gdale
Newbie
 Offline
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
|
 |
June 09, 2015, 11:15:20 PM |
|
I'm willing to test a unit and wright up a full review on the product if wanted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You get merit points when someone likes your post enough to give you some. And for every 2 merit points you receive, you can send 1 merit point to someone else!
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Testing Crypto
|
|
June 09, 2015, 11:15:59 PM |
|
Can't wait for Philipma1957 review ^_^
This ^ |
ZwNpPhVYrSrPMS71GLc7TEnbqA9VSZopGn // Gift5YapqsZqSTW8T4S3sCU4sngCkvh4ba // 3Gwc4KzVtuJ9ADnuqzF7XRhSaaE7HkBWpr // 1PAGEHrN62tgUHncGWbbhKe9jhZGXsxFC4
"In a nutshell, the network works like a distributed timestamp server, stamping the first transaction to spend a coin. It takes advantage of the nature of information being easy to spread but hard to stifle." -- Satoshi {SAT OS hi}
|
|
|
philipma1957
Legendary
 Online
Activity: 4116
Merit: 7849
'The right to privacy matters'
|
|
June 10, 2015, 12:16:50 AM
Last edit: June 10, 2015, 01:10:35 AM by philipma1957 |
|
Can't wait for Philipma1957 review ^_^
This ^ Okay I will start a consolidated review thread (as requested by sidehack) We can all post to it and keep the thread down to one. My worst skill is the software setup and others will get that done better then me. The idea of one central thread is best. I will title it as : The combined sidehack-novak usb stick review thread. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1086011.new#newIt is locked up. |
|
|
|
|
WBF1
|
|
June 10, 2015, 12:38:51 AM |
|
Can't wait for Philipma1957 review ^_^
This ^ Okay I will start a consolidated review thread (as requested by sidehack) We can all post to it and keep the thread down to one. My worst skill is the software setup and others will get that done better then me. The idea of one central thread is best. I will title it as : The combined sidehack-novak usb stick review thread. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1086011.new#newIt is locked but up. +1 Would love to contribute if iI get the chance to review some hw. |
|
|
|
|
philipma1957
Legendary
Online
Activity: 4116
Merit: 7849
'The right to privacy matters'
|
|
June 10, 2015, 01:10:03 AM |
|
Can't wait for Philipma1957 review ^_^
This ^ Okay I will start a consolidated review thread (as requested by sidehack) We can all post to it and keep the thread down to one. My worst skill is the software setup and others will get that done better then me. The idea of one central thread is best. I will title it as : The combined sidehack-novak usb stick review thread. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1086011.new#newIt is locked up. +1 Would love to contribute if iI get the chance to review some hw. |
|
|
|
sidehack (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3318
Merit: 1848
Curmudgeonly hardware guy
|
|
June 10, 2015, 02:12:49 AM |
|
Thanks, Phil, for getting that thread started. I almost asked if you'd do that since you've been pretty good about review threads and keeping things tidy, but I didn't want to impose so I left it fairly open for whoever got their stick first. The title seems a bit odd, but I guess sidehack and novak are probably more readily recognized names than GekkoScience, the business we've collectively run for about the last two years.
To the masses messaging me asking about doing a review, please stop. The first four guys know who they are, and I haven't talked to the next four guys yet but if you're not someone I already know and trust then be assured you're not on my list.
|
|
|
|
philipma1957
Legendary
Online
Activity: 4116
Merit: 7849
'The right to privacy matters'
|
|
June 10, 2015, 02:33:22 AM |
|
Thanks, Phil, for getting that thread started. I almost asked if you'd do that since you've been pretty good about review threads and keeping things tidy, but I didn't want to impose so I left it fairly open for whoever got their stick first. The title seems a bit odd, but I guess sidehack and novak are probably more readily recognized names than GekkoScience, the business we've collectively run for about the last two years.
To the masses messaging me asking about doing a review, please stop. The first four guys know who they are, and I haven't talked to the next four guys yet but if you're not someone I already know and trust then be assured you're not on my list.
I will alter title. here is new title; https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1086011.0 |
|
|
|
|
cavaliersrus
|
|
June 10, 2015, 01:52:12 PM |
|
cant wait to see some of the reviews from the several people whom sidehack has selected in his testers phaze... i will hopefully be one of the first to pick up a few stick miners and a few of the retrofit s1 boards kits when they come out
|
|
|
|
|
PlanetCrypto
|
|
June 10, 2015, 02:16:52 PM |
|
For those individuals that are considering upgrading their old S1's to the GekkoScience board (I'm one also): I believe the "bolt pattern" on the hash boards is the same for S1's, S3's, and S5's. Syscooling sells the waterblocks for the S3 hash boards here: http://shop.syscooling.com/goods.php?id=47They also sell an S5 water cooling upgrade kit here: http://shop.syscooling.com/goods.php?id=51And the radiators, pump, tubing, manifolds, clamps, etc. . . . here: http://shop.syscooling.com/goods.php?id=46In theory, this would accommodate 8 of the GekkoScience hash boards and make for one punchy quiet machine. When we do this we'll use the Arctic MX-4 Thermal paste. Which can be found here: http://www.amazon.com/Performance-Thermal-Compound-Coolers-ORACO-MX40001-BL/dp/B0045JCFLY/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1433945322&sr=8-2&keywords=mx-4+thermal+paste+20+gramsand here: www.amazon.com/ARCTIC-MX-4-Thermal-Compound-Non-Electricity/dp/B004ULZITS/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1433945489&sr=8-1&keywords=mx-4+thermal+paste+20+grams&pebp=1433945440932&perid=EBFED3F391BF4AAAB463We prefer this thermal compound due to it's non-electrical conductivity and improved thermal transfer properties over the Arctic 5 Silver. Likely we'll not plumb the waterblocks into little radiators but instead into our existing liquid cooling system. Which capture the "waste" heat for building comfort heating in our notoriously cold MN winters. Just some food for thought, hope this helps. |
|
|
|
sidehack (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3318
Merit: 1848
Curmudgeonly hardware guy
|
|
June 10, 2015, 02:31:43 PM |
|
Yeah, I hadn't even thought about using those waterblocks to build a double system. That'll be pretty dense.
|
|
|
|
|
dunand
|
|
June 10, 2015, 03:02:27 PM |
|
For those individuals that are considering upgrading their old S1's to the GekkoScience board (I'm one also):
I believe the "bolt pattern" on the hash boards is the same for S1's, S3's, and S5's.
Who can validate for the bold pattern. I already own 2 C1. In the winter I love the quietness and this summer I use them to heat a pool with a small stainless coil like this one. I just leave the coil lying behind the stairs in the pool. My loop is like this : pump > coil (in the pool) > C1#1 > C1#2 > pump again...  If we can use the syscooling waterblock with your next board I'm in for 8! |
|
|
|
|
sidehack (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3318
Merit: 1848
Curmudgeonly hardware guy
|
|
June 10, 2015, 03:07:13 PM |
|
I don't have a torn-down S3 to verify, but the S5 board and S1 board have the same holes. Actually the S5 has one fewer hole (top center) but it's present on the heatsink. As far as I can tell, the heatsinks from an S1 and the S5 I'm looking at are identical.
|
|
|
|
|
PlanetCrypto
|
|
June 10, 2015, 04:36:58 PM |
|
Yeah, I hadn't even thought about using those waterblocks to build a double system. That'll be pretty dense.
Just to state the obvious. If the S1 replacement board has 18 chips and each chip hashes @ 8.2 GH/s then each board = 147.6 GH/s. Assuming an overall efficiency of .4W/GH/s each board draws 59.04 watts. Eight boards in that liquid cooled case results in ~472.32 watts (1488 BTU) total consumption and hashes @ 1180.8 GH/s. Three of these would be easily powered by one DPS-2000, keeping the DPS-2000 in it's peak efficiency band with power to spare. Interesting. |
|
|
|
|
sobe-it
|
|
June 10, 2015, 04:40:31 PM |
|
I don't have a torn-down S3 to verify, but the S5 board and S1 board have the same holes. Actually the S5 has one fewer hole (top center) but it's present on the heatsink. As far as I can tell, the heatsinks from an S1 and the S5 I'm looking at are identical.
i have a few s1's 3's and 5's. i can tear em down tonight and look at them. edit: actually they are the same because there was an s1 to s3 upgrade kit. |
|
|
|
|
sidehack (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3318
Merit: 1848
Curmudgeonly hardware guy
|
|
June 10, 2015, 04:50:06 PM |
|
At 0.4W/GH board-level you could be seeing closer to 15GH per chip and 110W per board. 8.2GH per chip you should expect about 0.3W/GH and under 50W per board. That's at what I hope to be a low estimate for regulator efficiency. If you ran them up to 15GH per chip you'd see 272GH per board, so almost 2.2TH and 900W from an 8-board waterblocked system. Which if those waterblocks can handle 4x S5 boards (~1200W) they can surely handle a 900W load.
Top end for the chips would be about the same as an S5, estimated 22GH (400MHz) at hopefully 10.5W board-level per chip. The overall system efficiency for top clock would actually be between 5% and 10% worse than an S5 (hopefully closer to 5%), but the overall benefit of having adjustable voltage gives you access to a lot lower efficiency ranges than the S5 is capable of doing - same as with undervolting an S1 to get from 2W/GH down to 0.8-1W/GH board-level - which greatly increases the service life of the machine without requiring hardware modification to reach the low end.
|
|
|
|
|
sobe-it
|
|
June 10, 2015, 04:58:43 PM |
|
At 0.4W/GH board-level you could be seeing closer to 15GH per chip and 110W per board. 8.2GH per chip you should expect about 0.3W/GH and under 50W per board. That's at what I hope to be a low estimate for regulator efficiency. If you ran them up to 15GH per chip you'd see 272GH per board, so almost 2.2TH and 900W from an 8-board waterblocked system. Which if those waterblocks can handle 4x S5 boards (~1200W) they can surely handle a 900W load.
Top end for the chips would be about the same as an S5, estimated 22GH (400MHz) at hopefully 10.5W board-level per chip. The overall system efficiency for top clock would actually be between 5% and 10% worse than an S5 (hopefully closer to 5%), but the overall benefit of having adjustable voltage gives you access to a lot lower efficiency ranges than the S5 is capable of doing - same as with undervolting an S1 to get from 2W/GH down to 0.8-1W/GH board-level - which greatly increases the service life of the machine without requiring hardware modification to reach the low end.
Very interesting and great work. i love the idea of adjustable voltage so you can tune to your liking/power capacity/ability to cool. I have taken the 1382 (s3) to ~.56W/GH @ 300GH/170W. You have to reset them once in a while though. |
|
|
|
|
alh
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1843
Merit: 1050
|
|
June 10, 2015, 05:09:58 PM |
|
At 0.4W/GH board-level you could be seeing closer to 15GH per chip and 110W per board. 8.2GH per chip you should expect about 0.3W/GH and under 50W per board. That's at what I hope to be a low estimate for regulator efficiency. If you ran them up to 15GH per chip you'd see 272GH per board, so almost 2.2TH and 900W from an 8-board waterblocked system. Which if those waterblocks can handle 4x S5 boards (~1200W) they can surely handle a 900W load.
Top end for the chips would be about the same as an S5, estimated 22GH (400MHz) at hopefully 10.5W board-level per chip. The overall system efficiency for top clock would actually be between 5% and 10% worse than an S5 (hopefully closer to 5%), but the overall benefit of having adjustable voltage gives you access to a lot lower efficiency ranges than the S5 is capable of doing - same as with undervolting an S1 to get from 2W/GH down to 0.8-1W/GH board-level - which greatly increases the service life of the machine without requiring hardware modification to reach the low end.
This all really looks excellent. It makes me wonder why Bitmain skipped the option of adjustable voltage in the original S5 design. They would have the same insight into the chip that sidehack does. Maybe they just assumed that a massively adjustable power supply would materialize (i.e the whole 9v thing that evaporated). |
|
|
|
|
sidehack (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3318
Merit: 1848
Curmudgeonly hardware guy
|
|
June 10, 2015, 05:47:54 PM |
|
Yeah, an adjustable power supply was one of my projects too. The first prototype was pretty annoying to get together, and then failed miserably, so we shifted gears on the controller setup. I have a good plan now for one that should work, and it'll actually be pretty similar to the power system on the TypeZero board. We talked about doing a miner board, and then when we figured that wasn't likely to actually happen, we decided to work on the regulator portion instead. If we'd stuck with building a miner we'd probably already have both projects brought to market?
