Swedish ASIC miner company kncminer.com - page 1248.

Phoenix1969

legendary

Activity: 938

Merit: 1000

LIR DEV

Quote from: btcusr on October 22, 2013, 03:39:49 AM

Just wanted to check whether everyone received your miners (100 BTC/Jupiter) so far, able to earn at least 75 BTC/Jupiter? Cool

Because next week, November miners due for release which are only 25 BTC/Jupiter.

So, what's the moral of the story? Huh

The moral is.... your math sucks. Btc is 200 now, so takes 35 BTC to make 7 grand, not 75...lol

FiatKiller

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

Quote from: xyzzy099 on October 22, 2013, 10:30:41 AM

Quote from: FiatKiller on October 22, 2013, 10:28:44 AM

Quote from: xyzzy099 on October 22, 2013, 10:26:23 AM

Quote from: FiatKiller on October 22, 2013, 10:20:12 AM

"Difficulty has nothing to do with WU."

Sure it does. The miner has to work harder to do the calcs and is therefore less efficient.
How do you explain that WU has an inverse relationship for me then? WU always starts
greater than 4K and drops to as low as 3.6K

WU is just a ratio of accepted shares to rejected shares. It depends only on your hash rate and (effectively) how many difficulty 1 shares you submit that get accepted. Difficulty is not part of the calculation, and doesn't affect any of the factors that are.

Are you saying that your WU changes when difficulty changes? It sounds like you are saying that your WU varies over time even with no difficulty change, so I don't understand where you are deriving the relationship to difficulty. Diff only changes once ever 2016 blocks.

The difficulty from this pic:(ALWAYS starts low and rises constantly with time. WU starts high, and lowers over time)

That number is just the number of shares you have had accepted at the current difficulty, not the actual mining difficulty itself.

Ah, shares, not difficulty... got it. Thanks! Duh... lol

Luke-Jr

legendary

Activity: 2576

Merit: 1186

Quote from: trepex on October 22, 2013, 03:34:34 AM

Starting bfgminer as described (of course I "q"uit the original cgminer first) results in a Segmentation fault and the TTY settings broken and a cleared screen.

Code:

opkg install gdb
gdb --args ./bfgminer -S knc:auto -c /config/cgminer.conf -T -D
run

... wait for the crash ...

Code:

bt

Altomesi

newbie

Activity: 19

Merit: 0

Quote from: sickpig on October 22, 2013, 02:10:51 AM

Quote from: Luke-Jr on October 22, 2013, 01:25:25 AM

Code:

 bfgminer version 3.3.0 - Started: [2013-10-22 04:02:28] - [  0 days 02:14:20]
 [M]anage devices [P]ool management [S]ettings [D]isplay options  [H]elp [Q]uit 
 Connected to stratum.mining.eligius.st diff 64 with stratum as user 14cbTxT4nN1AFQzEdFURb9co
 Block: ...ed7f12e1 #265245  Diff:268M ( 1.92Ph/s)  Started: [06:23:33]
 ST:2  F:0  NB:29  AS:0  BW:[141/126 B/s]  E:457.72  I:20.14mBTC/hr  BS:939k
 2/379  60.0C | 267.0/269.3/255.2Gh/s | A:6847 R:28+0(.40%) HW:14839/3.0%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 KNC 0: 60.0C | 134.1/131.7/123.3Gh/s | A:3286 R:19+0(.55%) HW:12796/5.2%
 KNC 1: 55.0C | 140.4/137.7/131.9Gh/s | A:3564 R: 9+0(.25%) HW: 2044/.82%

Kudos! You're fast Tongue

I really appreciate that BFGminer split stats per asic slot, very useful.
So from the statistics you reported here it seems that the core with higher temp perform worse and has a lot of HW error more.
I'm really looking forward to use BFGminer on my jups.

Working like a champ on a .96 Mercury. seeing better results on HW errors initially, will see if long term it stays less. Donation coming your way Luke-Jr.

xyzzy099

legendary

Activity: 1066

Merit: 1098

Quote from: FiatKiller on October 22, 2013, 10:28:44 AM

Quote from: xyzzy099 on October 22, 2013, 10:26:23 AM

Quote from: FiatKiller on October 22, 2013, 10:20:12 AM

"Difficulty has nothing to do with WU."

Sure it does. The miner has to work harder to do the calcs and is therefore less efficient.
How do you explain that WU has an inverse relationship for me then? WU always starts
greater than 4K and drops to as low as 3.6K

WU is just a ratio of accepted shares to rejected shares. It depends only on your hash rate and (effectively) how many difficulty 1 shares you submit that get accepted. Difficulty is not part of the calculation, and doesn't affect any of the factors that are.

Are you saying that your WU changes when difficulty changes? It sounds like you are saying that your WU varies over time even with no difficulty change, so I don't understand where you are deriving the relationship to difficulty. Diff only changes once ever 2016 blocks.

The difficulty from this pic:(ALWAYS starts low and rises constantly with time. WU starts high, and lowers over time)

That number is just the number of shares you have had accepted at the current difficulty, not the actual mining difficulty itself.

FiatKiller

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

Quote from: xyzzy099 on October 22, 2013, 10:26:23 AM

Quote from: FiatKiller on October 22, 2013, 10:20:12 AM

"Difficulty has nothing to do with WU."

Sure it does. The miner has to work harder to do the calcs and is therefore less efficient.
How do you explain that WU has an inverse relationship for me then? WU always starts
greater than 4K and drops to as low as 3.6K

WU is just a ratio of accepted shares to rejected shares. It depends only on your hash rate and (effectively) how many difficulty 1 shares you submit that get accepted. Difficulty is not part of the calculation, and doesn't affect any of the factors that are.

Are you saying that your WU changes when difficulty changes? It sounds like you are saying that your WU varies over time even with no difficulty change, so I don't understand where you are deriving the relationship to difficulty. Diff only changes once ever 2016 blocks.

The difficulty from this pic:(ALWAYS starts low and rises constantly with time. WU starts high, and lowers over time)

texaslabrat

newbie

Activity: 56

Merit: 0

Quote from: FiatKiller on October 22, 2013, 10:20:12 AM

"Difficulty has nothing to do with WU."

Sure it does. The miner has to work harder to do the calcs and is therefore less efficient.
How do you explain that WU has an inverse relationship for me then? WU always starts
greater than 4K and drops to as low as 3.6K

The KnC version of cgminer includes the HW errors as part of the WU calculation. So, when you first start the miner, I'm guessing yours acts like mine and has all the bad cores running that it has to disable due to 10 errors in a row. While they are spewing garbage, those errors are being added to the WU number and thus artificially inflating it.

As was mentioned before, the difficulty of the block is irrelevant. You are not working on a block, you are working on a share of fixed difficulty. Now, if you want to change the pool difficulty up and down and document your relative HW error rate compared to Accepted shares...that I could see where the "it's working harder therefore less efficient" argument might be made depending on the results.

xyzzy099

legendary

Activity: 1066

Merit: 1098

Quote from: FiatKiller on October 22, 2013, 10:20:12 AM

"Difficulty has nothing to do with WU."

Sure it does. The miner has to work harder to do the calcs and is therefore less efficient.
How do you explain that WU has an inverse relationship for me then? WU always starts
greater than 4K and drops to as low as 3.6K

WU is just a ratio of accepted shares to rejected shares. It depends only on your hash rate and (effectively) how many difficulty 1 shares you submit that get accepted. Difficulty is not part of the calculation, and doesn't affect any of the factors that are.

Are you saying that your WU changes when difficulty changes? It sounds like you are saying that your WU varies over time even with no difficulty change, so I don't understand where you are deriving the relationship to difficulty. Diff only changes once ever 2016 blocks.

FiatKiller

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

"Difficulty has nothing to do with WU."

Sure it does. The miner has to work harder to do the calcs and is therefore less efficient.
How do you explain that WU has an inverse relationship for me then? WU always starts
greater than 4K and drops to as low as 3.6K

opentoe

legendary

Activity: 1274

Merit: 1000

Personal text my ass....

All I want is to break even...if that is even a small possibility now or not. I paid $4k for my Saturn. If things are static and stay the same it will take me 60 days or so to break even, I can deal with that. But so many more hashing power coming out its just gonna kill me/us. What to do. Would it even be wise to upgrade my Saturn to a Jupiter? If I do that, I'll be in the same boat, having spent more money. Yea, a little more hashing power but more cash out of my pocket. Oh, what to do.

xyzzy099

legendary

Activity: 1066

Merit: 1098

Quote from: FiatKiller on October 22, 2013, 09:39:09 AM

Quote from: sickpig on October 22, 2013, 09:36:20 AM

Quote from: FiatKiller on October 22, 2013, 08:51:03 AM

Interesting... applied 9.6.1 and it still shows 9.6 and initially everything was worse than 9.6

So I applied enablecores again and too early to say for sure, but looking very good.

I've also noticed an interesting phenomena of "bad boots". Sometimes after a restart things are not up to par, but if you keep trying you will hit a "golden boot" that works much better. I recommend for people having trouble to try this!

Never seen this much speed before, but too early to say how it will stabilize:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/40920348/KNC961EC.jpg

your WU is very good. I've 7475 for my jup.

Right now, but what happens is that the difficulty keeps going up to over 4 mill and the WU drops to 3700ish. We will see what happens. Going to let it ride without screwing around with it any further for awhile. lol

Difficulty has nothing to do with WU.

timmmers

sr. member

Activity: 1176

Merit: 265

Merc arrived, 10 mins unpacking and checking (using the various lists posted here so I didn't forget anything ..BIG THANKS FOR THAT)
Well packed and undamaged. They learned. Oh, no ethernet cable if you don't have a spare.

Everything whirring away...no stats in the KNC page...not hashing.

2nd screen with pool details didn't have cgminer enabled, did that restarted cgminer and we're off. Firmware .96 on it when it arrived.

Now been running about 10 mins at 110 to 139 Gh and 39 C with no extra cooling.
Feeling confident ish

Cat in box. He says it's a quality box and he knows these things Wink

FiatKiller

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

Quote from: sickpig on October 22, 2013, 09:36:20 AM

Quote from: FiatKiller on October 22, 2013, 08:51:03 AM

Interesting... applied 9.6.1 and it still shows 9.6 and initially everything was worse than 9.6

So I applied enablecores again and too early to say for sure, but looking very good.

I've also noticed an interesting phenomena of "bad boots". Sometimes after a restart things are not up to par, but if you keep trying you will hit a "golden boot" that works much better. I recommend for people having trouble to try this!

Never seen this much speed before, but too early to say how it will stabilize:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/40920348/KNC961EC.jpg

your WU is very good. I've 7475 for my jup.

Right now, but what happens is that the difficulty keeps going up to over 4 mill and the WU drops to 3700ish. We will see what happens. Going to let it ride without screwing around with it any further for awhile. lol

sickpig

legendary

Activity: 1260

Merit: 1008

Quote from: FiatKiller on October 22, 2013, 08:51:03 AM

Interesting... applied 9.6.1 and it still shows 9.6 and initially everything was worse than 9.6

So I applied enablecores again and too early to say for sure, but looking very good.

I've also noticed an interesting phenomena of "bad boots". Sometimes after a restart things are not up to par, but if you keep trying you will hit a "golden boot" that works much better. I recommend for people having trouble to try this!

Never seen this much speed before, but too early to say how it will stabilize:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/40920348/KNC961EC.jpg

your WU is very good. I've 7475 for my jup.

FiatKiller

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

Interesting... applied 9.6.1 and it still shows 9.6 and initially everything was worse than 9.6

So I applied enablecores again and too early to say for sure, but looking very good.

I've also noticed an interesting phenomena of "bad boots". Sometimes after a restart things are not up to par, but if you keep trying you will hit a "golden boot" that works much better. I recommend for people having trouble to try this!

Never seen this much speed before, but too early to say how it will stabilize:

soy

legendary

Activity: 1428

Merit: 1013

Quote from: paranoidx on October 22, 2013, 01:45:29 AM

Okay, received my jupiter today. Wast getting about 450gh/s with temperatures around 60 degrees C.
I updated to .96 and my temps went down to 40 degrees C. Hashrate stayed about the same.
I loaded up enablecore.bin and it gave me an error while rebooting. Now everytime I try to go to the miners setup page, it gives me a 404 page not found.

Any ideas??

**** Ignore ^. A hard reset did the trick.
Averaging 480 gh/s with temps around 50.

I sometimes wonder if when one first fires up a new miner and there's bad cores and high temperature, if it's better to let it run just like that for a couple of days. The rationale would be that if in shipment some ball grid away points cracked and separated but still making marginal electrical contact, there will be a higher resistance point there that will be hot, hence the high temperatures. It might get hot enough at that point or points to liquify the solder while nearby healthy solder points remain okay. Then after turning it off and cooling, when you restart that point has a solid solder contact.

Mine has been running at 100% on all 4 cores overnight and maxed out at 137.5GH/s avg so I would expect max avg of a Saturn to be 275GH/s and Jupiter 550GH/s, 5 second averages not withstanding.

pletharoe

sr. member

Activity: 278

Merit: 250

Quote from: c1010010 on October 22, 2013, 07:56:04 AM

So, talk performance. How are they? Not posted perf, but actual.

My Jupiter has been running for just under 23 hours. cgminer shows an average of 547Gh/s and 2.5% error rate. That translates to a pool speed of 533GH/s.

Bertmod (monitoring software) says the chips are taking 480 watts. Plus the power for the beaglebone.

sickpig

legendary

Activity: 1260

Merit: 1008

Quote from: mtbitcoin on October 22, 2013, 08:19:02 AM

Firmware 0.9.6.1 just released

a few hours ago:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.3385915

sorry can't resist

mtbitcoin

legendary

Activity: 876

Merit: 1000

Etherscan.io

Firmware 0.9.6.1 just released

FiatKiller

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

Quote from: c1010010 on October 22, 2013, 07:56:04 AM

So, talk performance. How are they? Not posted perf, but actual.

Most seem to work pretty well, but some are getting lemons...

Topic: Swedish ASIC miner company kncminer.com - page 1248. (Read 3049528 times)