Efudd Z-Series Fuddware 2.3 -Z11/Z11e/Z11j/Z9/Mini

[Apache13]

Hi all,

Based on community feedback, and taking into consideration the 25% tariff many of us had to pay, difficulty increases, etc., I have decided to add a single node option that is 25% less than the 2 node option (which has stayed the same).

This means for 25% less you can get up to 25% more (and those rare systems that can go well above 650Mhz can gain up to 50% more than factory... but this is _RARE_) for a single Z9; it is like adding a Z9 mini to your Z9!

Thank you,

Jason

Thanks for all your hard work on creating this and allowing everyone to benefit from your hard work. As far as this 1 node/2nod stuff, is this a new fw for 650+ on the z9’s? I was a little confused on the 1 and 2 node stuff

[1715161716]

1715161716

[1715161716]

1715161716

[1715161716]

1715161716

[1715161716]

1715161716

[1715161716]

1715161716

[cmiles7888]

Just got a response from nicehash, I don't really understand the file they are talking about but maybe you do efudd..

Hi,

Unfortunately we do not have these two ASICS. To give you exact instructions
we need to get two tpcdump files, one tcpdump should be from miner which
is connected to remote pool and is working properly and second tcpdump
should be when miner is connected to NiceHash. We are iust assuming where
could be the issue. With tpcdump files we will see exactly where is the issue.

Best regards,
NiceHash Team

[efudd]

Just got a response from nicehash, I don't really understand the file they are talking about but maybe you do efudd..

Hi,

Unfortunately we do not have these two ASICS. To give you exact instructions
we need to get two tpcdump files, one tcpdump should be from miner which
is connected to remote pool and is working properly and second tcpdump
should be when miner is connected to NiceHash. We are iust assuming where
could be the issue. With tpcdump files we will see exactly where is the issue.

Best regards,
NiceHash Team

I understand what they are talking about -- they responded to me with the same information last night. I asked another question in response and they replied immediately.

Thank you for the follow-up -- I'll see if I can throw together some basic instructions and get what we'd need pulled together.

I'll "add it to the list", lol!

-j

[efudd]

Going forward, I am available to work with commercial entities for consulting, customization, on all aspects of crypto-mining to help maximize profit margins. PM/DM to discuss details as I am still accepting commercial consulting clients for long-term working relationships.

Future updates will go to pre-existing customers, as promised.

Thank you,

Jason

[Crypto305]

@efudd

Sorry wont let me send a dm now.  To continue my temps at higher frequencies is expected due to other miners in the vicinitywhich raises the ambient temp in the room.  The main thing is my unit will not accept higher frequencies unfortunately.  I even tested by moving to another area to keep temps down and same issue even when fan at 100 and temps around 76

Thank you

[efudd]

@efudd

Sorry wont let me send a dm now.  To continue my temps at higher frequencies is expected due to other miners in the vicinitywhich raises the ambient temp in the room.  The main thing is my unit will not accept higher frequencies unfortunately.  I even tested by moving to another area to keep temps down and same issue even when fan at 100 and temps around 76

Thank you

Ok. I will contact you.

[Crypto305]

@efudd

Thank you for your offline help.  Everything is working great now with your premium firmware.  Great stuff I highly recommend.

Thank you

[efudd]

As of 10/2/2018 the download links for all unlocked firmware have been updated to an image that now supports 500-650 in 5Mhz steps, and 651-700 in 1Mhz steps. There is no guarantee that your machine(s) will work with these frequencies, they have just been exposed to make it easier on users.

Thank you,

Jason

[tahoeminer]

So just download again and re-flash?

[efudd]

So just download again and re-flash?

Yes sir. The primary dashboard will say "Version 1.1" if I remember what I wrote correctly. :-)

I'll try to update the download infrastructure soon to send a versioned filename to make this easier in the future.

-j

[efudd]

Howdy folk,

Just a quick update on progress. Addition of per-board frequency support is moving along, but a little slower than I would have liked. If anyone happens to have a spare Z9 control board, please let me know -- I'm looking to acquire one.

If anyone else is looking for Z9 firmware, I'll be online the next couple of hours for instant processing.

Thank you!

Jason

[xPETEx]

Just a quick update on progress. Addition of per-board frequency support is moving along...

REALLY looking forward to this. I have one ASIC where one board runs 10 degrees higher than the other two.

Has anybody tried re-pasting the heat-sync or something to try to lower temps?

[efudd]

Just a quick update on progress. Addition of per-board frequency support is moving along...

