BFL SC Singles running smoothly. ~59 GH/s each at 278 watts each

polarhei

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

Firing it up

Quote from: Cablez on June 28, 2013, 09:15:57 PM

You better mine the s**t out of them. Look what's coming: http://scienceblog.com/64278/large-scale-quantum-chip-validated/

Quantum based, currently it does not fit the current style as the operational cost is too high because of Liquified gas needed while the current only need normal air to run. I notice that. The being is still not in practical use.

Additionally, although the lab has solved some questions on human resources, Your being runs smoothly? I don't think so as early bird catches the worm. There are only two companies provide ASIC solution just in time while BFL is not.

ice_chill

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 250

What order number are these SC Singles from ?

titomane

sr. member

Activity: 389

Merit: 250

Good luck miner

twmz

hero member

Activity: 737

Merit: 500

Quote from: ?? on ??

So they have 16 chips each? Can you run GetInfo to see how many engines are running on each chip?
~15W per chip+35W for the board, I guess.

SC Single #1:

Code:

DEVICE: BitFORCE SC
FIRMWARE: 1.2.5
IAR Executed: NO
CHIP PARALLELIZATION: YES @ 16
QUEUE DEPTH:40
PROCESSOR 0: 14 engines @ 272 MHz -- MAP: FFBE
PROCESSOR 1: 13 engines @ 269 MHz -- MAP: F7BE
PROCESSOR 2: 14 engines @ 267 MHz -- MAP: FFF6
PROCESSOR 3: 15 engines @ 248 MHz -- MAP: FFFE
PROCESSOR 4: 13 engines @ 280 MHz -- MAP: FFEA
PROCESSOR 5: 11 engines @ 283 MHz -- MAP: F57C
PROCESSOR 6: 14 engines @ 250 MHz -- MAP: FFBE
PROCESSOR 7: 15 engines @ 260 MHz -- MAP: FFFE
PROCESSOR 8: 14 engines @ 258 MHz -- MAP: FFFC
PROCESSOR 9: 15 engines @ 255 MHz -- MAP: FFFE
PROCESSOR 10: 15 engines @ 269 MHz -- MAP: FFFE
PROCESSOR 11: 15 engines @ 255 MHz -- MAP: FFFE
PROCESSOR 12: 15 engines @ 258 MHz -- MAP: FFFE
PROCESSOR 13: 15 engines @ 252 MHz -- MAP: FFFE
PROCESSOR 14: 14 engines @ 277 MHz -- MAP: FDFE
PROCESSOR 15: 15 engines @ 249 MHz -- MAP: FFFE
THEORETICAL MAX: 59476 MH/s
ENGINES: 227
FREQUENCY: 274 MHz
XLINK MODE: MASTER
CRITICAL TEMPERATURE: 0
XLINK PRESENT: YES
DEVICES IN CHAIN: 1
CHAIN PRESENCE MASK: 00000001

SC Single #2:

Code:

DEVICE: BitFORCE SC
FIRMWARE: 1.2.5
IAR Executed: NO
CHIP PARALLELIZATION: YES @ 16
QUEUE DEPTH:40
PROCESSOR 0: 15 engines @ 267 MHz -- MAP: FFFE
PROCESSOR 1: 14 engines @ 267 MHz -- MAP: FEFE
PROCESSOR 2: 15 engines @ 273 MHz -- MAP: FFFE
PROCESSOR 3: 15 engines @ 253 MHz -- MAP: FFFE
PROCESSOR 4: 15 engines @ 243 MHz -- MAP: FFFE
PROCESSOR 5: 14 engines @ 246 MHz -- MAP: FBFE
PROCESSOR 6: 15 engines @ 267 MHz -- MAP: FFFE
PROCESSOR 7: 15 engines @ 250 MHz -- MAP: FFFE
PROCESSOR 8: 14 engines @ 265 MHz -- MAP: FFF6
PROCESSOR 9: 15 engines @ 255 MHz -- MAP: FFFE
PROCESSOR 10: 14 engines @ 234 MHz -- MAP: EFFE
PROCESSOR 11: 15 engines @ 260 MHz -- MAP: FFFE
PROCESSOR 12: 14 engines @ 265 MHz -- MAP: FFFC
PROCESSOR 13: 15 engines @ 262 MHz -- MAP: FFFE
PROCESSOR 14: 15 engines @ 257 MHz -- MAP: FFFE
PROCESSOR 15: 15 engines @ 255 MHz -- MAP: FFFE
THEORETICAL MAX: 60508 MH/s
ENGINES: 235
FREQUENCY: 274 MHz
XLINK MODE: MASTER
CRITICAL TEMPERATURE: 0
XLINK PRESENT: YES
DEVICES IN CHAIN: 1
CHAIN PRESENCE MASK: 00000001

Cablez

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1000

I owe my soul to the Bitcoin code...

You better mine the s**t out of them. Look what's coming: http://scienceblog.com/64278/large-scale-quantum-chip-validated/

twmz

hero member

Activity: 737

Merit: 500

Quote from: shmadz on June 28, 2013, 08:13:26 PM

thank you for this TWMZ. I have been searching for some real power numbers for the singles.

now to extrapolate to a little single (if these ever get shipped) I would assume little more than half, probably 150W each is a generous estimate.

I'm guessing you run each single from a dedicated PCIe cable. What are the connectors like on the ASIC end? is it 2*6 pin connectors? or 1*8 and 1*6 -- or 2*8?

Do you expect one would be able to run 2 little singles from one PCIe cable?

Each single has a two 6 pin PCIe sockets. So I have 4 cables coming out of my PSU. Two cables go to each single. The particular PSU I have is modular, so I get to choose exactly what cables I want coming out of it. In other words, I don't have a mess of HDD cables or other unused power cables, etc.

I have no information at all on the little singles. They are half as fast roughly, so you'd think they would use half the power requirements and therefore might have half the connectors, but again, that is entirely conjecture.

shmadz

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1000

@theshmadz

thank you for this TWMZ. I have been searching for some real power numbers for the singles.

now to extrapolate to a little single (if these ever get shipped) I would assume little more than half, probably 150W each is a generous estimate.

I'm guessing you run each single from a dedicated PCIe cable. What are the connectors like on the ASIC end? is it 2*6 pin connectors? or 1*8 and 1*6 -- or 2*8?

Do you expect one would be able to run 2 little singles from one PCIe cable?

polrpaul

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Love the Bitcoin.

Quote from: twmz on June 28, 2013, 07:31:44 PM

Quote from: polrpaul on June 28, 2013, 06:53:44 PM

From what mining platform or monitoring tool are you pulling these images?
I assume the top one is a pool? But the bottom one? TIA

The top one is btcguild. The bottom one is not a mining thing. I have do-it-your-self internet-enabled power/energy monitoring in my home and this is one of the dashboards for that data.

Major thumbs up!!

twmz

hero member

Activity: 737

Merit: 500

Quote from: polrpaul on June 28, 2013, 06:53:44 PM

From what mining platform or monitoring tool are you pulling these images?
I assume the top one is a pool? But the bottom one? TIA

The top one is btcguild. The bottom one is not a mining thing. I have do-it-your-self internet-enabled power/energy monitoring in my home and this is one of the dashboards for that data.

polrpaul

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Love the Bitcoin.

Quote from: twmz on June 25, 2013, 01:29:39 PM

The "fast" worker includes a 5.5 GH/s jalapeno as well:

Power usage: 440 watts on that circuit before plugging in the two singles, 996 watts after = 556 watts for the pair = 278 watts each on average:

From what mining platform or monitoring tool are you pulling these images?
I assume the top one is a pool? But the bottom one? TIA

twmz

hero member

Activity: 737

Merit: 500

Quote from: johnyj on June 25, 2013, 10:09:53 PM

Did you get power brick or just use ATX PCI-E power connector?

ATX power connectors are the only option at this point. BFL does not have the power bricks yet, and so if you want a power brick, you have to volunteer to have your shipment delayed (which would be stupid). I happened to have a good ATX power supply left over from my GPU mining rig (which has now been retired), so it wasn't a problem for me. My guess is that my ATX power supply is more efficient than the power brick that they will eventually have anyway (and it is UL tested and certified).

johnyj

legendary

Activity: 1988

Merit: 1012

Beyond Imagination

Did you get power brick or just use ATX PCI-E power connector?

twmz

hero member

Activity: 737

Merit: 500

Quote from: erk on June 25, 2013, 09:31:42 PM

Quote from: hl5460 on June 25, 2013, 08:51:19 PM

4.71w/G. So the chips are made of 110nm?

4.71W/GH/s is not what the chips consume. Think about the error in your calculation.

For starters a 110nm Avalon at 66GH/s consumes over 600watts, the BFL is less than half that.

My power numbers are taken from the wall and so do include the inefficiencies/overhead of the ATX power supply. I also think I added one additional table fan when I hooked these up, to the power draw from that fan may also be included in these numbers. When I get back home this weekend, I'll take some more careful measurements to isolate the power usage of just the SC Singles + power supply (which includes their chips, their mainboard, their fans, the ATX power supply, and the power supply's fan).

erk

hero member

Activity: 826

Merit: 500

Quote from: hl5460 on June 25, 2013, 08:51:19 PM

4.71w/G. So the chips are made of 110nm?

4.71W/GH/s is not what the chips consume. Think about the error in your calculation.

For starters a 110nm Avalon at 66GH/s consumes over 600watts, the BFL is less than half that.

hl5460

legendary

Activity: 1621

Merit: 1000

news.8btc.com

4.71w/G. So the chips are made of 110nm?

farproc

sr. member

Activity: 406

Merit: 250

ALGORY.io Crowdsale starts on 8/12/2017

Great efficiency!! Cheesy

erk

hero member

Activity: 826

Merit: 500

278watts per unit is good for that hash rate, considering that some of it will be the PSU and several fans.

davecoin

hero member

Activity: 816

Merit: 1000

What a happy little mining family you have there Grin

cdog

hero member

Activity: 1036

Merit: 500

Cool. Congrats. I wonder how many total Singles have shipped, and what BFL's per day output is at this point?

navigator

sr. member

Activity: 362

Merit: 250

I see you had some first day orders. They need to get through 11 more order days til they get to mine. I'm a little jelly

Topic: BFL SC Singles running smoothly. ~59 GH/s each at 278 watts each (Read 3360 times)