tyfo
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 4
Merit: 0
|
|
August 06, 2014, 03:03:34 PM |
|
i thought the S3's shut down if they reached 80 degrees celcius ? anyone tested this since i see alot of talk about fire hazards. also could get a tellstick and some kind of nexa unit and turn off the power if the temperature inside the room reaches X degrees If they shut down - what is the point of mining? Sure, the A/C will cool down the air eventually and ASICs will run again at some point. In this case the best option would be the chilled air flowing directly to the S3s and PSUs. Enclosing such heat makes it a hot air electric oven unless your A/C is more powerful than the S3s and PSUs combined (you can also think about throwing the PSUs outside the cold area if you don't care about cooling them).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
oskuro
|
|
August 06, 2014, 08:26:16 PM |
|
Question guys.
With 218.75 and 225 its necessary to use 4 PCIE? Or with just 2 PCIE its ok?? For 218.75 im sure i can just use 2 PCIE, but for 225 frequency im not that sure.
right now i have 4 PCIE for both, 716W total
|
|
|
|
chadwickx16
|
|
August 06, 2014, 09:00:05 PM |
|
Question guys.
With 218.75 and 225 its necessary to use 4 PCIE? Or with just 2 PCIE its ok?? For 218.75 im sure i can just use 2 PCIE, but for 225 frequency im not that sure.
right now i have 4 PCIE for both, 716W total
I've heard you can do it with two cables, just make sure they aren't getting too hot. As is hot to the touch.
|
|
|
|
allcoinminer
|
|
August 06, 2014, 09:08:48 PM |
|
Question guys.
With 218.75 and 225 its necessary to use 4 PCIE? Or with just 2 PCIE its ok?? For 218.75 im sure i can just use 2 PCIE, but for 225 frequency im not that sure.
right now i have 4 PCIE for both, 716W total
My recommendation is to use four cables for better stability. But its not a necessity. If you are overclocking I now strongly recommend(unlike earlier) to use 4 power cables.
|
|
|
|
oskuro
|
|
August 06, 2014, 09:26:05 PM |
|
Question guys.
With 218.75 and 225 its necessary to use 4 PCIE? Or with just 2 PCIE its ok?? For 218.75 im sure i can just use 2 PCIE, but for 225 frequency im not that sure.
right now i have 4 PCIE for both, 716W total
My recommendation is to use four cables for better stability. But its not a necessity. If you are overclocking I now strongly recommend(unlike earlier) to use 4 power cables. I wanted to use Corsair CX750M for both, but yeah i have one at 225 frequency, so thats OC and i suppose with just 2 PCIE wont work very well maybe
|
|
|
|
orviwan
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 8
Merit: 0
|
|
August 06, 2014, 11:13:48 PM |
|
Does anyone have any information about the JDH1238B fan used on the S3? Specifically Air Flow CFM and Noise Level dbA.
I'm looking to replace them with something quieter if possible.
Thanks
|
|
|
|
kebabman
|
|
August 06, 2014, 11:46:51 PM |
|
Which two of the four PCI-E connectors do you need to plug power into? Or does it not matter?
|
|
|
|
|
TracerX
|
|
August 07, 2014, 03:18:20 AM |
|
Which two of the four PCI-E connectors do you need to plug power into? Or does it not matter?
The blades run lengthways, and you need to power each. So one on the "left-side" and one on the "right-side", if you are looking at it from the front side with the ethernet connection.
|
|
|
|
allcoinminer
|
|
August 07, 2014, 06:19:29 AM |
|
Which two of the four PCI-E connectors do you need to plug power into? Or does it not matter?
You can connect any of the two, one in each blade. Its better and safe to have all the 4 cables connected to Ant S3. I found improved stability when connected all the fours. Make sure that you are not connecting a single blade from multiple PSUs. Same time you can connect one PSU to one blade and Another PSU to the other blade if you cannot have a single PSU which can power both the blades.
|
|
|
|
la7eralus
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 38
Merit: 0
|
|
August 07, 2014, 09:42:33 AM |
|
Work Input timing Clock Freq.(M) Hash rate(G) Reg.value Ideal delay(ms) Recommenddelay(ms) 100 6.30 0783 42.6 38 125 7.88 0983 34.0 31 150 9.45 0b83 28.4 26 175 11.03 0d83 24.3 22 200 12.60 0782 21.3 19 225 14.18 0882 18.9 17 250 15.75 0982 17.0 15 275 17.33 0a82 15.5 14 300 18.90 0b82 14.2 13 325 20.48 0c82 13.1 12 350 22.05 0d82 12.2 11 375 23.63 0e82 11.3 10 400 25.20 08f2 10.6 10
Has anyone successfully broken the above down into smaller incremental steps? Preferably 1/4 of their current spacing? Or even 1/6th? Thanks!
|
|
|
|
v0n
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 24
Merit: 0
|
|
August 07, 2014, 11:02:01 AM |
|
Both of my 1st batch S3's will overclock to 225 and beyond, at least for short time, but both hash slower at 225 and 250 than at 218.5. As in - both 5s and average GH/s figures are lower (barely reaching 400 at 225), whereas they will happily do stable throughput of 440 at 218.5.
|
|
|
|
la7eralus
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 38
Merit: 0
|
|
August 07, 2014, 09:35:41 PM Last edit: August 07, 2014, 09:49:14 PM by la7eralus |
|
Clock Freq.(M) Hash rate(G) Reg.value Ideal delay(ms) Recommenddelay(ms) 100 6.30 0783 42.6 38 -106.25 -112.5 -118.75 125 7.88 0983 34.0 31 -131.25 -137.5 -143.75 150 9.45 0b83 28.4 26 -156.25 -162.5 -168.75 175 11.03 0d83 24.3 22 -181.25 -187.5 -193.75 200 12.60 0782 21.3 19 -206.25 -212.5 -218.75 225 14.18 0882 18.9 17 -231.25 -237.5 -243.75 250 15.75 0982 17.0 15 -256.25 -262.5 -268.75 275 17.33 0a82 15.5 14 -281.25 -287.5 -293.75 300 18.90 0b82 14.2 13 -306.25 -312.5 -318.75 325 20.48 0c82 13.1 12 -331.25 -337.5 -343.75 350 22.05 0d82 12.2 11 -356.25 -362.5 -368.75 375 23.63 0e82 11.3 10 -381.25 -387.5 -393.75 400 25.20 08f2 10.6 10
I was able to seperate the above frequencies into smaller incremental steps, but I have no idea how to calculate the "reg. value" or the "ideal delay" for them. Anyone with a little more know-how than myself willing to help out? I know a few other people in this thread were looking for something like this as well, and any help at all would be appreciated. Thanks!
|
|
|
|
JakeTri
|
|
August 08, 2014, 06:24:46 AM |
|
I was able to seperate the above frequencies into smaller incremental steps, but I have no idea how to calculate the "reg. value" or the "ideal delay" for them. Anyone with a little more know-how than myself willing to help out? I know a few other people in this thread were looking for something like this as well, and any help at all would be appreciated. Thanks!
Adjusting the S1 formula based on S3 ASIC spec I was able to get following register values (and timeout). Use the settings below at your own risk! Clock_Freq | Register value | Timeout | (chip_freq) | (freq_value) | (timeout) | 100 | 0783 | 40 | 103.125 | 1007 | 39 | 106.25 | 0803 | 38 | 109.375 | 1107 | 37 | 112.5 | 0883 | 36 | 115.625 | 1207 | 35 | 118.75 | 0903 | 34 | 121.875 | 1307 | 33 | 125 | 0983 | 32 | 128.125 | 1407 | 31 | 131.25 | 0A03 | 30 | 134.375 | 1507 | 30 | 137.5 | 0A83 | 29 | 140.625 | 1607 | 28 | 143.75 | 0B03 | 28 | 146.875 | 1707 | 27 | 150 | 0B83 | 27 | 153.125 | 1807 | 26 | 156.25 | 0C03 | 26 | 159.375 | 1907 | 25 | 162.5 | 0C83 | 25 | 165.625 | 1A07 | 24 | 168.75 | 0D03 | 24 | 171.875 | 1B07 | 23 | 175 | 0D83 | 23 | 178.125 | 1C07 | 22 | 181.25 | 0E03 | 22 | 184.375 | 1D07 | 22 | 187.5 | 0E83 | 21 | 190.625 | 1E07 | 21 | 193.75 | 0F03 | 21 | 196.875 | 1F07 | 20 | 200 | 0782 | 20 | 206.25 | 1006 | 19 | 212.5 | 0802 | 19 | 218.75 | 1106 | 18 | 225 | 0882 | 18 | 231.25 | 1206 | 17 | 237.5 | 0902 | 17 | 243.75 | 1306 | 16 | 250 | 0982 | 16 | 256.25 | 1406 | 16 | 262.5 | 0A02 | 15 | 268.75 | 1506 | 15 | 275 | 0A82 | 15 | 281.25 | 1606 | 14 | 287.5 | 0B02 | 14 | 293.75 | 1706 | 14 | 300 | 0B82 | 13 | 306.25 | 1806 | 13 | 312.5 | 0C02 | 13 | 318.75 | 1906 | 13 | 325 | 0C82 | 12 | 331.25 | 1A06 | 12 | 337.5 | 0D02 | 12 | 343.75 | 1B06 | 12 | 350 | 0D82 | 11 | 356.25 | 1C06 | 11 | 362.5 | 0E02 | 11 | 368.75 | 1D06 | 11 | 375 | 0E82 | 11 | 381.25 | 1E06 | 10 | 387.5 | 0F02 | 10 | 393.75 | 1F06 | 10 | 400 | 0F82 | 10 |
|
BTC donations always welcome: 1JakeTriwbahMYp1rSfJbTn7Afd1w62p2q
|
|
|
la7eralus
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 38
Merit: 0
|
|
August 08, 2014, 07:08:06 AM |
|
I was able to seperate the above frequencies into smaller incremental steps, but I have no idea how to calculate the "reg. value" or the "ideal delay" for them. Anyone with a little more know-how than myself willing to help out? I know a few other people in this thread were looking for something like this as well, and any help at all would be appreciated. Thanks!
Adjusting the S1 formula based on S3 ASIC spec I was able to get following register values (and timeout). Use the settings below at your own risk! Clock_Freq | Register value | Timeout | (chip_freq) | (freq_value) | (timeout) | 100 | 0783 | 40 | 103.125 | 1007 | 39 | 106.25 | 0803 | 38 | 109.375 | 1107 | 37 | 112.5 | 0883 | 36 | 115.625 | 1207 | 35 | 118.75 | 0903 | 34 | 121.875 | 1307 | 33 | 125 | 0983 | 32 | 128.125 | 1407 | 31 | 131.25 | 0A03 | 30 | 134.375 | 1507 | 30 | 137.5 | 0A83 | 29 | 140.625 | 1607 | 28 | 143.75 | 0B03 | 28 | 146.875 | 1707 | 27 | 150 | 0B83 | 27 | 153.125 | 1807 | 26 | 156.25 | 0C03 | 26 | 159.375 | 1907 | 25 | 162.5 | 0C83 | 25 | 165.625 | 1A07 | 24 | 168.75 | 0D03 | 24 | 171.875 | 1B07 | 23 | 175 | 0D83 | 23 | 178.125 | 1C07 | 22 | 181.25 | 0E03 | 22 | 184.375 | 1D07 | 22 | 187.5 | 0E83 | 21 | 190.625 | 1E07 | 21 | 193.75 | 0F03 | 21 | 196.875 | 1F07 | 20 | 200 | 0782 | 20 | 206.25 | 1006 | 19 | 212.5 | 0802 | 19 | 218.75 | 1106 | 18 | 225 | 0882 | 18 | 231.25 | 1206 | 17 | 237.5 | 0902 | 17 | 243.75 | 1306 | 16 | 250 | 0982 | 16 | 256.25 | 1406 | 16 | 262.5 | 0A02 | 15 | 268.75 | 1506 | 15 | 275 | 0A82 | 15 | 281.25 | 1606 | 14 | 287.5 | 0B02 | 14 | 293.75 | 1706 | 14 | 300 | 0B82 | 13 | 306.25 | 1806 | 13 | 312.5 | 0C02 | 13 | 318.75 | 1906 | 13 | 325 | 0C82 | 12 | 331.25 | 1A06 | 12 | 337.5 | 0D02 | 12 | 343.75 | 1B06 | 12 | 350 | 0D82 | 11 | 356.25 | 1C06 | 11 | 362.5 | 0E02 | 11 | 368.75 | 1D06 | 11 | 375 | 0E82 | 11 | 381.25 | 1E06 | 10 | 387.5 | 0F02 | 10 | 393.75 | 1F06 | 10 | 400 | 0F82 | 10 |
Awesome! I'm testing the following now: option 'freq_value' '1306' option 'chip_freq' '243.75' option 'timeout' '16' One of my Ant's works fine at 250, however the other does not and had to be bumped down to the 237.5 to refrain from attaining X's. This seems to be stable so far, but only time will tell as it took about an hour/2 for it to show X's the first time around. Currently averaging 485-490 GH/s.
|
|
|
|
MinersAnonymous
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 27
Merit: 0
|
|
August 08, 2014, 08:25:24 AM |
|
Do you guys feel it is good to instantly remove the heatsinks and apply new thermal paste to the chips?
I am unsure of the quality paste used from manufacturer but I highly doubt it is premium due to production costs.
|
|
|
|
la7eralus
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 38
Merit: 0
|
|
August 08, 2014, 08:40:46 AM Last edit: August 08, 2014, 08:53:42 AM by la7eralus |
|
Do you guys feel it is good to instantly remove the heatsinks and apply new thermal paste to the chips?
