Thank you, I always felt the same way, but you put it so much nicer.
You're welcome, and thank you.
So, if I'm getting this right: unless I'm screwing with resistors, which I am ludicrously unqualified to do, I'm going to be only seeing a successful overclock to 2.0 GH/s, which is with the 0981 command. There's nothing else I can do that would otherwise allow me to overclock beyond that.
Yes. Most of these chips will not do 2.2GHs (275MHz) at stock voltage which is 0.8V. Some will do it, however, they will throw hardware errors, yet still submit over 2GHs (according to the third hashrate column in bfgminer) but like I said, most will throw too many hardware errors to make it worth it. Mine fall into the latter category, and will not run well at 2.2GHs. Keep in mind the nanofuries, which are based on bitfury chips throw around 5-10 percent hardware errors, which is due to the design of the bitfury chips, just like the asicminer chips. The antminer chips however do not exhibit this behavior unless they are voltage-starved, or possibly overheated - however I haven't overheated mine, so it's hard to say.
The only way to squeeze more hashrate from these is with more voltage, and therefor better cooling. You would probably be fine with the stock heatsinks at 0.9V and maybe 1 Volt, as long as you have good active cooling in a room temperature environment. (Personally I think 1V is pushing it without a better heatsink with the thermal mask being removed.) However, I would guess that you would be able to beat the nanofury hashrate of 2.2GHs at 0.9V with most chips, without hardware errors, which the nanofuries will have. Also I may be mistaken, but I think the nanofuries and the like also operate at 0.9V, while these operate at 0.8V.
It's not totally wrecked and is after the magic still as slow as before. But yes, your warning is correct. Shortening R1 would increase the Voltage and current flow throuh voltage divisor R1/R2.
