GekkoScience has a new pod miner, just in time for Christmas

[sidehack]

Introducing the newest quiet consumer miner from GekkoScience, the newest addition to the Terminus pod-miner line, the R909.

It may not look like much right away, but it's a significant improvement over the R606 in almost every way.

This miner is built with the same physical dimensions as the R606 so anything built around them would still fit this unit. Airflow ducting is the same, same 80mm fan. However, you'll notice ports and jacks are located at the exhaust end instead of accessible from the side.

This makes the unit more readily stackable, as you no longer have to keep three sides clear - two for airflow and one for cabling.

It also allowed us to expand the circuit board by 15%, making room for a better main regulator and improved thermal management. Heatsink area over the chips is increased by 40% over the R606, and we've added more board mounting legs for improved stability especially during shipping.

The miner runs on the S17's BM1397 ASIC, as used in our Compac-F USB stick miner. Kano has been hard at work improving the driver, and has added several features that will be very attractive to tuning enthusiasts, though the stock settings will already be fairly excellent.

The miner is guaranteed to run at 1.5TH from under 100 DC watts at stock voltage and do it nearly silently. Better performance isn't guaranteed, but is probably attainable. Take for example the test unit I had running 1.8TH at 70 watts, or the above-photographed machine which pulled down almost 2.1TH from 88 watts (on stock voltage, no voltage tuning) for over a week:

The Terminus R909 needs an external controller running cgminer, with USB connection to the miner (a 6-foot USB cable will be included with purchase). The driver has been tested extensively on linux PC and Raspberry Pi. Like previous Terminus models, the miner runs on 12V power from either a standard 2.1/5.5mm barrel jack (rated for 8A) or a PCIe 6-pin jack.

The "stock" speed will be set to 400MHz, expected to see 1.6TH, but higher frequencies are possible. Kano will explain the details, but he's been working on adding tuning features which include setting individual chip frequencies. Core voltage is adjustable in the range of 1.4V-1.6V per chip, same as on the Compac F, and though the R606 had a fancy push-button interface, we've rolled back to a basic knob you turn with a screwdriver on this one. That may be improved on future versions but I won't make promises just in case.

This miner also features Blinky Lights, but they're not as intrusive as previous models of pod or stick. The rate of blinking is proportional to hashrate. The base light color is a delightful pink-magenta.

The BM1397 chips have a significant temperature coefficient, which means that they pull noticeably more power as they get warmer. Nobody at GekkoScience will be offended if a tuner or enthusiast upgrades the fan, as more airflow could mean reducing power consumption by 5-10% just from maintaining lower temperatures. These units take a standard 80mmx25mm 3/4-wire 12V case fan.

And like all GekkoScience products, the Terminus R909 is Made In The USA.

Approximate dimensions: 3.5 x 4.2 x 6 inches.

SALES

So far, two resellers have confirmed to stock this machine, and should have stock in time to start delivering orders by Christmas. Production is already well underway on the first batch. This post will be updated as more sellers are added.

bitcoinmerch.com shipping from California
419mining.com shipping from Ohio
bitshopper.de in Europe/Germany (forum user MacEntyre)

The Terminus R909 will include a 6ft USB cable. It'll be up to resellers to provide any extras, power supplies or anything.

[1702216549]

1702216549

[1702216549]

1702216549

[kano]

BETA release of cgminer for the new R909

The 'beta' comment is that there's quite a few changes, so we'll see how it goes,

I've moved this, since it allows me to edit it more easily, and also gives me full HTML markup to make it easier to read.
Here: https://kano.is/gekko.php

I'll comment here when there are any major updates.

2022-12-11 R606 performance issues have been resolved.
2022-12-13 Windows binary for v4.12.1 is available now at https://kano.is/cgminer.php
2022-12-17 Git updated to add per chip tuning information. Windows binary updated. https://kano.is/gekko.php updated.
2022-12-21 Update to improve performance and tuning. Windows binary updated. https://kano.is/gekko.php updated.
2023-01-14 Update only necessary for the old R808 miner.

[pkspks]

Hoping for a reseller in APAC. International shipping cost to Australia is always a killer.

[cygan]

a very good news to finally present the r606 successor. i had been waiting for this release for a long time and will definitely order at least 1 exemplar.
@sidehack can you perhaps tell us the range in which the new r909 will be priced?

[kano]

The resellers decide their pricing.

[Powell]

Looks like I am going to have to grab a few!  Good work Sidehack and crew!

[willi9974]

Thanks for the new device, looks nice and will also Order one

[n0nce]

BM1397-based pod miner, amazing! The efficiency of these chips is so much better than what's in Futurebit's Apollo; depending on pricing, I can see the R909 making the Apollo 'Standard Unit' obsolete.
I'm definitely going to pick one up. (for mining and tinkering.. )

[Sledge0001]

Love home mining gear like this.
Well done!

Now just need Santa to deliver!

[Skot]

Looks amazing, nice work! Is this based on six BM1397 chips?

[cygan]

BM1397-based pod miner, amazing! The efficiency of these chips is so much better than what's in Futurebit's Apollo; depending on pricing, I can see the R909 making the Apollo 'Standard Unit' obsolete.
I'm definitely going to pick one up. (for mining and tinkering.. )

i see exactly the same as you
and the power consumption of the new r909 is in my opinion unbeatable at this performance then

[o_solo_miner]

BM1397-based pod miner, amazing! The efficiency of these chips is so much better than what's in Futurebit's Apollo; depending on pricing, I can see the R909 making the Apollo 'Standard Unit' obsolete.
I'm definitely going to pick one up. (for mining and tinkering.. )

That depends on what you are planning to do, mining on your own bitcoind or not.
IF this CGMiner version is not reduced in its original function, it will be a good replacement, if not, not worth to buy.

[kano]

BM1397-based pod miner, amazing! The efficiency of these chips is so much better than what's in Futurebit's Apollo; depending on pricing, I can see the R909 making the Apollo 'Standard Unit' obsolete.
I'm definitely going to pick one up. (for mining and tinkering.. )

That depends on what you are planning to do, mining on your own bitcoind or not.
IF this CGMiner version is not reduced in its original function, it will be a good replacement, if not, not worth to buy.

Please avoid spreading FUD for your own personal agenda, and at least word it truthfully.

To correct his FUD, what o_solo_miner is saying is that if I don't fix the bug in ck's code, that o_solo_miner insists I must fix for him, where it wont currently solo mine directly to a local bitcoind, then for some reason that is somehow relevant.
Sounds like a lousy attempt at coercion to me.

I do know how to fix it since I've already done it myself to ckpool ... but fixing it in cgminer hasn't been a priority since I'm also unsure about suggesting people do something that could easily lead to losing a block and then having them blame me for it.
While this may or may not seem likely to some, even o_solo_miner's attempt at coercion above makes me wary of such things.

I will also point out that someone put up a pull request to my git to fix this but that pull request can generate work that the miner will never get the reward if they find a block, in certain circumstances.

As I have made clear many times, I don't trust people's code that isn't tested properly.
Especially when it's involved with bitcoin blocks.

--

Edit: I will also point out that I have attempted to get core to simplify block testing for developers.
I've raised an issue quite a while ago and discussed it as can be seen:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/22119
I also explain there how I do full block testing at lower difficulty and the non-testing related issues with doing that.

[heslo]

This looks really nice! Might have to pick one up if there's a reseller for my region. As always, love your work sidehack!

[o_solo_miner]

BM1397-based pod miner, amazing! The efficiency of these chips is so much better than what's in Futurebit's Apollo; depending on pricing, I can see the R909 making the Apollo 'Standard Unit' obsolete.
I'm definitely going to pick one up. (for mining and tinkering.. )

That depends on what you are planning to do, mining on your own bitcoind or not.
IF this CGMiner version is not reduced in its original function, it will be a good replacement, if not, not worth to buy.

Please avoid spreading FUD for your own personal agenda, and at least word it truthfully.

First, there is no FUD, and there is no personal agenda.

To correct his FUD, what o_solo_miner is saying is that if I don't fix the bug in ck's code, that o_solo_miner insists I must fix for him, where it wont currently solo mine directly to a local bitcoind, then for some reason that is somehow relevant.
Sounds like a lousy attempt at coercion to me.

You better word it truthfully:
There is no bug in ck's code, there was a change from core after ck stop the support of cgminer and that stoped cgminers ability to mine
on the bitcoind.

I pointed that out here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5253096.msg54839526#msg54839526

While this may or may not seem likely to some, even o_solo_miner's attempt at coercion above makes me wary of such things.

There is no coercion by me!
You pointed it out the last time, and I get it, you won't do it, for obvious reason.

For me (and not only for me) it is a vital point of having the freedom of choice to solo mine on a bitcoind or a pool.
If all trustfull pools/solopools went away, I still got the opertunity to solo mine directly to core.

End of story

[sidehack]

Sounds like a Core problem. Also sounds like a problem that's already been discussed elsewhere and doesn't really need to be here too.

[o_solo_miner]

Sounds like a Core problem. Also sounds like a problem that's already been discussed elsewhere and doesn't really need to be here too.

Unfortunaly not, it is a cgminer problem, and because there is no alternative to it for running this miner it belongs here.
Sorry, you did a great job on developing this miner and I am sure it will sell like "hot cakes" even without real solo mining.

[Skot]

Sounds like a Core problem. Also sounds like a problem that's already been discussed elsewhere and doesn't really need to be here too.

Unfortunaly not, it is a cgminer problem, and because there is no alternative to it for running this miner it belongs here.
Sorry, you did a great job on developing this miner and I am sure it will sell like "hot cakes" even without real solo mining.

What about just running a stratum proxy along with bitcoin core and connecting to that with cgminer and your sweet new R909?

[kano]

Sounds like a Core problem. Also sounds like a problem that's already been discussed elsewhere and doesn't really need to be here too.

Unfortunaly not, it is a cgminer problem, and because there is no alternative to it for running this miner it belongs here.
Sorry, you did a great job on developing this miner and I am sure it will sell like "hot cakes" even without real solo mining.

What about just running a stratum proxy along with bitcoin core and connecting to that with cgminer and your sweet new R909?

Yes there are various ways to do it, just a certain person wants to make a deal out of me not directly fixing the problem that's in cgminer

The flags were deprecated in bitcoin core 0.12 in 2015 (it's now empty)
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/d449772cf69c01932fc5d72c46054815d6300b3c
And remove during 0.19 in 2019 (since it is empty)
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/e9a27cf338dc618b8ecab8984abc54d588de8a05

He seems to want to make it an issue for sidehack for some reason - no idea why.

Again, as before, I'm doing a driver that's opensource and free for everyone to use - with a couple of miners sent to me so I can write it.

Yes as I also stated clearly, cgminer still cannot mine directly to bitcoind, it fails to work, which is called a bug.
(since those changes above in core)

[n0nce]

What about just running a stratum proxy along with bitcoin core and connecting to that with cgminer and your sweet new R909?

Yes there are various ways to do it, just a certain person wants to make a deal out of me not directly fixing the problem that's in cgminer

Wouldn't even call it a problem (even though it can classify as a bug); separation of concerns is actually usually a pretty good idea.
Have one process for Bitcoin Core: bitcoind
One process for running the miner: cgminer
One process for connecting the two: Local Stratum server

[Powell]

For me (and not only for me) it is a vital point of having the freedom of choice to solo mine on a bitcoind or a pool.
If all trustfull pools/solopools went away, I still got the opertunity to solo mine directly to core.

End of story

So to me it seems like you are the equivalent to a Dooms Day Prepper for the Bitcoin world?  I don't mean that to come off as an attack, but this will be my 9th year on this forum and there are still trustworthy pools/solo pools you can mine on.  What I do notice though is you follow any project Kano is involved with because YOU want something changed.  I am sure like you said there are others but it's YOU that follows into Sidehack's product releases talking about how it's not truly something.  Which as of right now and for the forseeable future it is as I do not see pools disappearing for awhile, and by the time they do this hardware will be the equiv to running an Antminer U1 on a modern day pool.

Another analogy when it comes to the end of the pools, would be again comparing a person watching for the end of the world and prepping for it.  It would be the same as calling every gun manufacturer and complaining that even though they only make the firearm that nobody will be able to make bullets for it if the world were to come to an end.  You are literally worried about something that isn't a problem and have been all over any Gekkoscience release because Kano is involved.  

