Bitcoin Forum
April 23, 2024, 07:27:53 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 [44] 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 ... 115 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN] Bitfury ASIC sales in EU and Europe  (Read 250416 times)
spiccioli
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1378
Merit: 1003

nec sine labore


View Profile
September 05, 2013, 04:12:05 PM
 #861

Half of the chips, 7-16, are dead and go to zero with auto-tuning while not hashing with manual tuning.
Since the SPI signals form a long chain from chip to chip, there's probably a problem at chip 6 or 7. Check those extra carefully on the board. Note: the chips are numbered in white ink in the same order as in the software.

If the chips are mounted correctly, and one is broken, it could be that it prevents communication with next one in the chain. In that case, the chip could be removed, and the solder jumpers shorted. Beware: don't attempt to fix unless you've done stuff like this before.

Ok, I'll look at them more in depth.

I've never used a solder iron in my life, so I won't try to break it more than it already is Smiley

spiccioli

I've made a couple more photos, to my untrained eye the only strange thing is SJ51

http://imgur.com/c8hCggO,A4ImRve

Chips 6,7,8,9 seem to have their IO pins OK.

spiccioli
"There should not be any signed int. If you've found a signed int somewhere, please tell me (within the next 25 years please) and I'll change it to unsigned int." -- Satoshi
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1713857273
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1713857273

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1713857273
Reply with quote  #2

1713857273
Report to moderator
-Redacted-
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 574
Merit: 501


View Profile
September 05, 2013, 04:27:34 PM
 #862

Good eye, Spicciolli!  That looks like a problem, for certain...  Fix that (or get it fixed), and you've probably repaired the card.
cscape
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 251
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 05, 2013, 04:28:59 PM
 #863

I agree, the solder jumper will surely cause problems.

Happy with your c-scape product ? Consider a tip: 16X2FWVRz6UzPWsu4WjKBMJatR7UvyKzcy
achimsmile
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1225
Merit: 1000


View Profile
September 05, 2013, 04:45:39 PM
 #864

Sorry to interrupt you spiccioli.

My kit is showing me a Noncerate of 43.1GH/s (yayy! a gigahash more compared to autotuning)

But on BTCGuild I'm only at 33.3GH/s (99.32% valid shares)

I know the guild only shows an estimate, but the rate has always been considerably lower than what the raspbi tells me over the last 30 hours of uninterrupted mining.

Is that regular behaviour?
darkfriend77
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 434
Merit: 265


View Profile WWW
September 05, 2013, 04:52:25 PM
 #865

I had a similar issue ... somehow if I use load balanced mining .... with 40-42GH on 3 pools im getting 13GH at BTCGuild ... 13GH .... at eligius ... and 12 GH at Bitminter ...

if I change to mine 100% on BTCGuild it shows me 20-30 GH only .... i tryed with 16,32 & 64 diff

-:| www.DOTMog.com |:-
Sitarow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1792
Merit: 1047



View Profile
September 05, 2013, 05:12:09 PM
 #866

I had a similar issue ... somehow if I use load balanced mining .... with 40-42GH on 3 pools im getting 13GH at BTCGuild ... 13GH .... at eligius ... and 12 GH at Bitminter ...

if I change to mine 100% on BTCGuild it shows me 20-30 GH only .... i tryed with 16,32 & 64 diff

Have you tried the reported accepted shares from BTCGuild to the accepted shares the client reports?

This way you can compare with accuracy.
juhakall
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 657
Merit: 250


View Profile WWW
September 05, 2013, 05:13:47 PM
 #867

I had a similar issue ... somehow if I use load balanced mining .... with 40-42GH on 3 pools im getting 13GH at BTCGuild ... 13GH .... at eligius ... and 12 GH at Bitminter ...

if I change to mine 100% on BTCGuild it shows me 20-30 GH only .... i tryed with 16,32 & 64 diff

You could be having a different issue, but I noticed the stratum proxy is behaving strangely with BTC Guild. If my minimum worker difficulty is set to 1, the proxy correctly picks up when the difficulty quickly increases, and doesn't try to send shares which don't meet the requirement. However, if I set the minimum difficulty so high that it never has to be increased by the pool, the proxy keeps on thinking that the target is diff 1, and sends every share to the pool. Obviously most of them get rejected, and this might even overload a router.

I didn't have any actual problems with this, though. BTC Guild always reported my full hashrate, even when I was flooding it with tons of rejected shares. Of course flooding the server isn't exactly nice for the pool OP Smiley

I'm currently developing an experimental social AI platform
rammy2k2
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1974
Merit: 1003



View Profile
September 05, 2013, 05:14:27 PM
 #868

Tomorrow ill receive my starter kit  Grin Soon ill order a board with Oct delivery Smiley
I hope i wont have any major issues with the kit, will keep u guys updated
ssi
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70
Merit: 10



View Profile
September 05, 2013, 05:15:45 PM
 #869

I had a similar issue ... somehow if I use load balanced mining .... with 40-42GH on 3 pools im getting 13GH at BTCGuild ... 13GH .... at eligius ... and 12 GH at Bitminter ...

if I change to mine 100% on BTCGuild it shows me 20-30 GH only .... i tryed with 16,32 & 64 diff

You could be having a different issue, but I noticed the stratum proxy is behaving strangely with BTC Guild. If my minimum worker difficulty is set to 1, the proxy correctly picks up when the difficulty quickly increases, and doesn't try to send shares which don't meet the requirement. However, if I set the minimum difficulty so high that it never has to be increased, the proxy keeps on thinking that the target is diff 1, and sends every share to the pool. Obviously most of them get rejected, and this might even overload a router.

I had this issue as well... I had my difficulty set at 8 in btcguild, I only have 18GH.  Stratum proxy would send everything back at diff 1, and none of them were accepted.  I set my min difficulty to 1 in btcguild, and now it negotiates its way up to 8.

18xEDfc7y1Nzm2kmLvwYq56xwwEz4Fdh6
MXRider
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 466
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 05, 2013, 05:19:58 PM
 #870

I had a similar issue ... somehow if I use load balanced mining .... with 40-42GH on 3 pools im getting 13GH at BTCGuild ... 13GH .... at eligius ... and 12 GH at Bitminter ...

if I change to mine 100% on BTCGuild it shows me 20-30 GH only .... i tryed with 16,32 & 64 diff

What shows? BTCGuild or the miner's web GUI? Check /run/shm/.putstat.log file. First number on each row is the amount of queued work. It should be zero. I had problems with BTCGuild. EMC works perfectly.
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750
Merit: 1007



View Profile
September 05, 2013, 05:24:47 PM
 #871

There's a protocol implementation error in the official Stratum proxy.  The original spec always stated the first message a pool should be receiving is a mining.subscribe method.  However, if you try to make the Stratum Proxy do the authorization (-cu -cp args), it sends those *before* the subscribe method.  As a result, you're getting your difficulty set to 2/4/8/etc before the "default subscribe response" is sent.  A workaround is being added to the BTC Guild stratum code today to hopefully prevent this mixup.

RIP BTC Guild, April 2011 - June 2015
ssi
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70
Merit: 10



View Profile
September 05, 2013, 05:28:21 PM
 #872

There's a protocol implementation error in the official Stratum proxy.  The original spec always stated the first message a pool should be receiving is a mining.subscribe method.  However, if you try to make the Stratum Proxy do the authorization (-cu -cp args), it sends those *before* the subscribe method.  As a result, you're getting your difficulty set to 2/4/8/etc before the "default subscribe response" is sent.  A workaround is being added to the BTC Guild stratum code today to hopefully prevent this mixup.

Would it be potentially easier just to fix the error in the proxy?

18xEDfc7y1Nzm2kmLvwYq56xwwEz4Fdh6
CryptoCluster
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84
Merit: 10



View Profile
September 05, 2013, 05:32:15 PM
 #873

Hmmm. Another issue. I have disabled Autotune for all chips. I run miner with console output. And suddenly, after processing 800-1000 jobs, miner prints "SPI update chip xxx", and my Noncerate starts dropping drastically... If I check /run/shm/.stat.log chips have aIFDSo parameters.
How is it possible?

"The cumulative development of a medium of exchange on the free market — is the only way money can become established. ... government is powerless to create money for the economy; it can only be developed by the processes of the free market." M. N. Rothbard
spiccioli
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1378
Merit: 1003

nec sine labore


View Profile
September 05, 2013, 05:50:47 PM
 #874

I had a similar issue ... somehow if I use load balanced mining .... with 40-42GH on 3 pools im getting 13GH at BTCGuild ... 13GH .... at eligius ... and 12 GH at Bitminter ...

if I change to mine 100% on BTCGuild it shows me 20-30 GH only .... i tryed with 16,32 & 64 diff

You could be having a different issue, but I noticed the stratum proxy is behaving strangely with BTC Guild. If my minimum worker difficulty is set to 1, the proxy correctly picks up when the difficulty quickly increases, and doesn't try to send shares which don't meet the requirement. However, if I set the minimum difficulty so high that it never has to be increased, the proxy keeps on thinking that the target is diff 1, and sends every share to the pool. Obviously most of them get rejected, and this might even overload a router.

I had this issue as well... I had my difficulty set at 8 in btcguild, I only have 18GH.  Stratum proxy would send everything back at diff 1, and none of them were accepted.  I set my min difficulty to 1 in btcguild, and now it negotiates its way up to 8.

Hashing comrades!

HHTT works flawlessly and needs your hashing power a lot more than BTCGuild which is already the largest pool on Earth!

 Roll Eyes

spiccioli
-Redacted-
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 574
Merit: 501


View Profile
September 05, 2013, 05:55:10 PM
 #875

Hey spiccioli - go get your hashing card fixed and stop giving away secrets like that....   Tongue

Word will get around that people make lots of coins on HHTT and it will get too big...
vulgartrendkill
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500



View Profile WWW
September 05, 2013, 06:10:46 PM
 #876

Hey spiccioli - go get your hashing card fixed and stop giving away secrets like that....   Tongue

Word will get around that people make lots of coins on HHTT and it will get too big...

uhuh Smiley nice Smiley *switches pools*
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750
Merit: 1007



View Profile
September 05, 2013, 06:14:29 PM
 #877

There's a protocol implementation error in the official Stratum proxy.  The original spec always stated the first message a pool should be receiving is a mining.subscribe method.  However, if you try to make the Stratum Proxy do the authorization (-cu -cp args), it sends those *before* the subscribe method.  As a result, you're getting your difficulty set to 2/4/8/etc before the "default subscribe response" is sent.  A workaround is being added to the BTC Guild stratum code today to hopefully prevent this mixup.

Would it be potentially easier just to fix the error in the proxy?

The problem is, fixing the error in the proxy would require slush to actually still care about mining.  He hasn't been seen on bitcointalk in months.  Additionally, it'd require every user to upgrade to a forked proxy that fixes the problem.  It's much easier to just make the pool workaround the broken proxy rather than hope everybody else upgrades.

The error is only related to minimum difficulty though.  If you have your minimum difficulty set to 1, it will work just fine, and vardiff will adjust your difficulty as needed.

RIP BTC Guild, April 2011 - June 2015
-Redacted-
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 574
Merit: 501


View Profile
September 05, 2013, 06:22:58 PM
 #878

How can you say Slush doesn't still care?   I prepaid for a Trezor months ago.  Oh, well,  I mean, when I mine on his pool we only get a couple of invalids or bad block reward calculations per day....   Usually...  When the servers aren't down...   Maybe he just lost his BitcoinTalk password ??

Errrrrrmm.   Never mind...
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750
Merit: 1007



View Profile
September 05, 2013, 08:11:14 PM
 #879

BTC Guild has now deployed a workaround for the reverse auth/subscribe order in slush's Stratum Mining Proxy to prevent it from spamming low difficulty shares when a worker has a pre-set starting difficulty.

RIP BTC Guild, April 2011 - June 2015
pbigmoon
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 59
Merit: 0


View Profile
September 05, 2013, 08:13:46 PM
 #880

punin

When an order is placed and paid via bitpay does it go to processing automatically after so many confirmations?

Only asking as it took a few hours for the first confirmation (usually only takes 10 or so mins) and the order is still on hold.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 [44] 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 ... 115 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!