Topic: [Work in progess] Burnins Avalon Chip to mining board service - page 60. (Read 624200 times)

I found that my miners temperature is higher now than from the start. Before it was never above 49°C, now its at 53°C. I see a bit dust and i wonder if that bit dust can have such a great effect... can only test it.

Yesterday i had some problems with disabling cgminer. It stated then comms error buffer or something and cgminer did not close even after long time. I had to use a new tab for restart.


In my tests i found that the pools hashrate is very volatile. Using the same setting at the same temperature with cgminer gives nearly the same average hashrate after 1 hour. Its different with the pools hashrate. Even when i take an average out of the last 10 shown hashrate values. So i trust more the values i get from cgminer.

What i wonder... when i set the difficulty to 1000 doesnt i lose mining income? I mean cgminer only is sending such high shares to the pool then. All other shares are discarded. And there are a lot smaller shares at 1 and so. So doesnt this mean to lose much or doesnt this matter? I normally run with diffi 8 but if it doesnt matter i would use maybe 1000 or so.

Still running at 400 but I didn't put the voltage up
This is java API "ascset|0,mv,1333" just after I restarted

Note the HW (due to the higher voltage)
 BTB 0: 55C 400 1353mV | 10.38G/7.905Gh/s | A:12635 R:80 HW:1 WU:110.5/m

Looking good!

Great!

BTB 0: 47C 400 1225mV | 9.660G/7.839Gh/s | A:78047 R:747 HW:1000 WU:110.9/m

It's in current git master (not enough space to say "MHz" but easy enough to see what it is)

Not quite the same

The pool depends on the shares returned and whatever random calculation they do on that.
The higher difficulty, the higher the variance.

cgminer depends on the nonces found at difficulty 1.

Hallelujah.

cgminer has no way to measure the actual hashrate of the avalon asic chips, it is estimating based on the nonces returned, just as is the pool you are connected to.

I got that from testing. It seems to make a difference when you run the miner at max 46°C at a certain mV, when its up at 53°C then the hashrate is lower with the same mV. But if you slightly change it you can find the sweet spot again. Its strange but thats my observation.

The newest firmware is indeed good, it gave me a bit speed. I believe 5% more when i remember correctly.

Im not so sure yet with the better cooling. But i will try to change the setting of the fans so that the air is forced through the heatsinks. Maybe it changes something.


I read the first time of this option. Ill try it. Normally i get the 5 miners slightly above 44GH/s. What does the queue mean to bitburners? Are higher values worth a try?

But i experienced a problem. Today its the second time the miner seems to close down slowly hashratewise. The first time i found after maybe 40minutes. The 5s Hashing was at zero already, now it happened again. The hashing is at 20GH, the watt usage is nearly halved, temperature low and the stats say that the miner is idled often. Im not sure whats the problem but i hope thats not happening over night. The leds were still blinking now. I dont have a clue whats the problem. Does the rpi have to be rebooted some times?


The pools doesnt calculate very correct in my experience. A 1 hour average of cgminer is more trustworthy. Does it say the same? Whats your options?

Welcome and here is a start, but like I said I'm looking for something regarding these rigs specifically.
https://github.com/ckolivas/cgminer/blob/master/ASIC-README (Seems very simple, not a lot of settings).

IAS

I want one so bad! or ten!!

+1

Thanks¡

Well, for me it does:

Is there an ongoing doc available (or link) on the overclocking settings for when we get our Burin rigs?
(Something specific to these rigs).

edit - Also, has anyone played with this setting? "--avalon-auto       Adjust avalon overclock frequency dynamically for best hashrate"
I haven't read the whole thread but curious how this compares to manual...

Thx,
IAS

have you added the --queue 4 setting to the command line?
That is important to get close to theoretical performance.
My tests showed hashrates very close to 9ghash @ 450mhz for a single board.
Didn't test high OC with a cluster yet though.

I really have to do a MAX-OC test with a single line of chips to find out the real limits.
(maybe even more then 500Mhz)

OC headroom is also chip-dependent, some chips are just better then others.
(One reason why i want to push for individual-per-board OC settings in future firmware revs)

I think I need to put the MHz there and one temperature.
Time for another change ...

Where did you get that from? My 50 chips (20/20/10) run fine at 450 Mhz, 1.330 mV (it seems to overvolt slightly?) and cgminer "d" timing. Rejects and HW errors are reasonable. Temperature is around 47-49°C. I’m stuck on the old firmware because of a broken USB connector or my hashrate would be closer to the theoretical 22.5 GH/s.



I have a feeling that these chips would much higher with better cooling but burnin’s (slightly crude) cooling implementation is hard to beat for price/performance.
Putting fancy copper/heatpipe heatsinks with expensive TIMs on them would probably not make sense from a financial standpoint.

You can run it at 450MHz but that doesnt resolve to 9GH/s for me. Till now i didnt find a setting that can do this. And it looks like the temperature the chips have are changing the needed mV to get the best Hashrate, so in theory each Temperature should run its own mV to get the maximum possible hashrate.

I would suggest to stop OT here until burnin opens up a new thread for Bitfury design.

With avalon chips you get about 6gh/BTC with burnin's boards (that's purely CHIP PRICE, board price is not calculated)

20chips on BBXX = 9gh/s (450 mhz OC)
20 chips = 1.5 btc AVALON price (not going to calcualte for group buys + shipping etc.)

The BF chip is 3gh/s  so the price per chip should be less than .5 btc to match the gh/btc value of avalon.

However, if you have a board with BF chips similar to the BBXX = 20 BF chips = 60 GH/s with consumption 50watts (0.85w/gh based on the info on BF's site)

Power consumption compared to the BBXX is half and hashing power is 6.66 times greater so the BF chips are 13 times more power efficient than avalon's meaning you can mine with profit at a 13 times higher difficulty compared to avalon chips.

If BF's chips can hash at more than 3gh/s with burnin's design that would just be extra incentive ...

Also, another advantage is the hash power density which is 10 times higher with BF chips = of real importance to people who are looking to own larger amounts of hashing power and even more so if you are going to host your devices at a data center that charges based on rackspace used.

And in the end, if there's enough interest and burnin gets enough preorders (though the mention of preorder by him made me cringe) he can decide if it is worth his time to work on design for BF chips or just refund everybody.