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

[ewibit]

Code:

usb_write error on avalon write
BTB0: conns error (buffer)

I have nearly the same but only with BFL LS

Code:

2013.08.24 [21:25]  Cannot write to ttyUSB6: device disconnected (output stream gone) 
2013.08.24 [21:25]  Probe of port ttyUSB6 failed: timeout
2013.08.24 [21:26]  Cannot write to ttyUSB6: device disconnected (output stream gone) 
2013.08.24 [21:27]  Cannot write to ttyUSB6: device disconnected (output stream gone) 
2013.08.24 [21:27]  Cannot write to ttyUSB6: device disconnected (output stream gone) 
2013.08.24 [21:27]  Probe of port ttyUSB6 failed: timeout

[SebastianJu]

Then ill take it that all shares found below the diff set arent lost when you use such a high diff.

If you set the diff at X, you won't send any nonces found which are below X in difficulty. But one correct result (diff at X or higher) is worth X shares. The idea behind this is to lessen the impact of fast ASICs on pools. There simply is no need to send all the diff 1 work, when you can send, say, 1 diff 32 (or higher) result and get 32 shares accepted. Also network bandwidth is saved.

So, in essence, all the nonces your ASICs find that have difficulty below X are "wasted", but the valid nonces are also worth more. It will even out over time.

Thats what i wondered. So at a diff 8 all shares below 8 are wasted but thats not a problem because the pool pays you more because you only send higher shares to the pool. If that payment is done fair its ok. I only thought that all the wasted shares will summarize to a lot shares. Seems thats no an issue.
If i read it right a difficulty should be a multiple of 8 right? I tried with 5 and with 1000 but it looked like it lead to a lower hashrate. With 8 its good again. So ill try with multiples of 8 now.

Code:

usb_write error on avalon write
BTB0: conns error (buffer)

Try different usb hub. I've had that on one of my hubs.  Especially if you use rpi, Ive used that hub on pc and I dont get that errors anymore. At the same time I bought belkin hub yesterday and that works fine with rpi and pc but I can only use 4 out 7 ports. What I dont get is that I can use my BFL miners on any hub and any host with no problems, but for some reason bitburners are very picky when it comes to hubs or rpi is. Now I have worked out which hubs works where, I dont get usb write errors so try to play around and see if it helps.

The thing is that its one of the rpi-usb-ports i use. And i use this port from the start. I really dont know why this error started to appear now only since it worked all the time before. Im not even sure it has to do with the newest firmware since the new firmware ran fine for days before too. I dont have a clue if its the usb port of rpi or something with the bitburner. The usb cable is the same too since the start. And this problem only happens when i quit cgminer. Not at another time.

[burnin]

hi guys,

What doeas it mean BTB:0 Ideled 1 miners? I get that very frequently. It seems to more frequent when i have my biburners clustered. At the moment im running 4 clusters with 2 BB each, and 1 single. Also I have noticed that my cgminer is freezing twice a day( windows and rpi), but not crashing. Looks like its hashing but no submits, rejects or hw errors. Back to hashing after cgminer reboot.

Last night I noticed another thing. I had 2 cluster with 4 Bb each, and both ware hashing at 30gh average for the past 6 hours. Then hash rate dropped to around 20gh per cluster and I couldn't get them to hash as before. Powered down everything,  and nothing changed. Both clusters wouldn't go above 20gh. So I've broken down clusters to 4x2 and the speed is much better about 14.8gh per cluster. I cant explain why this is happening. I have 1000W psu and have 9 BB powered from it. Is it possible that the psu cant deliver stable power and that in turns affect the miners stability and speed?

if "idling miner X" messages appear means your are:
using an old cgminer build or the wrong settings
The newest firmware requires the freshest cgminer to function, i don't know if the windows build has those lastest changes in it.
  
@SebastianJu
if the hashrate reduces to over time and you see "idling miner X" messages that means the cgminer version is too old.

[turtle83]

Then ill take it that all shares found below the diff set arent lost when you use such a high diff.

If you set the diff at X, you won't send any nonces found which are below X in difficulty. But one correct result (diff at X or higher) is worth X shares. The idea behind this is to lessen the impact of fast ASICs on pools. There simply is no need to send all the diff 1 work, when you can send, say, 1 diff 32 (or higher) result and get 32 shares accepted. Also network bandwidth is saved.

So, in essence, all the nonces your ASICs find that have difficulty below X are "wasted", but the valid nonces are also worth more. It will even out over time.

Thats what i wondered. So at a diff 8 all shares below 8 are wasted but thats not a problem because the pool pays you more because you only send higher shares to the pool. If that payment is done fair its ok. I only thought that all the wasted shares will summarize to a lot shares. Seems thats no an issue.
If i read it right a difficulty should be a multiple of 8 right? I tried with 5 and with 1000 but it looked like it lead to a lower hashrate. With 8 its good again. So ill try with multiples of 8 now.

AFAIK this depends on the pool. What share setting they have. If on their end its diff 1, then for all your shares (no matter what difficulty share was found) you get rewarded with diff 1 share. If the pool setting is diff 8, then you only send the pool shares of diff 8 and above, the pool would give u 8x the shares of the user mining at diff 1. Many stratum pools decide the share diff per user based on their hashrate to minimize variance and improve efficiency. Higher the share diff, higher your variance ... but over the long term it should average out... but check with your pool operator.

[kano]

Code:

usb_write error on avalon write
BTB0: conns error (buffer)

I have nearly the same but only with BFL LS

Code:

2013.08.24 [21:25]  Cannot write to ttyUSB6: device disconnected (output stream gone) 
2013.08.24 [21:25]  Probe of port ttyUSB6 failed: timeout
2013.08.24 [21:26]  Cannot write to ttyUSB6: device disconnected (output stream gone) 
2013.08.24 [21:27]  Cannot write to ttyUSB6: device disconnected (output stream gone) 
2013.08.24 [21:27]  Cannot write to ttyUSB6: device disconnected (output stream gone) 
2013.08.24 [21:27]  Probe of port ttyUSB6 failed: timeout

That's not cgminer ...

[kano]

I think I need to put the MHz there and one temperature.

Hallelujah.

BTB 0: 47C 400 1225mV | 9.660G/7.839Gh/s | A:78047 R:747 HW:1000 WU:110.9/m

It's in current git master (not enough space to say "MHz" but easy enough to see what it is)

Still running at 400 but I didn't put the voltage up
This is java API "ascset|0,mv,1333" just after I restarted

Note the HW (due to the higher voltage)
 BTB 0: 55C 400 1353mV | 10.38G/7.905Gh/s | A:12635 R:80 HW:1 WU:110.5/m

... and still running ...
 BTB 0: 56C 400 1348mV | 8.499G/7.994Gh/s | A:159912 R:1704 HW:6 WU:111.7/m

So certainly getting the expected 8GH/s (the 2nd number 7.994Gh/s) at 400MHz now (and almost no HW) at 1333mV
Runtime is almost 24 hours

I can't really push the MHz up much more due to only having a simple fan to cool it - and staying in the middle 50'sC is what I'd consider ideal.
A better environment and better cooling (like burnin or SebastianJu probably have done) would make 9GH/s seem possible.

[LordTheron]

Running at 415mhz 29ms 1250mv and no problems so far. fingers crossed.

BTB 2: 48/ 48C 1266mV | 16.51G/16.01Gh/s | A:10299 R: 67 HW:292 WU:230.3/m
BTB 3: 51/ 51C 1291mV | 17.09G/15.62Gh/s | A:11400 R: 71 HW:336 WU:225.9/m
BTB 4: 51/ 51C 1280mV | 18.19G/16.05Gh/s | A: 9606 R: 70 HW:163 WU:228.1/m

[SebastianJu]

@SebastianJu
if the hashrate reduces to over time and you see "idling miner X" messages that means the cgminer version is too old.

I only had this once. Maybe rip has to be restarted every week or so. But i run cgminer 3.3.4 and the newest firmware.

@kano... i use the fans from burnin and the normal setup he suggests for now. I run at 450MHZ all the time with 1335mV, 28ms and with the dust its now at 53°C. cgminer claims after running them 2 days an average hashrate of 43.61GH/s which is 8.722GH/s for one miner. I think a fan that is capable of moving more air per second would help you.
By the way... since cgminer after 1hours gives a relatively exact average, the more after 10hours, the pool, in my case bitparking.com, gives a hashrate jumping between 43.4GH to 46.5GH... so its not really trustworthy.

[tiros]

Just a side note about overclocking



Ok, that didn't happen because of overclocking.
Here is the story if anyone is interested to read it.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=269802.msg2886697#msg2886697

[nemercry]

@burnin: Could you do those Overclocking tests in the next time ?
Would be interesting to know what the limiting factor is right now. Heat or the voltage-supply .
If its only a heat problem, people could use watercooled soloutions and stick to higher frequencys.

