I'm getting between 50-60 percent hw errors.
But after an hour of mining. The speed results show up correctly On btcguild.
It seem. These sticks have to burn in before they are running at 2.2gh with the hw errors. Seems theres nothing to worry about as long as it'. hashing away.
Topic: Blue Fury Support Thread. - page 38. (Read 89611 times)
60%ish hardware errors seem to be about normal
but...
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM0 | 5s: 2.31 avg: 2.30 u: 0.54 Gh/s | A:66 R:0+0(none) HW:2252/ 89%
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM1 | 5s: 1.99 avg: 1.99 u: 1.89 Gh/s | A:237 R:1+1(.84%) HW:1398/ 59%
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM2 | 5s: 2.29 avg: 2.29 u: 2.16 Gh/s | A:287 R:2+0(.52%) HW:1607/ 59%
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM3 | 5s: 2.21 avg: 2.21 u: 2.05 Gh/s | A:261 R:2+0(.76%) HW:1567/ 60%
seems like I got a couple duds.
but...
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM0 | 5s: 2.31 avg: 2.30 u: 0.54 Gh/s | A:66 R:0+0(none) HW:2252/ 89%
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM1 | 5s: 1.99 avg: 1.99 u: 1.89 Gh/s | A:237 R:1+1(.84%) HW:1398/ 59%
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM2 | 5s: 2.29 avg: 2.29 u: 2.16 Gh/s | A:287 R:2+0(.52%) HW:1607/ 59%
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM3 | 5s: 2.21 avg: 2.21 u: 2.05 Gh/s | A:261 R:2+0(.76%) HW:1567/ 60%
seems like I got a couple duds.
@zyk0 & @ssinc
What OS? As I've seen this before but after I recompiled BFG using 3.2.0, I haven't seen the issue since, so, I'm curious what OS you're using these on.
Was originally using a custom cgminer 3.6.6-1 w/ win7 x64 after debugging with ck and getting him to remove the manufacture string check, but it's speeds were horrible and inconsistent, I instead switched to bfgminer under a ubuntu server 13.10 VM in VirtualBox w/ USB passthrough from the win64 host OS. Originally I was using the 3.0.99 repository compiled binary, but have switched to 3.4.0. I have also tried cgminer 3.7.0 and 3.7.2 win32 binaries but they are still not up to snuff.
1/2 the time w/ bfgminer 3.0.99 I'll see random garbage as part of the model name/serial, and I've seen corrupted output on the device name from cgminer's API stats as well.
I'm hoping these are issues with only the firmware on these blue furies and we'll be getting a fix soon.
Sadly... my stick which now is getting more HW errors than the others, used to be my top performing Blue Fury:
Code:
[2013-11-05 07:17:33] BF10 BF1 15062915 | 5s:1.996 avg:1.993 u:1.895 Gh/s | A:8702 R:62+0(.70%) HW:0
[2013-11-05 07:17:33] BF11 BF1 15062B15 | 5s:2.302 avg:2.292 u:2.157 Gh/s | A:9907 R:78+2(.80%) HW:0
[2013-11-05 07:17:33] BF12 BF1 15040915 | 5s:2.314 avg:2.305 u:2.200 Gh/s | A:10102 R:66+0(.64%) HW:0
[2013-11-05 07:17:33] BF13 BF1 15062312 | 5s:2.215 avg:2.214 u:2.133 Gh/s | A:9795 R:72+1(.73%) HW:0
[2013-11-05 07:17:33] BF11 BF1 15062B15 | 5s:2.302 avg:2.292 u:2.157 Gh/s | A:9907 R:78+2(.80%) HW:0
[2013-11-05 07:17:33] BF12 BF1 15040915 | 5s:2.314 avg:2.305 u:2.200 Gh/s | A:10102 R:66+0(.64%) HW:0
[2013-11-05 07:17:33] BF13 BF1 15062312 | 5s:2.215 avg:2.214 u:2.133 Gh/s | A:9795 R:72+1(.73%) HW:0
But serial no. 15040915 is now my worst one, and no amount of resetting, power cycling, cooling off, leaving unplugged for a while, etc.. is getting it back to where it was.