REALLY looking forward to this. I have one ASIC where one board runs 10 degrees higher than the other two.

Has anybody tried re-pasting the heat-sync or something to try to lower temps?

xPETEx - I'm literally _currently_ working on this. I'm awaiting on some hardware to arrive for testing but am really hoping to get this closed out early next week at the latest. It'll have huge value to all users! Pray, keep fingers crossed, whatever it is you do for success. :-)

[fccs]

Just a quick update on progress. Addition of per-board frequency support is moving along...

REALLY looking forward to this. I have one ASIC where one board runs 10 degrees higher than the other two.

Has anybody tried re-pasting the heat-sync or something to try to lower temps?

I have a couple that are 10 degrees higher than other boards.  No idea why

[efudd]

Just a quick update on progress. Addition of per-board frequency support is moving along...

REALLY looking forward to this. I have one ASIC where one board runs 10 degrees higher than the other two.

Has anybody tried re-pasting the heat-sync or something to try to lower temps?

I have a couple that are 10 degrees higher than other boards.  No idea why

What temps are ya'll hitting? Still 75C or under even with the higher one?

[zeric]

Has anyone experienced problems running 650 mhz and up on the standard bitmain provided awp3 psu? The 1370 watt drawn at 650 mhz seems disturbingly close to the 1600w max on the psu since 1600 x 0,8 = 1280.

[efudd]

Has anyone experienced problems running 650 mhz and up on the standard bitmain provided awp3 psu? The 1370 watt drawn at 650 mhz seems disturbingly close to the 1600w max on the psu since 1600 x 0,8 = 1280.

zeric, perhaps others will provide some input. I tested on APW7 and APW3s, both at 240V. I also considered the "80 percent" rule -- in fact, higher overclocks, if possible, may require the APW7 as you have pointed out. In my particular environment I monitored equipment with a thermal imaging camera and never found the APW3 to be outside of what I would have been worried about.

Are you experiencing problems, or just a question of concern? Regardless, I think this is an excellent question.

Jason

[zeric]

Has anyone experienced problems running 650 mhz and up on the standard bitmain provided awp3 psu? The 1370 watt drawn at 650 mhz seems disturbingly close to the 1600w max on the psu since 1600 x 0,8 = 1280.

zeric, perhaps others will provide some input. I tested on APW7 and APW3s, both at 240V. I also considered the "80 percent" rule -- in fact, higher overclocks, if possible, may require the APW7 as you have pointed out. In my particular environment I monitored equipment with a thermal imaging camera and never found the APW3 to be outside of what I would have been worried about.


Are you experiencing problems, or just a question of concern? Regardless, I think this is an excellent question.

Jason

As we talked about on dicord I'm not experiencing problems since my z9s are still on their way to me However, I've read several places that 85% should be ok as well - if you have sufficient airflow. 1600 x 0,85 = 1360.

On paper it should be ok for 650 mhz, but more would probably be too much.

[Biodom]

Has anyone experienced problems running 650 mhz and up on the standard bitmain provided awp3 psu? The 1370 watt drawn at 650 mhz seems disturbingly close to the 1600w max on the psu since 1600 x 0,8 = 1280.

Typically, this is not the meaning of PSU power limit.

You can run 1300W PSU like EVGA with on-the wall reading of up to 1430W just fine.
i am not sure why you are multiplying 1600 by 0.8.
First, only the worst PSUs have 80% efficiency (maybe APw3 is one of them, i don't know), which is a Bronze level.
Second, PSU indication of 1300w (EVGA) or 1600 (APW3) usually means power output limit (to miner) and not power input (measured at the wall) AFAIK.

That said, maybe Bitmain got it backwards, who knows.

[imine2]

Has anyone experienced problems running 650 mhz and up on the standard bitmain provided awp3 psu? The 1370 watt drawn at 650 mhz seems disturbingly close to the 1600w max on the psu since 1600 x 0,8 = 1280.

Typically, this is not the meaning of PSU power limit.

You can run 1300W PSU like EVGA with on-the wall reading of up to 1430W just fine.
i am not sure why you are multiplying 1600 by 0.8.
First, only the worst PSUs have 80% efficiency (maybe APw3 is one of them, i don't know), which is a Bronze level.
Second, PSU indication of 1300w (EVGA) or 1600 (APW3) usually means power output limit (to miner) and not power input (measured at the wall) AFAIK.

That said, maybe Bitmain got it backwards, who knows.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4610213.msg46263811#msg46263811


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3375500.0