Topic: New R-Box Upgrade Kit (Read 4808 times)
So, Novak and I did some discussing and it makes more sense to prioritize a pod miner over NRB boards. That said, unless we can get more chips (either in this generation or the next), neither are going to happen. I'm gonna close this thread since it's really no longer relevant.
I bought 2 R-Boxes from this guy to serve as permanent lottery players.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.11799713
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.11799713
if gridseed 5 chips are getting a thumbs up here is an ebay link for them
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Gridseed-GC3355-ASIC-Scrypt-SHA-256-USB-Dual-BTC-LTC-Miner-GUARANTEED-/181766271902?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Gridseed-GC3355-ASIC-Scrypt-SHA-256-USB-Dual-BTC-LTC-Miner-GUARANTEED-/181766271902?
I wouldn't mind fetching a couple for the museum shelf anyways.
I think the 4-chip pod is a more logical target. It should be possible to make a single board which fits both the Gridseed and U3 heatsinks; I'll have to get ahold of an RBox pod to see what it'd require but I know I can hit the other two for sure.
I know someone selling R-boxes for about 20-25$. I could have one shipped to you as a last resort. I think someone above said they'd send one as a donation though.
I think the 4-chip pod is a more logical target. It should be possible to make a single board which fits both the Gridseed and U3 heatsinks; I'll have to get ahold of an RBox pod to see what it'd require but I know I can hit the other two for sure.
I know someone selling R-boxes for about 20-25$. I could have one shipped to you as a last resort. I think someone above said they'd send one as a donation though.
There are probably a lot more of the pods around than the GBlades - a board that would fit both would strike me as a very good idea, even though I have no pods.
I think the 4-chip pod is a more logical target. It should be possible to make a single board which fits both the Gridseed and U3 heatsinks; I'll have to get ahold of an RBox pod to see what it'd require but I know I can hit the other two for sure.
I have to applaud your designs. If you could make one to fit in greedseed and U3 heatsinks that would be a very very nice product. The good thing is there are A LOT more gridseed pods then new rboxs. So much this cheaper price for equipment to put it in. Although I do see why some want R-box it has merit as the amount of chips.
I personally would enjoy playing with a 4 chip modded gridseed pod. If you go though with this design I think it's a great idea. Either way you choose though best of luck. I have been playing with the 1 chip usb model still and has been fun, and still working good.
like you I am still working with the 1 chip sticks they are very nice gear. I get the felling they will run very well for a long time.
I think the 4-chip pod is a more logical target. It should be possible to make a single board which fits both the Gridseed and U3 heatsinks; I'll have to get ahold of an RBox pod to see what it'd require but I know I can hit the other two for sure.
CanaryInTheMines used to sell them on Eligius iirc, maybe they might have one or 2 (dead/alive) to spare?
if not, I will look out for one or 10 for you, if I get my hands on one I'll PM you.
I think the 4-chip pod is a more logical target. It should be possible to make a single board which fits both the Gridseed and U3 heatsinks; I'll have to get ahold of an RBox pod to see what it'd require but I know I can hit the other two for sure.
I have to applaud your designs. If you could make one to fit in greedseed and U3 heatsinks that would be a very very nice product. The good thing is there are A LOT more gridseed pods then new rboxs. So much this cheaper price for equipment to put it in. Although I do see why some want R-box it has merit as the amount of chips.
I personally would enjoy playing with a 4 chip modded gridseed pod. If you go though with this design I think it's a great idea. Either way you choose though best of luck. I have been playing with the 1 chip usb model still and has been fun, and still working good.
I think the 4-chip pod is a more logical target. It should be possible to make a single board which fits both the Gridseed and U3 heatsinks; I'll have to get ahold of an RBox pod to see what it'd require but I know I can hit the other two for sure.
I guess I was thinking of another piece of gear when it came to chip size.
J4bberwock's thread:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/gridseed-g-blade-overclocking-7mhs-improvements-and-repair-576784
The 2 disassembled PCB
J4bberwock's thread:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/gridseed-g-blade-overclocking-7mhs-improvements-and-repair-576784
The 2 disassembled PCB
I'm talking Antminer S5 chips though (1384) not S3 chips (1382) - the 1384 is the SAME SIZE (8mm square) as the GC3355 chips on the GBlade, and fit into LESS board space since they don't have leads sticking out from the chips like the GC3355 does. I have never bothered looking at the specs on the 1382 chip as it's outdated technology now and no longer available anyway.
Power isn't an issue on an 20 string, see the BM1384 specs at .6 volts (string). 18 string is closer to the .65 volt spec than the .7 but would fall somewhere inbetween.
