Topic: Batch 4 S9s to be clocked at 550MHz, Achieve 11.8THash/s? (Read 1455 times)
Obviously when somebody actually receives a Batch 4 S9, they could post what the default operating frequency is, and possibly the firmware identifying info (if it can be inspected).
It looks like the 550M link is up and working on the BMT website now.
I reworded my post above as I thought it could come across wrong. Tried to smooth out tone, not sure if it worked or not. But I just don't want to see guesses that are anecdotal as fact. And it is zero against you on this just anecdotal is very hard to take as fact as before when we talked some that were assumed as APW3's were DPS1200's so anecdotal really can bring false positives - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.15323232
I can say one has been tested in low 90's F with APW3 and it worked fine with S9. So that is a true test with one, and I realize my subset of 2 with one here is small. But my actual test's don't show this.
I can say one has been tested in low 90's F with APW3 and it worked fine with S9. So that is a true test with one, and I realize my subset of 2 with one here is small. But my actual test's don't show this.
don't worry we are friends not an issue. I put in my biggest two reasons after you posted.
the graphs on bitmaintech are right above that drop in amps is hidden by the scale the 10 c it takes to drop is 2 spaces and should be ⅓ of 1 space . so my guess is mostly based on those graphs and the fact that the s-2 had a 1000 watt psu and it needs a 1200 watt psu.
I have never owned or tested the antminer psu.---Fact
You own and tested it and it works ------------------------Fact
No long term tests have been done on a batch 1 s-9 at 650 freq --------- Fact
Long term is 30 days - not a fact but what I use to define long term as I have had psu's start to fail at the 30 day marked when pushed hard 24/7
The graphs show if it gets hot it drops. ------------------------------------------------------ Fact
The graphs are scaled to make you think the drop off is 6x less steep then it is. --------- Fact
The s-2 had a 1000 watt psu that failed often ---------------------------------------------- Fact
These are what we have as facts.
What it means is ?
What I would do is keep my eyes open if I had antminer psus. powering batch 1 ,2,3
if indeed the batch 4 scales back to freq 550 the issue may be a mute point.
I reworded my post above as I thought it could come across wrong. Tried to smooth out tone, not sure if it worked or not. But I just don't want to see guesses that are anecdotal as fact. And it is zero against you on this just anecdotal is very hard to take as fact as before when we talked some that were assumed as APW3's were DPS1200's so anecdotal really can bring false positives - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.15323232
I can say one has been tested in low 90's F with APW3 and it worked fine with S9. So that is a true test with one, and I realize my subset of 2 with one here is small. But my actual test's don't show this. I would love to hear from others using APW3's to see if I'm lucky or if they do work fine is correct.
I can say one has been tested in low 90's F with APW3 and it worked fine with S9. So that is a true test with one, and I realize my subset of 2 with one here is small. But my actual test's don't show this. I would love to hear from others using APW3's to see if I'm lucky or if they do work fine is correct.
So if there is no link for batch 4 firmware where did you find the info?
That screenshot is from the bitmain firmware site; the file description next to the blank field is:
Quote
S9 firmware-20160608-650M
s9firmware-20160608-600M,12.93T
s9 firmware -20160608-550M,11.85T
s9firmware-20160608-600M,12.93T
s9 firmware -20160608-550M,11.85T
The last line showed up most recently. Like I said - speculation, but it is pretty suggestive.
yeah and based on some reports about early batches and under clocks working I think the gear was a ting bit too hard on the
[antimatter < fuck you spell check]
antminer psu's . I had the feeling they would need to slow the clocks up based on heat from summer mining and the psu being rated a bit higher then it really is.
There is still nothing to backup APW3's not working. I am 2 for 2 on working with APW3's. There are others out there using them as-well. I just want to see actual test's showing this before we accept it as fact.
I just have not seen hand's on showing this. It seems to be speculation that is not backed up by testing. And that is just my opinion and I realize I'm one user. Again i'm not meaning this is a rude way (i hate how there is no emotion in posts). I just think we should have actual tests showing this which I have not seen.
I think they work if it is not too hot and all my guesses on this are antecdotial not backed up by any good tests at all.
The best I have is antminer reduced the draw on the miners from batch 1 to batch 2 and batch 3.
I never owned an antminer psu but they spec to the charts below
now look at the scale they put it is very deceptive the oval covers 30c the rectangle covers 10 c
the psu drops a ton of amps in that 10c range the angle is shown far less steep due to the scaling they put. that drop off is a lot and very steep not my graphs these are bitmaintech's graphs. Please remember how the psu would fail in the s-2 as it was a 1000 watt psu and should have been a 1200 watt psu.
So if there is no link for batch 4 firmware where did you find the info?
That screenshot is from the bitmain firmware site; the file description next to the blank field is:
Quote
S9 firmware-20160608-650M
s9firmware-20160608-600M,12.93T
s9 firmware -20160608-550M,11.85T
s9firmware-20160608-600M,12.93T
s9 firmware -20160608-550M,11.85T
The last line showed up most recently. Like I said - speculation, but it is pretty suggestive.
yeah and based on some reports about early batches and under clocks working I think the gear was a ting bit too hard on the
[antimatter < fuck you spell check]
antminer psu's . I had the feeling they would need to slow the clocks up based on heat from summer mining and the psu being rated a bit higher then it really is.
There is still nothing to backup APW3's not working. I am 2 for 2 on working with APW3's. There are others out there using them as-well. I just want to see actual test's showing this before we accept it as fact. We talked about it once before - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.15323232
Again I don't mean to be it in a rude way. If you have documentation showing real life testing of APW3's not working please do share it. I just hate to bring this to fact currently as I have not seen this. And me having 2 working on them I don't see it.
So if there is no link for batch 4 firmware where did you find the info?
That screenshot is from the bitmain firmware site; the file description next to the blank field is:
Quote
S9 firmware-20160608-650M
s9firmware-20160608-600M,12.93T
s9 firmware -20160608-550M,11.85T
s9firmware-20160608-600M,12.93T
s9 firmware -20160608-550M,11.85T
The last line showed up most recently. Like I said - speculation, but it is pretty suggestive.
yeah and based on some reports about early batches and under clocks working I think the gear was a ting bit too hard on the
[antimatter < fuck you spell check]
antminer psu's . I had the feeling they would need to slow the clocks up based on heat from summer mining and the psu being rated a bit higher then it really is.
So if there is no link for batch 4 firmware where did you find the info?
That screenshot is from the bitmain firmware site; the file descriptions are:
Quote
S9 firmware-20160608-650M
s9firmware-20160608-600M,12.93T
s9 firmware -20160608-550M,11.85T
s9firmware-20160608-600M,12.93T
s9 firmware -20160608-550M,11.85T
The last line showed up most recently. Like I said - speculation, but it is pretty suggestive.
So if there is no link for batch 4 firmware where did you find the info?
Frankly if the batch 4 does this but also does the volts a bit lower and efficiency goes from 0.100 watts to .085 watts I would not mind it at all.
BTW this matches my guess that the antminer psu is a tiny bit short for the s-9.
Frankly if the batch 4 does this but also does the volts a bit lower and efficiency goes from 0.100 watts to .085 watts I would not mind it at all.
BTW this matches my guess that the antminer psu is a tiny bit short for the s-9.
Speculation based on changes to S9 firmware page. No URL for the 550MHz firmware, but:
Jump to: