Antminer Z9 mini overclocked

[not.you]

Anyone opened up the miner to look at the boards?  I'm curious if there are markings on the weak hashing boards to indicate some sort of difference and that bitmain knew something about them.  Seems very coincidental that so many of these batch 2 miners have 1 weak board. 

[1714035843]

1714035843

[kodokbuduk]

The most I can get out of my two Batch 2 machines is 687 (although 681 produces a higher hashrate) and 625. Anything over that and the third hashboard on both machines goes to 0 hashrate.

i just recived my 2nd batch. mine too. 3rd chain die at 681 or up.

What hash rate are you getting at 681 or close. Do you get hw errors on any chains or does it just hash at 0 when you go at or over 681

   
same here... what about flashing the may 2018 firmware on to it?.... my batch 1 runs fine at 750..17 sols batch 2 one board dies above 675 freq.. 14 sols...

I'm wondering if bitmain hasn't cherry picked hashboards for the Z9s over the minis in this batch?
In theory I'll have a Z9 next week to see how (if?) it overclocks.

I wouldn't imagine their yield suddenly going down across the board on OC stability.

This makes sense. I'm at least 95% sure that the Z9 is just 2 minis combined with a much higher stock clock frequency. Classic silicon binning.

Just noticed Bitmains support page has a firmware upgrade for the Z9 that changes the frequency from 500 to 550...so no overclocking i guess?

https://service.bitmain.com/support/download?product=Antminer%20Z9

Edit: and the manual states it has a fixed frequency of 500 Mhz

What is the default freq for batch 2? 500mhz or 550??

[Blastcaps]

From what I've seen, recommended is keeping it 60 degrees or under

[masrobots]

What is the default freq for batch 2? 500mhz or 550??

Most (but not all) batch 2 units have the new firmware - the new firmware has only one setting in the advanced performance drop down menu that says "balanced." That setting equates to a frequency of 500 MHz.

[hillbilli]

hi

Could someone Upload a Firmware Backup from the first Batch of Z9 mini @650 Mhz?

It would be great 


Greets

hillbilli

[fanatic26_]

Anyone opened up the miner to look at the boards?  I'm curious if there are markings on the weak hashing boards to indicate some sort of difference and that bitmain knew something about them.  Seems very coincidental that so many of these batch 2 miners have 1 weak board. 

So because you cant OVERCLOCK one board as much as the others you are jumping right to a conspiracy theory that bitmain is doing things on purpose?

The boards are not weak, they hash just fine at the factory speeds.

There is NO guarantee of overclockability, you should be thanking bitmain for putting out a unit that can overclock by 40-60% in the first place. They only promised 10k sols out of the device....

[Tailgunner]

Anyone opened up the miner to look at the boards?  I'm curious if there are markings on the weak hashing boards to indicate some sort of difference and that bitmain knew something about them.  Seems very coincidental that so many of these batch 2 miners have 1 weak board.  

So because you cant OVERCLOCK one board as much as the others you are jumping right to a conspiracy theory that bitmain is doing things on purpose?

The boards are not weak, they hash just fine at the factory speeds.

There is NO guarantee of overclockability, you should be thanking bitmain for putting out a unit that can overclock by 40-60% in the first place. They only promised 10k sols out of the device....

I agree that technically they were honest with them providing their product to the advertised spec. But you can't say it isn't shady or misleading to give first batch users some extra unexpected hashing power as a silent marketing strategy just to sell batch 2s to folks expecting the same. I'm not going to bitch & complain about it because yes, I'm getting no less hashing power than what I paid for, but also I personally do not support this marketing practice and as a result I will never be purchasing another Bitmain product or recommend them.

Edit: Also, this is neither a conspiracy nor a coincidence. It's simply silicon binning which is a standard practice throughout the entire semiconducter industry because all chips from a batch are not created equally. The part where it gets shady is that it's likely the highest quality chips were reserved for the batch 1s so everyone could hype over a 50% OC and then pre-order batch 2s.

[eviltuna]

Anyone opened up the miner to look at the boards?  I'm curious if there are markings on the weak hashing boards to indicate some sort of difference and that bitmain knew something about them.  Seems very coincidental that so many of these batch 2 miners have 1 weak board.  

So because you cant OVERCLOCK one board as much as the others you are jumping right to a conspiracy theory that bitmain is doing things on purpose?

The boards are not weak, they hash just fine at the factory speeds.

There is NO guarantee of overclockability, you should be thanking bitmain for putting out a unit that can overclock by 40-60% in the first place. They only promised 10k sols out of the device....

I agree that technically they were honest with them providing their product to the advertised spec. But you can't say it isn't shady or misleading to give first batch users some extra unexpected hashing power as a silent marketing strategy just to sell batch 2s to folks expecting the same. I'm not going to bitch & complain about it because yes, I'm getting no less hashing power than what I paid for, but also I personally do not support this marketing practice and as a result I will never be purchasing another Bitmain product or recommend them.