10-12 chips would NOT be doable as a string, though they could be made to work with a VRM setup - optimally a software-configurable one like the SP20E has for better flexability and longevity.
Power isn't an issue on an 20 string, see the BM1384 specs at .6 volts (string). 18 string is closer to the .65 volt spec than the .7 but would fall somewhere inbetween.
10-12 chips would NOT be doable as a string, though they could be made to work with a VRM setup - optimally a software-configurable one like the SP20E has for better flexability and longevity.
I had 17 of these at one time the heatsinks can not handle 20 antminer s-3 chips. more of a size issue the chips won't fit.
I liked this gear. I used about 85 watts per unit with atx power. they did not overheat using 85 watts.
So they could do more like 10-12 chips since these s-3 chips can pull 7 or 8 watts on the top end. My sticks are doing freq 250 and pull around 5.5 watts
What I'd like to see would be a replacement for the Gridseed Gblades - the original "5.2 Mh/s Scrypt" per pair ones not the blacks.
I'm SURE, given the junk power regulation stuff on those, that there are a bunch around that have died or died on one "blade" but not the other.
HS on those should easily handle up to 20 chips, depending on the voltage they're run at.
Optimally voltage adjustable, but a 16-to-20 chip string should run pretty efficiently.
I figure (based actual power usage of my S5s) that the board (with a gold PS) would use about 40% more power at the wall than the chip specs, and I get the following:
16 string would be .75 volts - 286 GH/s at 155 watts (might be marginal these heatsinks but should be OK with a good 90mm fan)
18 string would be .666 volts - 200 GH/s at 80 watts (interpolating here, but this would be viable with the "specified" GBlade 12V/10A power supply per side)
20 string would be .6 volts - 165 GH/s at 58 watts (pretty close to a direct match on power consumption with the original GBlade, viable with a barrel power connector)
The 16 string would be kind of like a "quarter S5", a hair more efficient but not a bit diff.
The 18 string IMO would be the best tradeoff of performance vs. power usage and should run plenty cool on these HS with the original fan.
The 20 string would be a VERY nice high-efficiency replacement.
Board should be 4" x 8" to fit the original HS "pad", but could be longer on the 8" side for low-power components that don't really need the HS (like the UART and possibly a microcontroller). The pad would make it trivial to put the BM1384s on one side of it and make good heat transfer to the HS itself, put the other "taller" stuff on the other side (you have about 3/4 inch of space to work with if you design the boards to "interleave" or put tall components on a part of the board that sticks out past the HS).
If you could get any of these configurations built and sold for under $120 or so they'd be a winner!
I'm SURE, given the junk power regulation stuff on those, that there are a bunch around that have died or died on one "blade" but not the other.
HS on those should easily handle up to 20 chips, depending on the voltage they're run at.
Optimally voltage adjustable, but a 16-to-20 chip string should run pretty efficiently.
I figure (based actual power usage of my S5s) that the board (with a gold PS) would use about 40% more power at the wall than the chip specs, and I get the following:
16 string would be .75 volts - 286 GH/s at 155 watts (might be marginal these heatsinks but should be OK with a good 90mm fan)
18 string would be .666 volts - 200 GH/s at 80 watts (interpolating here, but this would be viable with the "specified" GBlade 12V/10A power supply per side)
20 string would be .6 volts - 165 GH/s at 58 watts (pretty close to a direct match on power consumption with the original GBlade, viable with a barrel power connector)
The 16 string would be kind of like a "quarter S5", a hair more efficient but not a bit diff.
The 18 string IMO would be the best tradeoff of performance vs. power usage and should run plenty cool on these HS with the original fan.
The 20 string would be a VERY nice high-efficiency replacement.
Board should be 4" x 8" to fit the original HS "pad", but could be longer on the 8" side for low-power components that don't really need the HS (like the UART and possibly a microcontroller). The pad would make it trivial to put the BM1384s on one side of it and make good heat transfer to the HS itself, put the other "taller" stuff on the other side (you have about 3/4 inch of space to work with if you design the boards to "interleave" or put tall components on a part of the board that sticks out past the HS).
If you could get any of these configurations built and sold for under $120 or so they'd be a winner!
What I'd like to see would be a replacement for the Gridseed Gblades - the original "5.2 Mh/s Scrypt" per pair ones not the blacks.
I'm SURE, given the junk power regulation stuff on those, that there are a bunch around that have died or died on one "blade" but not the other.
HS on those should easily handle up to 20 chips, depending on the voltage they're run at.
Optimally voltage adjustable, but a 16-to-20 chip string should run pretty efficiently.
I figure (based actual power usage of my S5s) that the board (with a gold PS) would use about 40% more power at the wall than the chip specs, and I get the following:
16 string would be .75 volts - 286 GH/s at 155 watts (might be marginal these heatsinks but should be OK with a good 90mm fan)
18 string would be .666 volts - 200 GH/s at 80 watts (interpolating here, but this would be viable with the "specified" GBlade 12V/10A power supply per side)
20 string would be .6 volts - 165 GH/s at 58 watts (pretty close to a direct match on power consumption with the original GBlade, viable with a barrel power connector)
The 16 string would be kind of like a "quarter S5", a hair more efficient but not a bit diff.
The 18 string IMO would be the best tradeoff of performance vs. power usage and should run plenty cool on these HS with the original fan.
The 20 string would be a VERY nice high-efficiency replacement.
Board should be 4" x 8" to fit the original HS "pad", but could be longer on the 8" side for low-power components that don't really need the HS (like the UART and possibly a microcontroller). The pad would make it trivial to put the BM1384s on one side of it and make good heat transfer to the HS itself, put the other "taller" stuff on the other side (you have about 3/4 inch of space to work with if you design the boards to "interleave" or put tall components on a part of the board that sticks out past the HS).
If you could get any of these configurations built and sold for under $120 or so they'd be a winner!
I'm SURE, given the junk power regulation stuff on those, that there are a bunch around that have died or died on one "blade" but not the other.
HS on those should easily handle up to 20 chips, depending on the voltage they're run at.
Optimally voltage adjustable, but a 16-to-20 chip string should run pretty efficiently.
I figure (based actual power usage of my S5s) that the board (with a gold PS) would use about 40% more power at the wall than the chip specs, and I get the following:
16 string would be .75 volts - 286 GH/s at 155 watts (might be marginal these heatsinks but should be OK with a good 90mm fan)
18 string would be .666 volts - 200 GH/s at 80 watts (interpolating here, but this would be viable with the "specified" GBlade 12V/10A power supply per side)
20 string would be .6 volts - 165 GH/s at 58 watts (pretty close to a direct match on power consumption with the original GBlade, viable with a barrel power connector)
The 16 string would be kind of like a "quarter S5", a hair more efficient but not a bit diff.
The 18 string IMO would be the best tradeoff of performance vs. power usage and should run plenty cool on these HS with the original fan.
The 20 string would be a VERY nice high-efficiency replacement.
Board should be 4" x 8" to fit the original HS "pad", but could be longer on the 8" side for low-power components that don't really need the HS (like the UART and possibly a microcontroller). The pad would make it trivial to put the BM1384s on one side of it and make good heat transfer to the HS itself, put the other "taller" stuff on the other side (you have about 3/4 inch of space to work with if you design the boards to "interleave" or put tall components on a part of the board that sticks out past the HS).
If you could get any of these configurations built and sold for under $120 or so they'd be a winner!
That, coupled with Jabberwock's apparent intention to make an SFARTS pod, kinda leans me toward the NRB board. Though a pod miner would still be cheaper and easier to prototype and manufacture, making it also quite attractive. Nuts.
lol whatever the decision, i have 5 gridseed pods collecting dust as well... i am game either way, just thought i would point out that rockminer used the same boards and heatsinks for quite a few different miners.
That, coupled with Jabberwock's apparent intention to make an SFARTS pod, kinda leans me toward the NRB board. Though a pod miner would still be cheaper and easier to prototype and manufacture, making it also quite attractive. Nuts.
I for one have the big r-box, as well as the R-K miner (think it was essentially 4 110gh/s big r-boxes thrown on a tubular heatsink) essentially that would allow me to upgrade 5 cards, and pretty much triple my entire hash power for less than a new s5 shipped from bitmain... will have to look for sure but i do believe the heatsink and hash boards in the rk-miner and the big rbox are the same.
* after comparing the 2 it looks like the the r-k miners added a controller (possibly a teensy) on each hashboard, but all in all same heatsink just 4x as many on the r-k miner and quite possibly the rockminer r-4
big rbox
r-k miner
r-4
so 3 miners utilizing the same form factor and heatsink :-)
* after comparing the 2 it looks like the the r-k miners added a controller (possibly a teensy) on each hashboard, but all in all same heatsink just 4x as many on the r-k miner and quite possibly the rockminer r-4
big rbox
r-k miner
r-4
so 3 miners utilizing the same form factor and heatsink :-)
Just for you Phil, I'm gonna start packaging these things in Pokeballs.
pokeballs look good
Just for you Phil, I'm gonna start packaging these things in Pokeballs.
Jump to: