896 mh/s firmware release - Butterfly Labs

[BTC-engineer]

Hi,
is it generally possibly to write and run my own firmware on the bitforce single?

Nope.

Well, I would not say that it's generally not possible.
BFL has not publicly documented the design and has at this point in time no interest that clients running not BFL released logic on the singles.
However it's a FPGA based product. How to use the JTAG connectors in the single is already  known. If you want to use the microcontroller or usb also you have to do some reverse engineering.

Other products are open source or have at least a good documentation (schematic etc.) to use it for other tasks also.
I don't understand why BFL keeps so many information as a secrete and doesn't use the power of the community to improve the products. BFL's main advantage is the good  source for the FPGA's.

[1714119666]

1714119666

[1714119666]

1714119666

[1714119666]

1714119666

[1714119666]

1714119666

[lomax]

Its been a couple of week since BFL teased us with word of faster firmware, appreciate you may have been busy but any word?

[BTC-engineer]

Its been a couple of week since BFL teased us with word of faster firmware, appreciate you may have been busy but any word?

I'm getting more and more disappointed about the support of products I've bought from them.
After a very long delivery time with up-front payment, I've now singles here which are looking like they can run at higher speed. BFL stated, last on May 29, that they have faster firmwares and will release them in a short while. I know that there is no guarantee that the faster firmware will run on every unit or even most of them. All the weeks no further information...

Releasing the firmwares sometime in the up-coming ASIC era , is then probably not necessary anymore... 

Luckily I'm not one of the customers who need slower firmwares like the 792, which is still broken.

[JWU42]

Luckily I'm not one of the customers who need slower firmwares like the 792, which is still broken.

That would be me... 

[crazyates]

I think they've been a little busy lately...

[Epoch]

I'm getting more and more disappointed about the support of products I've bought from them.
After a very long delivery time with up-front payment, I've now singles here which are looking like they can run at higher speed. BFL stated, last on May 29, that they have faster firmwares and will release them in a short while. I know that there is no guarantee that the faster firmware will run on every unit or even most of them. All the weeks no further information...

Releasing the firmwares sometime in the up-coming ASIC era , is then probably not necessary anymore...  

Luckily I'm not one of the customers who need slower firmwares like the 792, which is still broken.

I understand the frustration, but I bought these based on BFL's final published specs: 832Mhps +/-10%. I went in with eyes open, as did everyone else who ordered, and that is exactly what BFL has delivered. There is no justifiable reason to be disappointed that some magic 900Mhps+ firmware hasn't surfaced yet.

The release of multiple speed grades of firmware should be considered a 'bonus' to customers, not an 'entitlement'.

FWIW I'm running many of my units with 768 and 800 firmware. That's still well within the +/-10% spec, BTW. I've swapped the stock fans for low-speed ultra-quiet units. In exchange for a slight reduction in hashrate, I've gained something much more valuable to me: silence! And the ability to operate reliably in 85F+ ambient temperatures. Without the release of that 'slow' firmware, I wouldn't have been able to do this.

I can understand that others in a cool environment, for whom silence is of no concern, would want to run the fastest firmware possible. But guess what: the only 'guarantee' is that a Single will do 832Mhps +/-10%. We bought it knowing that full well. No one has any right to complain that BFL is not releasing XXX firmware ... rather we should be glad when they choose to release anything at all, since BFL is under no obligation to do so. And we all knew that going in.

But towards the end of this year when ASICS begin to enter the network, this discussion will be moot since a hashrate of 800 or 900 or 1000 megahashes/second will all be equally useless. And in light of that, we are all in the same boat.

[cuz0882]

Ok, I'm ready to take this to the next level. I'm running 38c on 896.

[bulanula]

Ok, I'm ready to take this to the next level. I'm running 38c on 896.

Please share how.

Did you put them into the fridge or something

[kano]

I'm getting more and more disappointed about the support of products I've bought from them.
After a very long delivery time with up-front payment, I've now singles here which are looking like they can run at higher speed. BFL stated, last on May 29, that they have faster firmwares and will release them in a short while. I know that there is no guarantee that the faster firmware will run on every unit or even most of them. All the weeks no further information...

Releasing the firmwares sometime in the up-coming ASIC era , is then probably not necessary anymore...  

Luckily I'm not one of the customers who need slower firmwares like the 792, which is still broken.

I understand the frustration, but I bought these based on BFL's final published specs: 832Mhps +/-10%. I went in with eyes open, as did everyone else who ordered, and that is exactly what BFL has delivered. There is no justifiable reason to be disappointed that some magic 900Mhps+ firmware hasn't surfaced yet.

The release of multiple speed grades of firmware should be considered a 'bonus' to customers, not an 'entitlement'.
...

Actually, it's a restriction.
The devices are unchangeable and clearly there is not much effort required by them to make a higher clock speed bitstream.

Yet people like cuz0882 are now left stranded since it appears that BFL really doesn't have the time nor interest to generate faster bitstreams - and this is for a device that they still are unable to ship on time due to backlog of orders (apparently)

If they said: "Here, here's the bitstream source and upload specs, now go ahead and make your own faster clock bitstream", then yes there would be no complaint if they didn't support the device anymore ... as they are giving the impression at the moment ...

[ice_chill]

There is no point releasing any faster Bitstream if during testing they see that only 10% of chips are capable of it. If you can run 896 firmware then you are already lucky.

[cuz0882]

Ok, I'm ready to take this to the next level. I'm running 38c on 896.

Please share how.

Did you put them into the fridge or something

I replaced the paste and screws on the heatsink. Then put a delta fan on, which seems to make a huge difference. I'm using a fan controller on it.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835213009

[Cablez]

Are you running that right off the PCB header?  At 1.04A I guess that's not too much of a load.

[fred0]

Luckily I'm not one of the customers who need slower firmwares like the 792, which is still broken.

That would be me...  

The 768 MH bitstream works, but not without problems. as seen in the screen shots below.  
768 MH bitstream
800 MH bitstream

Definitely the 792 MH bitstream is broken, but something is likely amiss with the 768 MH bitstream also, just not sure how serious the problem may be.

[Keefe]

Luckily I'm not one of the customers who need slower firmwares like the 792, which is still broken.

That would be me... 

The 768 MH bitstream works, but not without problems. as seen in the screen shots below. 
768 MH bitstream
800 MH bitstream

Definately the 792 MH bitstream is broken, but something is likely amiss with the 768 MH bitstream also, just not sure how serious the problem may be.

+1

Same here.

[JWU42]

Luckily I'm not one of the customers who need slower firmwares like the 792, which is still broken.

That would be me...  

The 768 MH bitstream works, but not without problems. as seen in the screen shots below.  
768 MH bitstream
800 MH bitstream

Definitely the 792 MH bitstream is broken, but something is likely amiss with the 768 MH bitstream also, just not sure how serious the problem may be.

I am running 768 on 1 unit without any problems - been running for about 4 weeks now...

[fred0]

Luckily I'm not one of the customers who need slower firmwares like the 792, which is still broken.

That would be me...  

The 768 MH bitstream works, but not without problems. as seen in the screen shots below.  
768 MH bitstream
800 MH bitstream

Definitely the 792 MH bitstream is broken, but something is likely amiss with the 768 MH bitstream also, just not sure how serious the problem may be.

I am running 768 on 1 unit without any problems - been running for about 4 weeks now...

Easyminer reports the singles as being NOT reliable when running the 768 bitstream. Even though you can mine on a unit deemed unreliable by easyminer, is this a good idea? I don't know. Possibly the only drawback is increased invalids, not sure though.  Contrast with the result by easyminer for the 800 bitstream, no errors, unit reliable.

[JWU42]

Fred0,

Easyminer didn't give me error reports like you are getting.  That said, I will hook it back up to Windows rig tonight and test again...

[fred0]

filename	filesize	filetype
alphaminer_768.bfl	7,112,003	application/octet-stream
alphaminer_792.bfl	5,926,664	text/plain
alphaminer_800.bf	7,112,003	application/octet-stream
alphaminer_808.bfl	7,112,003	application/octet-stream
alphaminer_816.bfl	7,112,003	application/octet-stream
alphaminer_824.bfl	7,112,003	application/octet-stream
alphaminer_832.bfl	7,112,003	application/octet-stream
alphaminer_864.bfl	7,112,003	application/octet-stream

[HDSolar]

Ok, I'm ready to take this to the next level. I'm running 38c on 896.

Please share how.

Did you put them into the fridge or something

I replaced the paste and screws on the heatsink. Then put a delta fan on, which seems to make a huge difference. I'm using a fan controller on it.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835213009

Ok, so something does not make sense to me, I get the paste and the delta fan but I really do see how that can get you to 38c on the devices or device.  Are you sure this is not another part of your formula you are leaving out.  I had some of my best singles with no case covers next to an AC unit and really could not get below 42c at 896.  I did not redo the paste or the different fan but still I think you would need one more item to your list to get to that level of cool.

[kano]

filename	filesize	filetype
alphaminer_768.bfl	7,112,003	application/octet-stream
alphaminer_792.bfl	5,926,664	text/plain
alphaminer_800.bf	7,112,003	application/octet-stream
alphaminer_808.bfl	7,112,003	application/octet-stream
alphaminer_816.bfl	7,112,003	application/octet-stream
alphaminer_824.bfl	7,112,003	application/octet-stream
alphaminer_832.bfl	7,112,003	application/octet-stream
alphaminer_864.bfl	7,112,003	application/octet-stream

Heh - damn shame about that hey.
That's what they have on the web site right now also.

I guess BFL just don't give a shit - coz it was OK back in May, and those who have made comment about it since then have been ignored.

It was OK when I originally download the 792:
alphaminer_792.bfl 7112003 sha256sum: 5fced0f00338d6aa513719fc2e6e67e765bdbb832c0c5c8f9a44dded30004f7b

I tested that not long ago and found mine worked fine - before I switched back to 880.