teknohog
|
|
February 10, 2014, 01:11:12 PM |
|
@kramble I'm thinking of running my FPGAs without fan. I have a big heatsink on them, at which frequency would the theoretical heat be ok for long duration hashing without damaging the Spartan-6 chips?
At 172MHz they don't seem to produce that much heat...
Also you may find you can achieve a faster clock speed if you run the device cooler (silicon generally gives better performance at lower temperatures), so its up to you to decide the acceptable trade-off between perhaps a lower clock speed with no fan cooling, and a higher clock speed with a fan (and its associated noise). I think the real question is why you'd want to run fanless, if a large and slow fan would be practically inaudible, and improve the speed considerably. Since you have a big heatsink, I assume you've also gotten rid of the tiny, whiny stock fans. (Why anyone would install them in the first place is beyond me - a single 80..120 mm fan would cover all 4 FPGAs quite ideally, keeping the high pressure center away from the heatsinks.) I've built quiet computers with passive and nearly-passive cooling for about 10 years, starting with the same general idea: if I use a big-ass heatsink and a low-power chip, I should not need a fan. The reality is that passive cooling is rather quirky. Even the smallest forced airflow makes a huge difference. It can be hard to get a good natural convection even with chimney-style setups, because the healthy temperatures for chips are so low.
|
|
|
|
kramble
|
|
February 10, 2014, 01:24:59 PM |
|
I think the real question is why you'd want to run fanless, if a large and slow fan would be practically inaudible, and improve the speed considerably. Since you have a big heatsink, I assume you've also gotten rid of the tiny, whiny stock fans. (Why anyone would install them in the first place is beyond me - a single 80..120 mm fan would cover all 4 FPGAs quite ideally, keeping the high pressure center away from the heatsinks.)
Agreed. I used a single 120mm fan balanced centrally over the four individual heatsinks on the ztex and this worked perfectly well. The heatsinks ran at only 35C (for 20C ambient).
|
|
|
|
jlsminingcorp
|
|
February 10, 2014, 02:31:18 PM |
|
I think the real question is why you'd want to run fanless, if a large and slow fan would be practically inaudible, and improve the speed considerably. Since you have a big heatsink, I assume you've also gotten rid of the tiny, whiny stock fans. (Why anyone would install them in the first place is beyond me - a single 80..120 mm fan would cover all 4 FPGAs quite ideally, keeping the high pressure center away from the heatsinks.)
Agreed. I used a single 120mm fan balanced centrally over the four individual heatsinks on the ztex and this worked perfectly well. The heatsinks ran at only 35C (for 20C ambient). Did the same here. It doesn't have to be a hurricane to keep these things cool and 120mm fans fit nicely over the ztex boards.
|
|
|
|
ShXnot
|
|
February 10, 2014, 04:01:34 PM |
|
hey guys, ahh... i can't see the first page of this threat is it just me or ...?
|
|
|
|
boymok
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 132
Merit: 100
BitCoin
|
|
February 10, 2014, 04:32:03 PM |
|
hey guys, ahh... i can't see the first page of this threat is it just me or ...?
it is just you.
|
|
|
|
ShXnot
|
|
February 10, 2014, 04:49:38 PM |
|
hey guys, ahh... i can't see the first page of this threat is it just me or ...?
