It was the Bitcointalk forum that inspired us to create Bitcointalksearch.org - Bitcointalk is an excellent site that should be the default page for anybody dealing in cryptocurrency,
since it is a virtual gold-mine of data. However, our experience and user feedback led us create our site;
Bitcointalk's search is slow, and difficult to get the results you need, because you need to log in first to find anything useful - furthermore, there are rate limiters for their search functionality.
The aim of our project is to create a faster website that yields more results and faster without having to create an account and eliminate the need to log in -
your personal data, therefore, will never be in jeopardy since we are not asking for any of your data and you don't need to provide them to use our site with all of its capabilities.
We created this website with the sole purpose of users being able to search quickly and efficiently in the field of cryptocurrency
so they will have access to the latest and most accurate information and thereby assisting the crypto-community at large.
Why has it been so hard for others to do the same to show proof of success for their firmware hacks?
I am curious to know if anyone actually reached out to Vnish and requested a block-finding proof and he said no? what is funny about this whole thing is that this image
is at LEAST 6 months old, antpool took their solo pool down in December 2019, it shows alive in this image, so the proof has always been there, on a side note, that person had a bit of terrible luck, hit a block in 5 hours with an S9 only for it to go to the pool, if only he made a typo in the 0,1 pools' URLs.
Well I have 1.8 ph of gear mining for 16 months zero blocks hit
A lot of the gear is stock bitmain.
My point is 10 s9's = 150th 100 s9's = 1.5 ph
So realistically 1000 s9's at 15ph should hit a block every 50 days
So if only 1000 s9's were done we should have had more then 7 blocks hit last 365 days. once you realize diff was less then 15.1 most of the time the last 365 days
maybe 10 blocks for every 1000 s9's with the firmware.
How many s9's have the firmware mods. 1000 10000 100000 1000000
my best guess is more then 100,000 have been modded.
so 7 x 100 = 700 blocks in the last 365 days were hit with modded firmware. Good luck having more people revealing it.
The real question is why won't bitmain make decent firmware.
such as braiins. The braiins options for the s9 are great and bitmain is simply hurting every s9 owner in the world by refusing to give a similar product.
I won't get into the s11 s15 or s17 or the t15 and the t17. and all variants.
Bitmain could offer good firmware for each and every one six months after eol. they don't.
I have a large number of miners who use Avalons on the pool that the source code has been readily available, so it is no where near 100% BM.
I have noway to confirm this claim, but it doesn't matter, 100% or 10% doesn't matter, you are still making money of Bitmain mining gears, and if you are honest about these numbers, why don't you just block bitmain gears?
The ones I stop are those who modify those miners with firmware that has not been tested that it finds blocks, after they change it.
No proof of finding blocks is the only reason you block them, you don't care about cgminer license as long as you get to make money, you curse bitmain but you don't mind thier gears mining to your pool because they make $$$.
I know very well what violets the cgminer license, I know and you know that Btmian does violate the license, you said that your self, yet you have no issue with earning money by your pool which makes nearly 100% of its profit of firmware that violates this very license, hypocrisy?
Firstly, the word is 'violate'
Secondly, I have a large number of miners who use Avalons on the pool that the source code has been readily available, so it is no where near 100% BM. In fact the largest miner on the pool is only Avalons ... the people who make them ...................... Can you please stop making up shit to make you arguments seem valid. I have regularly told people on my pool to get Avalon miners. They are more reliable than BM as pretty much everyone knows anyway. My miners often do get them at my suggestion. Some of them, including some of the top miners, specifically only use Avalon miners coz they hate BM as much as me
Yes Bitmain violate the licence, I have stated that many times on the forum in the past and recently. No need to repeat what I've already said ... as some bazaar sort of argument against me
I'm still wondering why you think I should stop people who legally buy miners from mining on my pool. The ones I stop are those who modify those miners with firmware that has not been tested that it finds blocks, after they change it.
Please drop the subject, I won't bother replying any more, I've done it enough times to your incorrect posts, in various threads, that it's a waste of my time.
I know very well what violets the cgminer license, I know and you know that Btmian does violate the license, you said that your self, yet you have no issue with earning money by your pool which makes nearly 100% of its profit of firmware that violates this very license, hypocrisy?
So does Bitmain firmware, and so does your mining pool by allowing firmware made by Bitmain and Microbt which refuse to release the source code, there is no difference between all of these firmware versions as far as Cgminer license is concerned.
Go read the GPLv3 license that governs cgminer. You do not know what you are talking about at all.
Quote
On a side note, refrain from posting twice in a row as it's against the forum rules, and your second post will be deleted or merged with the first one in the best-case scenario, and then you will likely accuse the mods of having a biased approach towards your posts which break the from rules.
You are not a mod - so go find someone else to annoy. If a mod combines my posts - then so be it - I'm not concerned - and it will probably be Frodo so he'll make more btc from the forum for doing it
So does Bitmain firmware, and so does your mining pool by allowing firmware made by Bitmain and Microbt which refuse to release the source code, there is no difference between all of these firmware versions as far as Cgminer license is concerned.
On a side note, refrain from posting twice in a row as it's against the forum rules, and your second post will be deleted or merged with the first one in the best-case scenario, and then you will likely accuse the mods of having a biased approach towards your posts which break the from rules.
I believe vinsh has fw for all variants but yes double check. We're hoping to partner with a dev since the 17 series aren't compatible with multiple (over three) coinbase outputs.
So instead you're going to parter with someone who will be violating the cgminer license. Wow - great - thanks very much ... scumbag.
None that I am aware of, the only reputable custom firmware I'd trust would be Braiin's or Vnish (Asic.to and Awesomeminer), you shouldn't trust any firmware without doing your due diligence.
You could contact taserz (Asic.to) or/and patrike (Awesomeminer) to see if they have any plans to support the T17e.
I believe vinsh has fw for all variants but yes double check. We're hoping to partner with a dev since the 17 series aren't compatible with multiple (over three) coinbase outputs.
None that I am aware of, the only reputable custom firmware I'd trust would be Braiin's or Vnish (Asic.to and Awesomeminer), you shouldn't trust any firmware without doing your due diligence.
You could contact taserz (Asic.to) or/and patrike (Awesomeminer) to see if they have any plans to support the T17e.
I went into great detail explaining the cause of this issue in my topic but let me summarize the part which matters for you, you have a faulty PSU.
There are mainly two types of sensor errors, one which fails to read temps on all sensors on all boards (your case), this is without a doubt a PSU issue, the other one where only a single board fails to report temps, that board has a bad chip/heatsink.
In both scenarios, you should always Sdflash that miner and then flash the latest firmware, if the problem remains, then for your case, test the miner with a different PSU.
I doubted the sensors have all died, as after a forced reboot (unplug and plug back in) it works again, a couple of days max and then again the hash has disappeared.
the machine keeps running though.
Bitmain where kind to reply and gave me the SD firmware to flash on it.
Our last order was T17+ 50 THs - batch February 1-10. We still didn't receive it due to coronavirus. Seller now offers a change order to T17 40 THs, which were manufactured in Malaysia. That way Seller can send it next week. Otherwise, we need to wait more, as the Bitmain factory in China is not operating at full capacity.
If they are offering a good coupon or $ difference in return with that T17 40TH/s, I'd accept that.
Our last order was T17+ 50 THs - batch February 1-10. We still didn't receive it due to coronavirus. Seller now offers a change order to T17 40 THs, which were manufactured in Malaysia. That way Seller can send it next week. Otherwise, we need to wait more, as the Bitmain factory in China is not operating at full capacity.
Seems like Bitmain don't have the T17+ which you have anymore, the only available type is the 57th
This one does not look much different from the T17e, which has the specs below.
The one you got does 65th at 2990w which is much more efficient than these two,that's about 46w/th which is just as efficient as the the S17e that does 64th for 2880w.
both do well at 53th but that area has filtered air. stable internet. temps now stay under 80f with input air at 2 sources both filtered. we fixed power drop to 185 volts so power is good.
It is not true data center grade but it is decent setup for mining.
I can not show the t17+ it is at a spot that I can not do a safe teamviewer connection
the t17+ is doing 64-65 th at 2990 watts the t17e is doing 53-54th at 3200 watts
the t17+ is cooler it is better gear.
of course it is all about feeding it 3000 watts of stable power. you need to be able to do this.
better then 64th about 66th see links maybe I got a unicorn
That is impressive to say the least, phill would you please post a screenshot of both t17e and t17+ temps and fans? I am confused about which to buy out of these three
T17,T17e,T17+, i have T17 running good, T17e on it's way but not a T17+ , my main concern is heat !
Summer here is really hot, i want to stack more of the gear that has the least temperature regardless of efficiency and price per TH among the T series, S series is a no-go.
9:07 pm 3630.74kwatts on meter 65.2th 7:07 pm 3624.14kwatts on meter 65.3th 6:07 pm 3621.18kwatts on meter 65.2th 5:37 pm 3619.71kwatts on meter 65.2th 5:07 pm 3618.23kwatts on meter 64.9th 4:37 pm 3616.74kwatts on meter 65.5th 4:07 pm 3615.24kwatts on meter
so far 1500 watts in 30 minutes doing about 65.5 th early numbers are 3000watts /65.5th = 45.80 watts a th
now 2990 watts in 60 minutes 2990/64.9th = 46.07 watts a th
now after 3 hours 45.43 watts a th now after 5 hours 47.54 watts a th
need to get longer reads but if true to this a nice unit I am very impressed at the power used for my t17+ 64 th
The new 17 series of miner S17,T17 Do not like the cold with their firmware. If you load my aftermarket firmware it slowly warms up the chips if it is too cold out and will still run. We have a client in Siberia that runs them at -20C
yeah my one t17e running well in a warm room 80f and my other t17e running poorly in a cold room 30f this will soon be put into place in clifton the warmer room.
It appears this model is very sensitive when it comes to temps (it must be to protect the cheaper/weaker chips used in the T model as compared to the 'better' ones used in the S models?! ).
I believe now that the power off (weird as it stopped hashing but the ventilators were going at 100% I believe) mode was due to protecting the hashing boards.
What I still hope to understand is why did it reoccur even after disabling the fan limit.
This has not happened again in the past 21 hours
When the newer bitmain miners stop mining due to heat the control board stays alive, just the hash boards are powered off.
This is how options look for S17e. All I had to do was go inspect elements and change "display:none" to "display:HERE" (I used caps so it can be visible on picture), you can use anything instead of "HERE". https://imgur.com/a/teF805s https://imgur.com/a/llVh1A2 As my pictures still won't show up here even after I tried changing resolutions you will have 2 links bellow with full resolution.
As with all things mechanical and otherwise...everything is "trade offs". As far as ASIC capacity goes, manufacturers are pushing the limits of these new chip densities. I am far from impressed at the fortitude of the 7nm technology. They are all relatively fickle and overly sensitive. Of course I am spoiled. I doubt we will ever see units as robust as the S9's. I've had ventilation go off in my facility and every single S9 shut dwn due to very intense heat. Let them cool down for a while and fire them back up. ( with the ventilation fixed of course). They just jump back online and hash away happily like nothing ever happened. These new units...if this happens or they get too hot...it's RMA city. Dead boards, cooked PSU's etc. My S9 attrition rate on units that were 2-3 years old last year was less than 5%. Now with a fair representation across the 7nm entrants, I'm pushing 12-15% RMA within months of onboarding the gear. This is even with augmenting cooling and ventilation in the facilities.
It appears this model is very sensitive when it comes to temps (it must be to protect the cheaper/weaker chips used in the T model as compared to the 'better' ones used in the S models?! ).
