ANTMINER S5: 1155GH(+OverClock Potential), In Stock $0.319/GH & 0.51W/GH

[QuintLeo]

Both  of these "used" S5s are running a bit odd - the "bottom of status screen" hash board runs 6-8 degrees cooler than the other of the same unit or than any of the other hash boards in ANY of my S5s when running at the same clock speed, the "top" board is kinda mid-range on temp compared to the boards in all my other S5s.
 Temps are running about the same on the S5 with the straight-blade heatsinks and the one with the older-style curved ones and they're both meeting specs easily though, once I got a couple configuration quibbles fixed (MY glitches, not theirs).


 I got a call from FEDEX the day after they shipped about some sort of customs issue, but they apparently resolved it before I noticed the call - by the time I noticed I HAD a voicemail about the issue asking me to call them back, tracking on their web site showed that the units were already in Indianapolis (I think they have a major hub there, for similar reasons to why UPS put THEIR primary air shipping hub at Weir Cook / Indianapolis International a couple decades back).

[1713961206]

1713961206

[1713961206]

1713961206

[1713961206]

1713961206

[1713961206]

1713961206

[1713961206]

1713961206

[VirosaGITS]

Both  of these "used" S5s are running a bit odd - the "bottom of status screen" hash board runs 6-8 degrees cooler than the other of the same unit or than any of the other hash boards in ANY of my S5s when running at the same clock speed, the "top" board is kinda mid-range on temp compared to the boards in all my other S5s.
 Temps are running about the same on the S5 with the straight-blade heatsinks and the one with the older-style curved ones and they're both meeting specs easily though, once I got a couple configuration quibbles fixed (MY glitches, not theirs).


 I got a call from FEDEX the day after they shipped about some sort of customs issue, but they apparently resolved it before I noticed the call - by the time I noticed I HAD a voicemail about the issue asking me to call them back, tracking on their web site showed that the units were already in Indianapolis (I think they have a major hub there, for similar reasons to why UPS put THEIR primary air shipping hub at Weir Cook / Indianapolis International a couple decades back).

Gotcha. Isint it normal for them to be 6~degree apart? I never found out why, maybe its the positing of the chips. (Since it basically just report the temp of itself, not necessarily the actual temp of the chips on the board) depending on where the chip is placed, the temp is more or less truly representative.

So you say the 2 new old units are odd. Do you mean more so than other S5's?

[valkir]

Gotcha. Isint it normal for them to be 6~degree apart? I never found out why, maybe its the positing of the chips. (Since it basically just report the temp of itself, not necessarily the actual temp of the chips on the board) depending on where the chip is placed, the temp is more or less truly representative.

So you say the 2 new old units are odd. Do you mean more so than other S5's?

Actually temp board are sometime different because of the temp sensor. The temp sensor is in the middle of the board and is not really accurate.
You can also repaste the thermal paste of the chip to drop the temp of the chip.
These chip are bottom heat so even if you but heatsink on top of it you will not see a big difference in temp. 

[QuintLeo]

I've got 3 that are usually 2-3 degrees apart, then the 2 new ones are more like 8 degrees apart. That seems a bit excessive.

 I might break down this weekend and try redoing thermal compound on the 2 boards that are reading way higher than the other 2 in the same machines.



 I DO wish they'd put temp sensors on the chips like Spondoolies did on the Rockerbox chips (SP20E etc.).

[TheRealSteve]

These chip are bottom heat so even if you but heatsink on top of it you will not see a big difference in temp. 

Might have that the wrong way around - these are, or are at least claimed to be, flip chip type designs with most of the heat going out the top of the chip.  The S5 miner design has heat sinks on the top.  Maybe you were referring to board sides, though.

I'm also not convinced that cooling the other side is entirely fruitless - just not necessary - as some heat is going there as well (can't disobey the laws of physics).  The S5's layout does mean that if one were to put heat sinks there, they'd either have to be small, or would require spacers to get the clearance above the taller passives.  My Compac's running a wee bit cooler with its shiny new heatsink on that side - but unlikely to be worth the bother on a large board vs getting better airflow.

[QuintLeo]

On the S5, you need the cooling air flowing across the back to cool the parts that are on the back side of the circuit board.

[Rabinovitch]

S5+

432 chips, 7722GH/s, 3436 Wt








Have anyone heard about it?

[MarkAz]

Good lord, definitely not targeting the hobby miner with that beast - where did you find it out about it?  At 240v that thing is going to be pulling down almost 15 amps, plus even those beast 2880w IBM server PSU aren't enough to power this... Power consumption is slightly better, 0.44w/GH instead of 0.51w/GH of the S5, but I that has to be a prototype case setup - I would imagine this is going into a rack mount case of some sort - but you never know with Bitmain!    It looks like they've got push and pull fans on it - and this also matches that the latest S5 firmware lists 6 fans on it's display....  I wonder what it's going to cost?

[pekatete]

Agree, getting a PSU for that is going to be tricky (and I would not want to rely on bitmain made PSU's ...). And the fans look less than the "standard" 38mm's ... so maybe being targeted at hobby miners ... but then any peace and quiet will certainly be shattered by the PSU fans ... Oh well.

[chiguireitor]

Going by bitmain standards, if that thing is published, it will cost around 11 Bitcoins.

Also, powering isn't a problem, remember you can always chain server PSUs

[Pt0x]

Finally a new kid on "the public block".

[Rabinovitch]

Good lord, definitely not targeting the hobby miner with that beast - where did you find it out about it?

Somehow our merchant adv shared this information before I found it here, on Bitcointalk...

[RichBC]

Wow that is a beast... Yes the server PSU's are perfect as they are designed to be connected in parallel and load share well. I hope they ship them with ear defenders.  

Seeing the construction makes you wonder if they will release a single unit with 3 PCB, would still be an impressive 2574GH

Rich

[Xian01]

S5+
432 chips, 7722GH/s, 3436 Wt !!!

I'm with RichBC. I'd be interested in a single 3 PCB unit running on 120V.

[RichBC]

So looking at the board layout & doing a bit of maths. It looks like they have changed the chain layout of the S5 which was.

A string of 15 Chip Pairs / board, total 30 chips. Giving  577 GH / Board @ a calculated 0.8V Core Voltage (Actual Core voltage will be a bit less than this) GH/chip 19.25


And the S5+ which has

A string of 16 Chip Triples / board, total 48 chips. Giving  858 GH / Board @ a calculated 0.75V Core Voltage. GH/chip 17.875

So they have dropped the core voltage and GH/ Chip slightly.


Rich

[Richy_T]

I've had a bit of an issue the last couple of days and I'm hoping to nip it in the bud...

On Wednesday, I switched to p2pool on a local node and switched it into my #1 position. Hashing seemed to be going OK but on Thursday in the day, I noticed my miner was no longer reachable (no ping, my router showed that port as not connected). Checking the p2pool graph showed that the miner had stopped hashing at 6am. I had someone at home restart it and hashing continued. However, p2pool was adversely affecting my internet connection so I shut it down, allowing the miner to fall back to antpool. I checked it was hashing on the pool and thought no more of it.

This morning, I was woken by a beeping sound at 6am. Could this be a recurring problem? Has anyone heard of this before? It just seems odd that the times are the same.

A few more relevant details:

• Other than this, the miner has been hashing for over a week with no issues.
• p2pool was not running this morning so it should have just been failing to connect and falling back to antpool
• Miner did not seem especially hot this morning
• • I moved the miner yesterday evening to a different room so it should not be location dependent. The new area should actually be cooler (currently running at 52 and 45).
  • Not sure of the firmware version but kernel is 3.8.13 and cgminer is 4.8.0, Hardware is 3.4.3.0
  
  So just a coincidence or something else?

[pekatete]

I've had a bit of an issue the last couple of days and I'm hoping to nip it in the bud...

By process of simple elimination, I'd say the issue is with your internet connection.
It may be that it is reset at 6am every morning (of late) for some reason, and could that also explain the issues you had with your local P2Pool node?

[babylon99]

I wanna buy one . the setup need a pro guy or it's easy ?

[Richy_T]

I've had a bit of an issue the last couple of days and I'm hoping to nip it in the bud...

By process of simple elimination, I'd say the issue is with your internet connection.
It may be that it is reset at 6am every morning (of late) for some reason, and could that also explain the issues you had with your local P2Pool node?

The only issue with the p2pool really was that it caused high pings for an online game. I don't see how an internet issue would cause the miner to become unresponsive on the local network either.

[Tupsu]

I wanna buy one . the setup need a pro guy or it's easy ?

I want to subtract it  of three parts, and put to work with S5 controllers each part separately.

it is possible to also add water cooling. Winter is not far away.