it is just you. ok, thanks
|
|
|
|
BlueDragon747 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1509
Merit: 1030
Solutions Architect
|
|
February 10, 2014, 05:29:28 PM |
|
kr105 has finished maintenance on www.blakecoinpool.org and looks like it is working great
|
Info: Github - Blakecoin.org - BCT Blakecoin thread - Twitter - BCS - BlakeZone Trade Blakecoin: Xeggex.com Merged Mining Pools: EU3 - NY2/AT1 - LA1Donation Addresses: BLC: Bd3jJftFbwxWSKNSNz35vkDd57kG6jHAjt PHO: BZXPMc8eF9YZcJStskkP2bVia38fv9VmuT BBTC: 2h8c4NbzXJXk6QQ89r7YYMGhe13gQUC2ajD ELT: e7cm6cAgpfhvk3Myh2Jkmi1nqaHtDHnxXb UMO: uQH9H17t7kz3eVQ3vKDzMsWCK4hn5nh2gC LIT: 8p8Z4h5fkZ8SCoyEtihKcjzZLA7gFjTdmL BTC: 1Q6kgcNqhKh8u67m6Gj73T2LMgGseETwR6
|
|
|
bzyzny
|
|
February 10, 2014, 05:38:39 PM |
|
thats great, we will need more pools to support the recent increase in miners
|
|
|
|
BlueDragon747 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1509
Merit: 1030
Solutions Architect
|
|
February 10, 2014, 05:47:49 PM |
|
thats great, we will need more pools to support the recent increase in miners I will look into adding 2 more
|
Info: Github - Blakecoin.org - BCT Blakecoin thread - Twitter - BCS - BlakeZone Trade Blakecoin: Xeggex.com Merged Mining Pools: EU3 - NY2/AT1 - LA1Donation Addresses: BLC: Bd3jJftFbwxWSKNSNz35vkDd57kG6jHAjt PHO: BZXPMc8eF9YZcJStskkP2bVia38fv9VmuT BBTC: 2h8c4NbzXJXk6QQ89r7YYMGhe13gQUC2ajD ELT: e7cm6cAgpfhvk3Myh2Jkmi1nqaHtDHnxXb UMO: uQH9H17t7kz3eVQ3vKDzMsWCK4hn5nh2gC LIT: 8p8Z4h5fkZ8SCoyEtihKcjzZLA7gFjTdmL BTC: 1Q6kgcNqhKh8u67m6Gj73T2LMgGseETwR6
|
|
|
MickGhee
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1414
Merit: 1001
Fucker of "the system"
|
|
February 12, 2014, 12:53:39 AM |
|
i just love blake! i cant wait till the price matches its awesomeness DON'T SELL YET!
|
Last night, while you were sleeping. I fucked the system!
|
|
|
|
BlueDragon747 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1509
Merit: 1030
Solutions Architect
|
|
February 12, 2014, 01:47:04 AM Last edit: February 12, 2014, 05:14:51 AM by BlueDragon747 |
|
Yeah I was informed by Luke but Keccak is not a good mining algo! Blake will beat it on almost every platform Edit: use the best hash for the job not blindly following NIST recommendations is the path Blakecoin has chosen Did following Recommendations help protect from the Dual_EC_DRBG problem due to a previous Recommendation from such standards organizations, nope Java and Android had to use a different random number generator when generating the public/private keys due to that weakness which was caused by large investment money by some agencies into pushing that standard. Keccak and Scrypt are not bad algorithms in themselves its just they are not well suited for a mining algo
|
Info: Github - Blakecoin.org - BCT Blakecoin thread - Twitter - BCS - BlakeZone Trade Blakecoin: Xeggex.com Merged Mining Pools: EU3 - NY2/AT1 - LA1Donation Addresses: BLC: Bd3jJftFbwxWSKNSNz35vkDd57kG6jHAjt PHO: BZXPMc8eF9YZcJStskkP2bVia38fv9VmuT BBTC: 2h8c4NbzXJXk6QQ89r7YYMGhe13gQUC2ajD ELT: e7cm6cAgpfhvk3Myh2Jkmi1nqaHtDHnxXb UMO: uQH9H17t7kz3eVQ3vKDzMsWCK4hn5nh2gC LIT: 8p8Z4h5fkZ8SCoyEtihKcjzZLA7gFjTdmL BTC: 1Q6kgcNqhKh8u67m6Gj73T2LMgGseETwR6
|
|
|
mogrith
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1470
Merit: 1001
Use Coinbase Account almosanywhere with Shift card
|
|
February 12, 2014, 03:59:56 AM |
|
That's Some Nice Agencies
|
|
|
|
|
BlueDragon747 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1509
Merit: 1030
Solutions Architect
|
|
February 12, 2014, 07:23:41 AM |
|
Blakecoin just got added to http://coinmarketcap.com
|
Info: Github - Blakecoin.org - BCT Blakecoin thread - Twitter - BCS - BlakeZone Trade Blakecoin: Xeggex.com Merged Mining Pools: EU3 - NY2/AT1 - LA1Donation Addresses: BLC: Bd3jJftFbwxWSKNSNz35vkDd57kG6jHAjt PHO: BZXPMc8eF9YZcJStskkP2bVia38fv9VmuT BBTC: 2h8c4NbzXJXk6QQ89r7YYMGhe13gQUC2ajD ELT: e7cm6cAgpfhvk3Myh2Jkmi1nqaHtDHnxXb UMO: uQH9H17t7kz3eVQ3vKDzMsWCK4hn5nh2gC LIT: 8p8Z4h5fkZ8SCoyEtihKcjzZLA7gFjTdmL BTC: 1Q6kgcNqhKh8u67m6Gj73T2LMgGseETwR6
|
|
|
rupy
|
|
February 12, 2014, 09:48:03 AM Last edit: February 12, 2014, 10:20:05 AM by rupy |
|
The ztex are a bit awkward to judge the best clock speed as they seem to give hardware errors even during normal operation (probably a bug in the communication protocol, either in the driver or the FPGA code).
Yes, I tried setting them to 200MHz and they just stalled, producing only HW... BTW, is the Blakecoin wallet running ok on a Raspberry Pi? I mean the chain should be small enough still to not hog all the cpu... Can we optimise the client for lightweight use or are we too lazy?
|
BANKBOOK GWT Wallet & no-FIAT Billing API
|
|
|
BlueDragon747 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1509
Merit: 1030
Solutions Architect
|
|
February 12, 2014, 10:26:38 AM |
|
The ztex are a bit awkward to judge the best clock speed as they seem to give hardware errors even during normal operation (probably a bug in the communication protocol, either in the driver or the FPGA code).
Yes, I tried setting them to 200MHz and they just stalled, producing only HW... BTW, is the Blakecoin wallet running ok on a Raspberry Pi? I mean the chain should be small enough still to not hog all the cpu... Can we optimise the client for lightweight use or are we too lazy? Its been optimized with the Blake-256 algo so should be more cpu efficient on any platform, no plans for any special version for mainline client my Github is available you could always optimize/lightweight your own version then its just your own effort/motivation that will get results
|
Info: Github - Blakecoin.org - BCT Blakecoin thread - Twitter - BCS - BlakeZone Trade Blakecoin: Xeggex.com Merged Mining Pools: EU3 - NY2/AT1 - LA1Donation Addresses: BLC: Bd3jJftFbwxWSKNSNz35vkDd57kG6jHAjt PHO: BZXPMc8eF9YZcJStskkP2bVia38fv9VmuT BBTC: 2h8c4NbzXJXk6QQ89r7YYMGhe13gQUC2ajD ELT: e7cm6cAgpfhvk3Myh2Jkmi1nqaHtDHnxXb UMO: uQH9H17t7kz3eVQ3vKDzMsWCK4hn5nh2gC LIT: 8p8Z4h5fkZ8SCoyEtihKcjzZLA7gFjTdmL BTC: 1Q6kgcNqhKh8u67m6Gj73T2LMgGseETwR6
|
|
|
kramble
|
|
February 12, 2014, 10:38:26 AM Last edit: February 12, 2014, 11:06:34 AM by kramble |
|
Yes, I tried setting them to 200MHz and they just stalled, producing only HW...
YMMV, I only have a sample of 10 devices (2 in my lancelot, 4 each in Blue's Ztex 1.15y and CM1). The lancelot ran at 200MHz, but with HW errors, so I run it at 195MHz. The ztex (modded for higher core voltage) and CM1 devices were all between 204 and 220 MHz, but with some HW errors. Just be sure to use the latest bitstreams (see the github for links to dropbox) as the earlier ones were slower, though nothing new has actually been built for a couple of months now (I got fed up of the the Xilinx toolchain, just way too frustrating). PS the ztex 1.15x build does appear to be slower than the 1.15y (it's quoted as 180MHz, error free), but that one is not my particular baby (hal7 did the work on the port, many thanks). Not sure if the speeds are like-for-like comparable as I tend to tolerate a higher HW error rate. BTW, is the Blakecoin wallet running ok on a Raspberry Pi? I mean the chain should be small enough still to not hog all the cpu... Can we optimise the client for lightweight use or are we too lazy?
I run it on raspi and it works fine (even with both a cgminer and python miner running on the same device). The huge caveat is that the network stack locks up on a regular basis (roughly once a day) requiring a reboot (which I've automated). I don't know if this is hardware or software related (though swapping for a different raspi made no difference). I am still running the original debian wheezy distribution though (its just far too much trouble to update it). PS One other caveat on raspi is that you may need to use the unsupported version of berlkeydb (libdb5.3++-dev) rather than the recommended version 4.8. This has the effect of making the wallet.dat incompatible with the windows/ubuntu builds. I tend to sweep funds into just a few addresses that I have paper backups for, just to be safe, but it will need care with change addresses when I need to spend some coin.
|
|
|
|
rupy
|
|
February 12, 2014, 03:38:18 PM |
|
What about Transaction Malleability, can we fix that for BLC? Would be great advertisement!
|
BANKBOOK GWT Wallet & no-FIAT Billing API
|
|
|
|
|