Edit:
Maybe it needed to "warm up", seems to have finally kicked in to normal after starting with a high HW error rate (unless the difficult change triggered it)
Code:
Block: ...2df02926 #268145 Diff:511M ( 3.66Ph/s) Started: [13:39:08]
ST:2 F:0 NB:33 AS:0 BW:[ 62/ 55 B/s] E:33.63 I: 341uBTC/hr BS:85.6k
4 | 8.92/ 8.79/ 8.29Gh/s | A:6405 R:63+0(.97%) HW:37790/ 59%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BPM 0: | 1.99/ 1.99/ 1.90Gh/s | A:1515 R:13+0(.85%) HW: 8501/ 59% <- still 10% slower than most
BPM 1: | 2.28/ 2.29/ 2.17Gh/s | A:1627 R:13+0(.79%) HW: 9817/ 59%
BPM 2: | 2.30/ 2.30/ 2.10Gh/s | A:1587 R:17+0(1.1%) HW:10027/ 61% <- back to working
BPM 3: | 2.22/ 2.21/ 2.13Gh/s | A:1677 R:20+0(1.2%) HW: 9450/ 59%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ST:2 F:0 NB:33 AS:0 BW:[ 62/ 55 B/s] E:33.63 I: 341uBTC/hr BS:85.6k
4 | 8.92/ 8.79/ 8.29Gh/s | A:6405 R:63+0(.97%) HW:37790/ 59%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BPM 0: | 1.99/ 1.99/ 1.90Gh/s | A:1515 R:13+0(.85%) HW: 8501/ 59% <- still 10% slower than most
BPM 1: | 2.28/ 2.29/ 2.17Gh/s | A:1627 R:13+0(.79%) HW: 9817/ 59%
BPM 2: | 2.30/ 2.30/ 2.10Gh/s | A:1587 R:17+0(1.1%) HW:10027/ 61% <- back to working
BPM 3: | 2.22/ 2.21/ 2.13Gh/s | A:1677 R:20+0(1.2%) HW: 9450/ 59%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@zyk0 & @ssinc
What OS? As I've seen this before but after I recompiled BFG using 3.2.0, I haven't seen the issue since, so, I'm curious what OS you're using these on.
What OS? As I've seen this before but after I recompiled BFG using 3.2.0, I haven't seen the issue since, so, I'm curious what OS you're using these on.
Ubuntu 12.04 - BFGminer 3.0.99
Personally I had shit luck on a fresh install of 12.04, but 13.10 worked like a charm within minutes with no issues. If you want I'll load up 12.04 and see if I can make a build of BFGMiner 3.2.0 (as that's what I'm using with the best success rate thus far).
Yeah that would be great
I'm loading up a windows box right now to see if I can reproduce the same results there as well.
@zyk0 & @ssinc
What OS? As I've seen this before but after I recompiled BFG using 3.2.0, I haven't seen the issue since, so, I'm curious what OS you're using these on.
What OS? As I've seen this before but after I recompiled BFG using 3.2.0, I haven't seen the issue since, so, I'm curious what OS you're using these on.
Ubuntu 12.04 - BFGminer 3.0.99
Personally I had shit luck on a fresh install of 12.04, but 13.10 worked like a charm within minutes with no issues. If you want I'll load up 12.04 and see if I can make a build of BFGMiner 3.2.0 (as that's what I'm using with the best success rate thus far).
60%ish hardware errors seem to be about normal
but...
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM0 | 5s: 2.31 avg: 2.30 u: 0.54 Gh/s | A:66 R:0+0(none) HW:2252/ 89%
seems like I got a couple duds.
but...
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM0 | 5s: 2.31 avg: 2.30 u: 0.54 Gh/s | A:66 R:0+0(none) HW:2252/ 89%
seems like I got a couple duds.
I have two units that are doing this as well.
No I was supplied exactly the amount that was ordered. I have no extras sadly.
60%ish hardware errors seem to be about normal
but...
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM0 | 5s: 2.31 avg: 2.30 u: 0.54 Gh/s | A:66 R:0+0(none) HW:2252/ 89%
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM1 | 5s: 1.99 avg: 1.99 u: 1.89 Gh/s | A:237 R:1+1(.84%) HW:1398/ 59%
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM2 | 5s: 2.29 avg: 2.29 u: 2.16 Gh/s | A:287 R:2+0(.52%) HW:1607/ 59%
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM3 | 5s: 2.21 avg: 2.21 u: 2.05 Gh/s | A:261 R:2+0(.76%) HW:1567/ 60%
seems like I got a couple duds.
but...
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM0 | 5s: 2.31 avg: 2.30 u: 0.54 Gh/s | A:66 R:0+0(none) HW:2252/ 89%
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM1 | 5s: 1.99 avg: 1.99 u: 1.89 Gh/s | A:237 R:1+1(.84%) HW:1398/ 59%
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM2 | 5s: 2.29 avg: 2.29 u: 2.16 Gh/s | A:287 R:2+0(.52%) HW:1607/ 59%
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM3 | 5s: 2.21 avg: 2.21 u: 2.05 Gh/s | A:261 R:2+0(.76%) HW:1567/ 60%
seems like I got a couple duds.
@zyk0 & @ssinc
What OS? As I've seen this before but after I recompiled BFG using 3.2.0, I haven't seen the issue since, so, I'm curious what OS you're using these on.
Ubuntu 12.04 - BFGminer 3.0.99
60%ish hardware errors seem to be about normal
but...
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM0 | 5s: 2.31 avg: 2.30 u: 0.54 Gh/s | A:66 R:0+0(none) HW:2252/ 89%
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM1 | 5s: 1.99 avg: 1.99 u: 1.89 Gh/s | A:237 R:1+1(.84%) HW:1398/ 59%
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM2 | 5s: 2.29 avg: 2.29 u: 2.16 Gh/s | A:287 R:2+0(.52%) HW:1607/ 59%
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM3 | 5s: 2.21 avg: 2.21 u: 2.05 Gh/s | A:261 R:2+0(.76%) HW:1567/ 60%
seems like I got a couple duds.
but...
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM0 | 5s: 2.31 avg: 2.30 u: 0.54 Gh/s | A:66 R:0+0(none) HW:2252/ 89%
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM1 | 5s: 1.99 avg: 1.99 u: 1.89 Gh/s | A:237 R:1+1(.84%) HW:1398/ 59%
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM2 | 5s: 2.29 avg: 2.29 u: 2.16 Gh/s | A:287 R:2+0(.52%) HW:1607/ 59%
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM3 | 5s: 2.21 avg: 2.21 u: 2.05 Gh/s | A:261 R:2+0(.76%) HW:1567/ 60%
seems like I got a couple duds.
@zyk0 & @ssinc
What OS? As I've seen this before but after I recompiled BFG using 3.2.0, I haven't seen the issue since, so, I'm curious what OS you're using these on.
60%ish hardware errors seem to be about normal
but...
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM0 | 5s: 2.31 avg: 2.30 u: 0.54 Gh/s | A:66 R:0+0(none) HW:2252/ 89%
seems like I got a couple duds.
but...
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM0 | 5s: 2.31 avg: 2.30 u: 0.54 Gh/s | A:66 R:0+0(none) HW:2252/ 89%
seems like I got a couple duds.
I have two units that are doing this as well.
60%ish hardware errors seem to be about normal
but...
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM0 | 5s: 2.31 avg: 2.30 u: 0.54 Gh/s | A:66 R:0+0(none) HW:2252/ 89%
seems like I got a couple duds.
but...
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM0 | 5s: 2.31 avg: 2.30 u: 0.54 Gh/s | A:66 R:0+0(none) HW:2252/ 89%
seems like I got a couple duds.
I have two units that are doing this as well.
60%ish hardware errors seem to be about normal
but...
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM0 | 5s: 2.31 avg: 2.30 u: 0.54 Gh/s | A:66 R:0+0(none) HW:2252/ 89%
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM1 | 5s: 1.99 avg: 1.99 u: 1.89 Gh/s | A:237 R:1+1(.84%) HW:1398/ 59%
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM2 | 5s: 2.29 avg: 2.29 u: 2.16 Gh/s | A:287 R:2+0(.52%) HW:1607/ 59%
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM3 | 5s: 2.21 avg: 2.21 u: 2.05 Gh/s | A:261 R:2+0(.76%) HW:1567/ 60%
seems like I got a couple duds.
but...
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM0 | 5s: 2.31 avg: 2.30 u: 0.54 Gh/s | A:66 R:0+0(none) HW:2252/ 89%
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM1 | 5s: 1.99 avg: 1.99 u: 1.89 Gh/s | A:237 R:1+1(.84%) HW:1398/ 59%
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM2 | 5s: 2.29 avg: 2.29 u: 2.16 Gh/s | A:287 R:2+0(.52%) HW:1607/ 59%
[2013-11-05 09:03:46] BPM3 | 5s: 2.21 avg: 2.21 u: 2.05 Gh/s | A:261 R:2+0(.76%) HW:1567/ 60%
seems like I got a couple duds.
im using bfgminer. with HW errors. cgminer not working. after following instructions.
if its git compiled bfgminer, it reports all the garbled data the bf1 sends back as hardware errors, and picks out the good nonces. your still getting, or should be getting the full 2.2ish ghash/sec
if its the one that beastlymac have put together, then uhoh
to paraphrase ckolivas: he doesn't even bother reporting errors in the BF1 code, only good nonces...leads to less headaches and end user freak outs...like when i got it going on bfgminer the first few times, i thought it was broken to all hell
im using bfgminer. with HW errors. cgminer not working. after following instructions.
so you have it sorta running? what is your command line?
this sucks
getting 50% HW error
getting 50% HW error
can someone list the exact cgminer command line script to run these bluefury
having issues being detected. installed the winusb driver.
thanks
having issues being detected. installed the winusb driver.
thanks
Tried cgminer 3.7.0, got lower hash rate than bfgminer32-3.2.0
At least now the BF1 is detected, however the sign that something is not right is that instead of alternating between red and orange, the LED flashes red/off.
At least now the BF1 is detected, however the sign that something is not right is that instead of alternating between red and orange, the LED flashes red/off.
That's what my miners do, I figured it was normal.
Stop cgminer Hit the rst button then restart cgminer.
I tried this, as far as I can tell it didn't do anything. And shortly after I had one miner fall on its face and I had to pull it out and then plug it back in.
Julz I am organising compensation for now. Ssinc already has it so you will need to contact him about distributing it.
Yeah how do we apply for our compensation? julz is my reseller.
I have talked with our EE he has said that the hashrate of 2.2ghs is because of the bitfury chip. He says that this is the average that people will be getting. If you are lucky you can get units that perform higher or if you aren't lucky you could potentially get some worse units it all depends on the bitfury chip. It seems when we build prototypes that we where lucky with the chips that we received.
For fairness, the burden of this 'bad luck' should be carried mainly by the seller, not by the consumers. The specified claimed performance was "Spec: Rated speed 2.6Gh/s. +/- 10%" (https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/blue-fury-miners-v2-26ghs-299295. You probably need to consider some sort of compensation, for example in coupons on future sales, rather than 'passing the buck' and blaming luck.But wait a minute. I haven't even gotten my 0.05 btc/unit compensation yet. Can I get those first? How?
ssinc
Tried cgminer 3.7.0, got lower hash rate than bfgminer32-3.2.0
At least now the BF1 is detected, however the sign that something is not right is that instead of alternating between red and orange, the LED flashes red/off.
Stop cgminer Hit the rst button then restart cgminer.At least now the BF1 is detected, however the sign that something is not right is that instead of alternating between red and orange, the LED flashes red/off.
I have talked with our EE he has said that the hashrate of 2.2ghs is because of the bitfury chip. He says that this is the average that people will be getting. If you are lucky you can get units that perform higher or if you aren't lucky you could potentially get some worse units it all depends on the bitfury chip. It seems when we build prototypes that we where lucky with the chips that we received.
For fairness, the burden of this 'bad luck' should be carried mainly by the seller, not by the consumers. The specified claimed performance was "Spec: Rated speed 2.6Gh/s. +/- 10%" (https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/blue-fury-miners-v2-26ghs-299295. You probably need to consider some sort of compensation, for example in coupons on future sales, rather than 'passing the buck' and blaming luck.But wait a minute. I haven't even gotten my 0.05 btc/unit compensation yet. Can I get those first? How?
Jump to: