GekkoScience has a new pod miner, just in time for Christmas - page 10.

100knot2dae

member

Activity: 100

Merit: 29

Quote from: sidehack on January 19, 2023, 04:13:11 PM

They're factory calibrated to 4.6V which isn't always the same position on the knob due to part tolerances in the volt-setting circuit. If it'll run at speed from a lower voltage, there's no reason not to.

Looks like my unit is approaching an efficiency sweet spot for this frequency (550 MHz). Since the voltage decrease (12 hours ago), it's not only using 5W less but also the avg hashrate has slightly increased (+10 Gh/s Cheesy

), while the WU/m has climbed up by 110 and the HW error ratio being stable.

Very cool, it's a really impressive device what you have crafted here @sidehack!

When turning the voltage knob, is it safe to do so when the unit is powered, or even while cgminer is running? Does it matter, if so what's the recommended way?

MoparMiningLLC

legendary

Activity: 2254

Merit: 2419

EIN: 82-3893490

if anyone is selling one for btc please let me know!

sidehack

legendary

Activity: 3416

Merit: 1865

Curmudgeonly hardware guy

2.3+T on the pods, nice.

RKG456

jr. member

Activity: 32

Merit: 5

This evening I rearranged everything and now have all my Gekkos mining off of a single Raspberry Pi 4 (4GB) host. Looks stable so far but has only been back up for a few hours. I let it run for a week and a half with no issues when it was spread across two hosts. The day before yesterday my peak hash rate spiked up to 8.025TH/s for a minute or so. Getting many spikes over 7.5TH/s

Code:

cgminer version 4.12.1 - Started: [2023-01-19 17:07:59.335]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 (5s):6.593T (1m):6.293T (5m):6.322T (15m):6.277T (avg):6.097Th/s
 A:15138816  R:0  HW:15828  WU:85182.8/m
 Connected to bitcoin.viabtc.io diff 8.19K with stratum as user N0F34R.NPandT
 Block: 533c0002...  Diff:37.6T  Started: [19:50:37.341]  Best share: 99.7M
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 [U]SB management [P]ool management [S]ettings [D]isplay options [Q]uit
 0: GSF 10070032: BM1397:06+ 600.00MHz T:600 P:600 (3:2)     | 96.8% WU: 97% | 2.541T / 2.350Th/s WU:32840.4/m
 1: GSF 10070012: BM1397:06+ 600.00MHz T:600 P:600 (3:2)     | 96.8% WU: 98% | 2.616T / 2.381Th/s WU:33272.4/m
 2: GSH 10041663: BM1387:02+ 375.00MHz T:375 P:375 (100:50)  |  100% WU: 98% | 89.85G / 83.92Gh/s WU: 1172.4/m
 3: GSH 10038894: BM1387:02+ 375.00MHz T:375 P:375 (100:50)  | 98.5% WU:^98% | 85.93G / 83.84Gh/s WU: 1171.4/m
 4: GSF 10052154: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (28:14)   |  100% WU:100% | 309.1G / 274.5Gh/s WU: 3834.7/m
 5: GSF 10053864: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (28:14)   |  100% WU:100% | 393.6G / 297.0Gh/s WU: 4148.7/m
 6: GSF 10050104: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (28:14)   |  100% WU:100% | 293.9G / 297.1Gh/s WU: 4150.1/m
 7: GSF 10054544: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (28:14)   |  100% WU:100% | 344.7G / 300.3Gh/s WU: 4195.1/m
 8: GSF 10053931: BM1397:01+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:450 (28:14)   |  100% WU:100% | 254.7G / 274.7Gh/s WU: 3837.1/m

sidehack

legendary

Activity: 3416

Merit: 1865

Curmudgeonly hardware guy

They're factory calibrated to 4.6V which isn't always the same position on the knob due to part tolerances in the volt-setting circuit. If it'll run at speed from a lower voltage, there's no reason not to.

100knot2dae

member

Activity: 100

Merit: 29

Got my unit this week, really a great piece of hardware! So far I am happy with it, have it running for now at 2.1Th/s with 550MHz for about 24 hours, with the flat side of the voltage knob pointing to between 9 and 10 (clock).

Speaking of the voltage knob, is there a standardized stock voltage position that applies to all units? Reason I am asking is because mine was shipped with the knob at 11, while I saw a picture of another user with the stock position at about 9 to 10: https://imgur.com/a/F1V84qf
Which is what I have set mine to as well now, saving me about 5 Watts while still running with the same hashrate.

kano

legendary

Activity: 4592

Merit: 1851

Linux since 1997 RedHat 4

Well, as long as you have the log going somewhere, it will say why it stepped the freq down each time.

Also, if anyone does change the step settings on the BM1397 miners, I'd suggest not to.

n0nce

hero member

Activity: 882

Merit: 5834

not your keys, not your coins!

Quote from: cygan on January 14, 2023, 02:13:12 AM

Quote from: n0nce on January 13, 2023, 08:11:04 PM

✂
If I were you, I'd slightly increase clock speeds. I'm not sure if I missed something, so are you deliberately running one R909 at 640MHz and one at 680?
✂

no, both were started with 680 only the one went down step by step to 640
maybe i should turn the screw a little on the one r909 (640) after all?

What I noticed is that sometimes the automatic 'step down' is a bit too aggressive; i.e. if you set the target frequency too high (like 680MHz maybe), it might step down to 640MHz, even though it would hold 650MHz just fine if you used that as a target.
So before fiddling with voltages, I'd try to (manually) find a stable frequency target by increasing / decreasing it in 50MHz or 25MHz steps and letting it run for a few hours.

Right now, after 12h on 675MHz, I have a 2.310Th/s average. That's substantially more than the ~2TH at 650MHz. As you can tell, I'm having a blast fine-tuning this thing. Cheesy

And I'm just getting started (need to install Java & such..).

kano

legendary

Activity: 4592

Merit: 1851

Linux since 1997 RedHat 4

Quote from: kano on January 02, 2023, 04:43:38 AM

Quote from: RKG456 on December 30, 2022, 03:27:58 PM

Got my R909 delivered today and got all my miners going except the R808 I got off of ebay appears to have pooped out. It was working then got stuck on Found 0 Chips..
...

Check it's not a software version issue - i.e. if it was working before, use the version of software from before just for the R808 and see if it's ok.
I've no idea if the R808 works with the current code.
I've run R909, R606, CompacF, NewPac, 2Pac and Compac on the new version (and you should use the new 4.12.1 version for those six)

As I mentioned in Discord, this turns out to be that the old magic '60' calc is no good for the R808.
Side effect was an average of about once per half an hour of it deciding to reset due to a slow nonce.

I've updated git with a fix for the R808 (and I've run it on all the miners now together) and the new calc is more reasonable (and more accurate)
So only if you have an old R808 you should do the update steps in https://kano.is/gekko.php#lin and it should fix that.

Edit; of course it wont fix a dead R808 - but it will fix it if it was resetting repeatedly, unnecessarily.

cygan

legendary

Activity: 3304

Merit: 8633

icarus-cards.eu

Quote from: n0nce on January 13, 2023, 08:11:04 PM

✂
If I were you, I'd slightly increase clock speeds. I'm not sure if I missed something, so are you deliberately running one R909 at 640MHz and one at 680?
✂

no, both were started with 680 only the one went down step by step to 640
maybe i should turn the screw a little on the one r909 (640) after all?

n0nce

hero member

Activity: 882

Merit: 5834

not your keys, not your coins!

Quote from: cygan on January 13, 2023, 02:51:12 PM

Quote from: n0nce on January 12, 2023, 01:17:29 PM

Quote from: cygan on January 12, 2023, 01:16:07 PM

@n0nce
so you mean i should turn the blue screw again around 12 o'clock or reduce the mhz rate?

Maybe first turn back the screw (I guess try something between 12 and 1) and try 690MHz. If that doesn't hold stable, try 680MHz, going down in 10MHz steps. In my experience, going above 650MHz was effortless at stock voltage.

now everything runs just over 24h but I still can not reach the limit of 2.

Code:

4: GSF 10070009: BM1397:06+ 680.00MHz T:680 P:655 (3:2) | 88.4% WU: 90% | 2.792T / 2.453Th/s WU:34281.3/m
5: GSF 10070003: BM1397:06+ 640.00MHz T:640 P:621 (3:2) | 89.8% WU: 90% | 1.961T / 2.331Th/s WU:32575.2/m

and here are the a, r and hw data (but there are 4 more compac f sticks connected)

Code:

A:131834880 R:54432 HW:51456 WU:85740.4/m

You've got an error rate of 0.0008025419406, in other words 0.08% which is excellent.
If I were you, I'd slightly increase clock speeds. I'm not sure if I missed something, so are you deliberately running one R909 at 640MHz and one at 680?

Quote from: n0nce on January 11, 2023, 01:15:47 PM

Quote from: kano on January 11, 2023, 02:21:09 AM

I wonder if 725MHz is just too high for them (as per my >20% HW) and 700 is the limit?

That's definitely possible. I'm running 650MHz now, since after a few hours it had dropped to 690MHz and I don't feel like pushing it to its max right now. Yet still I am getting 2.487Th/s on average. Still super close to that 2.5 mark, or 3.8% lower than my previous result, while reducing clock by 50MHz, so a 7.2% reduction in clock speed.
This indicates to me that above 650, we get into diminishing returns.

Update on this: It does seem like the sweet spot is right between 650MHz and 700MHz. I've turned mine back up a bit from 650MHz (just slightly over 2TH/s after a day) to 675MHz and I'm back on 2.531Th/s after an hour. Let's see what this looks like in a few hours.

cygan

legendary

Activity: 3304

Merit: 8633

icarus-cards.eu

Quote from: n0nce on January 12, 2023, 01:17:29 PM

Quote from: cygan on January 12, 2023, 01:16:07 PM

@n0nce
so you mean i should turn the blue screw again around 12 o'clock or reduce the mhz rate?🤔

Maybe first turn back the screw (I guess try something between 12 and 1) and try 690MHz. If that doesn't hold stable, try 680MHz, going down in 10MHz steps. In my experience, going above 650MHz was effortless at stock voltage.

now everything runs just over 24h but I still can not reach the limit of 2.

Code:

4: GSF 10070009: BM1397:06+ 680.00MHz T:680 P:655 (3:2) | 88.4% WU: 90% | 2.792T / 2.453Th/s WU:34281.3/m
5: GSF 10070003: BM1397:06+ 640.00MHz T:640 P:621 (3:2) | 89.8% WU: 90% | 1.961T / 2.331Th/s WU:32575.2/m

and here are the a, r and hw data (but there are 4 more compac f sticks connected)

Code:

A:131834880 R:54432 HW:51456 WU:85740.4/m

kano

legendary

Activity: 4592

Merit: 1851

Linux since 1997 RedHat 4

As mentioned on the gekko page,
https://kano.is/gekko.php#rang
the '[ChipNRanges]' data will give you a good idea what each chip is doing.

e.g. for my one before (data abbreviated to save space)

Code:

[FreqLocked] => true
   [Chip0Ranges] => 882/998/1010/1035/1021/971/5917/94.54%
   [Chip0FreqReply] => 725.000000
   [Chip1Ranges] => 141/153/170/155/161/148/928/21.50%
   [Chip1FreqReply] => 500.000000
   [Chip2Ranges] => 1011/1136/1136/1082/1115/1098/6578/105.10%
   [Chip2FreqReply] => 725.000000
   [Chip3Ranges] => 834/1030/1003/1049/927/996/5839/93.29%
   [Chip3FreqReply] => 725.000000
   [Chip4Ranges] => 1022/1127/1162/1120/1164/1083/6678/106.70%
   [Chip4FreqReply] => 725.000000
   [Chip5Ranges] => 891/984/1071/1046/1028/1051/6071/97.00%
   [Chip5FreqReply] => 725.000000

Edit:
Oh I should show Dups and Nonces since that also shows if CPU/USB can't handle it:

Code:

[Elapsed] => 31047
   [Nonces] => 1560325
   [Dups] => 7383
   [DupsReset] => 7383

   [Chip0Nonces] => 246973
   [Chip0Dups] => 8
   [Chip1Nonces] => 42874
   [Chip1Dups] => 267
   [Chip2Nonces] => 272900
   [Chip2Dups] => 57
   [Chip3Nonces] => 242216
   [Chip3Dups] => 11
   [Chip4Nonces] => 272852
   [Chip4Dups] => 6113
   [Chip5Nonces] => 243088
   [Chip5Dups] => 927

The first 3 are the most relevant numbers.

Chip4Dups might be suggesting that chip 4 can't handle 725MHz as well as the other 4 good ones, or is near it's limit - though I'm not sure

n0nce

hero member

Activity: 882

Merit: 5834

not your keys, not your coins!

Quote from: cygan on January 12, 2023, 01:16:07 PM

@n0nce
so you mean i should turn the blue screw again around 12 o'clock or reduce the mhz rate?🤔

Maybe first turn back the screw (I guess try something between 12 and 1) and try 690MHz. If that doesn't hold stable, try 680MHz, going down in 10MHz steps. In my experience, going above 650MHz was effortless at stock voltage.

cygan

legendary

Activity: 3304

Merit: 8633

icarus-cards.eu

@n0nce
so you mean i should turn the blue screw again around 12 o'clock or reduce the mhz rate?🤔

n0nce

hero member

Activity: 882

Merit: 5834

not your keys, not your coins!

Quote from: cygan on January 12, 2023, 01:11:16 PM

Quote from: kano on January 11, 2023, 09:07:18 PM

Quote from: n0nce on January 11, 2023, 01:15:47 PM

I'm running 650MHz now, since after a few hours it had dropped to 690MHz and I don't feel like pushing it to its max right now.

I initially got up to 2.497TH/s after more than an hour, hoping it would reach 2.5, but by the next day it was down to 2.475Th/s
I just let it go at 725/500 since, well, it didn't die, just the HW % kept rising.

i have now replaced the two fans with the nactua nf-a8 pwm and started the two r909 pod miners at 690mhz - before that i turned the blue screw to about 1 o'clock
now the two r909 run just over 2.5 hours and this is how the performance looks:

Code:

4: GSF 10070009: BM1397:06+ 680.00MHz T:680 P:646 (3:2) | 90.4% WU: 89% | 2.222T / 2.435Th/s WU:34028.6/m
5: GSF 10070003: BM1397:06+ 650.00MHz T:650 P:643 (3:2) | 83.7% WU: 84% | 2.141T / 2.196Th/s WU:30681.2/m

somehow the 2.5th/s does not want to fall... Grin

Weird; they're not running 690, though. Maybe decrease the voltage a little. Could be that they get too hot, return faulty computations and cgminer tells them to clock down. If they ran at stable 690.00MHz, they should right about reach 2.5TH/s.
Of course, there's some silicon lottery involved, but give that a shot. In my experience with Compac F, chips clocking down was usually a sign of bad cooling / too high voltage.

Can you show the line with A, R and HW numbers?

cygan

legendary

Activity: 3304

Merit: 8633

icarus-cards.eu

Quote from: kano on January 11, 2023, 09:07:18 PM

Quote from: n0nce on January 11, 2023, 01:15:47 PM

I'm running 650MHz now, since after a few hours it had dropped to 690MHz and I don't feel like pushing it to its max right now.

I initially got up to 2.497TH/s after more than an hour, hoping it would reach 2.5, but by the next day it was down to 2.475Th/s
I just let it go at 725/500 since, well, it didn't die, just the HW % kept rising.

i have now replaced the two fans with the nactua nf-a8 pwm and started the two r909 pod miners at 690mhz - before that i turned the blue screw to about 1 o'clock
now the two r909 run just over 2.5 hours and this is how the performance looks:

Code:

4: GSF 10070009: BM1397:06+ 680.00MHz T:680 P:646 (3:2) | 90.4% WU: 89% | 2.222T / 2.435Th/s WU:34028.6/m
5: GSF 10070003: BM1397:06+ 650.00MHz T:650 P:643 (3:2) | 83.7% WU: 84% | 2.141T / 2.196Th/s WU:30681.2/m

somehow the 2.5th/s does not want to fall... Grin

n0nce

hero member

Activity: 882

Merit: 5834

not your keys, not your coins!

Quote from: kano on January 11, 2023, 09:07:18 PM

Quote from: n0nce on January 11, 2023, 01:15:47 PM

I'm running 650MHz now, since after a few hours it had dropped to 690MHz and I don't feel like pushing it to its max right now.

I initially got up to 2.497TH/s after more than an hour, hoping it would reach 2.5, but by the next day it was down to 2.475Th/s

While also clocking itself down a bit? Or did you lock the frequencies?
I haven't done any such fancy stuff and it went down to 690 by itself, as mentioned before. So the sweet spot is probably between 650 and 700MHz depending on silicon lottery.
But I do think this behavior (automatic down clocking to a stable frequency) is a really great feature of cgminer. Much better than overly pushing the chip and just getting invalid blocks out of it.

Quote from: kano on January 11, 2023, 09:07:18 PM

I just let it go at 725/500 since, well, it didn't die, just the HW % kept rising.

For what it's worth, my HW% was always in check so far. It still downclocked. Oh well; again: diminishing returns, anyway.

kano

legendary

Activity: 4592

Merit: 1851

Linux since 1997 RedHat 4

Quote from: n0nce on January 11, 2023, 01:15:47 PM

I'm running 650MHz now, since after a few hours it had dropped to 690MHz and I don't feel like pushing it to its max right now.

I initially got up to 2.497TH/s after more than an hour, hoping it would reach 2.5, but by the next day it was down to 2.475Th/s
I just let it go at 725/500 since, well, it didn't die, just the HW % kept rising.

n0nce

hero member

Activity: 882

Merit: 5834

not your keys, not your coins!

Quote from: kano on January 11, 2023, 02:21:09 AM

Well that A says 1.5 hours so definitely higher hash rate than me

Quote from: kano on January 11, 2023, 02:21:09 AM

I wonder if 725MHz is just too high for them (as per my >20% HW) and 700 is the limit?

That's definitely possible. I'm running 650MHz now, since after a few hours it had dropped to 690MHz and I don't feel like pushing it to its max right now. Yet still I am getting 2.487Th/s on average. Still super close to that 2.5 mark, or 3.8% lower than my previous result, while reducing clock by 50MHz, so a 7.2% reduction in clock speed.
This indicates to me that above 650, we get into diminishing returns.

Quote from: kano on January 11, 2023, 02:21:09 AM

Yes you can kill it - no it's not bullet proof.
It is unlikely to kill it, but as you push it harder that means you are pushing the chips harder also.

I guess on its basic level, the transistors are going to be 'pushed' to switch faster; but in the realms of CPU overclocking I've never heard of a high frequency killing chips / diminishing their lifespan. It's usually the required higher voltage that does the most harm, to the best of my knowledge at least.

Quote from: kano on January 11, 2023, 02:21:09 AM

If you overload the power it will just switch off, and then the 'fuse' will need a power cycle and letting it cool will fix that.
But the chips themselves, I've no idea under what circumstances they might be at risk.
Maybe sidehack knows?

Feedback by sidehack would be amazing!

Topic: GekkoScience has a new pod miner, just in time for Christmas - page 10. (Read 6937 times)