Biffa
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3220
Merit: 1220
|
|
January 24, 2014, 03:57:36 PM |
|
thanks ! Don't you think that jupiter clocked on 325 mhz is too dangerous for a long run ?
Not dangerous, but it does void your warranty, which is why I would NEVER overclock my KnC hardware, but I have a purely scientific interest in these find people investigating the inner workings of the hardware. But if I was, theoretically, going to overclock my KnC hardware then the requirements of getting as many coins as quickly as possible would probably override my concerns about danger or warranty becuase by the time they actually started to be a concern, well, with the difficulty increases we have had recently, the equipment would be mining dust by then really.
|
|
|
|
mekadeka
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 31
Merit: 0
|
|
January 24, 2014, 03:58:09 PM |
|
you have to minus the percentage of errors and rejected shares from your hash rate to get hash rate that pool should show.
eg. if your hash rate is 300GH/s and you have 2% errors and 1% rejected then 300-9 = 291GH/s
Thanks. Ok, where do I find errors? The rejects are .13%. Also, I'm not following your formula. Your example is 2% errors and 1% rejects (3%) subtracted from the hashrate (300). That's 297, not 291. That said, if I followed your formula, I'd be less than 1% plus presumably 30% errors (326 - .13% - [30% errors]. That seems incorrect?
|
|
|
|
Biffa
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3220
Merit: 1220
|
|
January 24, 2014, 04:00:31 PM |
|
you have to minus the percentage of errors and rejected shares from your hash rate to get hash rate that pool should show.
eg. if your hash rate is 300GH/s and you have 2% errors and 1% rejected then 300-9 = 291GH/s
Thanks. Ok, where do I find errors? The rejects are .13%. Also, I'm not following your formula. Your example is 2% errors and 1% rejects (3%) subtracted from the hashrate (300). That's 297, not 291. That said, if I followed your formula, I'd be less than 1% plus presumably 30% errors (326 - .13% - [30% errors]. That seems incorrect? You would have to get the information from cgminer on the device. So either SSH onto the box or use the API and a third part App, or use Bertmod and it will show the Hardware errors (HW) on the web page.
|
|
|
|
mekadeka
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 31
Merit: 0
|
|
January 24, 2014, 04:04:42 PM |
|
You would have to get the information from cgminer on the device.
So either SSH onto the box or use the API and a third part App, or use Bertmod and it will show the Hardware errors (HW) on the web page.
Thank you. I'm able to SSH in, but I'm not clear on how to view errors once there. The "screen -r" view is this (keep in mind I just went down to 231, so the hashrate is reporting this stepped down as opposed to my original comments): cgminer version 3.9.0 - Started: [2014-01-24 15:25:51] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (5s):304.4G (avg):311.1Gh/s | A:159374 R:2242 HW:4403 WU:4346.0/m ST: 2 SS: 0 NB: 8 LW: 176865 GF: 0 RF: 1 Connected to stratum-lb-usa48.btcguild.com diff 128 with stratum as user qweqweqweqweqwe_qweqweqweqweqwe34 Block: 8c5d58f4... Diff:2.19G Started: [16:02:36] Best share: 231K -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [P]ool management [ S ]ettings [ D ]isplay options [Q]uit KnC 0: | 305.7G/311.4Gh/s | A:159502 R:2242 HW:4407 WU:4350.0/m --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Biffa
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3220
Merit: 1220
|
|
January 24, 2014, 04:17:14 PM |
|
R: is rejected, and HW: is hardware errors. A: is accepted
|
|
|
|
mekadeka
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 31
Merit: 0
|
|
January 24, 2014, 04:21:10 PM |
|
R: is rejected, and HW: is hardware errors. A: is accepted
A:159374 R:2242 = 1.406% rejections How are HW errors quantified? How do I make sense of the 4403? Thank you.
|
|
|
|
Biffa
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3220
Merit: 1220
|
|
January 24, 2014, 04:23:17 PM |
|
R: is rejected, and HW: is hardware errors. A: is accepted
A:159374 R:2242 = 1.406% rejections How are HW errors quantified? How do I make sense of the 4403? Thank you. In the same way as rejections. Out of the Accepted, x% were rejected and x% were hardware errors.
|
|
|
|
merv77
|
|
January 24, 2014, 04:30:02 PM |
|
cgminer version 3.9.0 - Started: [2014-01-24 15:25:51] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (5s):304.4G (avg):311.1Gh/s | A:159374 R:2242 HW:4403 WU:4346.0/m ST: 2 SS: 0 NB: 8 LW: 176865 GF: 0 RF: 1 Connected to stratum-lb-usa48.btcguild.com diff 128 with stratum as user qweqweqweqweqwe_qweqweqweqweqwe34 Block: 8c5d58f4... Diff:2.19G Started: [16:02:36] Best share: 231K --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[P]ool management [ S ]ettings [ D ]isplay options [Q]uit KnC 0: | 305.7G/311.4Gh/s | A:159502 R:2242 HW:4407 WU:4350.0/m
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accepted:159374 Rejects:2242 HWHardWare Errors:4403 2242/159374*100=1.4% rejects 4403/159374*100=2.76% errors 1.4+2.76=4.16% total 304*4.16/100=12.65GH/s 304-12.65=291.35GH/s
|
|
|
|
mekadeka
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 31
Merit: 0
|
|
January 24, 2014, 04:31:05 PM |
|
In the same way as rejections. Out of the Accepted, x% were rejected and x% were hardware errors.
Ah, thanks. So of my miner's total work: 1.406% are rejections 2.76% are HW errors =4.166% of empty work. The above is based off my current 211 configuration, but this difference would not cover the much wider gap of machine reporting versus poolside of my previous 251. So, I think the test should be extended to 231 and then 251. Perhaps I'll try temus's latest configuration, which is different altogether. What is WU, by the way? Thank you.
|
|
|
|
Biffa
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3220
Merit: 1220
|
|
January 24, 2014, 04:34:42 PM |
|
In the same way as rejections. Out of the Accepted, x% were rejected and x% were hardware errors.
Ah, thanks. So of my miner's total work: 1.406% are rejections 2.76% are HW errors =4.166% of empty work. The above is based off my current 211 configuration, but this difference would not cover the much wider gap of machine reporting versus poolside of my previous 251. So, I think the test should be extended to 231 and then 251. Perhaps I'll try temus's latest configuration, which is different altogether. What is WU, by the way? Thank you. From https://github.com/ckolivas/cgminer/blob/master/READMEThe output line shows the following: (5s):1713.6 (avg):1707.8 Mh/s | A:729 R:8 HW:0 WU:22.53/m
Each column is as follows: 5s: A 5 second exponentially decaying average hash rate avg: An all time average hash rate A: The total difficulty of Accepted shares R: The total difficulty of Rejected shares HW: The number of HardWare errors WU: The Work Utility defined as the number of diff1 shares work / minute (accepted or rejected).
BAS 1: max 67C 3.27V | 62.29G/62.19Gh/s | A:140813 R:256 HW:2860 WU: 852.0/m
Each column is as follows: Temperature (if supported) Fanspeed (if supported) A 5 second exponentially decaying average hash rate An all time average hash rate The total difficulty of accepted shares The total difficulty of rejected shares The number of hardware erorrs The work utility defined as the number of diff1 shares work / minute
The cgminer status line shows: ST: 1 SS: 0 NB: 1 LW: 8 GF: 1 RF: 1
ST is STaged work items (ready to use). SS is Stale Shares discarded (detected and not submitted so don't count as rejects) NB is New Blocks detected on the network LW is Locally generated Work items GF is Getwork Fail Occasions (server slow to provide work) RF is Remote Fail occasions (server slow to accept work)
The block display shows: Block: 0074c5e482e34a506d2a051a... Started: [17:17:22] Best share: 2.71K
This shows a short stretch of the current block, when the new block started, and the all time best difficulty share you've found since starting cgminer this time.
|
|
|
|
mekadeka
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 31
Merit: 0
|
|
January 24, 2014, 04:38:12 PM |
|
Accepted:159374 Rejects:2242 HWHardWare Errors:4403 2242/159374*100=1.4% rejects 4403/159374*100=2.76% errors
1.4+2.76=4.16% total
304*4.16/100=12.65GH/s
304-12.65=291.35GH/s
Ah, we were doing the same thing at the same time. The second part of the figuring is correct (but I didn't include it), but remember that this is for my current settings at 211, to which I reverted this AM after the big discrepancy I was finding at 251. I'll try again and test. Thanks!
|
|
|
|
tolip_wen
|
|
January 24, 2014, 05:15:45 PM |
|
Ideas on cooling I put air obstructions in my case so all air must pass the ASIC and VRM's. For Sat find/make a cardboard box that fits between front (towards BBB) ASIC modules. For Jup also find/make 2 smaller boxes to fill up outside edges. Also the air that passes over the aluminum plate is not doing much cooling I direct it towards the VRM's. Painters masking tape or similar wrapped around the heat pipes below the aluminum radiator will direct more air to the VRM's. You could shove a wadded paper towel in there for testing. Beware cardboard/paper burns, might not be ideal for long term usage in a box with a history of sparks. Folks who drop fans to bar might consider blocking top(no fan area) of aluminum radiator also. Aluminum tape/foil might be a better choice but then beware risk of shorts, keep it neat! Make sure the cables do not block airflow also. Oct. GE VRM's are designed for airflow from ASIC side to edge of board side. KnCMiner is not ideal for OC airflow but it is what it is. I'm glad they chose shortest lowV/highA copper runs making OC possible! YMMV
|
'twisted research and opinion' donations happily accepted @ 13362fxFAdrhagmCvSmFy4WoHrNRPG2V57 My sub 1337 vanity address
|
|
|
redbluebg
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 9
Merit: 0
|
|
January 24, 2014, 05:26:50 PM |
|
Here is how I have moved my fans, their are strapped with zip lock to the PCIe cables, temperature dropped with almost 20 degrees, now running under 40 degrees overclocked to 211, getting 485 GH/s. 231 and 251 are not working very good for my miner https://i.imgur.com/yXdBhzT.jpghttps://i.imgur.com/aXkBuLb.jpg
|
|
|
|
sickpig
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1008
|
|
January 24, 2014, 05:33:07 PM |
|
Ideas on cooling I put air obstructions in my case so all air must pass the ASIC and VRM's. For Sat find/make a cardboard box that fits between front (towards BBB) ASIC modules. For Jup also find/make 2 smaller boxes to fill up outside edges. Also the air that passes over the aluminum plate is not doing much cooling I direct it towards the VRM's. Painters masking tape or similar wrapped around the heat pipes below the aluminum radiator will direct more air to the VRM's. You could shove a wadded paper towel in there for testing. Beware cardboard/paper burns, might not be ideal for long term usage in a box with a history of sparks. Folks who drop fans to bar might consider blocking top(no fan area) of aluminum radiator also. Aluminum tape/foil might be a better choice but then beware risk of shorts, keep it neat! Make sure the cables do not block airflow also. Oct. GE VRM's are designed for airflow from ASIC side to edge of board side. KnCMiner is not ideal for OC airflow but it is what it is. I'm glad they chose shortest lowV/highA copper runs making OC possible! YMMV Care to share same pics?
|
Bitcoin is a participatory system which ought to respect the right of self determinism of all of its users - Gregory Maxwell.
|
|
|
DPoS
|
|
January 24, 2014, 05:34:02 PM |
|
Here is how I have moved my fans, their are strapped with zip lock to the PCIe cables, temperature dropped with almost 20 degrees, now running under 40 degrees overclocked to 211, getting 485 GH/s. 231 and 251 are not working very good for my miner
not sure on those temp readings.. I saw without the shroud you get less drop and tilting down kept more heat on the boards are you 20 degrees less than stock config? you might also be pointing directly onto the temp sensor. I forget where that is but if it is working for you don't move it !
|
|
|
|
temen
Member
Offline
Activity: 119
Merit: 10
|
|
January 24, 2014, 07:12:09 PM |
|
@pedrosoft: Closed case. I have repositioned those "case" fans to blow to asics boards (leaning in front of asic fan), heatsinks etc. on vrmr's. Read my previous mails=) Now I'm having 471 GH/s with 2 modules. I have a feeling that the asic doesnt even get so hot, voltage regulator are what heats the whole thing.