I believe now that the power off (weird as it stopped hashing but the ventilators were going at 100% I believe) mode was due to protecting the hashing boards.
What I still hope to understand is why did it reoccur even after disabling the fan limit.
First fail in 8 hours of testing is this one (translated by google to mean: 'No Data!'):
*my first image that works, thank you philipma1957
Causes unknown, kernel log will not help with much yet, but will email Bitmain to see what they say.
Only settings mingled with was the fan speed locked at 60% which appear to have been overridden to 100% as seen above.
So far the solution to it was to disable the fan control speed and restart the miner and wait for an amazing 10 to 15 minutes for it to start hashing again
Edit: This has now happened again, 1 hour after the first time.
Inno is crap. Loud, hot, power hungry beasts. I had 10 out of 100 brand new T2T 30 TH/s fail. Some PSU's and some Control boards. The company expects YOU to do all the trouble shooting by swapping PSU's and Control boards between working and broken units. THEN...they make you ask them permission to send warranty repair parts back to them for repair/replacement. They make you send pictures of the matching serial numbers of the effected units. Did I forget to mention you're shipping all the way to China? You pay. Then.....you wait. 30-60 DAYS!!! To Hell with INNO. I'll never send them another dime.
Seems the T17E performance is almost the same as whatsminer M21S 54T, But may i know how much is the noise db of T17E? I tested whatsminers noise, at least 80db.
Had a chance to briefly test one of these as well.
The gear is running smoothly at 54347.46 (54Th), it is quieter (58 dB ), pulls 3.12kW from the wall, and beautiful temps on both the hash board and the chips
Board 1 PCB 28-49-27-52 and Chips 50-59-45-64 Board 2 PCB 31-52-34-59 and Chips 53-65-55-70 Board 3 PCB 29-51-34-55 and Chips 54-62-55-66
Sleep mode meaning:
After a few tests found that it means the fans are running at around 59% - 60% - this allows the temperatures from above to be achieved and a very silent miner (compared to others, Inno T2T - 30 I am looking at you! )
Would not even dare to test it if it would be one power cord probably . Can't wait to relocate it and hope for the best in this up and down market .
Why:
Before this model, on older s9/s you could select fan speed and other functions that were hidden (aka Setup Mode) in the 'Miner Configuration' page if you would have right-clicked and Inspect the page (by searching for Fan_Ctrl and erasing the ':none' after display).
One must/should have the option to view that and this should not be restricted. If one is not responsible then do not play here, but the option has to be there.
With the new T17e (https://imgur.com/a/BMdeqrg) it appeared this has changed, among other things like the Kernel Log in the System tab.
I have managed to find the change and have attached photos on how to do it yourself to unlock the hidden menu again (Setup Mode).
Steps:
1. first step, go to your AntMiner Miner Configuration tab
4. On the second result found, it will allow you to edit the results on your right (NB. once you close the page and open it again you will have to start from number 1 again, as settings will not save and you will not have them visible upon revisiting). - see left-hand side arrow in the image at step 3.
5. in previous miners you could just delete the :none wording and the function would have re-appeared in the menu. Now, you need to activate the menu and then delete the :none value for what you want to change in order to see it, followed by deleting the :none wording for any function that you wish to see in the new area.
Also, this equipment is almost 20 dB silent than previous ones. Must be the Sleep mode function.
Moreover, if only delete the :none value no damage will happen to you miner, but if you change the values there - may that be whatever, you bear responsibility for it!
