GridSeed 5-chip USB miner voltage mod

[wolfey2014]

Hey yall!

Just a quick update.

I modded the rest of my 6 miners this afternoon, after work.

I am seeing at least a 150% increase in hashing power out of my 6 pods right now.

I just stated a fresh 24 hour test using litecoinpool.org at around 2015hrs tonight. So far, LOOKIN GOOD! REAL GOOD!
As of 2015hrs tomorrow night, I'll have a 24hr avarage per unit to look at.
I'll post those results, with screen shots, then.

Far out!
I have 6 miners doing the work of 9.sthng non-modified default clock miners. Fukkin eh, man!

Very good increase. Very good, indeed!

Wolfey2014

[bon4ire]

What?


Anyway.....

Nope, higher-ish...

WOLFEY2014

I mean combine your posts, no reason to make 5 back to back posts.

Not trolling or anything here:
I am excited to see your 24hour hash average.

Have you tried getting cgminer working, or you sticking with cpuminer?

Frankly, I don't like the pencil trick. So I limited the mod to the two bridges.

Is the new trick additive to the two bridges?

[bon4ire]

What?

Frankly, I don't like the pencil trick. So I limited the mod to the two bridges.

Is the new trick additive to the two bridges?

All 4 mods are necessary or trying to overclock the GS5's at 1000MHz will be for shit!
You'll just get tons of red nonce's.
The pencil trick is absolutely necessary like it or not. Either learn how to use a dvm or don't do any of the mods. You'll just be wasting your time, effort, emotions and energy. Who needs roller coaster rides like that?
I don't like the pencil trick either. That's why I'm doing something about it Frank! 
Wolfey2014

So far I've modded 6 out of 10. I'll wait to see what you have in store.  Pretty exciting actually 

Bon

[dani]

Hey yall!

Just a quick update.

I modded the rest of my 6 miners this afternoon, after work.

I am seeing at least a 150% increase in hashing power out of my 6 pods right now.

I just stated a fresh 24 hour test using litecoinpool.org at around 2015hrs tonight. So far, LOOKIN GOOD! REAL GOOD!
As of 2015hrs tomorrow night, I'll have a 24hr avarage per unit to look at.
I'll post those results, with screen shots, then.

Far out!
I have 6 miners doing the work of 9.sthng non-modified default clock miners. Fukkin eh, man!

Very good increase. Very good, indeed!

Wolfey2014

PICS OR DIDN'T HAPPEN!

[geetash]

2 bridge modded all my gridseeds, 7 of them.
running at 925 seems to be stable (none to 1 or 2 errors / 12 hours). its giving few H/W errors at 950.
most GSs can handle 938 and even 950 without H/W errors so im using the modified cgminer to set different unique clock speeds to each of them.
http://cryptomining-blog.com/1688-alternative-cgminer-3-7-2-for-scrypt-mining-on-gridseed-5-chip-gc3355-asics
want to do the pencil+SMD replace mod as well but too afraid to risk 250$ for few kilo hashes.

[wolfey2014]

Hey yall!

Just a quick update.

I modded the rest of my 6 miners this afternoon, after work.

I am seeing at least a 150% increase in hashing power out of my 6 pods right now.

I just stated a fresh 24 hour test using litecoinpool.org at around 2015hrs tonight. So far, LOOKIN GOOD! REAL GOOD!
As of 2015hrs tomorrow night, I'll have a 24hr avarage per unit to look at.
I'll post those results, with screen shots, then.

Far out!
I have 6 miners doing the work of 9.sthng non-modified default clock miners. Fukkin eh, man!

Very good increase. Very good, indeed!

Wolfey2014

PICS OR DIDN'T HAPPEN!

You call digital pics PROOF?  Hahahahhahahhaahahahahhahhahah!
All I can provide is EVIDENCE!
And it's coming up after I complete a full 24 hour run!
So, your !!!!PICS!!!! will be up, soon.

[wolfey2014]

2 bridge modded all my gridseeds, 7 of them.
running at 925 seems to be stable (none to 1 or 2 errors / 12 hours). its giving few H/W errors at 950.
most GSs can handle 938 and even 950 without H/W errors so im using the modified cgminer to set different unique clock speeds to each of them.
http://cryptomining-blog.com/1688-alternative-cgminer-3-7-2-for-scrypt-mining-on-gridseed-5-chip-gc3355-asics
want to do the pencil+SMD replace mod as well but too afraid to risk 250$ for few kilo hashes.

So what?

I believe that's possible with NO mods!

You're wasting your time not doing all 4 mods. They MUST be done together or modding is a waste of time.
IF you can solder 2 tiny bridges, you can easily replace the resistor and do the pencil mod - provided you have a dvm on hand to check the PLL voltage.

Anyway, it's all on you!
Remember, you cook it, you eat it

Wolfey2014

[geetash]

got all equipments. ill give it a try then. 

[bon4ire]

So what?

I believe that's possible with NO mods!

You're wasting your time not doing all 4 mods. They MUST be done together or modding is a waste of time.
IF you can solder 2 tiny bridges, you can easily replace the resistor and do the pencil mod - provided you have a dvm on hand to check the PLL voltage.

Anyway, it's all on you!

Wolfey2014

Ah ok, so it IS all 4 mods.  For some reason I was understanding there was a different mod other than the pencil trick you've discovered.  Well then. I'm on track

I got as far as doing all the mods minus the resister (didn't have any around). I did have my dvm around too.  The modded gridseeds are currently hashing at 950 mhz. Once the resister is in I'll push higher.

Bon

 

[Reggie0]

Hey yall!

Just a quick update.

I modded the rest of my 6 miners this afternoon, after work.

I am seeing at least a 150% increase in hashing power out of my 6 pods right now.

I just stated a fresh 24 hour test using litecoinpool.org at around 2015hrs tonight. So far, LOOKIN GOOD! REAL GOOD!
As of 2015hrs tomorrow night, I'll have a 24hr avarage per unit to look at.
I'll post those results, with screen shots, then.

Far out!
I have 6 miners doing the work of 9.sthng non-modified default clock miners. Fukkin eh, man!

Very good increase. Very good, indeed!

Wolfey2014

PICS OR DIDN'T HAPPEN!

It didn't happen. If you double the frequency, then you get double hashrate. At 1050MHz you will get 425kH/s. There are no magic...

[wolfey2014]

Hey yall!

Just a quick update.

I modded the rest of my 6 miners this afternoon, after work.

I am seeing at least a 150% increase in hashing power out of my 6 pods right now.

I just stated a fresh 24 hour test using litecoinpool.org at around 2015hrs tonight. So far, LOOKIN GOOD! REAL GOOD!
As of 2015hrs tomorrow night, I'll have a 24hr avarage per unit to look at.
I'll post those results, with screen shots, then.

Far out!
I have 6 miners doing the work of 9.sthng non-modified default clock miners. Fukkin eh, man!

Very good increase. Very good, indeed!

Wolfey2014

PICS OR DIDN'T HAPPEN!

It didn't happen. If you double the frequency, then you get double hashrate. At 1050MHz you will get 425kH/s. There are no magic...

The results I speak of and have been speaking of ALL ALONG are POOL SIDE!
I don't care what local hash rate says, I can't see it anyway using cpuminer. It's pool side that matters! AND That is where the money is made!
And by your own calculations / admission , it IS A 150% increase - client side - AT LEAST - moron!

SEE THAT! It's RIGHT IN YOUR FACE!!!

Wolfey2014

[geetash]

2 bridge modded all my gridseeds, 7 of them.
running at 925 seems to be stable (none to 1 or 2 errors / 12 hours). its giving few H/W errors at 950.
most GSs can handle 938 and even 950 without H/W errors so im using the modified cgminer to set different unique clock speeds to each of them.
http://cryptomining-blog.com/1688-alternative-cgminer-3-7-2-for-scrypt-mining-on-gridseed-5-chip-gc3355-asics
want to do the pencil+SMD replace mod as well but too afraid to risk 250$ for few kilo hashes.

So what?

I believe that's possible with NO mods!

You're wasting your time not doing all 4 mods. They MUST be done together or modding is a waste of time.
IF you can solder 2 tiny bridges, you can easily replace the resistor and do the pencil mod - provided you have a dvm on hand to check the PLL voltage.

Anyway, it's all on you!
Remember, you cook it, you eat it

Wolfey2014

i cannot get past 850 without the mod so this is already a big gain, no time waste at all

[Reggie0]

The results I speak of and have been speaking of ALL ALONG are POOL SIDE!
I don't care what local hash rate says, I can't see it anyway using cpuminer. It's pool side that matters! AND That is where the money is made!
And by your own calculations / admission , it IS A 150% increase - client side - AT LEAST - moron!

SEE THAT! It's RIGHT IN YOUR FACE!!!

Wolfey2014

1. Pool hashrate reports are inaccurate and its have high variance. You reported a peak hashrate, not an average. Maybe try it on ghash.io, there are 6 hour, 12 hour and daily average values.

2. There are a theoretical problem: you will never get higher average pool hashrate than local average hashrate in long term. Cgminer's hashrate calculation based on how many jobs are finished in a second, whatever its result(you got a share or it has no solution). Pool calculation based on how many shares are submitted in a second. It depends on luck, but as Law of Large Numbers says, in long term it has to be same as your local hashrate(in an ideal environment: no network latency, no stale share, no rejected share, etc.).

[wolfey2014]

The results I speak of and have been speaking of ALL ALONG are POOL SIDE!
I don't care what local hash rate says, I can't see it anyway using cpuminer. It's pool side that matters! AND That is where the money is made!
And by your own calculations / admission , it IS A 150% increase - client side - AT LEAST - moron!

SEE THAT! It's RIGHT IN YOUR FACE!!!

Wolfey2014

1. Pool hashrate reports are inaccurate and its have high variance. You reported a peak hashrate, not an average. Maybe try it on ghash.io, there are 6 hour, 12 hour and daily average values.

2. There are a theoretical problem: you will never get higher average pool hashrate than local average hashrate in long term. Cgminer's hashrate calculation based on how many jobs are finished in a second, whatever its result(you got a share or it has no solution). Pool calculation based on how many shares are submitted in a second. It depends on luck, but as Law of Large Numbers says, in long term it has to be same as your local hashrate(in an ideal environment: no network latency, no stale share, no rejected share, etc.).

Not interested in semantics.
Facts are facts, no matter how you try to rationalize them, REAL results speak for themselves.
Nuff said...
Wolfey2014

[Reggie0]

Not interested in semantics.
Facts are facts, no matter how you try to rationalize them, REAL results speak for themselves.
Nuff said...
Wolfey2014

The fact is, you have no REAL results, only unverified, wrong results. Sorry.

[DarkKnight]

2. There are a theoretical problem: you will never get higher average pool hashrate than local average hashrate in long term. Cgminer's hashrate calculation based on how many jobs are finished in a second, whatever its result(you got a share or it has no solution). Pool calculation based on how many shares are submitted in a second. It depends on luck, but as Law of Large Numbers says, in long term it has to be same as your local hashrate(in an ideal environment: no network latency, no stale share, no rejected share, etc.).

Actually, ghash.io often over reports my hash rate, incl the 1h & 1d averages, by about 25%. Use a good multipool like coinshift or clevermining for more accurate pool rates. The graphs have a finer resolution as well. 



Also! For anyone who wants to have a slower fan, but DOESN'T want to power it via USB, try inserting a 47ohm 1w resistor in the red wire to drop the 12v in half. It's important that you use a 1w resistor, as it will be dissipating about 3/4w.

[amix]

So anyone out there with a good camera that can take very clear pics of areas will be a hero to me besides the guys who worked all this out in first place  

camera? i have something better, wait a sec

oh, sorry. i tought scanning it with 1200dpi would produce better results,
but the focus got not far enough, even with my real tube ccd scanner

Thats a really good picture. Nice work .
I am looking for a way to make the "pencil" mode more time efficient. That would mean for me, that i will solder the correct resistor there that you reach 1.01V and the rest will be given by the pencil then. (lets assume you can go +- 0.01V with pencil mod, without changeing the voltage when occasionally sneeze on it.)].

OC Unit (2 bridge pin mod, 950mhz)
I measured 120,7 kohm on r211 and 0,3v
I measured  65.6 kohm between r211 and r212 1,09v
I measured  60kohm, 0,8v r212
OC+ Unit (1050mhz and 39k 1% resistor + pencil mod)
I measured 7 kohm on r211 0,03v
I measured 60.2 kohm between r211 and r212and 0,82v ( i measured it twice, i rubbed a little on the carbonglue and needed to recheck: 61kohm, 0,85v)
I assume    60kohm, 0,8v r212 (was not changed, so it should be the same)

So lets do some correlation:
65,6kohm / 1,09V  = 60,18349kohm/ v * 1.01v =  60.785kohm
60.2kohm / 0,82v =  73.41464kohm /v  * 1.01v =  74.149 kohm
(61kohm/0,85v = 71,7648kohm/v * 1.01v = 72,482 kohm)
(not sure where this offset comes from, i just assume that is just not a linear ?,(but i will try linear interpolation) )

Interpolation:
x = 1.01v; f(x)[kohm]; f0 = 60,2kohm,f1 = 65,6kohm, x0 =0,82v; x1 = 1,09v
f(x) = 64kohm
So my assumption would be, that ill get 1.01v when i can set the resistance between r211 and r212 to 64kohm.
Achievable that way:
x = (1.01 -0,8V ) = 0.21v; f(x)[kohm]; f0 = 7kohm,f1 = 120,7kohm, x0 =0,03v; x1 = 0,3v
= 82,8kohm

So in short: i need to replace the R211 with 82,8kohm and i would get a steady 1.01V.
Please confirm if correct.

On my currently modded unit, i remeasured things. Looks like as i did a little overshoot with the carbonglue ... As it got hard, it was more conductive and my pll voltage is now 0,82V:
I know that it is not a 24h run, and i am scientifcly very sorry for that and will post one the next days. In our first run it was much more stable, when the voltage was at 0.94V.
I will reduce som of the carbon glue and will rerun a new test.


Is there actually a scientific proven reason, why 1.01V shouild be the sweatspot ? In our sample, i could not measure any differences.
Can also someone specify which size the smd resistors are currently ? I mean which type of smd resistors (to be exact: which size?) are they ?

regards,
nemercry

still digesting all this just in from long day at work. but i believe the SMD series is 0403. i could be mistaken though. i did have a parts list for the gridseed, compelte with size, value, series and footprint, but i cant find it now. so im going on memory.

[nemercry]

I will do a new picture, when i am done with my smd resistor replacement on the pencil side.
I will try 2 different SMD's (eg at 0.94V and 1.01V) and try to give you a 24h run for each PLL voltage. (Will probably happen first on the next week, because i needed to order parts.)
As for replication of results i would advise to use the 39kOhm 1% resitor because its more exact on the resistor value.

Lets see what stable resulst we all get : ].

Regards


Edit: @ Amix thanks for the reply. I tried to measure it myself, and also estimated that it would be the 0402 series. I ordered some of them, which will probably arrive next week. Then i will be able to confirm .
Thanks for your reply!

EDIT: I tried 0.94V and 1.01V, DONT DO IT

[DarkKnight]

Hi-res HDR photo. Hope this helps.  

Click the image for larger verison.



Edit: New single, better photo. I rotated the GS to match the other photos for ease of use. Took 15 shots to get it right. 

[dani]

The results I speak of and have been speaking of ALL ALONG are POOL SIDE!
I don't care what local hash rate says, I can't see it anyway using cpuminer. It's pool side that matters! AND That is where the money is made!
And by your own calculations / admission , it IS A 150% increase - client side - AT LEAST - moron!

SEE THAT! It's RIGHT IN YOUR FACE!!!

Wolfey2014

1. Pool hashrate reports are inaccurate and its have high variance. You reported a peak hashrate, not an average. Maybe try it on ghash.io, there are 6 hour, 12 hour and daily average values.

2. There are a theoretical problem: you will never get higher average pool hashrate than local average hashrate in long term. Cgminer's hashrate calculation based on how many jobs are finished in a second, whatever its result(you got a share or it has no solution). Pool calculation based on how many shares are submitted in a second. It depends on luck, but as Law of Large Numbers says, in long term it has to be same as your local hashrate(in an ideal environment: no network latency, no stale share, no rejected share, etc.).

Not interested in semantics.
Facts are facts, no matter how you try to rationalize them, REAL results speak for themselves.
Nuff said...
Wolfey2014

You take your hashrate peaks as actual speed. 150% bullshit, I say. I don't see any facts here.
Anyway, let's stop it here and call it a day. I still like you