[JHenderson]

Any word on Batch 2 chips? Has Zefir shipped?

[RoadStress]

Any word on Batch 2 chips? Has Zefir shipped?

Just be patient. Zefir received them on friday. Give it at least 1-3 days to sort things out and to package the chips. Remember that not all the chips are going to burning and it will take some time to count and pack them.

[Taugeran]

Would this PSU be able to power a single bitburner XX after I OC it to 450?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817159124

[tiros]

Would this PSU be able to power a single bitburner XX after I OC it to 450?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817159124

I think one bitburner XX with 20 chips is something around 100W, so yes this one is more then sufficient.

Edit: here is accurate power consumption:

Air:
431 - 54, 48, 1.30V, 87W, stable
450 - 56, 48, 1.30V, 90W, HW Errors
450 - 57, 52, 1.34V, 94W, slightly increased error rate compared to what i normally call "stable" but close enough

Water:
450 - 54, 32, 1.34V, 94W, slightly less hw errors then with air

[zulover]

Any word on Batch 2 chips? Has Zefir shipped?

Just be patient. Zefir received them on friday. Give it at least 1-3 days to sort things out and to package the chips. Remember that not all the chips are going to burning and it will take some time to count and pack them.

so are batches starting to come through now?

[iikun]

Any word on Batch 2 chips? Has Zefir shipped?

Just be patient. Zefir received them on friday. Give it at least 1-3 days to sort things out and to package the chips. Remember that not all the chips are going to burning and it will take some time to count and pack them.

so are batches starting to come through now?

better to chk the thread of whatever group buy you joined..

[AMD FTW]

Would this PSU be able to power a single bitburner XX after I OC it to 450?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817159124

One bitburner overclocked wont consume more than 100w of energy. The question you have to ask yourself is it better to invest in a quality brand psu that has less chance of damaging the board or costing you more money in down time. I myself prefer psu's from Seasonic, Corsair, XFX and a few others. Seasonic is a quality company that designs great psu's and other companies like XFX and even Corsair use their designs.

Johnnyguru and HardOCP are some great sources to read regarding equipment testing and durability. I personally wouldn't touch that pus

For my setups that I ordered in Batch 2, I'll be powering them with 3 of the XFX 1250w Blacks which will have plenty of overhead in terms of power.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/03/12/xfx_proseries_1250w_power_supply_review/#.UhvAw098NUY

http://www.jonnyguru.com/modules.php?name=NDReviews&op=Story&reid=273

[iikun]

Would this PSU be able to power a single bitburner XX after I OC it to 450?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817159124

One bitburner overclocked wont consume more than 100w of energy. The question you have to ask yourself is it better to invest in a quality brand psu that has less chance of damaging the board or costing you more money in down time. I myself prefer psu's from Seasonic, Corsair, XFX and a few others. Seasonic is a quality company that designs great psu's and other companies like XFX and even Corsair use their designs.

Johnnyguru and HardOCP are some great sources to read regarding equipment testing and durability. I personally wouldn't touch that pus

For my setups that I ordered in Batch 2, I'll be powering them with 3 of the XFX 1250w Blacks which will have plenty of overhead in terms of power.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/03/12/xfx_proseries_1250w_power_supply_review/#.UhvAw098NUY

http://www.jonnyguru.com/modules.php?name=NDReviews&op=Story&reid=273

For people running serious numbers of boards this is true, I would def. go with a quality name and gold/platinum psu. But for people with fewer boards I don't think it will prove to be cost effective unless they can get them cheap for whatever reason. At least where I am the difference in price is significant enough for low watt PSUs to matter. Less so at 800W+

[burnin]

Would this PSU be able to power a single bitburner XX after I OC it to 450?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817159124

Johnnyguru and HardOCP are some great sources to read regarding equipment testing and durability. I personally wouldn't touch that pus

^^
This
I wouldn't touch that psu either.

@AMD Too bad your order is still hanging in customs, but you should get it soon.

[Bogart]

Are you saying that Customs has not released them?  It looks like they have on the tracking page: https://i.imgur.com/sRoFrnp.png

Yes, i will pick them up tomorrow, once i verified that the chips are functional i will send out a assembled board asap.

Received?  Tracking page shows no updates.