Sometimes vrm:s start to dropt their amps to 24 amp, once the whole asic 0 was down to 24 amps, and hashing 415ghs. Stopped the miner, waited for vrms to cool and started again.
If you want to overclock, you cant start the miner on hot VRMs. You'll just get fault 96/97. VRMs needs to be cool when starting the miner when overclocking! If they are not your miner will settle for lower hashrate for rest of the session or those VRM-faults.
|
|
|
|
redbluebg
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 9
Merit: 0
|
|
January 24, 2014, 07:56:46 PM |
|
Here is how I have moved my fans, their are strapped with zip lock to the PCIe cables, temperature dropped with almost 20 degrees, now running under 40 degrees overclocked to 211, getting 485 GH/s. 231 and 251 are not working very good for my miner
not sure on those temp readings.. I saw without the shroud you get less drop and tilting down kept more heat on the boards are you 20 degrees less than stock config? you might also be pointing directly onto the temp sensor. I forget where that is but if it is working for you don't move it ! It is minus 20 degree from overclocked, before my temps were around 57-60 now there are 37 to 40, both times with the same config 211. now the whole box feels cooler, the vrms are cooler, and the whole radiator is cooler, I think the readings are real.
|
|
|
|
DPoS
|
|
January 24, 2014, 08:50:21 PM |
|
It is minus 20 degree from overclocked, before my temps were around 57-60 now there are 37 to 40, both times with the same config 211. now the whole box feels cooler, the vrms are cooler, and the whole radiator is cooler, I think the readings are real.
nice, when I did something similar it didn't seem to do well without the shrouds is why I put them on the crossbar maybe you have it at a better angle than I did mine run pretty cool as well but 20c is a big drop
|
|
|
|
captain-v
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 3
Merit: 0
|
|
January 24, 2014, 09:17:18 PM |
|
Here is how I have moved my fans, their are strapped with zip lock to the PCIe cables, temperature dropped with almost 20 degrees, now running under 40 degrees overclocked to 211, getting 485 GH/s. 231 and 251 are not working very good for my miner https://i.imgur.com/yXdBhzT.jpghttps://i.imgur.com/aXkBuLb.jpgBelow are the images from OCT 4 VRMs with fans blowing about 45 Degree to the boards like Redbluebg doing. Running 231 with stock settings... https://i.imgur.com/fLwkotI.jpghttps://i.imgur.com/jFLMBXt.jpgBased on these images I am not sure if adding heatsinks to VRMs be really beneficial. There is a danger of reducing the air flow in areas really needs cooling. Does anyone know where is the temperature sensor for the ASICs? 1BFkmxwdjH4PM8X2YUK8HTuN1nnQn4bwct
|
|
|
|
redbluebg
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 9
Merit: 0
|
|
January 24, 2014, 09:56:40 PM |
|
Here is how I have moved my fans, their are strapped with zip lock to the PCIe cables, temperature dropped with almost 20 degrees, now running under 40 degrees overclocked to 211, getting 485 GH/s. 231 and 251 are not working very good for my miner https://i.imgur.com/yXdBhzT.jpghttps://i.imgur.com/aXkBuLb.jpgBelow are the images from OCT 4 VRMs with fans blowing about 45 Degree to the boards like Redbluebg doing. Running 231 with stock settings... https://i.imgur.com/fLwkotI.jpghttps://i.imgur.com/jFLMBXt.jpgBased on these images I am not sure if adding heatsinks to VRMs be really beneficial. There is a danger of reducing the air flow in areas really needs cooling. Does anyone know where is the temperature sensor for the ASICs? 1BFkmxwdjH4PM8X2YUK8HTuN1nnQn4bwct What temps do you get on the chip itself? From the web interface and from your readings? And what hash rate do you get per board? If there is a better way to cool the down side of the VRMs, we'd be able to achieve better performance, any ideas?
|
|
|
|
|