tarmi]

yes, please!

[tiros]

As i am finishing the hardware design a question popped up i'd like some feedback on:

Would you guys like software controlled over/under-volting?
I am thinking about providing 1.1/1.2/1.3V core voltage selection.

A per-module setting with automatic overclocking by the host software would require
huge changes to the protocol i can't provide in the given time.
But a per-cluster setting with manual overclocking would sure be do-able.
And as the Firmware is user-upgradeable more enhancements could be delivered later in deployment.

I would like any solutions which will give us product as soon as possible

[burnin]

To summarize your answers: yes 

I'll add the components to support voltage changes on the fly.
Its not a big addition that takes a lots of time to do.

[nosbit]

hi burnin,
also think this is the right way if i understood everything right.
so this would mean a minor hardware change in your PCB layout?
but wouldn't that eventually come in conflict with as you stated:

[...]
And as the Firmware is user-upgradeable more enhancements could be delivered later in deployment.

later on planned firmware upgrades that shall do the overclocking software based ?

[SebastianJu]

hi burnin,
also think this is the right way if i understood everything right.
so this would mean a minor hardware change in your PCB layout?
but wouldn't that eventually come in conflict with as you stated:

[...]
And as the Firmware is user-upgradeable more enhancements could be delivered later in deployment.

later on planned firmware upgrades that shall do the overclocking software based ?

I believe it can only be done with software when he applied the needed hardware for this before...

[nosbit]

hi burnin,
also think this is the right way if i understood everything right.
so this would mean a minor hardware change in your PCB layout?
but wouldn't that eventually come in conflict with as you stated:

[...]
And as the Firmware is user-upgradeable more enhancements could be delivered later in deployment.

later on planned firmware upgrades that shall do the overclocking software based ?

I believe it can only be done with software when he applied the needed hardware for this before...

thats how i interpreted the whole thing, too.
just thinking of morons like myself, having a device in hands with a hardware possibility to change settings and later on the software embedded possibility...
if it is not a problem by solving this with like an if-switch (sorry for my basics...) ok...
I'm just interested in how much effort it would be implementing it in the software compared to the hardware solution - burnin, is it worth for you redesigning your so far made efforts on the board?
i mean, just for my sake at least, just don't do it because of the pressure of guys asking for the soonest point of time the whole project is finished...