I'm still not sure what the holdup is on the S5 working below about 11V, which I think folks have gotten them down to 10.8V but that was pretty much the bottom end. I'll have to spend some more time with them to figure it out, but one of the things I suspect is the stringed clock line so I came up with a better way of doing it that should remove any inter-node voltage issues. It could also have to do with how their node-level LDOs are powered, which is another thing I've taken into consideration on our design.
|
|
|
|
|
PlanetCrypto
|
|
June 10, 2015, 06:05:43 PM |
|
At 0.4W/GH board-level you could be seeing closer to 15GH per chip and 110W per board. 8.2GH per chip you should expect about 0.3W/GH and under 50W per board. That's at what I hope to be a low estimate for regulator efficiency. If you ran them up to 15GH per chip you'd see 272GH per board, so almost 2.2TH and 900W from an 8-board waterblocked system. Which if those waterblocks can handle 4x S5 boards (~1200W) they can surely handle a 900W load.
Top end for the chips would be about the same as an S5, estimated 22GH (400MHz) at hopefully 10.5W board-level per chip. The overall system efficiency for top clock would actually be between 5% and 10% worse than an S5 (hopefully closer to 5%), but the overall benefit of having adjustable voltage gives you access to a lot lower efficiency ranges than the S5 is capable of doing - same as with undervolting an S1 to get from 2W/GH down to 0.8-1W/GH board-level - which greatly increases the service life of the machine without requiring hardware modification to reach the low end.
In my estimate I was "worst casing" it. The S3/S5 bolt pattern compatibility is addressed here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=914354.0and here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=947254.msg11464031;topicseen#msg11464031In our experience, the heat absorption capability of these waterblocks is dependent on flow rate and coolant composition. We like and use a 50/50 mix of water and automotive green antifreeze (Walmart brand). But pure (de-ionized) water has better thermal capabilities. I might add that all the tubing we use is of the oxygen barrier type (metal, PEX, etc. . .). We never string more than 2 waterblocks in series, as the coolant temps can become excessive feed to the last waterblock in the chain. This is due to the flow capability of a 3/8" pipe at less than 5psi differential pressure. We've found that each pair of waterblocks need just under 2 gpm (~450L/hr) flow. All things being the same, 4 3/8" pipes = 1 3/4" pipe and 4 3/4" pipes = 1 1.5" pipe, from a flow rate standpoint. So 1 1.5" pipe, manifolded down to 3/8", will service 16 pairs of waterblocks (64 boards). So on the circulating pumps/circulators we run 1.5" in and out pump manifolds. And use the Taco 0010 w/IFC ( http://www.supplyhouse.com/Taco-0010-F3-1IFC-0010-Cast-Iron-Circulator-with-Integral-Flow-Check-1-8-HP-3778000-p) w/ 1.5" manifolds ( http://www.supplyhouse.com/Taco-110-254F-1-1-2-Taco-Iron-Freedom-Flange-Pair-1976000-p). Another thing that bears mentioning is that these "pumps" are really not pumps in the purest sense of the definition. They're circulators, as they are designed not to build pressure and as such have a reduced capability to "pump" into a head. So the maximum distance between the high point and the low points in the system is restricted. Didn't mean to hijack the thread so I'll shut the F* up. |
|
|
|
|
dunand
|
|
June 10, 2015, 07:30:28 PM
Last edit: June 10, 2015, 11:46:28 PM by dunand |
|
In our experience, the heat absorption capability of these waterblocks is dependent on flow rate and coolant composition. We like and use a 50/50 mix of water and automotive green antifreeze (Walmart brand). But pure (de-ionized) water has better thermal capabilities. I might add that all the tubing we use is of the oxygen barrier type (metal, PEX, etc. . .).
50/50 in your miner. Go pure de-ionized water with a corrosion inhibitor. I use a product (super coolant don't remeber the name) 1/20 mix to prevent corrosion. We never string more than 2 waterblocks in series, as the coolant temps can become excessive feed to the last waterblock in the chain. This is due to the flow capability of a 3/8" pipe at less than 5psi differential pressure.
I run 2 C1 in series (4 waterblocks - 8 boards). Each waterblock is about 3C hotter than the previous one. So if the first waterblock is at 30C the fourth will run at 39C. |
|
|
|
|
|