So how about you set up your own stratum server and run instead of worrying about mining directly to Bitcoin core?  OR, how about you pay to have your own developer write a new miner specifically for people like you and the others you mention and then you don't have to follow people like Kano and Sidehack constantly trying to tell people that it's not a solo miner because in the future you can't just mine directly to core?  

[cygan]

if you want to run the new r909 miner together with other compac f sticks, what should the cmd line look like to start all the miners via cgminer?

[kano]

I've posted the details now back in the 2nd post
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5423227.msg61350496#msg61350496

[Dlikrot]

When is it back in stock?

[sidehack]

It's a brand-new product and we busted our butts to get the assembly line up to speed in time for the first batches to be out for Christmas, which is still 19 days off. Reseller stock requests are being filled right now, so they'll be "in stock" with resellers in one to two weeks.

[Dlikrot]

Thank you! Very excited about this miner.

[cygan]

so i will run my 2 gekko usb hubs (with 3 compac f sticks each) together with the 2 new r909 pod miners using a rpi4. if everything runs well and is configured well i would get ~3.6th/s together

[BiticaMan]

It's a brand-new product and we busted our butts to get the assembly line up to speed in time for the first batches to be out for Christmas, which is still 19 days off. Reseller stock requests are being filled right now, so they'll be "in stock" with resellers in one to two weeks.

sidehack how many s17 chips does this miner pod have?

From what I understand I could use 3 or 4 on a PI connected directly to the USB port?
Could you please confirm.

Thanks.

[sidehack]

I've only tested 1 at a time on my Pi, but we're running five per USB bus (10 per machine) on the old Dell 755 testers. If a current model Pi has comparable horsepower to half an office PC from like 2010 you'd be fine. Given a Pi will run something like 12-14 Compac F, 3-4 R909 shouldn't be difficult.

By the way, 1.5TH is the baseline spec. The last batch off testers were running 1.6-1.7TH and still had headroom. Kano and I have both tested units at 2TH and up. Of course the top-end of your units will be dependent on the hardware behaving nicely but I bet you could get 3.6TH just from the R909s.

[NebulaMiner]

Hi, I am working on a BM13xx High Level Analyzer for Saleae Logic 2. You can find it on Saleae Logic 2 market place as an extension (and also in GH : https://github.com/GPTechinno/bm13xx-hla). Maybe you can have a use of it

Currently, basic communicatin (FIL/VIL mode, R/W register, manage chip address, job/nonce) is well handled. I am digging into the register functions and fields now.

I am sure your level of knowledge on the BM13xx serial protocol is higher han mine, but such a practical tool can be handy for your dev also.

Let me know what you think about it.

[yxt]

It's a brand-new product and we busted our butts to get the assembly line up to speed in time for the first batches to be out for Christmas, which is still 19 days off. Reseller stock requests are being filled right now, so they'll be "in stock" with resellers in one to two weeks.

can it purchased directly (where?) or only via reseller?

[sidehack]

Resellers only, same as we've done for the last several years. Mine is a small shop so we focus on R&D and manufacture and let resellers handle advertising, distribution and customer support.

[BiticaMan]

I've only tested 1 at a time on my Pi, but we're running five per USB bus (10 per machine) on the old Dell 755 testers. If a current model Pi has comparable horsepower to half an office PC from like 2010 you'd be fine. Given a Pi will run something like 12-14 Compac F, 3-4 R909 shouldn't be difficult.

By the way, 1.5TH is the baseline spec. The last batch off testers were running 1.6-1.7TH and still had headroom. Kano and I have both tested units at 2TH and up. Of course the top-end of your units will be dependent on the hardware behaving nicely but I bet you could get 3.6TH just from the R909s.

sidehack I have 350gh/s in my each compacF, if the R909 reaches 3Th/s that would give between 8 to 9 compacF, is this comparison correct?

I would like to know how many compacF or S17 processors have 1 R909 for me to calculate here and see what it pays for me to assemble my next miner, can you help me with this information?

[os2sam]

I would like to know how many compacF or S17 processors have 1 R909

My  guess would be 6

[kano]

Update:

as now mentioned in the 2nd post, the latest code has problems with the older miners.

Specifically the R606 wont scale up performance properly.
It performs badly and keeps dropping the frequency.

The CompacF, and R909 of course, work well with all the new features.

Switching back to the previous version will fix this for the old miners, for now, until I do regression testing on my old miners later.
The git commands to switch to the previous 4.12.0 version is:

Code:

cd
cd cgminer
git checkout f357f61c1d
CFLAGS="-O2 -march=native -fcommon" ./autogen.sh --enable-gekko --enable-icarus
make

The second last line is to make sure it say it's v4.12.0

[NotFuzzyWarm]

It should be pointed out that at least when using Raspian on a Pi3, it is a good idea to run multiple instances of cgminer when your sticks/pods are along side older ones that have vastly lower hash rate. In my case a Compac-F in one instance and 1 Newpac + 1 2Pac in a 2nd instance.

If need be just run the latest/greatest instance for F's & R909 and older one for others until Kano gets it worked out

[419mining]

419Mining opened the preorder sales, limited to 20 units. https://www.419mining.com/shop/miners/gekkoscience-r909/

[Dlikrot]

Ordered! No PlayStation 5 for me this christmas. Lottery mining for my family, here we go!

[Powell]

Got mine ordered as well!

[Dlikrot]

Should a Raspberry Pi 3 suffice for running it? Or even a 2?

[sidehack]

The Pi4 doesn't even blink, so a Pi3 should handle just fine.

[kano]

Anyone waiting for the code update for the R606 issues, it's been resolved.
See the 2nd post (or https://kano.is/gekko.php )

[jwinterm]

Just to make sure I am mathing correctly:

With 1.5 Th/s at current network difficulty you would get ~$0.15 in BTC per day? So if reseller charges $600 and BTC price doesn't change then you would recover purchase cost in 4000 days or about 11 years (not including electricity costs)?

I guess you mine for a year and then pray BTC price goes up 10x in USD terms?

Anyway, product looks awesome, I am tempted even with the above mathing. Nice work kano and sidehack

[Skot]

Just to make sure I am mathing correctly:

With 1.5 Th/s at current network difficulty you would get ~$0.15 in BTC per day? So if reseller charges $600 and BTC price doesn't change then you would recover purchase cost in 4000 days or about 11 years (not including electricity costs)?

I guess you mine for a year and then pray BTC price goes up 10x in USD terms?

Anyway, product looks awesome, I am tempted even with the above mathing. Nice work kano and sidehack

The time to recover the purchase cost of a Bitcoin node is infinity, but tons of people do that also because it's fun, educational and helps in a small way to secure the world's best money. Solo mine on your R909 and you'll even have a chance at 6.25+ BTC!

[sidehack]

Yeah nobody here is going to lie to you about the numbers. It's a toy, not a business case. Lot of people will solo mine with them because, for a bitcoin lottery ticket, you can't really beat a nearly silent 2TH miner using under $10 of power per month.

[Dlikrot]

I even hope it produces a bit heat. I will use it to heat a small isolated shed that has new products etc. that needs to be dry and not get moisture from outside.

I would have put a 80w oven there (though, with thermostat, but still) if it weren't for this purchase.

The only usecases would be for educational purpose or lottery mining (as a heater?). It COULD end up being genius lol.

[NotFuzzyWarm]

I even hope it produces a bit heat.

Folks... Ja it would make for a nice foot warmer but remember it is only drawing 60-maybe 100(?) watts and that means very little heat is produced

 The smallest space heater Ive ever found pulls ~150w on low and 300w on high and is sold as a <drum roll please> under the desk foot warmer...
Hmm, found a nice little radiant heat panel, 170W

[Dlikrot]

My father may have meant a oven pulls about 80w on a average (a small heater that is). Anyhow. Will come back with review after I get it ^^ Hope for some heat at least... haha

[kano]

As per the 2nd post,
There is a Windows binary for v4.12.1 available now at https://kano.is/cgminer.php
That should work fine with the older Gekko miners also (let me know if you have problems vs v4.12.0)
and will of course work with the new R909 when you get one.

[n0nce]

Does anyone (sidehack or European customers) know if Bitshopper already sold out or if it's just 'not available yet'?
The website says 'Out of stock', but it's not clear whether stock ran out or whether it has not been stocked yet.

[Dlikrot]

419mining delivers to europe too. still preorder open (last I checked).

[n0nce]

419mining delivers to europe too. still preorder open (last I checked).

Good call! Would be a good bit more expensive, though.
$599 = 570€, plus international shipping, VAT and import tax will end up near 700 bucks.
Meanwhile Bitshopper sells for 599€ incl. VAT and cheap shipping.

[o_solo_miner]

Bitshopper just listed the miner, I don't think you can order them before christmas.
On the CompacF there was a "early Bird" Discount, but not with this miner.

[cygan]

Bitshopper just listed the miner, I don't think you can order them before christmas.
✂

the r909 has been in stock at bitshopper.de since today and can now be ordered.
currently there are 5 miner left...
actually i would order 1-2 now but i am still waiting for an answer from the bitshopper owner to organize a kind of group buy

[o_solo_miner]

Bitshopper just listed the miner, I don't think you can order them before christmas.
✂

the r909 has been in stock at bitshopper.de since today and can now be ordered.
currently there are 5 miner left...
actually i would order 1-2 now but i am still waiting for an answer from the bitshopper owner to organize a kind of group buy

WOW that was quick!
now just 3 left

[cygan]

✂
WOW that was quick!
now just 3 left

ordered the last 2 r909 miners today
when i put them into working i can give a little update then

[kano]

Git updated to add per chip tuning information (see sig)
Windows binary updated.
https://kano.is/gekko.php updated.

[cygan]

Git updated to add per chip tuning information (see sig)
Windows binary updated.
https://kano.is/gekko.php updated.

do i understand correctly that only users who run the r909 through windows need to update cgminer?
my 4.12.0 version runs on linux, so i would not have to do anything - did i understand that correctly

[kano]

Git updated to add per chip tuning information (see sig)
Windows binary updated.
https://kano.is/gekko.php updated.

do i understand correctly that only users who run the r909 through windows need to update cgminer?
my 4.12.0 version runs on linux, so i would not have to do anything - did i understand that correctly

4.12.0 doesn't handle the new R909
My changes in git for it, I also updated the version to 4.12.1
All the new tuning is only in 4.12.1

[cygan]

Git updated to add per chip tuning information (see sig)
Windows binary updated.
https://kano.is/gekko.php updated.

do i understand correctly that only users who run the r909 through windows need to update cgminer?
my 4.12.0 version runs on linux, so i would not have to do anything - did i understand that correctly

4.12.0 doesn't handle the new R909
My changes in git for it, I also updated the version to 4.12.1
All the new tuning is only in 4.12.1

gotcha!
and what is the easiest command to update to the 4.12.1 version under linux?

[n0nce]

and what is the easiest command to update to the 4.12.1 version under linux?

Probably just download the latest release (or git pull all changes) and copy over your existing miner config file.
In case you installed it to your path, re-installing will simply overwrite the old binary / symlink wherever it sits on your path.

[willi9974]

Git updated to add per chip tuning information (see sig)
Windows binary updated.
https://kano.is/gekko.php updated.

do i understand correctly that only users who run the r909 through windows need to update cgminer?
my 4.12.0 version runs on linux, so i would not have to do anything - did i understand that correctly

4.12.0 doesn't handle the new R909
My changes in git for it, I also updated the version to 4.12.1
All the new tuning is only in 4.12.1

gotcha!
and what is the easiest command to update to the 4.12.1 version under linux?

Hi cygan,

Than you have your miners at home, let us know your config and the result that you will get.
Interested in the mining speed and configuration what you have.

Best regards,
Willi

[kano]

...
and what is the easiest command to update to the 4.12.1 version under linux?

https://kano.is/gekko.php#lin

If you typed "make install" last time you built it, then add that also at the end to overwrite the last one.

Edit: I've added a comment about that at the link

[n0nce]

Hey @sidehack; why did you choose to go with a USB-Mini Type-B cable?


I'm not even asking that everything becomes USB-C; but my issue with Type-B (Mini and Micro) is that they're (always?) often (like in this case) SMD-soldered. This means they can be ripped off the circuit board and cause almost irreparable damage.
Meanwhile both USB-A Type-B (shown below) and some USB Type-C sockets have through-hole pins that hold it firmly in place.

[sidehack]

And that's why we reinforce each one with epoxy.

[RKG456]

I just ordered one from Bitcoinmerch. 

I really need to get going on getting this setup. I now have 4 Compac-Fs, 2 NewPacs, a Terminus 808, and now this RS909. I have been so busy, I buy the items when I see them in stock but keep getting side tracked. I have never even powered them up. Hopefully none are duds.
I also have multiple USB hubs two from Bitcoinmerch and 2 Sipolar-USB Hub- 10 Ports USB 2.0 powered hubs as well as multiple RPI 4s in 4GB and 8GB as well as Radza Zeros, Libra Computer, a Neo PI, RockPi4b and multiple RPI Zeros and Zero2s.

Anyways enough rambling, on to my actual questions / concerns -
Are there issues with running multiple hosts? I ask as I am not sure if the USB 2.0 ports on an single RPI4 can handle all of the miners above across two powered USB2.0  hubs so I am thinking I may I run two RPI4s as hosts and run the Compac-Fs and the 909 on one and the older miners (two Newpacs and the 808) on the other.  Will that work with two hosts mining to the same pool from the same Public IP address, or do I need to introduce a some kind of proxy to regulate work for the two miners?  (I am not sure if a proxy is needed, but I read not to long ago about a proxy being an issue with mining Monero and thought I would ask about it. )  - Given the USB hubs have their own power supply does that make the USB power concern a moot point?

Regarding power - I am thinking of getting a UPS with surge protection  or a 10 plug AC power strip  I have that also has surge protection to plug the RPI4s, POD miners and USB hubs with the usb miners into.  Any concerns there? 
I am also thinking that if I go the multiple RPI4 host route, I can then split the electricity draw between multiple wall outlets so not to overload one wall outlet.

Thoughts and guidance much appreciated.

[kano]

As per the 2nd post,
There is a new Windows binary for v4.12.1 available now at https://kano.is/cgminer.php

2022-12-21 Update to improve performance and tuning. Windows binary updated. https://kano.is/gekko.php updated.

[kano]

...
Thoughts and guidance much appreciated.

The basics is that an R909 is equivalent to 6xCompacF - but requires no power from USB to run the chips.
Basically cgminer is now running 6xBM1397 chips in an R909, rather than one chip in a CompacF.
The R909 gets it's mining power from the power connectors on the R909 itself, so no hub or any hub will do.

Simplest solution is to just run another RPi for the R909.
It should also be OK running 1xR909 and 4xCompacF on one RPI4.
Then put the older miners on a separate RPi.

As reported in my pool discord #gekko channel, I've run 2xR909 and 2xCompacF on a single RPi4 and it uses about 50% of the 400% of CPU.

[cygan]

✂
As reported in my pool discord #gekko channel, I've run 2xR909 and 2xCompacF on a single RPi4 and it uses about 50% of the 400% of CPU.

thank you for the note...
i was actually planning to run 2x r909 and 2x hubs on my rpi4 with 6 compacf sticks in total...
could this work well, what do you think?

[kano]

✂
As reported in my pool discord #gekko channel, I've run 2xR909 and 2xCompacF on a single RPi4 and it uses about 50% of the 400% of CPU.

thank you for the note...
i was actually planning to run 2x r909 and 2x hubs on my rpi4 with 6 compacf sticks in total...
could this work well, what do you think?

Let me know how it goes

[cygan]

✂
As reported in my pool discord #gekko channel, I've run 2xR909 and 2xCompacF on a single RPi4 and it uses about 50% of the 400% of CPU.

thank you for the note...
i was actually planning to run 2x r909 and 2x hubs on my rpi4 with 6 compacf sticks in total...
could this work well, what do you think?

Let me know how it goes

i will definitely do it.
but what could happen in the worst case if the rpi4 can't handle all the hardware?

[kano]

✂
As reported in my pool discord #gekko channel, I've run 2xR909 and 2xCompacF on a single RPi4 and it uses about 50% of the 400% of CPU.

thank you for the note...
i was actually planning to run 2x r909 and 2x hubs on my rpi4 with 6 compacf sticks in total...
could this work well, what do you think?

Let me know how it goes

i will definitely do it.
but what could happen in the worst case if the rpi4 can't handle all the hardware?

Worst case, you'll get less hash rate and all that fun API data I've added will tell you why.

[AFox]

Got my R909 unit yesterday.

It was equipped with an Artic F8 fan, that has a good airflow : 52.7 m³/h at 22.5 dB
Replaced by a Noctua NF-A8 PWM : 55.5 m³/h at 17.7 dB

Plugged it to a Raspberry Pi 3 Model B, Quad Core CPU 1.2 GHz, 1 GB, with Raspberry Pi OS Lite.
It's using around 38~40% of the CPU. Edit: The CPU percentage goes to 400% on my model. See Kano's explanation here (link).



I've turned the voltage knob clockwise, to add voltage.
It's running at around 2.061 Th/s for 99 watts at the plug (including power supply, Raspberry Pi and R909).
The heatsink of the mining chips are around 43°c.
I'm not used to be running CGMiner, what numbers should I look at for the "rejected shares" and "hardware errors" ?

[willi9974]

Got my R909 unit yesterday.

...

Thanks for the Information.
is it possible to show us the power supply and could you write a short installation stepp info? What raspi image do you use, and what for software package you have installed and what have you changed in the configuration... ans so one...

Best regards,
Willi

[sidehack]

Nice, 99W all in. 2.055TH is about 97% of ideal for that speed, which is pretty solid considering 525MHz is an overclock. I'm pretty proud of the R909.

[AFox]

is it possible to show us the power supply and could you write a short installation stepp info? What raspi image do you use, and what for software package you have installed and what have you changed in the configuration... ans so one...

For the power supply, I'm using a +10 year old Corsair TX650 (650w, 80Plus Bronze). It won't be the most efficient power supply, because of it's age.
Also power supplies are the most efficient when you use 50% of their total rated output power. But hard to find (impossible?) a 200w 80Plus Platinum computer power supply. And I didn't want to buy a new one, to only save ~1$ per month of electricity.
It is kept on, with a "jump start" adapter, like these : https://i.imgur.com/ERai2HX.jpg
And I use the 6-pin PCIe connector on the R909. In theory that plug is rated for 75watts (link). But I don't worry about that. Just check it's well plugged in.

For the configuration and installation of the Raspberry Pi, I've got an old model, so I went with the command line OS, no fancy interface or desktop.
To "flash" the SD card, I used Raspberry Pi Imager (link), selected Raspberry Pi OS Lite, and in the advance options activated "Enable SSH" giving a username and password. I'm using a SSH connection to connect to the Raspberry Pi.

Once everything is copied, put the SD card in the Raspberry, and turn it on.
Connect the Raspberry to the network. You'll need it's IP address to connect to it. You can find it on the router, or with a program like Advance IP Scanner (link).
Once you found the IP address, you can connect to it with the program Putty (link).
It will ask for the username and password you entered earlier.

For the installation of CGMiner, I used Kano's website : https://kano.is/gekko.php
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get upgrade -y
sudo apt-get install -y build-essential autoconf automake libtool pkg-config libcurl4-openssl-dev libudev-dev libusb-1.0-0-dev libncurses5-dev zlib1g-dev git
cd
git clone https://github.com/kanoi/cgminer.git
cd cgminer
CFLAGS="-O2 -march=native -fcommon" ./autogen.sh --enable-gekko --enable-icarus
make
sudo apt-get install -y openjdk-8-jre-headless

To run CGminer, and start mining, I go in the CGminer folder (cd CGMiner), and enter this command :
sudo ./cgminer -o mining pool -u btc address -p x --gekko-start-freq 400 --gekko-r909-freq 525
I saw somewhere that you should be able to enter that command without "sudo". But if I don't enter "sudo", it can't access the USB peripherals. I'm too lazy to find the fix.

I use "Screen" to be able to run multiple programs in the terminal (CGMiner and HTop) : https://raspi.tv/2012/using-screen-with-raspberry-pi-to-avoid-leaving-ssh-sessions-open
I use "HTop" to see the CPU and RAM usage : https://linuxhint.com/raspberry-pi-cpu-usage-monitoring/

Nice, 99W all in. 2.055TH is about 97% of ideal for that speed, which is pretty solid considering 525MHz is an overclock. I'm pretty proud of the R909.

I'm happy with it also. I ordered six Compac F, before the announcement of the R909. I ended up not using the Compac F, as the R909 is much easier to power, is compact, and needs only one fan to cool down (compared to the Compac F that needs one fan each, plus the USB Hub that has a fan also).




For my question what numbers should I look at for the "rejected shares" and "hardware errors", if I looked up correctly, these are the calculation to get the "rejected shares" and "hardware errors" percentage :

Number taken from my earlier screen capture. You need to take the values that are at the top
rejected shares percentage  =  R * 100 / (R+A+HW)  =  6944 * 100 / (6944+14955024+7616)  =  0.046%
hardware errors percentage  =  HW * 100 / (R+A+HW)  =  7616 * 100 / (6944+14955024+7616)  =  0.051%

If these calculation are correct, I think I have some headroom to lower the voltage, and watt usage. 2Th/s was my goal, I don't want to push it more.
On graphic cards, I'm happy when these values are bellow 1%.

[kano]

The Rejects depend on your connection to the pool.
Also note that on linux the CPU% has a max based on the number of threads/cores.
So on an RPi if it's 2 cores the max is 200% and 4 cores the max is 400%
On an intel CPU they all have 2 threads per core, so a 4 core intel CPU would have a max of 800%

Edit: also be aware that hw errors on the gekko driver reports a correct value, that literally no other driver or miner does.
The hw error count is the difficulty of the errors, not the count of errors.
Since the R909 mines internally at 64 difficulty, the number of errors returned is your number/64 - however that's not meaningful, since each error represents 64 difficulty and thus comparing apple with apples for hw vs accepted/rejected at the top of the screen requires making hw based on the internal work difficulty. I had to change the hw code in cgminer to allow this correction (back when I added the ferrari)

Also the lower accepted rejected count on your display doesn't mean much since share difficulty can change, so that's no longer comparing equally weighted numbers, just look at the top A/R/HW.

[willi9974]

Many thanks to your guide and your effort to post the information !!!

THANKS !!!

[RKG456]

Got my R909 unit yesterday.

It was equipped with an Artic F8 fan, that has a good airflow : 52.7 m³/h at 22.5 dB
Replaced by a Noctua NF-A8 PWM : 55.5 m³/h at 17.7 dB

Plugged it to a Raspberry Pi 3 Model B, Quad Core CPU 1.2 GHz, 1 GB, with Raspberry Pi OS Lite.
It's using around 38~40% of the CPU. Edit: The CPU percentage goes to 400% on my model. See Kano's explanation here (link).

I've turned the voltage knob clockwise, to add voltage.
It's running at around 2.061 Th/s for 99 watts at the plug (including power supply, Raspberry Pi and R909).

How much of a clockwise turn did you do? 1/8, 1/4, 1/2?

Also you mentioned you are not using the compac Fs.   Are planning on using them eventually or selling them?    You could get another 1.8TH with those.

[RKG456]

I just took a peek.. Bitcoinmerch website shows to have 4 left in stock for those that may still be looking for the 909. That is where I bought mine. They are bundling with the power brick.

[AFox]

Also note that on linux the CPU% has a max based on the number of threads/cores

Didn't know Linux worked that way. My original post was updated.

Many thanks to your guide and your effort to post the information !!! THANKS !!!

You're welcome. I hope it can help a lot of other people also. It can be applied for those that use Compac F, replace "--gekko-r909-freq 525" by "--gekko-compacf-freq 525".
Also, I use "525" frequency in my setup, but I recommend starting with 400, and gradually going up. To see if there's a point where it overheats (I have an infrared thermometer) and/or gets a lot of hardware errors.

How much of a clockwise turn did you do? 1/8, 1/4, 1/2?
Also you mentioned you are not using the compac Fs.   Are planning on using them eventually or selling them?    You could get another 1.8TH with those.

I barely turned it. It must have been 1/8. I took pictures before turning it. I'll post "before" and "after" pictures, but I don't have access to it now, to take an "after" picture.
I'll be using the Compac F's
Edit: Here are the before and after pictures https://imgur.com/a/F1V84qf

[os2sam]

Got my R909 unit yesterday.

Great.  It really was "just in time for Christmas"!

Merry Christmas all.
Sam

[cygan]

i finally connected my 2 r909 pod miners to my existing setup today
on the picture you can see the two new r909 and on top of it a gekoo usb hub with another 3 compacf sticks. i have 3 more compacf miners, but since my rpi4 has no usb-port left, they can't be used now and in addition one of the usb hubs almost died (one usb pair still works)...
the whole fun consumes now ~250watt and the r909 fans are very quiet in my opinion ... but as AFox has already done, i will also replace it with the noctua nf-a8 pwm



and this is how the whole thing looks like at the moment:

Code:

cgminer version 4.12.1 - Started: [2022-12-22 17:14:20.873]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 (5s):4.787T (1m):4.870T (5m):4.807T (15m):4.773T (avg):4.706Th/s
 A:6051658  R:0  HW:2768  WU:65748.6/m
 Connected to solo.ckpool.org diff 3.08K with stratum as user cygan
 Block: 7034e12b...  Diff:35.4T  Started: [18:46:51.507]  Best share: 3.88M
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 [U]SB management [P]ool management [S]ettings [D]isplay options [Q]uit
 0: GSF 10051796: BM1397:01+ 525.00MHz T:525 P:525 (24:12) |  100% WU:100% | 373.6G / 319.3Gh/s WU: 4460.3/m
 1: GSF 10051619: BM1397:01+ 525.00MHz T:525 P:525 (24:12) |  100% WU:100% | 351.5G / 351.7Gh/s WU: 4913.7/m
 2: GSF 10053622: BM1397:01+ 525.00MHz T:525 P:525 (24:12) |  100% WU:100% | 357.5G / 342.6Gh/s WU: 4786.4/m
 3: GSF 10070003: BM1397:06+ 525.00MHz T:515 P:523 (4:2)   | 88.7% WU:^83% | 1.785T / 1.760Th/s WU:24588.4/m
 4: GSF 10070009: BM1397:06+ 525.00MHz T:525 P:513 (4:2)   | 91.7% WU: 91% | 1.968T / 1.932Th/s WU:26999.8/m
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

and here is the usage of the rpi4:



do you see any potential for improvement in performance?

[AFox]

i will also replace it with the noctua nf-a8 pwm
do you see any potential for improvement in performance?

You won't regret the fan change. Even less noise, and less vibration as the Noctua fans have anti-vibration pads on each corner.

To get more performance, you could turn the voltage knob clockwise, giving it more voltage. The hashrate should increase.
Here's pictures of the knob on mine (before/stock, and after) : https://imgur.com/a/F1V84qf

[100knot2dae]

Is it possible to disable the magenta LEDs (resp. the LEDs in general) via jumper or DIP switch on the R909? Or via driver/software?

[sidehack]

Nope

[gt_addict]

Is it possible to disable the magenta LEDs (resp. the LEDs in general) via jumper or DIP switch on the R909? Or via driver/software?

Just get a Sharpie or similar and put a little dab in the leds. It will "dim" them slightly. Personally I love the blinky lights 

[cygan]

✂
As reported in my pool discord #gekko channel, I've run 2xR909 and 2xCompacF on a single RPi4 and it uses about 50% of the 400% of CPU.

thank you for the note...
i was actually planning to run 2x r909 and 2x hubs on my rpi4 with 6 compacf sticks in total...
could this work well, what do you think?

Let me know how it goes

on my rpi4 are now 2 r909 and 2 gekko hubs with a total of 4 compacf sticks connected
the performance is also impressive

Code:

cgminer version 4.12.1 - Started: [2022-12-24 11:22:54.187]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 (5s):5.025T (1m):5.340T (5m):5.293T (15m):5.254T (avg):5.145Th/s
 A:8849622  R:2850  HW:2208  WU:71879.2/m
 Connected to solo.ckpool.org diff 2.85K with stratum as user cygan
 Block: 1dbb8e6f...  Diff:35.4T  Started: [13:13:09.645]  Best share: 7.62M
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 [U]SB management [P]ool management [S]ettings [D]isplay options [Q]uit
 0: GSF 10051796: BM1397:01+ 525.00MHz T:525 P:525 (24:12) |  100% WU:100% | 298.7G / 316.7Gh/s WU: 4424.9/m
 1: GSF 10051619: BM1397:01+ 525.00MHz T:515 P:525 (24:12) |  100% WU:100% | 316.5G / 347.5Gh/s WU: 4854.7/m
 2: GSF 10053622: BM1397:01+ 525.00MHz T:525 P:525 (24:12) |  100% WU:100% | 290.3G / 344.1Gh/s WU: 4807.7/m
 3: GSF 10053618: BM1397:01+ 525.00MHz T:515 P:525 (24:12) |  100% WU:100% | 368.8G / 343.2Gh/s WU: 4794.8/m
 4: GSF 10070003: BM1397:06+ 525.00MHz T:515 P:521 (4:2)   | 88.7% WU:^84% | 2.109T / 1.783Th/s WU:24908.5/m
 5: GSF 10070009: BM1397:06+ 525.00MHz T:515 P:525 (4:2)   | 98.5% WU:^95% | 1.613T / 2.010Th/s WU:28088.4/m
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[RKG456]

Got my R909 delivered today and got all my miners going except the R808 I got off of ebay appears to have pooped out. It was working then got stuck on Found 0 Chips.. But that is not the point of this post.
I have to keep an eye on the Compac-F (item 5) as it appears to be sluggish. I was reporting 35%  until I captured this output. Right when I chose copy it jumped to 100% but as you can see the hash is way lower than the other compac-f (3, 4 and 6).  With this setup though I have seen the overall 5s hash shoot as high as 3.799T.

Now to start saving $$ for another R909.

Code:

cgminer version 4.12.1 - Started: [2022-12-30 15:12:45.297]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 (5s):3.215T (1m):3.442T (5m):2.976T (15m):1.703T (avg):3.212Th/s
 A:464622  R:39064  HW:355  WU:44943.4/m
 Connected to solo.ckpool.org diff 2.42K with stratum as user USER.NPandT
 Block: 68b3a9c7...  Diff:35.4T  Started: [15:13:51.054]  Best share: 262K
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[U]SB management [P]ool management [S]ettings [D]isplay options [Q]uit
 0: GSF 10070012: BM1397:06+ 550.00MHz T:550 P:550 (3:2)     |  100% WU:^96% | 2.294T / 2.134Th/s WU:29835.9/m
 1: GSH 10041663: BM1387:02+ 375.00MHz T:375 P:375 (100:50)  | 99.1% WU:^95% | 81.85G / 80.95Gh/s WU: 1130.9/m
 2: GSH 10038894: BM1387:02+ 375.00MHz T:375 P:375 (100:50)  | 98.8% WU:^94% | 83.98G / 80.72Gh/s WU: 1127.8/m
 3: GSF 10052154: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:445 (28:14)   |  100% WU:^98% | 272.1G / 231.0Gh/s WU: 3227.6/m
 4: GSF 10053864: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (28:14)   |  100% WU:100% | 405.9G / 284.4Gh/s WU: 3973.2/m
 5: GSF 10050104: BM1397:01+ 440.00MHz T:440 P:347 (28:15)   |  100% WU: 58% | 119.0G / 134.0Gh/s WU: 1872.6/m
 6: GSF 10054544: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (28:14)   |  100% WU:100% | 339.5G / 270.1Gh/s WU: 3775.4/m
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 [2022-12-30 15:23:31.244] Accepted 10ae7164 Diff 3.93K/2422 GSF 4
 [2022-12-30 15:23:34.321] 5: GSF 3 - setting [all] frequency to 420.00MHz (420.00) (168/2/1/5)
 [2022-12-30 15:23:34.322] 5: GSF 3 - new frequency 415.00MHz -> 420.00MHz
 [2022-12-30 15:23:38.089] 5: GSF 3 - setting [all] frequency to 425.00MHz (425.00) (170/2/1/5)
 [2022-12-30 15:23:38.091] 5: GSF 3 - new frequency 420.00MHz -> 425.00MHz
 [2022-12-30 15:23:42.391] 5: GSF 3 - setting [all] frequency to 430.00MHz (430.00) (172/2/1/5)
 [2022-12-30 15:23:42.393] 5: GSF 3 - new frequency 425.00MHz -> 430.00MHz
 [2022-12-30 15:23:43.882] Accepted 1a8fdabb Diff 2.47K/2422 GSF 0
 [2022-12-30 15:23:47.545] 5: GSF 3 - setting [all] frequency to 435.00MHz (435.00) (174/2/1/5)
 [2022-12-30 15:23:47.546] 5: GSF 3 - new frequency 430.00MHz -> 435.00MHz
 [2022-12-30 15:23:48.225] Accepted 17b81fcb Diff 2.76K/2422 GSF 2
 [2022-12-30 15:23:48.794] Accepted 06bbbbce Diff 9.73K/2422 GSF 0
 [2022-12-30 15:23:51.762] Accepted 0535c27c Diff 12.6K/2422 GSF 2
 [2022-12-30 15:23:52.555] 5: GSF 3 - setting [all] frequency to 440.00MHz (440.00) (176/2/1/5)
 [2022-12-30 15:23:52.557] 5: GSF 3 - new frequency 435.00MHz -> 440.00MHz

[sidehack]

If it's running slow, best bet is probably pull it, adjust the voltage up a little, and plug it back in.

[RKG456]

If it's running slow, best bet is probably pull it, adjust the voltage up a little, and plug it back in.

How do you adjust the voltage on a compac-F?  I do not see a dial.



Also I just got a notice of Ticket Value confirmed after 5000 nonces..   what does that mean?  - it looked to be on the R909.

[sidehack]

Tiny knob in the corner, same as all other Gekko sticks. Slight clockwise turn.

Ticket value confirmed message is a leftover from some early testing. Just means we understood the format of the ticket mask register assignment correctly when we reverse-engineered the protocol.

[RKG456]

Tiny knob in the corner, same as all other Gekko sticks. Slight clockwise turn.

Ticket value confirmed message is a leftover from some early testing. Just means we understood the format of the ticket mask register assignment correctly when we reverse-engineered the protocol.

Thanks Sidehack.  The stick seems better now but just a little slow compared to the others.  I will tweak the tuning.


Here is a video of the blinking lights.  You would not think this would generate that much heat, but so far it is enough to raise the overall temp in a 500 sq ft room by 4 degrees F.  That corner went from 72 - 73 degrees to 77.7 degrees.  However the HP Power supply and the  USB hub power bricks are also putting off some heat.

https://youtu.be/ErYD_5Pi5Zc

[MoparMiningLLC]

Anyone willing to buy one or two with fiat from 419mining and sell to me for BTC? Or willing to trade 2 of these for 4 r606’s?

[kano]

Got my R909 delivered today and got all my miners going except the R808 I got off of ebay appears to have pooped out. It was working then got stuck on Found 0 Chips..
...

Check it's not a software version issue - i.e. if it was working before, use the version of software from before just for the R808 and see if it's ok.
I've no idea if the R808 works with the current code.
I've run R909, R606, CompacF, NewPac, 2Pac and Compac on the new version (and you should use the new 4.12.1 version for those six)

[n0nce]

Got my R909 unit yesterday.

It was equipped with an Artic F8 fan, that has a good airflow : 52.7 m³/h at 22.5 dB
Replaced by a Noctua NF-A8 PWM : 55.5 m³/h at 17.7 dB

Are you sure that you got the PWM fan? If so, it is now running at 100% fixed fan speed, since the R909 only outputs a 3-pin DC fan signal and Noctua PWM fans default to 100% fan speed if they get a (any) 3-pin DC fan signal.

@sidehack does the R909 have any fan speed control at all or is it just outputting a fixed 12V? In that case, it wouldn't matter (at least in case of Noctua fans!) which type we choose.

I need to replace my fan, too, since I find it too loud (at least the type of noise it's making is annoying me, somehow).

[AFox]

Are you sure that you got the PWM fan? If so, it is now running at 100% fixed fan speed, since the R909 only outputs a 3-pin DC fan signal and Noctua PWM fans default to 100% fan speed if they get a (any) 3-pin DC fan signal.

Yes, I confirm I bought the PWM model. The PWM part isn't important for the R909, but it is the 80mm Noctua model that has the most airflow.

[n0nce]

Are you sure that you got the PWM fan? If so, it is now running at 100% fixed fan speed, since the R909 only outputs a 3-pin DC fan signal and Noctua PWM fans default to 100% fan speed if they get a (any) 3-pin DC fan signal.

Yes, I confirm I bought the PWM model. The PWM part isn't important for the R909, but it is the 80mm Noctua model that has the most airflow.

I see, that makes a lot of sense! Only one question: the pin header outputs constant 12V? So, no control at all even on DC (3-pin) fans? Because in that case, I'd get the PWM, too. But if it meant losing fan control, I'd prefer an actual DC fan whose RPM can be controlled by the miner. No reason to 'over-cool' the hashboard, if there's more noise reduction to be had, right?

[AFox]

I see, that makes a lot of sense! Only one question: the pin header outputs constant 12V? So, no control at all even on DC (3-pin) fans? Because in that case, I'd get the PWM, too. But if it meant losing fan control, I'd prefer an actual DC fan whose RPM can be controlled by the miner. No reason to 'over-cool' the hashboard, if there's more noise reduction to be had, right?

It seems the miner only outputs 12v, with no control on the voltage.
You could use the Noctua NA-FC1 (link) to control a PWM fan.

I didn't play with the fan speed, because with the Noctua NF-A8 PWM, and at 525MHz, the heatsink is at 55°c; you can barely keep your finger on it. You need the fan at full blast to cool it properly.
You'll probably need to lower the frequency, to be able to lower the fan speed.

[sidehack]

Yep. Just like with the R606, I didn't put fan speed control on here because the fan's quiet enough even at full speed to be pretty unintrusive, so why bother with less than full speed if there's probably going to be a heat/efficiency penalty?

[RKG456]

Is there a general thread for Gekkoscience miners?  Not just for the  R909?

I will mention this here since there is an R909 in the mix, but It may be better suited for a different thread. Let me know.  I tried mining the nicehash pool this morning via cgminer, and though it works, the difficulty seems to be a little much. it is very slow and the R909 seems to hang at around 89% but still hashes at around 2.5TH/s.  The Compac-Fs see to be the ones that struggle the most as a few of them will reset the frequency down to 200mhz and ramp back up.   I am running 1 R9-9, 4 Compac-Fs and 2 New Pacs with an over all hash rate of 3.1TH to as high as 4.2TH/s.  The pool settles on a difficulty of 40k and and overall it does get excepted shares, just really slow to handle them.  That being said, I was curious if anyone else had tried to mine nicehash with usb miners.  Is it worth it or is there an increased risk of damage to the miners?  Anyone have suggested difficulty for nicehash pool?

Here is what I used: NiceHash External Mining:
sudo ./cgminer -o stratum+tcp://sha256.auto.nicehash.com:9200 -u WALLET-ADDRESS.Workername -p x --gekko-newpac-freq 350 --gekko-compacf-freq 400 --gekko-r909-freq 550

I was thinking of trying it again with the --suggest-diff 20000  flag and then with --suggest-diff 10000 flag to see how those work.  I have been mining ckpool with --suggest-diff 10000 flag  to see how that went.  it seems stable just getting about half the shares than if I let it auto set the difficulty.  When I do let it auto set on ckpool it usually sets it somewhere between 2400 and 3400. 

Here is what I used to mine ckpool: 
sudo ./cgminer -o stratum+tcp://solo.ckpool.org:3333 -u WALLET-ADDRESS.Workername  -p x --gekko-newpac-freq 375 --gekko-compacf-freq 450 --gekko-r909-freq 575 --suggest-diff 10000

Earlier today ckpool reported these stats for my worker. These are the frequency same settings I normally run only difference is the suggested difficulty.

Code:

{
 "hashrate1m": "6.14T",
 "hashrate5m": "4.81T",
 "hashrate1hr": "3.68T",
 "hashrate1d": "3.17T",
 "hashrate7d": "1.14T",
 "lastshare": 1672677213,
 "workers": 1,
 "shares": 196345749,
 "bestshare": 283475270.1970135,
 "bestever": 283475270,
 "worker": [
  {

Code:

cgminer version 4.12.1 - Started: [2023-01-02 11:04:46.777]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 (5s):3.477T (1m):3.632T (5m):3.624T (15m):3.608T (avg):3.589Th/s
 A:9450000  R:10000  HW:4260  WU:50140.9/m
 Connected to solo.ckpool.org diff 10K with stratum as user bc1qwgc4p4gf6qlpv0m.NPandT
 Block: 3df2368c...  Diff:35.4T  Started: [14:08:11.563]  Best share: 21M
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 [U]SB management [P]ool management [S]ettings [D]isplay options [Q]uit
 0: GSF 10070012: BM1397:06+ 575.00MHz T:575 P:575 (4:2)     | 98.7% WU: 97% | 1.991T / 2.256Th/s WU:31524.2/m
 1: GSH 10041663: BM1387:02+ 375.00MHz T:375 P:375 (100:50)  | 99.8% WU: 98% | 82.56G / 83.99Gh/s WU: 1173.4/m
 2: GSH 10038894: BM1387:02+ 375.00MHz T:375 P:375 (100:50)  | 98.0% WU: 98% | 88.03G / 83.83Gh/s WU: 1171.2/m
 3: GSF 10052154: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (29:14)   |  100% WU:100% | 301.0G / 270.4Gh/s WU: 3777.5/m
 4: GSF 10053864: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (28:14)   |  100% WU:100% | 290.8G / 297.1Gh/s WU: 4150.3/m
 5: GSF 10050104: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (28:14)   |  100% WU:100% | 271.5G / 299.6Gh/s WU: 4185.5/m
 6: GSF 10054544: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (29:14)   |  100% WU:100% | 415.4G / 297.7Gh/s WU: 4158.8/m
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 [2023-01-02 14:06:44.553] Accepted 048725ba Diff 14.5K/10000 GSF 0
 [2023-01-02 14:06:56.428] Accepted 025d6339 Diff 27.7K/10000 GSF 0
 [2023-01-02 14:07:10.289] Accepted 04fd253a Diff 13.1K/10000 GSF 4
 [2023-01-02 14:07:24.395] Accepted 0859ff5b Diff 2.01M/10000 GSF 0
 [2023-01-02 14:07:25.985] Accepted 0476518e Diff 14.7K/10000 GSF 0
 [2023-01-02 14:07:30.342] Accepted 0558b45a Diff 12.3K/10000 GSF 0
 [2023-01-02 14:07:48.383] Accepted 02d12650 Diff 23.3K/10000 GSF 4
 [2023-01-02 14:08:09.490] Accepted 0168869e Diff 46.5K/10000 GSF 3
 [2023-01-02 14:08:11.563] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block at height 770072
 [2023-01-02 14:08:25.631] Accepted 030ba34c Diff 21.5K/10000 GSF 3
 [2023-01-02 14:08:52.728] Accepted 01897353 Diff 42.6K/10000 GSF 2
 [2023-01-02 14:09:07.898] Accepted 0392977d Diff 18.3K/10000 GSH 1
 [2023-01-02 14:09:11.982] Accepted 045f91be Diff 15K/10000 GSF 0
 [2023-01-02 14:09:13.723] Accepted 026ca67b Diff 27K/10000 GSF 0
 [2023-01-02 14:09:18.526] Accepted 40db734b Diff 259K/10000 GSF 1

[os2sam]

Is there a general thread for Gekkoscience miners?  Not just for the  R909?

I am running 1 R9-9, 4 Compac-Fs and 2 New Pacs

All the Gekko threads are pretty close to the  top of the list so you should be able to see them.

Newpac:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5053833.msg47068859#msg47068859

Compac F:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5355470.msg57735149#msg57735149

[NotFuzzyWarm]

Is there a general thread for Gekkoscience miners?  Not just for the  R909?

I am running 1 R9-9, 4 Compac-Fs and 2 New Pacs

All the Gekko threads are pretty close to the  top of the list so you should be able to see them.
Newpac:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5053833.msg47068859#msg47068859

Compac F:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5355470.msg57735149#msg57735149

Long ago Kano recommended that the slower original Compacs, 2Pacs & NewPacs be ran in a separate instance of cgminer and the F's & obviously the R909 in their own instance. You can of course still run them off of the same hub and code - cgminer is perfectly happy running multiple instances of itself, AIR it is due to the vastly different data rates involved with the chips and how the CPU(s) & cgminer has to process the data for them.

[sidehack]

Is that a 2.26TH average speed from the R909? Nice. The fastest I've pushed one stable was 2.1TH so, you know, cool.

[RKG456]

Is that a 2.26TH average speed from the R909? Nice. The fastest I've pushed one stable was 2.1TH so, you know, cool.

I have been running the last round of testing with the R909 at 600mhz and it appears stable. Difficulty is locked at 10K and it seems to be handling it.
575mhz on the R909 seems to be the sweet spot for mine though. The Best share resets every time i restart the miner.. So far the best share I have seen is with the R909 at 550mhz and it was 293M and the difficulty was at 3211.  
EDIT: I did have to turn the blue know about 1/8th Clockwise to get 600mhz to be stable otherwise the R909 would not work well above 575mhz.

Code:

cgminer version 4.12.1 - Started: [2023-01-02 18:44:28.984]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 (5s):4.040T (1m):3.779T (5m):3.681T (15m):3.670T (avg):3.671Th/s
 A:4280000  R:0  HW:2747  WU:51295.3/m
 Connected to solo.ckpool.org diff 10K with stratum as user bc1qwgc4p4gf6qlpv0mh95ju6rtqvlhmnwtyn87dpa.NPandT
 Block: 740932e4...  Diff:35.4T  Started: [19:49:00.595]  Best share: 4.3M
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 [U]SB management [P]ool management [S]ettings [D]isplay options [Q]uit
 0: GSF 10070012: BM1397:06+ 600.00MHz T:600 P:600 (3:2)     | 95.7% WU: 97% | 2.813T / 2.342Th/s WU:32720.5/m
 1: GSH 10041663: BM1387:02+ 375.00MHz T:375 P:375 (100:50)  | 97.2% WU: 98% | 86.06G / 83.85Gh/s WU: 1171.4/m
 2: GSH 10038894: BM1387:02+ 375.00MHz T:375 P:375 (100:50)  | 99.4% WU: 98% | 86.39G / 83.46Gh/s WU: 1166.0/m
 3: GSF 10052154: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:449 (28:14)   |  100% WU:100% | 268.3G / 265.7Gh/s WU: 3711.9/m
 4: GSF 10053864: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (28:14)   |  100% WU:100% | 328.1G / 300.6Gh/s WU: 4199.6/m
 5: GSF 10050104: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (28:14)   |  100% WU:100% | 276.8G / 298.5Gh/s WU: 4169.8/m
 6: GSF 10054544: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (28:14)   |  100% WU:100% | 292.9G / 297.5Gh/s WU: 4156.0/m
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 [2023-01-02 20:16:18.754] Accepted 23d05810 Diff 468K/10000 GSF 2
 [2023-01-02 20:16:29.731] Accepted 0498d7c1 Diff 14.3K/10000 GSF 0
 [2023-01-02 20:16:33.821] Accepted 059fe3a0 Diff 11.7K/10000 GSF 0
 [2023-01-02 20:16:58.581] Accepted 0159b5a0 Diff 48.5K/10000 GSH 0
 [2023-01-02 20:16:59.384] Accepted 02e3922a Diff 22.7K/10000 GSF 0
 [2023-01-02 20:17:03.497] Accepted 04fcfc43 Diff 13.1K/10000 GSH 1
 [2023-01-02 20:17:07.362] Accepted 017e3b91 Diff 43.9K/10000 GSF 1
 [2023-01-02 20:17:14.330] Accepted 0323fce4 Diff 20.9K/10000 GSF 1
 [2023-01-02 20:17:21.062] Accepted 02faca58 Diff 22K/10000 GSF 0
 [2023-01-02 20:17:34.834] Accepted 02a5b268 Diff 24.8K/10000 GSF 0
 [2023-01-02 20:17:47.444] Accepted 02063572 Diff 32.4K/10000 GSF 0
 [2023-01-02 20:17:49.857] Accepted 01f438d1 Diff 33.5K/10000 GSF 0
 [2023-01-02 20:18:01.234] Accepted 052019bb Diff 12.8K/10000 GSF 0
 [2023-01-02 20:18:08.316] Accepted 01c339b1 Diff 37.2K/10000 GSF 0
 [2023-01-02 20:18:17.076] Accepted 05934f47 Diff 11.8K/10000 GSF 0

[RKG456]

So today I have been letting it run and letting cgminer and the pool manage the difficulty, and it is set low at 2587.  Yet somewhere along the line today, this little setup pulled a Best share of 1.15G.

 

Code:

cgminer version 4.12.1 - Started: [2023-01-03 08:12:27.546]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 (5s):3.382T (1m):3.570T (5m):3.589T (15m):3.575T (avg):3.567Th/s
 A:25203274  R:49005  HW:12163  WU:49832.5/m
 Connected to solo.ckpool.org diff 2.59K with stratum as user MyWallert.NPandT
 Block: 60df4130...  Diff:34.1T  Started: [16:34:05.450]  Best share: 1.15G
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 [U]SB management [P]ool management [S]ettings [D]isplay options [Q]uit
 0: GSF 10070012: BM1397:06+ 575.00MHz T:575 P:575 (3:2)     | 99.1% WU: 96% | 2.258T / 2.229Th/s WU:31141.5/m
 1: GSH 10041663: BM1387:02+ 375.00MHz T:375 P:375 (100:50)  | 97.3% WU: 98% | 89.83G / 84.13Gh/s WU: 1175.4/m
 2: GSH 10038894: BM1387:02+ 375.00MHz T:375 P:375 (100:50)  | 98.4% WU: 98% | 86.88G / 84.08Gh/s WU: 1174.7/m
 3: GSF 10052154: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:445 (28:14)   |  100% WU:100% | 299.3G / 270.0Gh/s WU: 3772.5/m
 4: GSF 10053864: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (28:14)   |  100% WU:100% | 392.4G / 298.9Gh/s WU: 4175.3/m
 5: GSF 10050104: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (28:14)   |  100% WU:100% | 359.9G / 299.3Gh/s WU: 4181.4/m
 6: GSF 10054544: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (28:14)   |  100% WU:100% | 301.3G / 301.5Gh/s WU: 4211.8/m

[Atrax]

My 909 was working without any flaw.
Now, after some days, I get this messages:

[2023-01-06 13:25:48.954] Started cgminer 4.12.1-wrk                    
 [2023-01-06 13:25:48.955] Loaded configuration file /home/gilkane/.cgminer/cgminer.conf                    
 [2023-01-06 13:25:48.956] Probing for an alive pool                    
 [2023-01-06 13:25:49.173] Pool 0 difficulty changed to 8192                    
 [2023-01-06 13:25:49.174] Pool 2 difficulty changed to 8192                    
 [2023-01-06 13:25:49.345] Pool 1 difficulty changed to 262144                    
 [2023-01-06 13:25:50.255] 0: GSF 0 - Toggling ASIC nRST to reset                    
 [2023-01-06 13:25:51.494] 0: GSF 0 - R909 Bitcoin Miner (10070007)                    
 [2023-01-06 13:25:51.497] Network diff set to 34.1T                    
 [2023-01-06 13:25:53.394] 0: GSF 0 - set ticket to 0xfc/64 work 128/128.0                    
 [2023-01-06 13:25:53.597] 0: GSF 0 - setting bauddiv : 00 61 (ftdi/2)                    
 [2023-01-06 13:25:53.673] 0: GSF 0 - setting [all] frequency to 400.00MHz (400.00) (160/2/1/5)                    
 [2023-01-06 13:25:53.694] GSF 0 failure, disabling!    

Frequency was originally set on 450 in my configuration. Changed it to 400, but still the same result.

Rebooting the Raspi didn't change anything.

edit:
Now, since a while, I only got this message:

[2023-01-06 13:33:51.305] GekkoScience detect (1:11) failed to initialise (incorrect device?), resetting

Any advice where I should begin with finding the error?

[Atrax]

Get the same behavior when I plug in the 909 on my desktop computer. So I guess there's something I should be able to fix on the 909?

[Atrax]

Okay, seems it is a power problem. Had to find a more stable PSU for we have here massive problems with the current in our house. Hope it will be better once I put the device out of the testing environment in my house and  on a solar device.

[RKG456]

For those still looking for an R909. I see them listed on Amazon for $620 with free prime shipping.  Sold by Eyeboot and ships from Amazon.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0BQZ35B6G/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1 

[MoparMiningLLC]

For those still looking for an R909. I see them listed on Amazon for $620 with free prime shipping.  Sold by Eyeboot and ships from Amazon.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0BQZ35B6G/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1 

419mining has them as well for 599 but they dont take btc - neither does amazon, so I am unable to order.

[sidehack]

R909 seem to be a bit particular about power, yeah. The fairly cheap brick on my linux laptop is noisy and I had to replace it before it'd detect the R909 over USB. Sometimes it'd load up and work for a few seconds then drop out again, but most of the time it just doesn't work. I ended up in a pinch just using a second lab PSU for the laptop, just like the one powering my test R909, and it's been running beautifully at 600MHz for the last day on that setup.

Didnt have the problem on a Pi controller, because it was running off the same clean power source as the pod. Low quality power for either the pod or controller could cause ground loop noise issues that throw off the USB signal voltages and make for a poor connection.

[yettihead]

Bitcoinmerch has them and I believe they take bitcoin through Coinbase Commerce.

https://bitcoinmerch.com/products/bitcoin-merch%C2%AE-geoscience-terminus-sha256-bitcoin-r909-pod-miner-led-version

For those still looking for an R909. I see them listed on Amazon for $620 with free prime shipping.  Sold by Eyeboot and ships from Amazon.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0BQZ35B6G/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1 

419mining has them as well for 599 but they dont take btc - neither does amazon, so I am unable to order.

[n0nce]

The BM1397 chips have a significant temperature coefficient, which means that they pull noticeably more power as they get warmer. Nobody at GekkoScience will be offended if a tuner or enthusiast upgrades the fan, as more airflow could mean reducing power consumption by 5-10% just from maintaining lower temperatures. These units take a standard 80mmx25mm 3/4-wire 12V case fan.

Speaking of this: is there any way to read out the chips' temperatures?
Or would we need to manually place a thermocouple and monitor it that way? I'm asking, because I replaced the stock fan and now I'm not sure whether it's getting too hot.

[kano]

So I tried to do something that I'd not suggest anyone else to do
Of course try it if you really know what you are doing and have a 5kRPM fan, high quality power and are using linux

The aim was to see how fast I can get the R909 going - and I've got a record so far, we'll see who can beat it
My production R909 has one chip not as good as the other 5, so someone with 6 perfect chips should be able to beat it.

Anyway, I put in a 5kRPM fan, set the blue screw close to maximum, set 5 chips to ... 725MHz ... and the dodgy chip to 500MHz.

Results after hours of running (that I posted in discord earlier):

Code:

(5s):5.067T (1m):5.046T (5m):5.105T (15m):5.098T (avg):5.024Th/s
 A:36261324  R:23056  HW:8786576  WU:70192.7/m
 Connected to               diff 2.88K with stratum as user
 Block: 5fd33018...  Diff:34.1T  Started: [19:45:10.943]  Best share: 84.9M
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 0: GSF 10008346: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (28:14) |  100% WU:100% | 307.9G / 292.5Gh/s WU: 4086.1/m
 1: GSF 10008000: BM1397:06+ 500.00MHz T:500 P:500 (4:2)   |  100% WU: 98% | 2.265T / 1.970Th/s WU:27525.2/m
 2: GSF 10055348: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (28:14) |  100% WU:100% | 296.0G / 286.5Gh/s WU: 4001.8/m
 3: GSF 10070004: BM1397:06+ 687.50MHz T:500 P:665 (3:2)   | 90.4% WU: 89% | 2.433T / 2.475Th/s WU:34579.3/m

Massive >20% hardware errors, but "3: GSF 10070004: BM1397:06+" powering along at 2.475Th/s

(and of course the other number there, total of >5TH for 2xR909 and 2xCompacF)

Mine on!

Edit: I should add, when you change frequencies or it has finished ramping up the frequencies, reset the averages.
I've added the details to http://kano.is/gekko.php#perf

[sidehack]

Mine with 6 good chips is sitting at 2.4T flat at 600MHz, blue knob about 1 o'clock, pulling 104 watts DC with a stock fan and pretty low HW. My old laptop craps the latency timer at any higher MHz but if I can get the Pi back running I'm gonna try to beat that record.

[cygan]

i will also try to get to the performance/record of kanos r909. but for now i have no desire to tinker with my small lottery farm.
first wait for my new gekko usb hub and then i will first adjust my two r909 and among other things replace the fans against the noctua ones

[Atrax]

R909 seem to be a bit particular about power, yeah. The fairly cheap brick on my linux laptop is noisy and I had to replace it before it'd detect the R909 over USB. Sometimes it'd load up and work for a few seconds then drop out again, but most of the time it just doesn't work. I ended up in a pinch just using a second lab PSU for the laptop, just like the one powering my test R909, and it's been running beautifully at 600MHz for the last day on that setup.

Didnt have the problem on a Pi controller, because it was running off the same clean power source as the pod. Low quality power for either the pod or controller could cause ground loop noise issues that throw off the USB signal voltages and make for a poor connection.

Yep, once the power problem has been solved, it is hashing beautifully on 600 Mhz at room temperature:

(5s):2.887T (1m):2.433T (5m):2.418T (15m):2.422T (avg):2.401Th/s   

Now measuring for a couple of days how much power it sucks before installing it in a solar system. There it will work in constantly 15° Celsius, so looking forward on how the performance will be then.

[n0nce]

among other things replace the fans against the noctua ones

For what it's worth, do be aware that Noctua does not equal absolute silence. So far, their most quiet fans in my experience are the A12x25, which even at roughly half speed (1000RPM) provide ample cooling and static pressure for my application while being almost silent. Of course, they don't fit this miner.

Other Noctua fans however, need more RPM to cool properly and are definitely audible. Even larger ones like the NF-A14 PWM.

I installed the NF-A8 PWM in the R909 earlier today and it sounds slightly higher pitched (at full 2200RPM speed) than the stock Arctic F8 at 2000RPM, although the sound is a bit quieter and more pleasant; the F8 almost sounded 'rattly' in a way; some kind of frequency was probably spiking higher than the others.
Right now, I am running the Noctua with the included LNA (low noise adapter) at 1750RPM and that makes it almost silent from a few meters away. However, it results in a bit less airflow than even the stock fan.

For now it works without issues at 525MHz and a bit over 2TH/s, but I definitely need to check my temps somehow.

[n0nce]

I've been gradually increasing frequency, without playing with the voltage knob, and so far I've reached 600MHz. Getting 2.3TH/s out of it. Pretty amazing!

Anyway, I put in a 5kRPM fan, set the blue screw close to maximum, set 5 chips to ... 725MHz ... and the dodgy chip to 500MHz.

Results after hours of running (that I posted in discord earlier):

Code:

(5s):5.067T (1m):5.046T (5m):5.105T (15m):5.098T (avg):5.024Th/s
 A:36261324  R:23056  HW:8786576  WU:70192.7/m
 Connected to               diff 2.88K with stratum as user
 Block: 5fd33018...  Diff:34.1T  Started: [19:45:10.943]  Best share: 84.9M
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 0: GSF 10008346: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (28:14) |  100% WU:100% | 307.9G / 292.5Gh/s WU: 4086.1/m
 1: GSF 10008000: BM1397:06+ 500.00MHz T:500 P:500 (4:2)   |  100% WU: 98% | 2.265T / 1.970Th/s WU:27525.2/m
 2: GSF 10055348: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (28:14) |  100% WU:100% | 296.0G / 286.5Gh/s WU: 4001.8/m
 3: GSF 10070004: BM1397:06+ 687.50MHz T:500 P:665 (3:2)   | 90.4% WU: 89% | 2.433T / 2.475Th/s WU:34579.3/m

In this overview, what frequency is shown when a device has multiple chips? On your two R909's, I can spot one at 500MHz and one at 687.5MHz. Is it the average?
I guess so.. (725*5+500)/6 = 687.5

I'm going to need to dabble with the Java API and individual frequencies, too. Right now, just using --gekko-r909-freq 600 and restarting the process when trying another setting.

[RKG456]

Thought I would provide an update with my setup. I got the 2nd R909 and 5th Compac-F up and running on a 2nd RPi4.  I have been mining ViaBTC pool with the rig setups below and the 24hour mining results are: 10-Min Avg. HashRate fluctuates between 5.5TH/s and 7.5TH/s.   All is working great and the R909s are AWESOME!

1st Rig: 1x R909, 4 Compac-Fs and 2 NewPacs.

Code:

cgminer version 4.12.1 - Started: [2023-01-09 22:10:42.856]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 (5s):4.208T (1m):3.642T (5m):3.670T (15m):3.680T (avg):3.302Th/s
 A:39440384  R:8192  HW:47379  WU:46131.1/m
 Connected to bitcoin.viabtc.io diff 4.1K with stratum as user N0F34R.NPandT
 Block: 11fe4e31...  Diff:34.1T  Started: [11:59:55.799]  Best share: 31.6M
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 [U]SB management [P]ool management [S]ettings [D]isplay options [Q]uit
 0: GSF 10070012: BM1397:06+ 600.00MHz T:600 P:600 (3:2)       | 96.3% WU:^87% | 2.745T / 2.104Th/s WU:29401.4/m
 1: GSH 10041663: BM1387:02+ 375.00MHz T:375 P:375 (100:50)    | 98.9% WU:^88% | 87.78G / 75.03Gh/s WU: 1048.2/m
 2: GSH 10038894: BM1387:02+ 375.00MHz T:375 P:375 (100:50)    | 98.6% WU:^88% | 82.19G / 74.92Gh/s WU: 1046.6/m
 3: GSF 10052154: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:449 (28:14)     |  100% WU:100% | 287.0G / 242.7Gh/s WU: 3390.6/m
 4: GSF 10053864: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (28:14)     |  100% WU:100% | 337.9G / 267.3Gh/s WU: 3734.2/m
 5: GSF 10050104: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (28:14)     |  100% WU:100% | 317.0G / 269.7Gh/s WU: 3767.1/m
 6: GSF 10054544: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (28:14)     |  100% WU:100% | 306.3G / 267.9Gh/s WU: 3743.0/m

2nd Rig: 1x R909 and 1x Compac-F. 

Code:

cgminer version 4.12.1 - Started: [2023-01-09 08:51:23.596]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 (5s):2.266T (1m):2.598T (5m):2.554T (15m):2.528T (avg):2.234Th/s
 A:50655232  R:4096  HW:60608  WU:31211.2/m
 Connected to bitcoin.viabtc.io diff 4.1K with stratum as user N0F34R.T9andCF
 Block: 11fe4e31...  Diff:34.1T  Started: [11:59:55.782]  Best share: 118M
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 [U]SB management [P]ool management [S]ettings [D]isplay options [Q]uit
 0: GSF 10070032: BM1397:06+ 575.00MHz T:575 P:575 (3:2)      |  100% WU:^86% | 2.211T / 1.995Th/s WU:27878.9/m
 1: GSF 10053931: BM1397:01+ 400.00MHz T:400 P:400 (31:16)    |  100% WU:100% | 259.0G / 238.5Gh/s WU: 3332.3/m
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Updated Rig video link: https://youtu.be/MHAziVzA6I8

[n0nce]

All is working great and the R909s are AWESOME!

They really are! It seems to me like sidehack did good work on the thermal design. Super beefy heatsinks on both sides, with nice channel for the air, all in all running great.
I've ran 600MHz for over 48h without touching the voltage knob, and got no anomalies in error rate or anything.

Now testing 650MHz just using --gekko-r909-freq 650 on all cores, stock voltage.

Updated Rig video link: https://youtu.be/MHAziVzA6I8

Nice setup! For what it's worth, you could run multiple cgminer instances all on a single Pi, or are you getting issues when too many USB devices are connected?

[RKG456]

Nice setup! For what it's worth, you could run multiple cgminer instances all on a single Pi, or are you getting issues when too many USB devices are connected?

Essentially with all of the fans being plugged in I was running out of usb ports.   The original setup for Rig 1 was running stable as it was so I didn't want to change it. Given I have many Raspberry Pi and other Single Board computers laying about, I figured I would just spit it into two mining rigs.  That way I could relocate one if need be. Plus test mining against different pools to see how things went.  Right now it is a little cramped in that one area. With Rig 1 I have a keyboard and mouse connected. With Rig 2 I am forcing myself to work it remotely.

[n0nce]

Essentially with all of the fans being plugged in I was running out of usb ports.

I see, makes sense!

So I tried to do something that I'd not suggest anyone else to do
Of course try it if you really know what you are doing and have a 5kRPM fan, high quality power and are using linux

The aim was to see how fast I can get the R909 going - and I've got a record so far, we'll see who can beat it
My production R909 has one chip not as good as the other 5, so someone with 6 perfect chips should be able to beat it.

Anyway, I put in a 5kRPM fan, set the blue screw close to maximum, set 5 chips to ... 725MHz ... and the dodgy chip to 500MHz.

Results after hours of running (that I posted in discord earlier):

Code:

(5s):5.067T (1m):5.046T (5m):5.105T (15m):5.098T (avg):5.024Th/s
 A:36261324  R:23056  HW:8786576  WU:70192.7/m
 Connected to               diff 2.88K with stratum as user
 Block: 5fd33018...  Diff:34.1T  Started: [19:45:10.943]  Best share: 84.9M
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 0: GSF 10008346: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (28:14) |  100% WU:100% | 307.9G / 292.5Gh/s WU: 4086.1/m
 1: GSF 10008000: BM1397:06+ 500.00MHz T:500 P:500 (4:2)   |  100% WU: 98% | 2.265T / 1.970Th/s WU:27525.2/m
 2: GSF 10055348: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (28:14) |  100% WU:100% | 296.0G / 286.5Gh/s WU: 4001.8/m
 3: GSF 10070004: BM1397:06+ 687.50MHz T:500 P:665 (3:2)   | 90.4% WU: 89% | 2.433T / 2.475Th/s WU:34579.3/m

Massive >20% hardware errors, but "3: GSF 10070004: BM1397:06+" powering along at 2.475Th/s

Hey kano, I'm running 700MHz for around an hour now, without changes to the voltage screw and the NF-A8 PWM running at 2200RPM. Seems stable and good so far. I'm finally getting over 2.5TH/s (that was my goal), so I guess I beat you, with stock voltage!

Just to make sure: worst that can happen when aiming for too high clock speeds is that it crashes or returns faulty hashes, right? Or is there any 'risk' to pushing the overclock as long as the voltage screw is not touched? And the error rate is displayed through those Java API commands, right? The only way I've checked my error rate so far was the log printed when killing cgminer.

Proof:

Code:

(5s):2.647T (1m):2.735T (5m):2.639T (15m):2.602T (avg):2.585Th/s
 A:3259855  R:0  HW:1984  WU:36123.2/m
 Connected to stratum.kano.is diff 1.62K with stratum as user
 Block: 4b258ede...  Diff:34.1T  Started: [07:05:45.608]  Best share: 1.5M
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 0: GSF 10070017: BM1397:06+ 700.00MHz T:700 P:697 (3:2) | 94.2% WU: 92% | 2.615T / 2.585Th/s WU:36125.3/m

2.585Th/s

[cygan]

✂
Hey kano, I'm running 700MHz for around an hour now, without changes to the voltage screw and the NF-A8 PWM running at 2200RPM. Seems stable and good so far. I'm finally getting over 2.5TH/s (that was my goal), so I guess I beat you, with stock voltage!
✂

you definitely beat him
i will try my luck with my 2 r909 pod miner, only i would have to know how to adjust the rotations of the noctua fans ...

[n0nce]

you definitely beat him
i will try my luck with my 2 r909 pod miner, only i would have to know how to adjust the rotations of the noctua fans ...

Good luck!
The fan header on the R909 doesn't seem to output a fan curve so whatever you plug in, will run at its max speed. For the NF-A8 PWM, that should be 2200RPM.

You could plug in the included (with the fan) low-noise adapter that reduces it to a fixed 1750RPM but then the airflow will be less than the original fan so I'd be very careful with temps.

[kano]

Hey kano, I'm running 700MHz for around an hour now, without changes to the voltage screw and the NF-A8 PWM running at 2200RPM. Seems stable and good so far. I'm finally getting over 2.5TH/s (that was my goal), so I guess I beat you, with stock voltage!

Just to make sure: worst that can happen when aiming for too high clock speeds is that it crashes or returns faulty hashes, right? Or is there any 'risk' to pushing the overclock as long as the voltage screw is not touched? And the error rate is displayed through those Java API commands, right? The only way I've checked my error rate so far was the log printed when killing cgminer.

Proof:

Code:

(5s):2.647T (1m):2.735T (5m):2.639T (15m):2.602T (avg):2.585Th/s
 A:3259855  R:0  HW:1984  WU:36123.2/m
 Connected to stratum.kano.is diff 1.62K with stratum as user
 Block: 4b258ede...  Diff:34.1T  Started: [07:05:45.608]  Best share: 1.5M
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 0: GSF 10070017: BM1397:06+ 700.00MHz T:700 P:697 (3:2) | 94.2% WU: 92% | 2.615T / 2.585Th/s WU:36125.3/m

2.585Th/s

Well that A says 1.5 hours so definitely higher hash rate than me

I wonder if 725MHz is just too high for them (as per my >20% HW) and 700 is the limit?

Also as mentioned in my case, one chips is somewhat of a dud,
so I had to keep pushing the freq higher to get closer to 2.5T,
so for you all 6 chips running OK at 700 will give a higher avg for you also "BM1397:06+ 700.00MHz"
(though my dud does about 25% of 500MHz when you set it to 500MHz)

'Error rate' is HW / (A+R+HW) = 1984 / (3259855 + 0 + 1984)

I changed cgminer to report HW on the screen correctly for the Gekkos - it used to only count HW occurrences, but alas most miners don't return nonces at diff1 - so for the Gekko's it uses the ticket per HW.
In the case of the R909 that's 64 - i.e. 1984 / 64 = 31 bad nonces returned (and each nonce returned is worth 64)

Yes you can kill it - no it's not bullet proof.
It is unlikely to kill it, but as you push it harder that means you are pushing the chips harder also.
If you overload the power it will just switch off, and then the 'fuse' will need a power cycle and letting it cool will fix that.
But the chips themselves, I've no idea under what circumstances they might be at risk.
Maybe sidehack knows?

[n0nce]

Well that A says 1.5 hours so definitely higher hash rate than me

I wonder if 725MHz is just too high for them (as per my >20% HW) and 700 is the limit?

That's definitely possible. I'm running 650MHz now, since after a few hours it had dropped to 690MHz and I don't feel like pushing it to its max right now. Yet still I am getting 2.487Th/s on average. Still super close to that 2.5 mark, or 3.8% lower than my previous result, while reducing clock by 50MHz, so a 7.2% reduction in clock speed.
This indicates to me that above 650, we get into diminishing returns.

Yes you can kill it - no it's not bullet proof.
It is unlikely to kill it, but as you push it harder that means you are pushing the chips harder also.

I guess on its basic level, the transistors are going to be 'pushed' to switch faster; but in the realms of CPU overclocking I've never heard of a high frequency killing chips / diminishing their lifespan. It's usually the required higher voltage that does the most harm, to the best of my knowledge at least.

If you overload the power it will just switch off, and then the 'fuse' will need a power cycle and letting it cool will fix that.
But the chips themselves, I've no idea under what circumstances they might be at risk.
Maybe sidehack knows?

Feedback by sidehack would be amazing!

[kano]

I'm running 650MHz now, since after a few hours it had dropped to 690MHz and I don't feel like pushing it to its max right now.

I initially got up to 2.497TH/s after more than an hour, hoping it would reach 2.5, but by the next day it was down to 2.475Th/s
I just let it go at 725/500 since, well, it didn't die, just the HW % kept rising.

[n0nce]

I'm running 650MHz now, since after a few hours it had dropped to 690MHz and I don't feel like pushing it to its max right now.

I initially got up to 2.497TH/s after more than an hour, hoping it would reach 2.5, but by the next day it was down to 2.475Th/s

While also clocking itself down a bit? Or did you lock the frequencies?
I haven't done any such fancy stuff and it went down to 690 by itself, as mentioned before. So the sweet spot is probably between 650 and 700MHz depending on silicon lottery.
But I do think this behavior (automatic down clocking to a stable frequency) is a really great feature of cgminer. Much better than overly pushing the chip and just getting invalid blocks out of it.

I just let it go at 725/500 since, well, it didn't die, just the HW % kept rising.

For what it's worth, my HW% was always in check so far. It still downclocked. Oh well; again: diminishing returns, anyway.

[cygan]

I'm running 650MHz now, since after a few hours it had dropped to 690MHz and I don't feel like pushing it to its max right now.

I initially got up to 2.497TH/s after more than an hour, hoping it would reach 2.5, but by the next day it was down to 2.475Th/s
I just let it go at 725/500 since, well, it didn't die, just the HW % kept rising.

i have now replaced the two fans with the nactua nf-a8 pwm and started the two r909 pod miners at 690mhz - before that i turned the blue screw to about 1 o'clock
now the two r909 run just over 2.5 hours and this is how the performance looks:

Code:

4: GSF 10070009: BM1397:06+ 680.00MHz T:680 P:646 (3:2)   | 90.4% WU: 89% | 2.222T / 2.435Th/s WU:34028.6/m
5: GSF 10070003: BM1397:06+ 650.00MHz T:650 P:643 (3:2)   | 83.7% WU: 84% | 2.141T / 2.196Th/s WU:30681.2/m

somehow the 2.5th/s does not want to fall...

[n0nce]

I'm running 650MHz now, since after a few hours it had dropped to 690MHz and I don't feel like pushing it to its max right now.

I initially got up to 2.497TH/s after more than an hour, hoping it would reach 2.5, but by the next day it was down to 2.475Th/s
I just let it go at 725/500 since, well, it didn't die, just the HW % kept rising.

i have now replaced the two fans with the nactua nf-a8 pwm and started the two r909 pod miners at 690mhz - before that i turned the blue screw to about 1 o'clock
now the two r909 run just over 2.5 hours and this is how the performance looks:

Code:

4: GSF 10070009: BM1397:06+ 680.00MHz T:680 P:646 (3:2)   | 90.4% WU: 89% | 2.222T / 2.435Th/s WU:34028.6/m
5: GSF 10070003: BM1397:06+ 650.00MHz T:650 P:643 (3:2)   | 83.7% WU: 84% | 2.141T / 2.196Th/s WU:30681.2/m

somehow the 2.5th/s does not want to fall...

Weird; they're not running 690, though. Maybe decrease the voltage a little. Could be that they get too hot, return faulty computations and cgminer tells them to clock down. If they ran at stable 690.00MHz, they should right about reach 2.5TH/s.
Of course, there's some silicon lottery involved, but give that a shot. In my experience with Compac F, chips clocking down was usually a sign of bad cooling / too high voltage.

Can you show the line with A, R and HW numbers?

[cygan]

@n0nce
so you mean i should turn the blue screw again around 12 o'clock or reduce the mhz rate?🤔

[n0nce]

@n0nce
so you mean i should turn the blue screw again around 12 o'clock or reduce the mhz rate?🤔

Maybe first turn back the screw (I guess try something between 12 and 1) and try 690MHz. If that doesn't hold stable, try 680MHz, going down in 10MHz steps. In my experience, going above 650MHz was effortless at stock voltage.

[kano]

As mentioned on the gekko page,
https://kano.is/gekko.php#rang
the '[ChipNRanges]' data will give you a good idea what each chip is doing.

e.g. for my one before (data abbreviated to save space)

Code:

  [FreqLocked] => true
   [Chip0Ranges] => 882/998/1010/1035/1021/971/5917/94.54%
   [Chip0FreqReply] => 725.000000
   [Chip1Ranges] => 141/153/170/155/161/148/928/21.50%
   [Chip1FreqReply] => 500.000000
   [Chip2Ranges] => 1011/1136/1136/1082/1115/1098/6578/105.10%
   [Chip2FreqReply] => 725.000000
   [Chip3Ranges] => 834/1030/1003/1049/927/996/5839/93.29%
   [Chip3FreqReply] => 725.000000
   [Chip4Ranges] => 1022/1127/1162/1120/1164/1083/6678/106.70%
   [Chip4FreqReply] => 725.000000
   [Chip5Ranges] => 891/984/1071/1046/1028/1051/6071/97.00%
   [Chip5FreqReply] => 725.000000

Edit:
Oh I should show Dups and Nonces since that also shows if CPU/USB can't handle it:

Code:

  [Elapsed] => 31047
   [Nonces] => 1560325
   [Dups] => 7383
   [DupsReset] => 7383

   [Chip0Nonces] => 246973
   [Chip0Dups] => 8
   [Chip1Nonces] => 42874
   [Chip1Dups] => 267
   [Chip2Nonces] => 272900
   [Chip2Dups] => 57
   [Chip3Nonces] => 242216
   [Chip3Dups] => 11
   [Chip4Nonces] => 272852
   [Chip4Dups] => 6113
   [Chip5Nonces] => 243088
   [Chip5Dups] => 927

The first 3 are the most relevant numbers.

Chip4Dups might be suggesting that chip 4 can't handle 725MHz as well as the other 4 good ones, or is near it's limit - though I'm not sure

[cygan]

@n0nce
so you mean i should turn the blue screw again around 12 o'clock or reduce the mhz rate?🤔

Maybe first turn back the screw (I guess try something between 12 and 1) and try 690MHz. If that doesn't hold stable, try 680MHz, going down in 10MHz steps. In my experience, going above 650MHz was effortless at stock voltage.

now everything runs just over 24h but I still can not reach the limit of 2.

Code:

4: GSF 10070009: BM1397:06+ 680.00MHz T:680 P:655 (3:2)   | 88.4% WU: 90% | 2.792T / 2.453Th/s WU:34281.3/m
 5: GSF 10070003: BM1397:06+ 640.00MHz T:640 P:621 (3:2)   | 89.8% WU: 90% | 1.961T / 2.331Th/s WU:32575.2/m

and here are the a, r and hw data (but there are 4 more compac f sticks connected)

Code:

A:131834880  R:54432  HW:51456  WU:85740.4/m

[n0nce]

@n0nce
so you mean i should turn the blue screw again around 12 o'clock or reduce the mhz rate?

Maybe first turn back the screw (I guess try something between 12 and 1) and try 690MHz. If that doesn't hold stable, try 680MHz, going down in 10MHz steps. In my experience, going above 650MHz was effortless at stock voltage.

now everything runs just over 24h but I still can not reach the limit of 2.

Code:

4: GSF 10070009: BM1397:06+ 680.00MHz T:680 P:655 (3:2)   | 88.4% WU: 90% | 2.792T / 2.453Th/s WU:34281.3/m
 5: GSF 10070003: BM1397:06+ 640.00MHz T:640 P:621 (3:2)   | 89.8% WU: 90% | 1.961T / 2.331Th/s WU:32575.2/m

and here are the a, r and hw data (but there are 4 more compac f sticks connected)

Code:

A:131834880  R:54432  HW:51456  WU:85740.4/m

You've got an error rate of 0.0008025419406, in other words 0.08% which is excellent.
If I were you, I'd slightly increase clock speeds. I'm not sure if I missed something, so are you deliberately running one R909 at 640MHz and one at 680?

I wonder if 725MHz is just too high for them (as per my >20% HW) and 700 is the limit?

That's definitely possible. I'm running 650MHz now, since after a few hours it had dropped to 690MHz and I don't feel like pushing it to its max right now. Yet still I am getting 2.487Th/s on average. Still super close to that 2.5 mark, or 3.8% lower than my previous result, while reducing clock by 50MHz, so a 7.2% reduction in clock speed.
This indicates to me that above 650, we get into diminishing returns.

Update on this: It does seem like the sweet spot is right between 650MHz and 700MHz. I've turned mine back up a bit from 650MHz (just slightly over 2TH/s after a day) to 675MHz and I'm back on 2.531Th/s after an hour. Let's see what this looks like in a few hours.

[cygan]

✂
If I were you, I'd slightly increase clock speeds. I'm not sure if I missed something, so are you deliberately running one R909 at 640MHz and one at 680?
✂

no, both were started with 680 only the one went down step by step to 640
maybe i should turn the screw a little on the one r909 (640) after all?

[kano]

Got my R909 delivered today and got all my miners going except the R808 I got off of ebay appears to have pooped out. It was working then got stuck on Found 0 Chips..
...

Check it's not a software version issue - i.e. if it was working before, use the version of software from before just for the R808 and see if it's ok.
I've no idea if the R808 works with the current code.
I've run R909, R606, CompacF, NewPac, 2Pac and Compac on the new version (and you should use the new 4.12.1 version for those six)

As I mentioned in Discord, this turns out to be that the old magic '60' calc is no good for the R808.
Side effect was an average of about once per half an hour of it deciding to reset due to a slow nonce.

I've updated git with a fix for the R808 (and I've run it on all the miners now together) and the new calc is more reasonable (and more accurate)
So only if you have an old R808 you should do the update steps in https://kano.is/gekko.php#lin and it should fix that.

Edit; of course it wont fix a dead R808 - but it will fix it if it was resetting repeatedly, unnecessarily.

[n0nce]

✂
If I were you, I'd slightly increase clock speeds. I'm not sure if I missed something, so are you deliberately running one R909 at 640MHz and one at 680?
✂

no, both were started with 680 only the one went down step by step to 640
maybe i should turn the screw a little on the one r909 (640) after all?

What I noticed is that sometimes the automatic 'step down' is a bit too aggressive; i.e. if you set the target frequency too high (like 680MHz maybe), it might step down to 640MHz, even though it would hold 650MHz just fine if you used that as a target.
So before fiddling with voltages, I'd try to (manually) find a stable frequency target by increasing / decreasing it in 50MHz or 25MHz steps and letting it run for a few hours.

Right now, after 12h on 675MHz, I have a 2.310Th/s average. That's substantially more than the ~2TH at 650MHz. As you can tell, I'm having a blast fine-tuning this thing. And I'm just getting started (need to install Java & such..).

[kano]

Well, as long as you have the log going somewhere, it will say why it stepped the freq down each time.

Also, if anyone does change the step settings on the BM1397 miners, I'd suggest not to.

[100knot2dae]

Got my unit this week, really a great piece of hardware! So far I am happy with it, have it running for now at 2.1Th/s with 550MHz for about 24 hours, with the flat side of the voltage knob pointing to between 9 and 10 (clock).

Speaking of the voltage knob, is there a standardized stock voltage position that applies to all units? Reason I am asking is because mine was shipped with the knob at 11, while I saw a picture of another user with the stock position at about 9 to 10: https://imgur.com/a/F1V84qf
Which is what I have set mine to as well now, saving me about 5 Watts while still running with the same hashrate.

[sidehack]

They're factory calibrated to 4.6V which isn't always the same position on the knob due to part tolerances in the volt-setting circuit. If it'll run at speed from a lower voltage, there's no reason not to.

[RKG456]

This evening I rearranged everything and now have all my Gekkos mining off of a single Raspberry Pi 4 (4GB) host.  Looks stable so far but has only been back up for a few hours.   I let it run for a week and a half with no issues when it was spread across two hosts.  The day before yesterday my peak hash rate spiked up to 8.025TH/s for a minute or so.  Getting many spikes over 7.5TH/s

Code:

cgminer version 4.12.1 - Started: [2023-01-19 17:07:59.335]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 (5s):6.593T (1m):6.293T (5m):6.322T (15m):6.277T (avg):6.097Th/s
 A:15138816  R:0  HW:15828  WU:85182.8/m
 Connected to bitcoin.viabtc.io diff 8.19K with stratum as user N0F34R.NPandT
 Block: 533c0002...  Diff:37.6T  Started: [19:50:37.341]  Best share: 99.7M
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 [U]SB management [P]ool management [S]ettings [D]isplay options [Q]uit
 0: GSF 10070032: BM1397:06+ 600.00MHz T:600 P:600 (3:2)     | 96.8% WU: 97% | 2.541T / 2.350Th/s WU:32840.4/m
 1: GSF 10070012: BM1397:06+ 600.00MHz T:600 P:600 (3:2)     | 96.8% WU: 98% | 2.616T / 2.381Th/s WU:33272.4/m
 2: GSH 10041663: BM1387:02+ 375.00MHz T:375 P:375 (100:50)  |  100% WU: 98% | 89.85G / 83.92Gh/s WU: 1172.4/m
 3: GSH 10038894: BM1387:02+ 375.00MHz T:375 P:375 (100:50)  | 98.5% WU:^98% | 85.93G / 83.84Gh/s WU: 1171.4/m
 4: GSF 10052154: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (28:14)   |  100% WU:100% | 309.1G / 274.5Gh/s WU: 3834.7/m
 5: GSF 10053864: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (28:14)   |  100% WU:100% | 393.6G / 297.0Gh/s WU: 4148.7/m
 6: GSF 10050104: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (28:14)   |  100% WU:100% | 293.9G / 297.1Gh/s WU: 4150.1/m
 7: GSF 10054544: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (28:14)   |  100% WU:100% | 344.7G / 300.3Gh/s WU: 4195.1/m
 8: GSF 10053931: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (28:14)   |  100% WU:100% | 254.7G / 274.7Gh/s WU: 3837.1/m