Edit: Also, this is neither a conspiracy nor a coincidence. It's simply silicon binning which is a standard practice throughout the entire semiconducter industry because all chips from a batch are not created equally. The part where it gets shady is that it's likely the highest quality chips were reserved for the batch 1s so everyone could hype over a 50% OC and then pre-order batch 2s.

Why is this shady? They aren't going to redesign the chips from batch 1 to batch two just so YOU can't overclock. Get over yourself, the world doesn't revolve around you.

[KrK27]

Same for me, 2 Z9mini received 27/08, 650m is limit working, at 14,5 avrg

[Tailgunner]

Anyone opened up the miner to look at the boards?  I'm curious if there are markings on the weak hashing boards to indicate some sort of difference and that bitmain knew something about them.  Seems very coincidental that so many of these batch 2 miners have 1 weak board.  

So because you cant OVERCLOCK one board as much as the others you are jumping right to a conspiracy theory that bitmain is doing things on purpose?

The boards are not weak, they hash just fine at the factory speeds.

There is NO guarantee of overclockability, you should be thanking bitmain for putting out a unit that can overclock by 40-60% in the first place. They only promised 10k sols out of the device....

I agree that technically they were honest with them providing their product to the advertised spec. But you can't say it isn't shady or misleading to give first batch users some extra unexpected hashing power as a silent marketing strategy just to sell batch 2s to folks expecting the same. I'm not going to bitch & complain about it because yes, I'm getting no less hashing power than what I paid for, but also I personally do not support this marketing practice and as a result I will never be purchasing another Bitmain product or recommend them.

Edit: Also, this is neither a conspiracy nor a coincidence. It's simply silicon binning which is a standard practice throughout the entire semiconducter industry because all chips from a batch are not created equally. The part where it gets shady is that it's likely the highest quality chips were reserved for the batch 1s so everyone could hype over a 50% OC and then pre-order batch 2s.

Why is this shady? They aren't going to redesign the chips from batch 1 to batch two just so YOU can't overclock. Get over yourself, the world doesn't revolve around you.

It's shady because of perceived value pricing. Bitmain sold batch 2s at the price they did knowing the value was perceived higher than reality. I don't even know what you're talking about with chip redesigns, they're the same chips obviously. I really don't know what I said that makes you think i'm selfish either, I'm just saying how I feel about this behavior. Sorry that some random guy on the internet choosing to no longer support a specific company offends you.

[MnngSprvsr]

Same for me, 2 Z9mini received 27/08, 650m is limit working, at 14,5 avrg

675 will also run stable

[grinbuck]

It's shady because of perceived value pricing.

IMHO this doesn't even start qualifying as 'shady' as per Bitmain standards. They're selling units advertised at 10KSol/s - which can be overclocked by a minimum of 45% and a maximum of 60%. Period. 14.5 KSol/s is a great overclock over specs - whichever way you look at it. My batch 1 only achieves 15.5 KSol/s vs. the 16.5 - 17 KSol/s others are getting - there's some variation in batch 1 as well. Also, I've not heard of any Batch 2 machines which are getting less than 14.5 KSol/s.

"Shady practises" would include some of the following:

• Selling the first batch at $1999 and then dropping them down to $1500 and $850 within a month's time.
• Issuing coupons to people who paid full price for it - that's like saying - come on suckers - buy more from us if you want to make up for the drop in price.
• Advertising as "limited to one unit per customer" and then changing that to 50 units per customer in a weeks time, and then making it unlimited after that.
• Rebranding and releasing old models as new with some miniscule adjustments to dump old stock. S9, S9i, S9j - all basically the same machines. L3+, L3++ - same story.

And the list could go on and on.

[Tailgunner]

It's shady because of perceived value pricing.

"Shady practises" would include some of the following:

• Selling the first batch at $1999 and then dropping them down to $1500 and $850 within a month's time.
• Issuing coupons to people who paid full price for it - that's like saying - come on suckers - buy more from us if you want to make up for the drop in price.
• Advertising as "limited to one unit per customer" and then changing that to 50 units per customer in a weeks time, and then making it unlimited after that.
• Rebranding and releasing old models as new with some miniscule adjustments to dump old stock. S9, S9i, S9j - all basically the same machines. L3+, L3++ - same story.

And the list could go on and on.

Exactly, it's not like this is Bitmain's first sin. This just happens to be the one that finally pushed me over the edge.
Also, how are batch 2s getting 14.5k sols/s? I haven't gotten mine yet but from what I've read if I understand correctly they locked them down so no more OC.

[steemboatwilly]

I just got my z9 mini an hour ago and it’s stuck on balanced. Can’t seem to find a way to change the attribute as well.
Hmm

[grinbuck]

Also, how are batch 2s getting 14.5k sols/s? I haven't gotten mine yet but from what I've read if I understand correctly they locked them down so no more OC.

They tried to lock them down but the workaround to overclocking them is pretty simple. You just have to hit F12 in Google Chrome, inspect the HTML and change the overclock value for the option to whatever you want.

There are multiple posts on this. You can find one of them here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4610213.msg44904070#msg44904070

However, because the chips in batch 2 are "inferior" or whatever to batch 1, most people are not able to overclock reliably to over 675Mh or so - which translates to about 14.5KSol/s.

P.S. This applies to @steemboatwilly's post above as well.

[KaydenC]

Same for me, 2 Z9mini received 27/08, 650m is limit working, at 14,5 avrg

675 will also run stable

Lucky for you, 3 of mine will only do 650, even 662 will drop boards after a few hours.

[not.you]

Anyone opened up the miner to look at the boards?  I'm curious if there are markings on the weak hashing boards to indicate some sort of difference and that bitmain knew something about them.  Seems very coincidental that so many of these batch 2 miners have 1 weak board. 

So because you cant OVERCLOCK one board as much as the others you are jumping right to a conspiracy theory that bitmain is doing things on purpose?

The boards are not weak, they hash just fine at the factory speeds.

There is NO guarantee of overclockability, you should be thanking bitmain for putting out a unit that can overclock by 40-60% in the first place. They only promised 10k sols out of the device....

Seems like maybe you projected a whole bunch of shit I didn't say into what I actually said.

[eviltuna]

Anyone opened up the miner to look at the boards?  I'm curious if there are markings on the weak hashing boards to indicate some sort of difference and that bitmain knew something about them.  Seems very coincidental that so many of these batch 2 miners have 1 weak board.  

So because you cant OVERCLOCK one board as much as the others you are jumping right to a conspiracy theory that bitmain is doing things on purpose?

The boards are not weak, they hash just fine at the factory speeds.

There is NO guarantee of overclockability, you should be thanking bitmain for putting out a unit that can overclock by 40-60% in the first place. They only promised 10k sols out of the device....

I agree that technically they were honest with them providing their product to the advertised spec. But you can't say it isn't shady or misleading to give first batch users some extra unexpected hashing power as a silent marketing strategy just to sell batch 2s to folks expecting the same. I'm not going to bitch & complain about it because yes, I'm getting no less hashing power than what I paid for, but also I personally do not support this marketing practice and as a result I will never be purchasing another Bitmain product or recommend them.

Edit: Also, this is neither a conspiracy nor a coincidence. It's simply silicon binning which is a standard practice throughout the entire semiconducter industry because all chips from a batch are not created equally. The part where it gets shady is that it's likely the highest quality chips were reserved for the batch 1s so everyone could hype over a 50% OC and then pre-order batch 2s.

Why is this shady? They aren't going to redesign the chips from batch 1 to batch two just so YOU can't overclock. Get over yourself, the world doesn't revolve around you.

It's shady because of perceived value pricing. Bitmain sold batch 2s at the price they did knowing the value was perceived higher than reality. I don't even know what you're talking about with chip redesigns, they're the same chips obviously. I really don't know what I said that makes you think i'm selfish either, I'm just saying how I feel about this behavior. Sorry that some random guy on the internet choosing to no longer support a specific company offends you.

If you think it's shady, vote with your wallet and don't buy. I've been doing business with Chinese companies for a long time and this is no where near shady. They didn't promise you that batch 2 will be better or the same. As for pricing its supply and demand, I would set the prices like that too if I was in their position. It's called running a business.

[Captain Crypto Pants]

I just got my z9 mini an hour ago and it’s stuck on balanced. Can’t seem to find a way to change the attribute as well.
Hmm

Mine didn't have a balanced option, can you share a picture?  What batch was yours? 

[Joykiller]

I just got my z9 mini an hour ago and it’s stuck on balanced. Can’t seem to find a way to change the attribute as well.
Hmm

Mine didn't have a balanced option, can you share a picture?  What batch was yours?  

I have a First batch which was fine, Got a Second batch delivered a few hours ago and its firmware had a Balanced no OC firmware preloaded.

It seems they have altered the firmware that came with it to stop OCing too high.

Now I flashed the firmware to the older firmware on the website It cant seem to OC as high as the first batch.  I got it at 650 mhz and increasing as I go. Once it gets too high one of the chips shuts down.

They obviously nerfed the fuck out of the 2nd batches.


UPDATE:

Seems if you flash second batch with firmware from website and try older settings it will not work too well, because freq must of changed on the new chips? It seems good OC max is around 681~ on second batch pulling about 15.8k~ solz on Zec.

Just checked again and it lowered down on the 3rd chip, lowering the freq again, ill let you know what I find.

Update 2: Run time 15m~

Freq: 675 Fan: 95% - They running fairly hot these chips they must of changed something on them big time.  They holding around 72c atm on the chip. Might have to think about adding a 2nd fan on the back. Getting about 14.8-15k sol. Will update in a few hours.