This is how the actual code looks like, you just have to find all the :none and delete them
I recently was told that the only difference in all these different "S" models is that when the Chip orders arrive, Bitmain tests them. The most efficient chips from the foundry are assembled into the "Pro" units and the less efficient chips are earmarked for the T's and E's and etc etc. I don't pretend to know about "chip quality" or manufacturing processes. How plausible does this sound to someone who knows this space?
this is exactly how it works, some chips from the die's will have near perfect traces and have the ability to keep a constant temp at a certain frequency
the under performers will heat up under the same settings , so those chips need to be set to run at a lower freq to achieve adequate cooling so as not to
over heat and destroy the chips, just like the s9's the 13.5 units have an average 600 set on freq, the s9i's have 650 so each board running 50hz faster
will yield that .5-1 th +
this is some what common in chip manufacturing , in my years building computes you will see some of Intel's chips not do as good in the benchmark tests and
those same chips would always be hotter compared to the cream of the crop
I recently was told that the only difference in all these different "S" models is that when the Chip orders arrive, Bitmain tests them. The most efficient chips from the foundry are assembled into the "Pro" units and the less efficient chips are earmarked for the T's and E's and etc etc. I don't pretend to know about "chip quality" or manufacturing processes. How plausible does this sound to someone who knows this space?
im kinda glad i didn't get the s17e or + it looks to be a beast but not super efficient,
cargober with tesla watt got me a great deal 1750 shipped s17 pro , only using 9.5 amps @ 240v pushing 55+ th,
the turbo setting is lack luster, the boards were doing 18th each , on turbo they went to 19.5 th each, and the uint was drawing 10.2 amps @240 v
so the turbo setting is not worth it , but i cant wait till slush pool adds the s17 sires to the Braiins Os Firmware, i like the real-time graphs and such
with out having to refresh the page to see the real time shares and est hash rate and temps
i didnt get a chance for coupons but i dont plan on ordering in the next few months
so now i have 7x s17pro @ 385 th and 14 s9/s9i's doing 196 th , starting to make a dent
Not happy with mine and they owe me serious refund on them as I paid them 3600 and they dropped to 2735. 865 due. They pull a lot of power. Taxed them at 102 or 103. They pull more power then first mentioned and they no longer show power specs. So basically don't get them.
I am bummed out...two 53th T17e were send from China, NOT Malaysia or Singapore. S17e as well, so double whammy (27.6% tax), darned it. Also why Bitmain sends it on Thanksgiving when everything is closed? Ridiculous.
Edit Last night was cold -3 c or 25-26f. I had an issue with 1 unit not working. I went to solar array today added an s17 pro so there is now 8800-9000 watts used in the spot The 17e fired up. I will monitor this until Monday or tues or Weds after thanksgiving then move gear to Clifton NJ the room there is warmer air is filtered and still have good venting to keep it under 85f or 30c
Okay they are in buysolar loft which is the first solararray. this is an unheated spot.
been -2 to 10c outside
loft has good ventilation
so at 27f to 50f it runs very well been up for 2.5 days doing 53-55th
I would guess space is getting warmer and may be closer to 60f or 15c since I am running 6600 watts or 25000-27000 btu of endless heat. These will be moved to Clifton after Thanksgiving.
I will not buy anymore of them as I do not like 3000 watt units. I will end up with
1x t17+ 2x t17e 2x m20s 1x m21s 2x a1066 these 8 pieces will pull 27000 watts. and put out 100,000 + btu
Great info and nice pics, how do you find them to react to hot/cold air?
I got my second s17e 64 and its behaving the same as the first , I cannot explain it so I figure id ask (the s17 pros do not behave this way) I live in Canada and its 0 C currently if I plug the miner beside and open window for air intake the second hashboard never boots up only 0 and 2 showing exactly the same as the first s17e I received, move it down on the floor and it runs fine, put it back by the window and same hashboard 1 doesn't boot up turn it sideways so its not sucking in cold air, works??? secondly the hash is always lower with colder air avgs 63.5 by the windows fans 3800 and 4800 and 67.4 on the floor fans 5600 5700 issue is its sooo loud much louder then the s17 pros running normal or turbo it also heats up a 450sq ft basement in no time from 20c to 25.5C the two s17s never managed to get it over 24.5 (even on colder nights)
I know the unit Is not detective as the previous was the same how's them t17e are they rock solid? You had a couple days to play
)
.
