I think thats just his way of buying MORE time.
Like eldentyrell said in his thread, hes always coming up with new and interesting ways to say its going to be a bit longer ...
kind regards
Topic: Cairnsmore1 - Quad XC6SLX150 Board - page 113. (Read 286370 times)
They haven't posted yet admittedly, mostly since they've not done full tests to be able to go around boasting yet.
However this type of processor is capable of 200 Mhash/s each, it was used in the Icarus Board (twin processor).
There is 4 of them, thus 800+ is the minimum to be expected really.
However this type of processor is capable of 200 Mhash/s each, it was used in the Icarus Board (twin processor).
There is 4 of them, thus 800+ is the minimum to be expected really.
It would be nice to roll eldentyrell's bitstream onto these boards and get close to that 1GH output.
kind regards
apparently we'll know what's going to happen w/ that in this many days
They haven't posted yet admittedly, mostly since they've not done full tests to be able to go around boasting yet.
However this type of processor is capable of 200 Mhash/s each, it was used in the Icarus Board (twin processor).
There is 4 of them, thus 800+ is the minimum to be expected really.
However this type of processor is capable of 200 Mhash/s each, it was used in the Icarus Board (twin processor).
There is 4 of them, thus 800+ is the minimum to be expected really.
It would be nice to roll eldentyrell's bitstream onto these boards and get close to that 1GH output.
kind regards
Probably, so I guess you aren't going to explain it either?
I think you missed the whole point of the post. 
They haven't posted yet admittedly, mostly since they've not done full tests to be able to go around boasting yet.
However this type of processor is capable of 200 Mhash/s each, it was used in the Icarus Board (twin processor).
There is 4 of them, thus 800+ is the minimum to be expected really.
With the right modifications, tweaks and fairy dust (kidding about that last one), many have suggested it is possible to push each processor to do 250 each. So a ballpark figure of 800-1000 Mhash/s is the only news on it right now.
Concerning cat hair. It has a fan guard but no filter, so keep fluffy away from it
However this type of processor is capable of 200 Mhash/s each, it was used in the Icarus Board (twin processor).
There is 4 of them, thus 800+ is the minimum to be expected really.
With the right modifications, tweaks and fairy dust (kidding about that last one), many have suggested it is possible to push each processor to do 250 each. So a ballpark figure of 800-1000 Mhash/s is the only news on it right now.
Concerning cat hair. It has a fan guard but no filter, so keep fluffy away from it
Yohan,
There is one very important statistic that hasn't been posted yet. I understand that anything at this point would be only an educated guess since the bitstream isn't built yet, but that's all I'm looking for at this point is a rough estimate. Can you get a number from the engineers on what the cat-hair/Mh is going to be? Are we talking 0.01, 1, 100?
There is one very important statistic that hasn't been posted yet. I understand that anything at this point would be only an educated guess since the bitstream isn't built yet, but that's all I'm looking for at this point is a rough estimate. Can you get a number from the engineers on what the cat-hair/Mh is going to be? Are we talking 0.01, 1, 100?
It is a F12 fan and blowing down. When it is stacked that way it will draw air over back of board above. Equally setting a stack heigh of say 40mm would allow reasonable side to side air flow especially if the ends are boxed as well. We are looking for a r/a bracket that will allow the side mount fans for the push pull fan arrangement but that is not high priority at the moment.
The F12 is a very quite fan with good airflow and long life. The way we did the mounts will also allow a heatsink and fan arrangement for the back if you want but that is
The F12 is a very quite fan with good airflow and long life. The way we did the mounts will also allow a heatsink and fan arrangement for the back if you want but that is
Oh no! Yohan was taken by ninjas midway through his post! Now we may never hear more about the rear mount cooling stuff! I bet Bitcoin Kitteh was in on it!
It is a F12 fan and blowing down. When it is stacked that way it will draw air over back of board above. Equally setting a stack heigh of say 40mm would allow reasonable side to side air flow especially if the ends are boxed as well. We are looking for a r/a bracket that will allow the side mount fans for the push pull fan arrangement but that is not high priority at the moment.
The F12 is a very quite fan with good airflow and long life. The way we did the mounts will also allow a heatsink and fan arrangement for the back if you want but that is maybe overkill. (cat fixed)
The F12 is a very quite fan with good airflow and long life. The way we did the mounts will also allow a heatsink and fan arrangement for the back if you want but that is maybe overkill. (cat fixed)
Some more to salivate over.
Looks very good. Will be interesting to see how the heatsinks perform with a push-pull configuration blowing across the boards.
4 individual heat sinks so each one is perfectly mated to the chip, and one large fan. Very very nice.
The fan can also be removed and used for side blowing if you really want to pack them in and if you really want to keep them cooler use a push pull fan arrangement. In this way you might get down to a 40-50mm stack spacing. With the right r/a bracket, and suitable stack spacing, the fan holes on the PCB can be used to hold on 120mm side fans in a stack.
That's what I would like to do. Can you supply a suitable r/a bracket?
Looks like the airflow is down, is that correct?
Yeah, it's down .. took a look at one of my installed F12's to confirm. 
Looks like the airflow is down, is that correct?
Some more to salivate over.
Is that the Arcfic cooling F12 or F14 ?
..Either way a good choice of fan supplier.
Some more to salivate over.
The problems with integrating bit-pay aren't limited to a risk of not being paid the full amount.
In fact I don't think there is a risk there (given that there's no chargeback provision in Bitcoin, once you get your GBP and start processing the purchase the risk is entirely assumed by the shopper). The problems with integrating bit-pay aren't limited to a risk of not being paid the full amount. There is some effort to be put integrating it (someone must work on the shopping site), there may be local legislation/regulation making things more difficult. If I were a business I'll submit this kind of project to my an accountant and if he/she raises some issues maybe a lawyer too.
Quite so. I understand they are under a bit of pressure to start getting the devices out the door, and I don't want to interrupt that. I was only posting to clear common misconceptions, and would be glad to wait.
k, i'll be your guinea pig.
I will personally guarantee my payment through bit-pay.
i.e. if you receive less than the agreed upon price (minus transaction fees of course) due to exchange rate volatility, I will pay the difference prior to the product being shipped.
I will personally guarantee my payment through bit-pay.
i.e. if you receive less than the agreed upon price (minus transaction fees of course) due to exchange rate volatility, I will pay the difference prior to the product being shipped.
I would also do this.
The problems with integrating bit-pay aren't limited to a risk of not being paid the full amount. There is some effort to be put integrating it (someone must work on the shopping site), there may be local legislation/regulation making things more difficult. If I were a business I'll submit this kind of project to an accountant and if he/she raises some issues maybe a lawyer too.
Jump to: