Topic: Changing S17+ hashboards between miners doesn't mine. (Read 174 times)

The same 3 years old answer still stands, you can't mix and match different hash boards from different 17 series models unless you get very lucky, you either flash the eeprom or use firmware that doesn't read it all, if you are having trouble installing BO+ then visit their support thread or use another custom firmware.

Did you ever get this sorted? I'm in a similar situation, looking to go the simple route of just flashing Braiins OS+ onto them.

Curious how all yours turned out and what you had to do.

Your screen is with awesomeminer firmware ?

We ran Vnish on about 3PH worth of hashrate the last summer, and we tested the fees against the monthly reports, and we took the mining into account (which you probably failed to do) it's safe to assume that while running custom firmware especially if it's on auto-tune it won't be 100% online, so while you do lose a certain % of your total hashrate it does not go to the dev's pool, it is just lost.

You can use AwesomeMiner or manually collect the information, it's highly unlikely that you will find a miner with 100% mining/uptime on your primary pool, below is a screenshot of the 30 days report on one of my miners



This miner is underclocked, runs cool all the time, and looks perfectly fine, but for some reasons, it failed to stay connected to the pool 100%, which is pretty normal.

We have also done some packet sniffing and checked the bandwidth to dev vs main pool, you can perform that yourself, you will notice that while your main pool stays connected the transmitting of data does change when dev fees take place, this does not show on the mining graph (for most pools) probably because they use XNSUB.

I also believe you can use the DiffA to get a somehow accurate guess about the fees and here is an example



The last two rows belong to the dev's pool if you add them together you get 56,198,434, compare that against the total which is 1,930,069,282 and you get exactly 2.9117%, keep in mind that this is AwesomeMiner's version with license included so it's 3%.

Of course, the second method could be off by an order of magnitude if the dev is displaying false figures out of the box, but Vnish and Vnish distributors like Marc and Patrick from AwoeosmeMiner are long-standing community members, Patrick probably makes millions from his monitoring software, it would be a completely stupid move to try and lie about the fees he collects especially that at least half of it goes to Vnish in the first place.

Of course, this is just my point of view, I am not saying my tests were 100% accurate and that my way is the only right way of doing this, I could be wrong after all.



This is not a valid excuse, forgive me for my honesty, you could always use a throwaway account to expose scammers, if you are afraid just send me the findings and I'll post them, if anyone can provide solid proof which the community agrees with and accepts as an accurate test, I won't hesitate to tag every firmware dev involved.

Meh I am sorry but your doing your math wrong. run it for a few days make sure uptime is OVER 24 hours and compare the 24 hour on the pool. Or just do the math from the real time API and you can see the devfee difficulty and when it gets triggered and the math is right in front of you and is reflected on the pool.

If we were taking more that our advertised fee we would not be running in every major farm.

Using the same method with Bitmain standard firmware gives matching results (hashrate reported in miner matches report in pool). May I ask what method did you use to test it and establish that the claimed 2.8% fee is accurate?

yes I hear well, but I believe that the community is sometimes blind, and does not want to open its eyes ...

I don't name anyone, because I don't want to go to war with anyone, and I don't want to be called a detractor to put my firmware ahead of others and say that I'm the best because it's not the case...

people are sometimes stupid ... I'll tell you, recently I had a person interested in my firmware, he installed my firmware on an S17E, it contains 1.8% fee, I advise it on discord for about 2 hours, on how to install, and configure, I also advise him to optimize the settings, he shares screens with me so I can help him! he is happy but the minor is still heating up ... and suddenly, he tells me that he has totally cleaned his minor, that he was particularly dirty, now he does not heat any more, and he sends me a proof. screen, ..... he just installed another custom firmware just after cleaning !!! he tells me that the consumption has slightly increased but that now he no longer overheats, and as his (these in fact, he has 10), works well, he does not touch anything!

I find this a lack of respect for the time I gave him, and in addition he puts his face in my face! totally stupid and annoying!


and this hystory is not the only one, all that to say, people are sometimes totally stupid and blind ... just because we don't talk much about me I pence, yet I am legitimate as some know it here

I have to agree with wndsnb's statement, this is what I meant by the "imperfections" of your test, the fee on Asic.to is 2.8% so 4.84%-2.8% is just 2%, this variance will most likely happen on all miners regardless of the firmware they use, of course, I am not defending anyone here nor I am associated with any custom firmware devs.



Why wouldn't you mention it? I believe if you have the evidence (which I am sure you do since you are a developer yourself) it's probably a moral responsibility to let the users know.

To name no one, I found fee pool hidden in some custom firmware ... just listen ...

I also offer my firmware, with REAL 1% for T17 and 1,8% for T17+, with frequency and voltage control, which also completely ignores the eprom data, so you can mix the cards without worry!

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1yl0fym6ezHnKptGaHrWB6W2Rl2p9nwNp

I don't think that is an accurate way to measure what fee they are charging. I think you'd need to compare the #s to the stock firmware running the same frequency/voltage to get an accurate comparison. Also not sure that 1 day is long enough to get a measurement accurate enough to see a 1% difference. Just look at the daily average of any miner over time. I just checked the daily average graph on a worker on Viabtc and it varied >3% over the past couple of weeks.

I'm just going by the hashrate reported in miner GUI vs 24h hashrate reported from the pool, tested on both Poolin and F2pool. I brought this up a while back and seem to recall some others posted similar findings (I can't remember which thread though, sorry).

Currently running Asic.To I have the following:

T17+ Reported Hashrate (Avg) 55,852. Actual hashrate at pool (24h) = 53,160 (4.84% difference)
S17+ Reported Hashrate (Avg) 71,024. Actual hashrate at pool (24h) = 67,320 (5.5% difference)

I'm using Asic.to for those. But I need to sell a few of these and I need to sell them with the original Firmware.
Guess I will have to buy a code resetter...

This is a very serious claim given how widely the firmware is used (vnish in general), could there be some imperfection in your testing? I have personally tested about 150 miners with Vnish and the fees were within range, of course, things could have changed in later versions, mind if we take this discussion to the original topic and see what Marc has to say to this?

I've found Vnish (Asic.to) also charges MUCH higher fees than advertised.

As mentioned above you need firmware that ignores the voltage/frequency written into hash boards, but keep in mind that most custom firmware out there are either scam or charge higher fees than advertised, stick to Vnish (AwesomeMiner/Asic.to) or BraiinOs.

Use 3rd party firmware, they ignore the settings in the hashboard eeprom.

Hello,

I have received a bunch of used S17+ miners from china with a bunch of hashboards not working due to A LOT of loose heatsinks and hashboards showing 0 Asics found.
So I'm interchanging working hashboards between the miners to make a few complete working miners.

Now the problem is a working hashboard in the original miner doesn't work when I take it out and put it in another miner.
I've read that these hashboards are coded and tied to it's original miner.
Is there a way to reset the hash board code without having to buy a 300$ hash board code editor?

Or any other tips I can use?