DragonMint T1 16TH/S halongmining.com

[philipma1957]

Can someone who got their Dragon take high res picture of chips without heatsink ?

if I was willing to kill off  1 board  I could.  also if I ever get the test demo.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2443327.msg33615552#msg33615552

PCB designer here...

When I look at the side by side boards I see something that was shared.  No one would spend so much time to accidentally make a board look that similar.  It would take much more effort than just designing from scratch.

When we see similar boards we count the things that are the same in terms such as "a few", not the ones that are different.    If they were designed independently someone would have had to go to a lot of trouble to make them so similar.

I've had PCBs copied and reproduced.  This doesn't look like that.  This looks like someone had access to inno designs and made slight modifications, and routed the modifications.  This is far different than the car examples, or both boards are green memes that people have been posting on twitter.  The examples of both intel based motherboards having the same chip-sets just don't apply.

The level that boards are identical is just embarrassing.

For a couple grand they could have reverse engineered the PCB, turned it into a schematic, made their own layout, and at least made it look like they were trying not to copy someone.  There are lots of contractors who perform this service in China.  Of course the US has them too, but they are more expensive and typically prefer to do it on designs a company owns but lost to obsolesce.  

Occam's razor guys...

It's a prototype Innosilicon BTC miner. How Halong has obtained these is anyone's guess? Even the Web UI is just re-skinned/re-shuffled from an existing Inno one: https://i.imgur.com/KzC3RoP.png. If Innosilicon wanted to compete with BITMAIN through Halong as their proxy, surely they would make better effort to hide the association?

Do you guys think there is even any ASICBOOST in the chips? We are not seeing the kind of performance and efficiency gains one would expect. We need some experienced people to reverse engineer this hardware and see what is happening. Something is not adding up here.

this interests me

lets say  the numbers give at the wall are correct

15.13 th and 1489 watts

the 14 th s-9  does

13.9 to 14  at  1500 watts on a bitmain psu

and 13.9 to 14 at 1450 watts on a delta 2400 watts psu


so  1489/15130 =  0.0984 at the wall  T1

vs 1500/14000 =  0.10714 at the wall  s-9


that is 8.88%  better with the T1


unfortunately   Halong has yet to send me a unit  so I can do proper comaprasion of power savings.

the ones above  are  only partly mine the s-9 numbers are accurate.

the t1 may be accurate but it is with a different psu.

I can do side by side tests with 5 different quality psu's which will let us see if 8.88%  is your savings or improvement.

I reached out to Halong  today via text and got a fast reply  they apologized for not shipping gear to me.

they said "soon and sorry for delay"



Maybe Monday or Tues   is my hope

[Sandal_Hat]

My five units are running at various speeds and power draw: 1489 watts, 1521watts, 1656 watts on 220V single phase and one at 1688 watts 110v using an EVGA 1600 G2. (5th unit I have not checked wattage but pulling 7 amps on 220V). room temperature is 70 degrees

Hashrates showing on Dragonmint miner status page: 15.13TH/s, 15.86TH/s, 15.38TH/s, 15.42TH/s, & 15.40TH/s  (slushpool)

Are u sure?? If so, how did they pull off their demo video off https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRCsQUyR7_I
It showed 16.26 TH at 1470 watts? Recheck your readings perhaps. That video was using the standard PSU.

This video was in nov 2017, about 4-5 months back.

Your room temperature is 21 degrees celcius, converted from farenheit. At wat temps are your miners running?
S9 is around 13.8TH for 1420w in hagsfin review - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2676763  This S9 is on 220-240v wall socket, same as the T1 numbers here.

S9 - 1420w/13.8th =   102.9 watts per TH
T1 - 1489w/15.13th =  98.41 watts per TH
T1 - 1521w/15.86th =  95.90 watts per TH
T1 - 1656w/15.38th =  107.67 watts per TH
T1 - 1688w/15.42th =  109.46 watts per TH

It is at around 5-7% more efficient as S9 with those numbers u mention. If the 1600+ watt range were used, it can be less efficient than an S9.
Can u double check because it makes no sense how it is that far apart. 1688w and 1489 watts is a 199 watts difference. It does not seem right.

[picominer]

Do be sure to try them on both an AB tweaked pool (slush) and one of the far more common non-AB pools

That's pointless. As I pointed out they do NOT run without AB.

Is that because the pool will just reject the shares with modified version? If I understand correctly, there is nothing in the hardware implementation for AB that would make it incompatible with non-AB pools.

[Searing]

Do be sure to try them on both an AB tweaked pool (slush) and one of the far more common non-AB pools

That's pointless. As I pointed out they do NOT run without AB.

Is that because the pool will just reject the shares with modified version? If I understand correctly, there is nothing in the hardware implementation for AB that would make it incompatible with non-AB pools.

Just a side note....does that mean these miners basically will only work on Slush? or maybe a couple others? and/or they have to have an ASIC BOOST
capable pool JUST to work at all? and as such...would these be mainly bitcoin cash pools?

just trying to catch up ..this seems more than a bit confusing..

*just curious* *don't have a dragonmint on order*

brad

[-ck]

Do be sure to try them on both an AB tweaked pool (slush) and one of the far more common non-AB pools

That's pointless. As I pointed out they do NOT run without AB.

Is that because the pool will just reject the shares with modified version? If I understand correctly, there is nothing in the hardware implementation for AB that would make it incompatible with non-AB pools.

Just a side note....does that mean these miners basically will only work on Slush? or maybe a couple others? and/or they have to have an ASIC BOOST
capable pool JUST to work at all? and as such...would these be mainly bitcoin cash pools?

just trying to catch up ..this seems more than a bit confusing..

*just curious* *don't have a dragonmint on order*

They will refuse to connect to a pool unless they support AB. If the miner code is modified to allow them to point to a non-AB pool, only 1/4 of the hashes are valid. I've explained before but people seem to not believe me - they do NOT run without asicboost active; they do not have the switching hardware required to enable/disable it in the T1. It is mandatory.

Additionally shitcoin cash has nothing to do with this - there isn't a single shitcoin cash pool that supports overt asicboost as far as I'm aware. You're mixing up covert hidden asicboost which only works now on shitcoin cash from overt asicboost which works everywhere, provided the pool supports it.

[Searing]

They will refuse to connect to a pool unless they support AB. If the miner code is modified to allow them to point to a non-AB pool, only 1/4 of the hashes are valid. I've explained before but people seem to not believe me - they do NOT run without asicboost active; they do not have the switching code required to enable/disable it in the T1. It is mandatory.

Additionally shitcoin cash has nothing to do with this - there isn't a single shitcoin cash pool that supports overt asicboost. You're mixing up covert hidden asicboost which only works now on shitcoin cash from overt asicboost which works everywhere, provided the pool supports it.

ok ..thanks for the clarification....so pool wise from what I gather it is 'Slush' or a pool that supports asicboost in their manner or you are SOL... that seems a bit

pre-meditated....in how they originally promoted their hash rate w/o mentioning this asic boost angle in detail (or how I seem to remember such)

again .thanks for the clarification (crypto always drama!)

brad


Moderator's note: This post was edited by frodocooper to remove multiple nested quotes.

[elokk]

My five units are running at various speeds and power draw: 1489 watts, 1521watts, 1656 watts on 220V single phase and one at 1688 watts 110v using an EVGA 1600 G2. (5th unit I have not checked wattage but pulling 7 amps on 220V). room temperature is 70 degrees

Hashrates showing on Dragonmint miner status page: 15.13TH/s, 15.86TH/s, 15.38TH/s, 15.42TH/s, & 15.40TH/s  (slushpool)

Are u sure?? If so, how did they pull off their demo video off https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRCsQUyR7_I
It showed 16.26 TH at 1470 watts? Recheck your readings perhaps. That video was using the standard PSU.

This video was in nov 2017, about 4-5 months back.

Your room temperature is 21 degrees celcius, converted from farenheit. At wat temps are your miners running?
S9 is around 13.8TH for 1420w in hagsfin review - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2676763  This S9 is on 220-240v wall socket, same as the T1 numbers here.

S9 - 1420w/13.8th =   102.9 watts per TH
T1 - 1489w/15.13th =  98.41 watts per TH
T1 - 1521w/15.86th =  95.90 watts per TH
T1 - 1656w/15.38th =  107.67 watts per TH
T1 - 1688w/15.42th =  109.46 watts per TH

It is at around 5-7% more efficient as S9 with those numbers u mention. If the 1600+ watt range were used, it can be less efficient than an S9.
Can u double check because it makes no sense how it is that far apart. 1688w and 1489 watts is a 199 watts difference. It does not seem right.

The wattage and Hashrate numbers you quoted are accurate but how it was paired up may have been wrong.

Here are TH/s & wattage for 4 rigs I am looking at right now:
 #1: 15.15TH/s @ 1647w (Myrig PSU). 108.71w per TH
 #2: 15.42TH/s @ 1586w (Myrig PSU). 102.85w per TH
 #3: 15.51TH/s @ 1477w (Myrig PSU). 95.23w per TH
 #4: 15.24Th/s @1680w (EVGA 1600 G2). 110.24 TH

Hashrate is fairly stable when raising room temps from 70 degrees F to 80 degrees F
Wattage is taken from APC AP8641 PDU display on #1, 2, & 3. Wall outlet meter being used on #4

board temps range from 66-75 degrees, not sure why so much variance from one rig to the next but hopefully new firmware will improve power consumption and hashrate.

I just swapped out rig #1 Myrig PSU with Bitmain 1600watt PSU and saw no improvement in numbers. Wish I had some larger PSU's and try what Phil suggested.

Rig #5 is at home and I ran it in a much cooler room temp over night to see what would happen and the hash rate dropped from 15.40 TH/s to below 13.0TH/s. EDIT: I warmed up the room and happy to report it is hashing 16.3 TH/s on slush
EDIT 2: Hashrate back down to 14.50TH/s

[philipma1957]

The wattage and Hashrate numbers you quoted are accurate but how it was paired up may have been wrong.

Here are TH/s & wattage for 4 rigs I am looking at right now:
 #1: 15.15TH/s @ 1647w (Myrig PSU). 108.71w per TH
 #2: 15.42TH/s @ 1586w (Myrig PSU). 102.85w per TH
 #3: 15.51TH/s @ 1477w (Myrig PSU). 95.23w per TH
 #4: 15.24Th/s @1680w (EVGA 1600 G2). 110.24 TH

Hashrate is fairly stable when raising room temps from 70 degrees F to 80 degrees F
Wattage is taken from APC AP8641 PDU display on #1, 2, & 3. Wall outlet meter being used on #4

board temps range from 66-75 degrees, not sure why so much variance from one rig to the next but hopefully new firmware will improve power consumption and hashrate.

I just swapped out rig #1 Myrig PSU with Bitmain 1600watt PSU and saw no improvement in numbers. Wish I had some larger PSU's and try what Phil suggested.

Rig #5 is at home and I ran it in a much cooler room temp over night to see what would happen and the hash rate dropped from 15.40 TH/s to below 13.0TH/s. I warmed up the room and will check back later to see what has happened.

Try the bitmain psu with controller and two boards
Try the Halong psu with controller and two boards
Lastly try the Evga psu with controller and two boards.

In those three cases the three psus will have good overhead


Moderator's note: This post was edited by frodocooper to remove multiple nested quotes.

[Sandal_Hat]

The wattage and Hashrate numbers you quoted are accurate but how it was paired up may have been wrong.

Here are TH/s & wattage for 4 rigs I am looking at right now:
 #1: 15.15TH/s @ 1647w (Myrig PSU). 108.71w per TH
 #2: 15.42TH/s @ 1586w (Myrig PSU). 102.85w per TH
 #3: 15.51TH/s @ 1477w (Myrig PSU). 95.23w per TH
 #4: 15.24Th/s @1680w (EVGA 1600 G2). 110.24 TH

Hashrate is fairly stable when raising room temps from 70 degrees F to 80 degrees F
Wattage is taken from APC AP8641 PDU display on #1, 2, & 3. Wall outlet meter being used on #4

board temps range from 66-75 degrees, not sure why so much variance from one rig to the next but hopefully new firmware will improve power consumption and hashrate.

I just swapped out rig #1 Myrig PSU with Bitmain 1600watt PSU and saw no improvement in numbers. Wish I had some larger PSU's and try what Phil suggested.

Rig #5 is at home and I ran it in a much cooler room temp over night to see what would happen and the hash rate dropped from 15.40 TH/s to below 13.0TH/s. EDIT: I warmed up the room and happy to report it is hashing 16.3 TH/s on slush
EDIT 2: Hashrate back down to 14.50TH/s

Room temps at 21-27 degrees celcius is good. U should not need to adjust them and 21 should be better. I see. The T1 can work better or worse than the S9 depending on luck. It is making me wonder how they made that demo vid with 16th and 1460watts.


Moderator's note: This post was edited by frodocooper to remove multiple nested quotes.

[QuintLeo]

Even the Web UI is just re-skinned/re-shuffled from an existing Inno one: https://i.imgur.com/KzC3RoP.png.

That looks almost IDENTICAL to the Bitmain UI on the S5 miners I used to have and almost NOTHING like the interface on my Innosilicon A2 miners.

Not saying the HARDWARE does or does not have a lot of Innosilicon input or influence, but that UI don't look like Innosilicon at all.



As far as the Dragonmint unit managing over 16 TH in their video, my first guess would be "cherry-picked unit".

Most gold/platinum/titanium rated power supplies don't lose much efficiency from 50% to full load - 3% ballpark is pretty common, sometimes LESS sometimes a bit more.

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/EVGA/SuperNOVA_G2_1300/5.html (table at the bottom of the page) for an example - drops from almost 93% at 40% load to a hair over 90 at full rated load or a hair under 90 at 110% of rated load.

[HagssFIN]

Even the Web UI is just re-skinned/re-shuffled from an existing Inno one: https://i.imgur.com/KzC3RoP.png.

That looks almost IDENTICAL to the Bitmain UI on the S5 miners I used to have and almost NOTHING like the interface on my Innosilicon A2 miners.

Not saying the HARDWARE does or does not have a lot of Innosilicon input or influence, but that UI don't look like Innosilicon at all.

As far as the Dragonmint unit managing over 16 TH in their video, my first guess would be "cherry-picked unit".

Most gold/platinum/titanium rated power supplies don't lose much efficiency from 50% to full load - 3% ballpark is pretty common, sometimes LESS sometimes a bit more.

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/EVGA/SuperNOVA_G2_1300/5.html (table at the bottom of the page) for an example - drops from almost 93% at 40% load to a hair over 90 at full rated load or a hair under 90 at 110% of rated load.

@QuintLeo

Halong has reskinned the graphic user interface in their latest version.

The first version of the DragonMint graphic user interface was exactly like in the current generation Innosilicon miners.

Have you seen these comparisons I have made earlier?

Graphic user interface comparison: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2443327.msg31724407#msg31724407
Control board comparison: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2443327.msg33484292#msg33484292

I think the reason why offordscott has zoomed in the miner status page view might be that he doesn't want the logo "INNOSILICON" be visible in the picture.

[Biffa]

@QuintLeo

Halong has reskinned the graphic user interface in their latest version.

The first version of the DragonMint graphic user interface was exactly like in the current generation Innosilicon miners.

Have you seen these comparisons I have made earlier?

Graphic user interface comparison: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2443327.msg31724407#msg31724407
Control board comparison: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2443327.msg33484292#msg33484292

I think the reason why offordscott has zoomed in the miner status page view might be that he doesn't want the logo "INNOSILICON" be visible in the picture.

Personally I don't care who makes them for Halong, as long as they are affordable, perform close to spec and are reliable.


Moderator's note: This post was edited by frodocooper to remove multiple nested quotes.

[HagssFIN]

<snip> ..as long as they are affordable, perform close to spec and are reliable.

Yeah I agree 100% that in the end it is those things that matter.

[Thetaj]

<snip> ..as long as they are affordable, perform close to spec and are reliable.

Yeah I agree 100% that in the end it is those things that matter.

But have they? because right now, they're just glorified toasters......energy efficient toasters.......but toasters.

[Shazam!!!]

<snip> ..as long as they are affordable, perform close to spec and are reliable.

Yeah I agree 100% that in the end it is those things that matter.

But have they? because right now, they're just glorified toasters......energy efficient toasters.......but toasters.

Indeed glorified. All of the hype is centered around "asicboost", and Halongmining's use of the terms; "more efficient" and "New".
They are even leading buyers into the IDEA of Decentralization. So how exactly are any of these terms truthful???

The Dragonmint MAY become more efficient, IF the firmware can be squeezed to a stable version. We all know that
"asicboost" is not New, and the fact it only works on a couple of compatible pools only pushes towards Centralization.
Then, there is the cookie cutter pcb, that at best, is very misleading of WHO actually makes this product.

Halongmining's LACK of communication with consumers is very troubling. Everything you can dig up points directly to Hype.
This Hype is keeping the Money Boat afloat, at this moment. Though there may be units being delivered, and plugged in, most people
receiving them, are "standard" users that can do just that: Plug it in.

It would seem, they are AVOIDING users who are more knowledgeable about miners. Why not send them out to people like
phillipma, or HagssFIN,  before a vlogger???  To help spread the Hype of release, or to hide the fact the units DO NOT WORK AS
ADVERTISED??? Yes, they work. Do they work as Advertised???

Halongmining has avoided every single path that leads to customer support, and follow every path directly to the Bank. They've said,
their silence was because of the secret nature of their cash cow: AsicBoost. Where are they now???

[itod]

The Dragonmint MAY become more efficient, IF the firmware can be squeezed to a stable version. We all know that
"asicboost" is not New, and the fact it only works on a couple of compatible pools only pushes towards Centralization.

The product that brakes current one-company-monopoly on ASIC miners "pushes towards centralization"?!? How can you say such a nonsense? Once enough hashing power leaves HalongMining production line other pools will race to support this new hardware. Several pools doing it right out of the box, thanks to CK's work, is enough that you even today have a choice of a pool.

[Shazam!!!]

The Dragonmint MAY become more efficient, IF the firmware can be squeezed to a stable version. We all know that
"asicboost" is not New, and the fact it only works on a couple of compatible pools only pushes towards Centralization.

How can you say such a nonsense?

I can say such "nonsense", because the only pool being marketed at this point is Slush. Not -ck's pool. And, being auto set to Slush, right out of the box, points new users in the same direction. Every single media report you find is about Dragonmint and Slush. Then you have the Slush Corporate Committee Advertising "The 1st pool to support overt AsicBoost", leading users to connect with familiarity. There is no Media Hype about any other pools, -ck's included. Yes, we here are aware of -ck's involvement, and his work within this community.

However, this information about -ck's involvement, and his pool's ability to run these Dragonmint's are NOT mentioned in the
obvious media campaign, being pushed by Halongmining and Slush's Corporate Committee. The direct result of this will be, users
who do not know any better, will all Flood to Slush. In turn, this will lead to my "nonsense" Centralization.  By the time other pools
have access to implement AsicBoost, it will have already begun. -ck's pool has access and is currently supporting,  where are the
reports of the blocks found with asicboost at his pool??? New users will flock to Slush, like Moths to a Flame. Exactly as intended
to, in which I made reference to, by Halongmining releasing these to vloggers VS. Mining Veterans.

[dimaze]

I've gotten in touch with Halong and they've agreed to send me a T1 sometime this week for review. I'll have more details and a review when the unit arrives and I get it check it out.

As some of you may remember my previous post, I'm a fairly old school mining enthusiast that has ordered offerings from a good chunk of the well known mining manufacturers. I look forward to reviewing my experience with Halong

[HagssFIN]

I've gotten in touch with Halong and they've agreed to send me a T1 sometime this week for review. I'll have more details and a review when the unit arrives and I get it check it out.

As some of you may remember my previous post, I'm a fairly old school mining enthusiast that has ordered offerings from a good chunk of the well known mining manufacturers. I look forward to reviewing my experience with Halong

Are they going to send you a free unit, like they are sending to Philip?

[QuintLeo]

@QuintLeo

Halong has reskinned the graphic user interface in their latest version.

The first version of the DragonMint graphic user interface was exactly like in the current generation Innosilicon miners.

I don't have an A5 to compare to, didn't realise Innosilicon had changed their UI to be so much closer to the Antminer S5 UI - which I STILL maintain is more likely to be the ORIGINAL model for that UI (or perhaps something even older out of Bitmain, since I didn't own anything before the S5 from them).

I'm not questioning the possibility of Innosilicon being involved (nothing new in THAT corporate history as I've pointed out), though I'd think they'd be more likely to be involved at the CHIP level than the MINER DESIGN level.


I'm also wondering if the chips involved are a next-generation upgrade from the announced but "never made it into a miner" Innosilicon A3 chips....