Topic: Braiins OS & Braiins OS+ custom ASIC firmware: optimize performance & efficiency - page 14. (Read 45351 times)

the new firmware  bos with autotune has a 2% dev fee ?

Not yet. They are currently working in S17 support. Make sure you subscribe their newsletter in their website to be readily informed, or join the telegram group if you have any more questions.

Does this firmware work on S9k or S9E ?

With default values, bOS+ aims to overclock the unit, within those two limits: 1200w, and 89°. Under excellent air flow conditions, it could take it to 17TH, but its common to see 15TH.

You can see people in this very thread people complaining about the previous warning temp value at 95° being "too low", these are now 100° for "Hot", and 110° for "dangerous" (power off). You can always change those values to whatever you like.

Also you can switch to the community edition and do the tuning yourself, i have explained this process on this thread before, you can manually adjust the voltage and speed per hashboard yourself, but be sure to measure your watt usage when overclocking to avoid damage to your PSU.

I didn't changed the temp settings and I agree this is the problem.
I think it would be better to change to defaults to a lower target temp.

Well the default power limit is 1200w, which is roughly 20% and is the safe margin for a typical 1600w psu. If you rise this level like that, you will be stressing your PSU. There are of course the thermal limits, but they need the sensors to be properly working (which may not).

Did you also change the temperature limits? The new default is "aim for 89°C", it was aim for 75°C before, so beware of that.

And if you use bOS+ for the autotuning, this can take anywhere from 2 to 6 hours, and the miner will restart many times; it will keep trying higher settings according to your limits (which is why you shouldn't mindlessly increase either power or temperature limits). You could wait for the next release until things get ironed out, or stick to the community version and use sane settings.

Did some test, great software. I burned 2 hashboards when running autotune @1599watts when the standard power supply, so watch out and test.

It is recommended that you do not. T1 support is getting completely dropped following next release. This is because the T1 was barely a basic test use at best.

Its better that you keep your factory firmware.

If you try it, you will be on your own.

hi
i have t1 16 th/s miner.
can i use  braiins frimware

my miner control boards have not memory card socket.

when I bring  the s9's off line and start to build them into one and two board space heaters for next winter I will test on solo.ckpool.org

It won't be enough hash  to guarantee hitting a block  , but it could indeed hit one.  While I control 2ph  it would take 13 months to hit a block with it if I have average luck.  So I simply can not run  for 13 months.  Test net is just that test net.  Since diff is lower on test net hitting blocks with a low difficulty proof that you can hit a low diff no more than that.

This model is not yet supported in the expected March release.

Does anyone know if s9 SE will be supported?

Then ...

YOU are in a better position with your mining hoard to test this simple but (seemingly) enigmatic question. A single miner will undoubtedly have almost ZERO chance to find any block with BTC, but 2PH could easily solve the problem of answering this question mate.

Whether you WANT to do this is another story

Even at 2PH, the only way that I believe this could be solved is to mine a test block on testnet, considering that the testnet blockchain is exactly (almost) the same as mainnet. If you hit/solve a block there, you are likely to solve one on mainnet, logically speaking.

#crysx

 I have 1 s9 with two boards running braiins  this is my only sha-256 asic miner that does not run stock firmware.

One of the reasons I don't have more units mining on this firmware is the no proof issue of blocks.

I have about 2 ph of sha-256 mining on viabtc pps+ it would be nice to see some blocks hit proof for any aftermarket firmware.

As Stryfe said - we have asked for proof in the other FW threads as well. No responses at all or deleted. I will say that it is heartening to at least have a response from you even if it is rather negative... The folks behind Braiins certainly do deserve Kudos for it being Open Source complete with the availability of all source code as required per the cgminer license. You are the only aftermarket firmware group do do that  

Regarding

Mostly right but not entirely accurate. Up to Canaan's A10 series their code is freely published in Github repository. From A10 on up - not sure since they have completely revamped their firmware & software but odds are it *is* available. Then again, since Canaan (up to the A10x) has the cgminer More Options field in their GUI it (was) simplicity in itself to tweak their miners to your hearts content which negated any need for aftermarket firmware...

Never said that Braiins is only used on Slush (and yes it is banned on Kano), was just saying that with Braiins being part of the Slush family, it should be easy for you folks to check how it performs.

My point was that Slush (and other pools) can easily log what FW is in the miners. As they are the ones behind Braiins they should have a vested interested in how it performs and are in the best position to verify it has no problems. I know that Kano periodically checks what FW miners are using because Kanopool (and all other small pools) does not have the hash rate to risk *any* chance of missing a block due to a bug. If the other small pools don't care - well, that's entirely up to them and is just another reason I don't mine elsewhere.

 For pool operators, when a miner finds a BTC block, query the logs to see if it runs Braiins, if it does - let folks know about it. On the actual miner side - especially large farms - the cgminer API has a block found function: Setup your monitoring software to flag it. If a non-oem miner finds a block - and any large farms should find several in a very short period of time - lets folks know! I would think that large farms should not only be checking their hash rate vs income but also be very interested in the "how many blocks did WE find and which miner did it" metrics.

Oh, and yes, the chance of any one single piece of hardware finding a block has always been slim and barring a drop in diff will just keep getting harder. But since 2014 I've found 15 blocks and over the course of 125 miners ranging from S1-S9, an uber rare AMT A1 miner circa 2014, several Avalons from 721-841, and Whatsminer M10's at least 1 from each family has found a block. I have an R4 that has found 2. The only miners I have that have not yet found a block are 2x A941, and 5x A10's. I currently run 25 miners and found Kano's last block with an A841 cluster of 5. Point is that given a large sample of miners running and provided they bother to check, a person/company *will* find blocks with their hardware giving them (and us if they share) data as to what works and what does not work.

Again, I have no animosity towards the Braiins devs and do respect you for fulfilling the cgminer license. But as an example, in the Genesis mining kerfuffle obviously shares from them were accepted by Slushpool as normal and yet there was a precipitous and lengthy drop in the farms find rate due to a bug in the proxy software that Genesis was testing. As in despite running over 300PH Genesis suddenly went from several blocks per day to zero for over a month and until other folks started bitching about the pools Luck and their income dropping apparently no one noticed something was wrong somewhere...

I and others would just like to see proof that nothing was inadvertently broken.

Riiiight... so you are confirming, there is no proof that this firmware finds blocks.

If you are a supporter of bitcoin then you should be very concerned about this. I don't understand why you sound so butthurt about it. Your not getting paid to shill the software so why the angry tirade over an honest and fair question that EVERYONE should ask.

If everyone on a pool ran firmware that didn't find blocks then that pool would NEVER find a block. Surely that's a concern. Or what about if only 25% of people ran firmware that didn't find blocks, that would only lower the pools block finding ability and earning capability by 25%.

We are fundamentally curious about it, I'm hoping it does find blocks, I'm hoping someone can come and show me that it finds blocks because then no pool will prevent its use.

i think what he is asking as are a few others - those that use this should have done what you suggested and tested it and shown the results - we are only asking for verification. There have been and are a lot of FW out there that does not and has been proven to not find blocks - flashback to slush and genesis mining. Slush let them run a large qty of hash (think around 300 PH) using a custom FW and paid them - when it was identified that their FW does indeed not find blocks, slush still paid them.

we all want more out our miners but we also want miners that are capable of finding blocks at the end of the day.

as for challenging the others, we have asked - no one answers or the posts get deleted - or we get told to prove it doesnt work. The proving should be the responsibility of the one pushing the fw. I have no animosity nor have my posts shown any so my guess is you mean that towards Fuzzy.

edit: and if it has been shown/proven and I missed it, I apologize and ask that I be pointed to the right thread/post.

As time passes, less and less gear will ever find a block in their lifetime. Best you can do is mine some sha256 altcoin and see for yourself or check the source code, it's not like its hidden like the others. Spot anything that would prevent it from finding a block? No? Then where is your proof it doesn't?

Or, you can clone Bitcoin, make your private blockchain for testing and point it there. Are you up to the challenge?

Now go take your silly unfounded misconceptions to the only pool that doesn't like this Free and Open Source firmware, the rest don't care.

TL;DR: Prove that it doesn't or just shut up. Go take your unsubstantiated suspicions to the closed source OEM and modded firmwares, why are you two not challenging every single one of them in their own threads?

I know for a fact a miner with a large bOS install, as typical large miners do, they go with ViaBTC so there. It is false that people use this firmware with just Slush. It is false that Slush only has bOS users, but only the pool operators can tell so go ask them in their Slush thread. The next version, however might be more interesting for large miners to use with Slush (or any pool implementing v2) due to the bandwidth savings and added security among things.

This firmware does NOT use a default pool, unlike what Bitmain does with Antpool. Feel free to use ANY(*) pool with this zero fee dev, Free and Open Source firmware. Audit it, compile it, install your own audited compiled version. Can you do that with OEM? No, because none of them releases the code like bOS does.

Your animosity against bOS is suspicious to say the least, its getting in the realm of FUD.

(*)Except Kanopool, stay away from it.

---

Seph213: I don't know if it will have auto tune, or power guesstimate. I know it is the first release of bosminer replacing cgminer, which means Stratum V2 support and probably bugfixes (such as no more reordering hashboards). After that release next version is aiming to support newer gear like the S17, that's all i know so far.

So far I have not seen hide nor hair of any proof that Braiins - or any other non-OEM firmware -finds BTC blocks. Considering that it is Slush who is behind the FW and no doubt there are a lot of Braiins users on Slush one would think that it would be very very easy for them to post proof it finds BTC blocks...

But so far

maybe it was posted somewhere here? if so, I apologize. but can anyone show proof of anyone using this FW that has found a block?