I am unsure of the quality paste used from manufacturer but I highly doubt it is premium due to production costs.
I have been running both of my Ant's OC'd to 500 GH/s and 490 GH/s and both temperatures are well within normal ranges and all chips are stable and hashing with no X's. One of them has been running a few hours as if you look up a post or two you'll see where we came up with the newer smaller incremental frequency steps, and that is the one running at 490 GH/s up from the 237.5 clock which was in the 470-480 GH/s range, while the other has been running for 72 hours at 500 GH/s. Highest temperature reached by any miner is 44C, while averaging 40-43 C in use, so I would say replacing the thermal compound is unnecessary. That being said, if you do decide to go ahead and upgrade/replace the thermal compound, do not use any compound with Silver in it as it is conductive, and make absolutely sure that whatever brand you decide to go with DOES NOT CONDUCT ELECTRICITY - YOU WILL FRY YOUR ANTMINER!!!!!
|
|
|
|
davinrover
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 1
Merit: 0
|
|
August 08, 2014, 09:04:14 AM |
|
Hi Guys I just got my antminer s3 and having big problems. It's only mining at about 250ghs and gets around 75% hw error. I am using a brand new Corsair CX500 and have also tried with my Corsair HX850. I have changed the thermal paste on all the chips. I have flashed it to latest firmware. I have very stable internet connection. Anyone have advice for me? After 5min: http://i62.tinypic.com/2psln39.jpgAfter 10min: http://i61.tinypic.com/28vaza.jpgHW error: http://i58.tinypic.com/262qnmq.jpg
|
|
|
|
MinersAnonymous
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 27
Merit: 0
|
|
August 08, 2014, 09:14:46 AM |
|
Do you guys feel it is good to instantly remove the heatsinks and apply new thermal paste to the chips?
I am unsure of the quality paste used from manufacturer but I highly doubt it is premium due to production costs.
I have been running both of my Ant's OC'd to 500 GH/s and 490 GH/s and both temperatures are well within normal ranges and all chips are stable and hashing with no X's. One of them has been running a few hours as if you look up a post or two you'll see where we came up with the newer smaller incremental frequency steps, and that is the one running at 490 GH/s up from the 237.5 clock which was in the 470-480 GH/s range, while the other has been running for 72 hours at 500 GH/s. Highest temperature reached by any miner is 44C, while averaging 40-43 C in use, so I would say replacing the thermal compound is unnecessary. That being said, if you do decide to go ahead and upgrade/replace the thermal compound, do not use any compound with Silver in it as it is conductive, and make absolutely sure that whatever brand you decide to go with DOES NOT CONDUCT ELECTRICITY - YOU WILL FRY YOUR ANTMINER!!!!! I see Yes my current have same temperature, from some pictures I have seen of heatsinks removed I noticed very bad application of the paste. I don't expect too much from the assembly line. Silly question but I must ask, outside of trial and error how are you coming up with the newer reg codes you posted above? Should I completely ignore the first page and use the recent posting?
|
|
|
|
la7eralus
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 38
Merit: 0
|
|
August 08, 2014, 12:26:00 PM |
|
Do you guys feel it is good to instantly remove the heatsinks and apply new thermal paste to the chips?
I am unsure of the quality paste used from manufacturer but I highly doubt it is premium due to production costs.
I have been running both of my Ant's OC'd to 500 GH/s and 490 GH/s and both temperatures are well within normal ranges and all chips are stable and hashing with no X's. One of them has been running a few hours as if you look up a post or two you'll see where we came up with the newer smaller incremental frequency steps, and that is the one running at 490 GH/s up from the 237.5 clock which was in the 470-480 GH/s range, while the other has been running for 72 hours at 500 GH/s. Highest temperature reached by any miner is 44C, while averaging 40-43 C in use, so I would say replacing the thermal compound is unnecessary. That being said, if you do decide to go ahead and upgrade/replace the thermal compound, do not use any compound with Silver in it as it is conductive, and make absolutely sure that whatever brand you decide to go with DOES NOT CONDUCT ELECTRICITY - YOU WILL FRY YOUR ANTMINER!!!!! I see Yes my current have same temperature, from some pictures I have seen of heatsinks removed I noticed very bad application of the paste. I don't expect too much from the assembly line. Silly question but I must ask, outside of trial and error how are you coming up with the newer reg codes you posted above? Should I completely ignore the first page and use the recent posting? I separated out the operating speed's into incremental steps and JakeTri calculated the appropriate Freq values and Timings.
|
|
|
|
|