Topic: GekkoScience has a new pod miner, just in time for Christmas - page 7. (Read 6703 times)
Hey everyone - so I see lots of chatter about thermal pads here. I routinely re-paste all of my asic miners every 3 months or so because they run 24/7 and my cat's dander is like a gnarly dust invasion for my miners because of all of the fans in my apartment blowing it directly at them lol. Has anyone removed the top heatsinks from the R909 and can they confirm wether it has pads or paste on the chips?
so i will run my 2 gekko usb hubs (with 3 compac f sticks each) together with the 2 new r909 pod miners using a rpi4. if everything runs well and is configured well i would get ~3.6th/s together 
Did it work out to be this hashrate?I would imagine stable at the right settings and the right fan placements for the one on the usb hubs.
After 2~ months later you should have an idea if this arrangement works.
Was eyeing a gekkoscience pod for a while and I might pull the trigger on one in this setup if the time is right.
How do they compare to buying a mars solo miner from bitcoin merch and plugging in several of the compaq F1s into a hub?
Would the price of the 909 be relativity the same for the amount of hashrate produced?
https://github.com/kanoi/cgminer/blob/master/API-README#L70
So {"command":"ascset","parameter":"1,chip,0:0"}
However, you don't need to use JSON, so as per https://kano.is/gekko.php
java API "ascset|1,chip,0:0" MinerIP
So {"command":"ascset","parameter":"1,chip,0:0"}
However, you don't need to use JSON, so as per https://kano.is/gekko.php
java API "ascset|1,chip,0:0" MinerIP
I will give it a try, if not i will try to call using shell the JAVA Api, just wanted to avoid os calls. THANK YOU!
https://github.com/kanoi/cgminer/blob/master/API-README#L70
So {"command":"ascset","parameter":"1,chip,0:0"}
However, you don't need to use JSON, so as per https://kano.is/gekko.php
java API "ascset|1,chip,0:0" MinerIP
So {"command":"ascset","parameter":"1,chip,0:0"}
However, you don't need to use JSON, so as per https://kano.is/gekko.php
java API "ascset|1,chip,0:0" MinerIP
Two things:
1) The CompacF mines at a minimum of 16 diff - I've coded it to not go lower.
The R909 miners at a minimum of 64 diff - I've coded to not go lower.
These values are already below what is needed.
People should expect pools to be pissed off at them if they tried to DDoS the pool with lower values.
2) All about worker difficulty: https://kano.is/index.php?k=workdiff
1) The CompacF mines at a minimum of 16 diff - I've coded it to not go lower.
The R909 miners at a minimum of 64 diff - I've coded to not go lower.
These values are already below what is needed.
People should expect pools to be pissed off at them if they tried to DDoS the pool with lower values.
2) All about worker difficulty: https://kano.is/index.php?k=workdiff
Hi @Kano, I tired the api and made it work half way, I changed the number on ASIC ID from 0 to 1 to modify the 2nd unit and it responds "ASC 0 set OK", and it set the frequency to all chips on Asia 0 vs. 1, and also using chip lets say 0,chip,0:0 it set all to 0 on ASC 0 vs. only chip 0. then if I change to 1,chip,0:0 it sets same all to 0 on ASC 0.
this is how I am sending the payload: {"command": "ascset", "parameter": "[{1,chip,0:0}]"} (then I encode it) is this OK?
initially I did this but sends error, and landed making it partially work with the previous one {"command": "ascset", "parameter": "[{"ID":"1","option":"chip","value":"0:0"}]"}
or for frequency to all {"command": "ascset", "parameter": "[{"ID":"1","option":"freq","value":"0"}]"}
hope you can give me some advise.
thermal conductivity is impacted due to height of thermal path so, don’t exceed 1mm so still stays in a good small size and then you dont need crazy high conductivity pads 20+ and a 13+ will do a great job, 0.5 can be very thin and can get easily damaged so a .75-1mm to my experience is a good choice and still will effectively conduct heat to the heatsink.
Thanks, I think I will order a set of these Iceberg pads: https://www.iceberg-thermal.com/product/consumer/thermal-pad/driftice/. 80x40 should be a near to perfect fit, just need to cut the length a little. Hope that I won't mess up with the upper heatsinks' thermal pad when re-screwing the bottom heatsinks... Actually the unit is running very well at the moment, but I don't think I can leave it now without these pads attached, now that I know of the air gap.
It's like @n0nce has said, this neat device makes you want to tinker with it.
@sidehack: Would be great if you could share details on the thermal pads used for the upper heatsinks.
The upper are 0.5mm 20w/k. the ones you selected are ok for the back plate, these can be an top plate option as they are 20w/mk and they have different sizes so you can order 0.5 just in case and if you see ok to have both the same type then a 1mm (the pads can be cut with no effort with regular pair of scissors, so 1x0.5 will be enough for 1 unit top plate the two heatsinks, and also will work the same to backplate) :
https://www.amazon.com/Kritical-Thermal-Pads-Conductivity-othermicroelectronic/dp/B0B1ZF7MZ7/ref=sr_1_18?crid=2MYFZWYK4O5F2&keywords=thermal%2Bpath%2B20w%2Fmk%2B0.5&qid=1674689278&sprefix=thermal%2Bpath%2B20w%2Fmk%2B0.5%2Caps%2C152&sr=8-18&th=1
thermal conductivity is impacted due to height of thermal path so, don’t exceed 1mm so still stays in a good small size and then you dont need crazy high conductivity pads 20+ and a 13+ will do a great job, 0.5 can be very thin and can get easily damaged so a .75-1mm to my experience is a good choice and still will effectively conduct heat to the heatsink.
Thanks, I think I will order a set of these Iceberg pads: https://www.iceberg-thermal.com/product/consumer/thermal-pad/driftice/. 80x40 should be a near to perfect fit, just need to cut the length a little. Hope that I won't mess up with the upper heatsinks' thermal pad when re-screwing the bottom heatsinks... Actually the unit is running very well at the moment, but I don't think I can leave it now without these pads attached, now that I know of the air gap.
It's like @n0nce has said, this neat device makes you want to tinker with it.
@sidehack: Would be great if you could share details on the thermal pads used for the upper heatsinks.
Definitely check the heatsinks for tight screws. Reporting 5 chips is problematic; was it doing that from the start, or after running a bit?
Right from the go.
And its 2 r909's on a 750W psu so I know its getting enough powa!
I'll dig into this tomorrow a bit more and check the screws.
UPDATE:
This morning woke up and Zombie mode for the one that was showing on 5+ The other chugging away averaging 1.7+TH
Reboot doesn't seem to help. I'll reach out to the seller and hope they have a spare somewhere since they are sold out.
Definitely check the heatsinks for tight screws. Reporting 5 chips is problematic; was it doing that from the start, or after running a bit?
Well 2 of the units came in tonight and I am not having much luck with one of em..
1 seems to be spot on from the factory.
The other I am not sure why but it doesn't seem to be coming to life or getting anywhere near the hashrate it should.
I've swapped USB cables, tried a different PSU, tried only 1 R909 but no luck
Anyone have suggestions?
What I do notice is one shows up with 6+ and the other with 5+....
The one with 5+ is not performing in spec.
1 seems to be spot on from the factory.
The other I am not sure why but it doesn't seem to be coming to life or getting anywhere near the hashrate it should.
I've swapped USB cables, tried a different PSU, tried only 1 R909 but no luck
Anyone have suggestions?
Code:
cgminer version 4.12.1 - Started: [2023-01-24 19:44:49.046]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(5s):1.995T (1m):1.802T (5m):653.5G (15m):244.7G (avg):2.037Th/s
A:55629 R:0 HW:1280 WU:28262.8/m
Connected to solo.ckpool.org diff 519 with stratum as user
Block: a7b97cfa... Diff:37.6T Started: [19:45:21.343] Best share: 282K
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[U]SB management [P]ool management [S]ettings [D]isplay options [Q]uit
0: GSF 10070005: BM1397:06+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:439 (4:2) | 100% WU:^97% | 1.432T / 1.753Th/s WU:24490.1/m
1: GSF 10070040: BM1397:05+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:109 (5:3) | 21.6% WU: 18% | 367.3G / 270.1Gh/s WU: 3772.7/m
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(5s):1.995T (1m):1.802T (5m):653.5G (15m):244.7G (avg):2.037Th/s
A:55629 R:0 HW:1280 WU:28262.8/m
Connected to solo.ckpool.org diff 519 with stratum as user
Block: a7b97cfa... Diff:37.6T Started: [19:45:21.343] Best share: 282K
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[U]SB management [P]ool management [S]ettings [D]isplay options [Q]uit
0: GSF 10070005: BM1397:06+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:439 (4:2) | 100% WU:^97% | 1.432T / 1.753Th/s WU:24490.1/m
1: GSF 10070040: BM1397:05+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:109 (5:3) | 21.6% WU: 18% | 367.3G / 270.1Gh/s WU: 3772.7/m
What I do notice is one shows up with 6+ and the other with 5+....
