Asic.to Firmware 17Series • Optimized efficiency/Performance •

[taserz]

Its probably using the other miner application to mine its 2.8% fee.

No. Bitmain has both of them installed and running from the factory. Dev fee doesn't do anything with running a separate miner and that would just cause issues as they both can't send work to hashboards at the same time.

i have one T17, and contain CGMINER + BMMINER to ! original firmware, i have examined this, and, CGMINER is used only for running hashing, and BMMINER is user for booting / rebooting or apply config...

So, no problem, just stipide bitmain, mixed two version... if you delete only BMMINER, miner run good, but you don't want apply new config (pool for exemple) ... the code is mixed ...

It does more than that. Bitmain did some wonky stuff on this machine.

You do get that bmminer is cgminer right?
BM just changed the name.

Why would bitmain be running two copies of cgminer then?

New firmware working great. Have a s17 53th running on a 62th profile. Just selected the 62th profile, let it autotune and now it runs great at 62th.
Chips cool, highest 75C

You can potentially go higher if you like. Target chip temp defaults to 75C so it trys to keep fan power draw low. It makes enough airflow to hold 75C I bet fans are not maxing out. But 62th is a very safe overclock.

[1715473076]

1715473076

[1715473076]

1715473076

[wolfen]

... You can potentially go higher if you like. Target chip temp defaults to 75C so it trys to keep fan power draw low. It makes enough airflow to hold 75C I bet fans are not maxing out. But 62th is a very safe overclock.

Yes, trying to stay safe. If I set the chip temp to 80C fans  throttle up to 100%, then start to slowly drop to about 30%, then throttle back up to 100%, rinse, repeat. So I'm sticking with 75C default for now. Fans at 2500-3300 rpm. I'm going to flash a few more s17 at 62th profile. Don't want anything to break, who knows when replacement parts will be available.

[kano]

...
Why would bitmain be running two copies of cgminer then?
...

Same reason as asking why the new Canaan miners run cgminer as a thread of a master process, rather than a separate process of it's own.
They've changed how they start it and run it.
No big deal.
... and since they run two processes on the BM hardware, they prolly decided to name them differently so they could tell which is which.

[wolfen]

I had an s17 53th that did not want to play with the new firmware.
To get it back to stock I upgraded to  the bitmain s17 5-24 firmware, then upgraded to the s17 12-25 firmware from the bitmain website using the GUI.
After upgrading to the s17 12-25 firmware it comes up in sleep mode.
Switched to normal mode and away it went. Pools still configured correctly. SSH disabled.

[fyoung55]

WOW! Auto-tune feature is amazing!

I spent 6 hours tweaking domains on each chain by setting voltage and then pushing each domain up 5 or 10 Mhz.  Set auto tune to 58TH and 600Mhz  and then 45 minutes later is was hashing away right around 57.5TH/s and stable.  Good power savings too, better than my 6 hour attempt  

Thanks for this.

I used to run the blissz on an l3+ and it wold shift pools once a day for like 18 minutes or something to cover the dev fee.  Is that what this firmware does?

[taserz]

WOW! Auto-tune feature is amazing!

I spent 6 hours tweaking domains on each chain by setting voltage and then pushing each domain up 5 or 10 Mhz.  Set auto tune to 58TH and 600Mhz  and then 45 minutes later is was hashing away right around 57.5TH/s and stable.  Good power savings too, better than my 6 hour attempt  

Thanks for this.

I used to run the blissz on an l3+ and it wold shift pools once a day for like 18 minutes or something to cover the dev fee.  Is that what this firmware does?

Kind of we do it in a way where it wont spike power like blissz does but that's essentially how it works.

[taserz]

S17/T17+ out now + major update to S17/T17

Hi Guys.
Meet the new release for Antminer S17, S17 Pro, T17, S17 +, T17 + version 1.1.0 from the best development team✌🏻.

1) General stability, code refactoring to simplify adding support for other models and finalizing the main driver.
2) Full support for S17+.
3) Full support for T17+.
4) Added a new way of reading temperature sensors (rewritten from scratch).
5) Automatic switching to a lower profile when the miner overheats.
6) Automatically switches to a lowered profile when it is not possible to tune the selected profile.
7) Added a trigger for the maximum number of miner restarts in case of a board failure.
Improved cooler speed control algorithm (smooth transition from manual to automatic mode without failures).
9) Fixed error setting voltage in manual mode.
10) Fixed the minimum hash rate check (worked when the value was 0 as disabled in the config).
11) Added information on all successful profiles tuned.
12) Added protection of the miner against hashrate theft by viruses.
13) Low temperatures mode is activated only when the silent mode is on (silent start).
14) A trigger has been added that makes it possible to disable the function of heating (pre-heating) chips.
15) Fix a bug, when the firmware sets the cooler speed to 100% in manual mode.

[Amenthor]

Hi Taserz,

I have updated a few of my miners from 1.0.0 to 1.1.0:
1) It seems the profiles I had set in 1.0.0 are not 100% stable with the new version. After the update multiple chains need to be re-adjusted or a complete Auto-Tune process was necessary.
2) Auto-Tuning is much faster based on my feeling.

A negative thing I have recognized was happening on one miner. The S17 was set to a 62TH profile under 1.0.0 with a voltage of 18.5mV.
It was running very stable all the time and the rate of Errors was very low.

After the update to 1.1.0 the profile was not working as I described in 1) and I tried Auto-Tune.
It was vissible, the chips 45-48 on chain #3 where very hard to tune and the tuning process failed for over 25 rounds and still it was red and orange rating all the time.
(Although the tuning process set the voltage to 18.9mV already)
I have tried to reduce the frequency down to 100 but no success - I failed to get the chain on a proper level.

Today after two days I decided to give it a try and flashed the FW back to 1.0.0 and the miner is back to green level 100% and is working very stable again...
Any idea what could be the reason?

[taserz]

Hi Taserz,

I have updated a few of my miners from 1.0.0 to 1.1.0:
1) It seems the profiles I had set in 1.0.0 are not 100% stable with the new version. After the update multiple chains need to be re-adjusted or a complete Auto-Tune process was necessary.
2) Auto-Tuning is much faster based on my feeling.

A negative thing I have recognized was happening on one miner. The S17 was set to a 62TH profile under 1.0.0 with a voltage of 18.5mV.
It was running very stable all the time and the rate of Errors was very low.

After the update to 1.1.0 the profile was not working as I described in 1) and I tried Auto-Tune.
It was vissible, the chips 45-48 on chain #3 where very hard to tune and the tuning process failed for over 25 rounds and still it was red and orange rating all the time.
(Although the tuning process set the voltage to 18.9mV already)
I have tried to reduce the frequency down to 100 but no success - I failed to get the chain on a proper level.

Today after two days I decided to give it a try and flashed the FW back to 1.0.0 and the miner is back to green level 100% and is working very stable again...
Any idea what could be the reason?

1) Yeah slight changes let it retune if it is not stable

Try to retune and let her run. It should tune the same. That is odd. If you can't get it stable at old settings try to flash back to 1.0 see if it tunes.

The autotune goes for stability so even if it can do it at lower power it bumps it up I think .2 to keep stable

Sorry just read last sentence... That is odd. Let me confirm if we changed voltage step up after tune. After it tunes it bumps power slightly for stability

[Amenthor]

Try to retune and let her run. It should tune the same. That is odd. If you can't get it stable at old settings try to flash back to 1.0 see if it tunes.

The autotune goes for stability so even if it can do it at lower power it bumps it up I think .2 to keep stable

Yep, it is really odd as exactly these chips are working perfectly on 650M Frequency and 18.7mV now on FW 1.0.0
The tuning process detected 18.7mV as minimum voltage on the new firmware and inreased to 18.9mV and 520M until it confirms the chains are stable.
But the machine was working on very low performance for these chips and still marked in red color.
So I have tried to reduce the frequency more and more but nothing was working. (Also 100M/18.9mV was still red)

Sorry just read last sentence... That is odd. Let me confirm if we changed voltage step up after tune. After it tunes it bumps power slightly for stability

No problem, if the miner is working stable with 1.0.0 it is no issue for me to stay on that FW.
Anyway I thought it is important to report as maybe there is a issue with the new release?

[taserz]

Can you humor me.

Tune on 1.0

Then flash to 1.1 I think it keeps the learned tune. That way you can benefit from the return at lower preset on over heat and some of the other changes if you want them.

[fyoung55]

I did just that.  It saves the old tunes.  The new version adds an autotune at 65 TH/s, which I did, but it locked in at a higher voltage than 67TH/s.  Also the new firmware for some reason pulls an extra 30 watts from the wall on the same settings.  Very strange.  I rolled back to 1.0 again.

[AlecMe]

Do you have a step by step guide for a first-timer who is loading different firmware on miner? (i might have missed it on the website)

is the s17+ 105TH speed for immersion, or normal air cooling operating medium?
I need to make sure I am making a profit, after the increase in speed and dev fee calculation, hence asking.

Also, what is the wattage increase at the OC speed? will the PSU need extra cooling, will it be ok in the long term?

what about the dev fee, as halving is soon.  will it be lowered?

Thanks

Edit1. I think I found it. is it this one https://asic.to/ssh-unlock/ also, will it work/has been tested on s17+?
 
Edit2. 'S17+, T17+, S17, and T17 SD Card Image to Downgrade'/Unlock SD images.zip will not finish downloading, keep having my connection reset. do you have another link for it, please?

[taserz]

Do you have a step by step guide for a first-timer who is loading different firmware on miner? (i might have missed it on the website)

is the s17+ 105TH speed for immersion, or normal air cooling operating medium?
I need to make sure I am making a profit, after the increase in speed and dev fee calculation, hence asking.

Also, what is the wattage increase at the OC speed? will the PSU need extra cooling, will it be ok in the long term?

what about the dev fee, as halving is soon.  will it be lowered?

Thanks

Edit1. I think I found it. is it this one https://asic.to/ssh-unlock/ also, will it work/has been tested on s17+?
 
Edit2. 'S17+, T17+, S17, and T17 SD Card Image to Downgrade'/Unlock SD images.zip will not finish downloading, keep having my connection reset. do you have another link for it, please?

http://asic.to/files/SD%20images/SD_S17%2B.rar

[AlecMe]

Do you have a step by step guide for a first-timer who is loading different firmware on miner? (i might have missed it on the website)

[Q1]is the s17+ 105TH speed for immersion, or normal air cooling operating medium?
I need to make sure I am making a profit, after the increase in speed and dev fee calculation, hence asking.

Also, [Q2]what is the wattage increase at the OC speed? and, [Q3]will the PSU need extra cooling, will it be ok in the long term?

what about the dev fee, as halving is soon. [Q4] will it be lowered?

Thanks

Edit1. I think I found it. is it this one https://asic.to/ssh-unlock/ also, will it work/has been tested on s17+?
 
Edit2. 'S17+, T17+, S17, and T17 SD Card Image to Downgrade'/Unlock SD images.zip will not finish downloading, keep having my connection reset. do you have another link for it, please?

http://asic.to/files/SD%20images/SD_S17%2B.rar

The new link worked. thank you.

About my other 4 questions in bold above, do you have an answer, please?

[favebook]

About my other 4 questions in bold above, do you have an answer, please?

Q1-Immersion or really really really cold environment with ton of airflow.

Q2-Depends on settings you use, your ambient temp and luck of a draw (silicon lottery).

Q3-Not unless you are in very hot environment or you plan on going above specs of PSU.

Q4-I am not part of taserz team nor do I have anything to do with devs (I am just another customer who pays fee same as you) but I assume they wouldn't lower the fee.

[Scorpyy]

Hello,

There have been many issues reported with T17 series that are tied to temperature sensors checks.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5217800.0


Basicly all 4 sensors on 1 chain stop giving info and miner shuts down the chain. After several restarts it starts hashing normally until issue re-occurs after some time.

Is there a way we can disable / skip temp check on 1 chain with this firmware? Yes i am aware of all risks.

[favebook]

There probably is a way if developers decide to add it, but I highly doubt it because of the said risks.

I personally would never use that option, nor would I recommend anyone to use it even if it was implemented.

That said, I highly doubt Vnish or Taserz will add that option.

[Scorpyy]

It would be good to have it for troubleshooting reasons. I am aware of a risk, but i am willing to take it. I mean, aren't we all crypto-enthusiasts risk takers?  

I do know that awesome miner firmware has option to set requirement to accept at least 1 out of 4 on-board sensors in order to let the board hash, but i don't think it would work in my case as when issue occures all 4 sensors do not report their temps:

Code:

[2020/04/21 04:11:03] ERROR: src/temp.c:218 chain[0] sen[2] - Lost, no updates for 10 sec
[2020/04/21 04:11:03] ERROR: src/temp.c:218 chain[0] sen[3] - Lost, no updates for 10 sec
[2020/04/21 04:11:03] WARN: chain[0] - 2 sensor(s) reported their temps!
[2020/04/21 04:11:04] ERROR: src/temp.c:218 chain[0] sen[0] - Lost, no updates for 10 sec
[2020/04/21 04:11:04] ERROR: src/temp.c:218 chain[0] sen[1] - Lost, no updates for 10 sec
[2020/04/21 04:11:04] WARN: chain[0] - 0 sensor(s) reported their temps!
[2020/04/21 04:11:04] ERROR: driver-btm-chain.c:950 chain[0] - Failed to read temp from all sensors!
[2020/04/21 04:11:04] INFO: chain[0] - Shutting down the chain

I wasn't thinking of adding it as an option per se. I would be happy if it was possible to terminate process via SSH.

[favebook]

It would be good to have it for troubleshooting reasons. I am aware of a risk, but i am willing to take it. I mean, aren't we all crypto-enthusiasts risk takers? 

I do know that awesome miner firmware has option to set requirement to accept at least 1 out of 4 on-board sensors in order to let the board hash, but i don't think it would work in my case as when issue occures all 4 sensors do not report their temps:

I wasn't thinking of adding it as an option per se. I would be happy if it was possible to terminate process via SSH.

Some risks are not worth taking. I would personally either RMA the unit or buy new temp sensors.