The one with 5+ is not performing in spec.
use Kano new miner.php and get into the gekkochip page check if all 6 are reporting, also at stats if your chips are failing to get set in frequency few causes:
Power not enough - you need a 100w as minimum to run these ones, or they are getting very hot let them cool, and try to push with no to little force the top heatsink and see if move, if it does then the heatsink bolts might got losen with shipping
Heatsink is about 45x70mm
Yes there's no interface between the bottom heatsink and the board. I'm gonna be doing some testing this week on a few potential changes to improve cooling, and underside paste is one of them.
Yes there's no interface between the bottom heatsink and the board. I'm gonna be doing some testing this week on a few potential changes to improve cooling, and underside paste is one of them.
Thanks for the info, then I will probably order some thermal pad and do some tests here as well. Actually when touching the bottom heatsink, this really feels just warm, so the cooling should definitely improve with proper heat conduct. (which was in fact already pointed out/confirmed by @gergar)
thermal conductivity is impacted due to height of thermal path so, don’t exceed 1mm so still stays in a good small size and then you dont need crazy high conductivity pads 20+ and a 13+ will do a great job, 0.5 can be very thin and can get easily damaged so a .75-1mm to my experience is a good choice and still will effectively conduct heat to the heatsink.
Well 2 of the units came in tonight and I am not having much luck with one of em..
1 seems to be spot on from the factory.
The other I am not sure why but it doesn't seem to be coming to life or getting anywhere near the hashrate it should.
I've swapped USB cables, tried a different PSU, tried only 1 R909 but no luck
Anyone have suggestions?
What I do notice is one shows up with 6+ and the other with 5+....
The one with 5+ is not performing in spec.
1 seems to be spot on from the factory.
The other I am not sure why but it doesn't seem to be coming to life or getting anywhere near the hashrate it should.
I've swapped USB cables, tried a different PSU, tried only 1 R909 but no luck
Anyone have suggestions?
Code:
cgminer version 4.12.1 - Started: [2023-01-24 19:44:49.046]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(5s):1.995T (1m):1.802T (5m):653.5G (15m):244.7G (avg):2.037Th/s
A:55629 R:0 HW:1280 WU:28262.8/m
Connected to solo.ckpool.org diff 519 with stratum as user
Block: a7b97cfa... Diff:37.6T Started: [19:45:21.343] Best share: 282K
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[U]SB management [P]ool management [S]ettings [D]isplay options [Q]uit
0: GSF 10070005: BM1397:06+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:439 (4:2) | 100% WU:^97% | 1.432T / 1.753Th/s WU:24490.1/m
1: GSF 10070040: BM1397:05+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:109 (5:3) | 21.6% WU: 18% | 367.3G / 270.1Gh/s WU: 3772.7/m
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(5s):1.995T (1m):1.802T (5m):653.5G (15m):244.7G (avg):2.037Th/s
A:55629 R:0 HW:1280 WU:28262.8/m
Connected to solo.ckpool.org diff 519 with stratum as user
Block: a7b97cfa... Diff:37.6T Started: [19:45:21.343] Best share: 282K
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[U]SB management [P]ool management [S]ettings [D]isplay options [Q]uit
0: GSF 10070005: BM1397:06+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:439 (4:2) | 100% WU:^97% | 1.432T / 1.753Th/s WU:24490.1/m
1: GSF 10070040: BM1397:05+ 450.00MHz T:450 P:109 (5:3) | 21.6% WU: 18% | 367.3G / 270.1Gh/s WU: 3772.7/m
What I do notice is one shows up with 6+ and the other with 5+....
The one with 5+ is not performing in spec.
Heatsink is about 45x70mm
Yes there's no interface between the bottom heatsink and the board. I'm gonna be doing some testing this week on a few potential changes to improve cooling, and underside paste is one of them.
Paste is a good idea, since there is no conductivity issue on the back of the PCB. Is it possible to remove the back side heatsinks without touching the ones on the front? I'm a little hesitant touching those, since I wouldn't know where to get replacement thermal pads with 20W/mK of thermal conductivity and electrical isolation. In the name of right to repair and keeping these things running for as long as possible, I'd really appreciate if you could release more information on the ones you put into the machines.Yes there's no interface between the bottom heatsink and the board. I'm gonna be doing some testing this week on a few potential changes to improve cooling, and underside paste is one of them.
I regard them as consumables, just like the fan, which you did a great job of documenting.
For what it's worth, I plan to design a 3D-printable shroud for the back of the unit that lets you route the cables out the top and funnels the air further back where a secondary fan will be placed. Interested to see if it makes any difference.
I love how tinker-friendly this device is, not gonna lie!
Heatsink is about 45x70mm
Yes there's no interface between the bottom heatsink and the board. I'm gonna be doing some testing this week on a few potential changes to improve cooling, and underside paste is one of them.
Yes there's no interface between the bottom heatsink and the board. I'm gonna be doing some testing this week on a few potential changes to improve cooling, and underside paste is one of them.
Thanks for the info, then I will probably order some thermal pad and do some tests here as well. Actually when touching the bottom heatsink, this really feels just warm, so the cooling should definitely improve with proper heat conduct. (which was in fact already pointed out/confirmed by @gergar)
Heatsink is about 45x70mm
Yes there's no interface between the bottom heatsink and the board. I'm gonna be doing some testing this week on a few potential changes to improve cooling, and underside paste is one of them.
Yes there's no interface between the bottom heatsink and the board. I'm gonna be doing some testing this week on a few potential changes to improve cooling, and underside paste is one of them.
@sidehack is there really no thermal pad between the "backplate" heatsink and the PCB board (as mentioned here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.61639015)? Was that by intention? If not, what would be the recommended choice from your side in regards to thickness and thermal conductivity of such thermal pad? And would that give some significant cooling benefit at all?
If that makes sense, I am tempted to do that. Unfortunately, I didn't check the heatsink dimensions back then when I replaced the fan. Can you please share these, so that I don't need to unscrew my unit again.
If that makes sense, I am tempted to do that. Unfortunately, I didn't check the heatsink dimensions back then when I replaced the fan. Can you please share these, so that I don't need to unscrew my unit again.
Am I the only one struggling to take these things apart? Any suggestions would be appreciated! I managed to unscrew everything except the screws for PCB standoff and I still can't slide or pop the cover off. Do I also need to unscrew the screws holding the PCB standoff? These screws seem somewhat tighter and didn't want to risk stripping it.
You would have to flex the case outward at the bottom a little bit to get around the board. If you unscrew the PCB standoffs from the base and slide the whole innards out the front, the case would come free without issue. There's a planned board revision for the next batch that addresses heatsink screws and also ease of [dis]assembly.
Two things:
1) The CompacF mines at a minimum of 16 diff - I've coded it to not go lower.
The R909 miners at a minimum of 64 diff - I've coded to not go lower.
These values are already below what is needed.
People should expect pools to be pissed off at them if they tried to DDoS the pool with lower values.
2) All about worker difficulty: https://kano.is/index.php?k=workdiff
1) The CompacF mines at a minimum of 16 diff - I've coded it to not go lower.
The R909 miners at a minimum of 64 diff - I've coded to not go lower.
These values are already below what is needed.
People should expect pools to be pissed off at them if they tried to DDoS the pool with lower values.
2) All about worker difficulty: https://kano.is/index.php?k=workdiff
Am I the only one struggling to take these things apart? Any suggestions would be appreciated! I managed to unscrew everything except the screws for PCB standoff and I still can't slide or pop the cover off. Do I also need to unscrew the screws holding the PCB standoff? These screws seem somewhat tighter and didn't want to risk stripping it.
What I think can help is make the fan to pull / extract the air use the original as it is stronger than Noctua (Arctic label pointing the PCB will make it to extract --- I checked their specs as I have Noctuas too) and add thermal pads to the bottom heatsinks 1mm @ 13+w/k will have the highest impact in it, those few changes will give you [email protected] stable on a ~120W on stock voltage.
Hm, why do you think the stock fan is stronger? When comparing the specs between the Noctua NF-A8 and the Arctic F8, I see the Noctua better in every discipline. Slightly higher RPM, better airflow and MUCH better static pressure. The latter of which makes it an even better candidate for blowing air into the unit (the original direction).My bad i checked vs the Noctua R8 (the ones i have with me), I didn’t saw you were using the A8, yes that is better to push but still it is weak, it will do better extracting thought but pushing these fans are quite weak.
having it to push and the original and/or other noctua pull will help, but i not sure how effective will be as it wont be in a close setup “tunnel” but i assume it will help to keep them cooler and accelerate the air causing it to cool a bit more.
Jump to: