Just a few notes:
1. The pad delivered with the cooler not optimal (but sufficient). Thermal grease is recommended instead (as stated on the products page: http://www.ztex.de/usb-fpga-1/usb-fpga-1.15x.e.html#hs). Some thermal grease also is delivered with the cooler.
2. All boards I tested from the 1st batch (delivered beween 10/11 and 12/11) achieve at least 200MHz. (But I did not test all boards so cannot guarantee it.) If a board from the 1st batch does no achieve this speed then probably the cooling is not optimal. E.g. 192MHz is the typical frequency if the FPGA is cooled passively with the delivered heat sink.
3. The TDP of the FPGA is about 8W. It is not a 150W CPU. A few well placed case fans can replace 40mm fans on the heat sinks.
Topic: ZTEX USB-FPGA Modules 1.15x and 1.15y: 215 and 860 MH/s FPGA Boards - page 43. (Read 182450 times)
January 03, 2012, 03:10:37 PM
January 03, 2012, 01:37:37 PM
Much fun to clean them 
I was looking into watercooling too but if you don't have any existing hardware it's way too expensive. Zalman has some nice northbridge cooling blocks that should fit quite well. For my new 3 board setup i went with 2 80mm vents. Plan to place the boards inline one fan blowing fresh air in, the other sucking it out. Soon my 4 boards will make more than half of my hashing power...
I was looking into watercooling too but if you don't have any existing hardware it's way too expensive. Zalman has some nice northbridge cooling blocks that should fit quite well. For my new 3 board setup i went with 2 80mm vents. Plan to place the boards inline one fan blowing fresh air in, the other sucking it out. Soon my 4 boards will make more than half of my hashing power... 
January 03, 2012, 11:34:37 AM
going to strip them down and use a paste this time. Been on the lookout for good quality chipset water blocks at a decent cost. after spending as much as i have already, and plan to, why not spring for water cooling while i'm at it?
January 03, 2012, 12:06:39 AM
I higly recommend using some regular thermal compund instead of that thermal tape.
+1, the pad is crap.
January 02, 2012, 07:24:43 PM
I highly recommend using some regular thermal compound instead of that thermal tape.
January 02, 2012, 07:09:54 PM
Received two boards I purchased last week. Been running them both all weekend. think heatsink isn't seated correctly on one (used the double sided thermal tape), getting errors (0.02 to 0.26 fluctuating) and its down clocked itself to around 190Mh/s. Other board is clocked around 191, but gets no errors. My dsl can be pretty bad at times. Hope to get more, at least a couple Gh worth, of these cards when they are back in stock. Great boards so far, I am a fan.
December 30, 2011, 02:39:01 PM
Been running a board for a few weeks here, works pretty well. Generates stunningly little heat, very easy to cool.
To get the BTCMiner software running under BSD, you'll need to build libusbJava (in the USB SDK) and make sure /dev/usb? and /dev/ugen? are accessible.
Have also loaded a custom bitstream (just a clock divider FF chain), to see if it works. Works okay, just remember you need Xilinx Foundation, not Webpack, to use the spartan6 lx150.
To get the BTCMiner software running under BSD, you'll need to build libusbJava (in the USB SDK) and make sure /dev/usb? and /dev/ugen? are accessible.
Have also loaded a custom bitstream (just a clock divider FF chain), to see if it works. Works okay, just remember you need Xilinx Foundation, not Webpack, to use the spartan6 lx150.
December 28, 2011, 01:13:40 PM
You get 200 MH/s @ 200 MHz. If there is a connection loss the rate can drop a bit. But that's only statistics. I just ordered some more boards today.
December 28, 2011, 08:52:40 AM
Got my FPGAs earlier this week and finally got my 12V adapter for individual testing. So far everything is working great, getting higher speeds than advertised!
UPDATE: Added a link to my performance graph thus far. Speed data points are using 2 hour average speeds on VALID SHARES ONLY. http://i.imgur.com/xj6xv.png
The variance shown is within expected norms. Peak is just over 220, low is just under 180, which means it has about a +/- 10% spread over the mean which is just under 200. This is the same variance you expect from any GPU miner when taking slices of 2 hours for your averages. I'll update again in a few days once I have enough data points to use 4 hour averages, which eliminate most of the peaks/valleys seen so far.
UPDATE: Added a link to my performance graph thus far. Speed data points are using 2 hour average speeds on VALID SHARES ONLY. http://i.imgur.com/xj6xv.png
The variance shown is within expected norms. Peak is just over 220, low is just under 180, which means it has about a +/- 10% spread over the mean which is just under 200. This is the same variance you expect from any GPU miner when taking slices of 2 hours for your averages. I'll update again in a few days once I have enough data points to use 4 hour averages, which eliminate most of the peaks/valleys seen so far.
Did you ever record more data points?
Since the new miner has increased hashrate I would be interested to see a graph w/ 4 hour moving average. Alternately the raw data would also be interesting.
December 14, 2011, 01:29:41 PM
A new version of BTCMiner with improved performance (now typically 200 MH/s) has been released on http://www.ztex.de/btcminer/ (release number 111214).
I also updated the prices and volume discount conditions (volume discount is now calculated based on the purchases within the last 10 weeks), see the initial post of this thread: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ztex-usb-fpga-modules-115x-and-115y-215-and-860-mhs-fpga-boards-49180.
This has an even better performance running at 200MHz and 208Mhz on my 2 boards. I also updated the prices and volume discount conditions (volume discount is now calculated based on the purchases within the last 10 weeks), see the initial post of this thread: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ztex-usb-fpga-modules-115x-and-115y-215-and-860-mhs-fpga-boards-49180.
December 14, 2011, 12:13:42 PM
cool i'll try it out !Edit: It's faster and has a better error rate ! You are a genius
December 14, 2011, 07:29:34 AM
A new version of BTCMiner with improved performance (now typically 200 MH/s) has been released on http://www.ztex.de/btcminer/ (release number 111214).
I also updated the prices and volume discount conditions (volume discount is now calculated based on the purchases within the last 10 weeks), see the initial post of this thread: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ztex-usb-fpga-modules-115x-and-115y-215-and-860-mhs-fpga-boards-49180.
I also updated the prices and volume discount conditions (volume discount is now calculated based on the purchases within the last 10 weeks), see the initial post of this thread: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ztex-usb-fpga-modules-115x-and-115y-215-and-860-mhs-fpga-boards-49180.
December 10, 2011, 08:12:04 PM
This is the last time I'm personally going to get involved in this discussion.. It's over in my mind and ztex stands as "NOT a scammer", to me anyway..
The specifications state that these boards may be operated from 4.5 to 16V. WHAT MORE OF A WARNING LABEL DO YOU NEED?
Danger, if exposed to a bath tub, ztex boards may no longer function.
Caution, if exposed to a lightning strike, ztex boards may no longer function.
Warning, ztex boards were not designed for use at temperatures like those found at the center of the sun. Operation inside of the sun is not guaranteed.
Notice, do not take ztex boards swimming with you.
You've really gotten to the point of hysteria with this whole topic. NONE OF THE PRODUCTS YOU OWN are protected against over voltage - Literally NONE of them. Hook your 30, 40, 50 thousand dollar vehicle up to 110V and watch what happens (it's pretty awesome, by the way). Hook your cisco/linksys/d-link product up to reverse voltage or double voltage and see what happens.
ztex very clearly states that the boards operate from 4.5 to 16V. I don't see how the specifications could possibly be any more clear. It's like a vehicle tire - they have a speed rating - S, for instance means 112MPH. There is no further warning. The speed rating tells you that it's safe to operate the tire continuously at 112MPH. At 113MPH, the tire may explode, but there isn't a bright orange warning label on the side of the tire.. It's been stated, and doesn't need to be stated again..
I'm glad ztex added a wiki entry about power supplies, but I will defend his old specifications - they were plenty clear. He simply can't be responsible for you providing power far outside the specification - which from the burnt chips, you clearly did.
If you'd like to PM me, I'll even let you send me the power supply in question (3com) and I'll tell you beyond doubt whether it hurt the ztex board or something else did. I have hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of test equipment at my disposal, and I will be able to see if that supply is dangerous to the ztex power supply or not. Beyond that offer though, I'm ignoring this thread.
Enigma.
The specifications state that these boards may be operated from 4.5 to 16V. WHAT MORE OF A WARNING LABEL DO YOU NEED?
Danger, if exposed to a bath tub, ztex boards may no longer function.
Caution, if exposed to a lightning strike, ztex boards may no longer function.
Warning, ztex boards were not designed for use at temperatures like those found at the center of the sun. Operation inside of the sun is not guaranteed.
Notice, do not take ztex boards swimming with you.
You've really gotten to the point of hysteria with this whole topic. NONE OF THE PRODUCTS YOU OWN are protected against over voltage - Literally NONE of them. Hook your 30, 40, 50 thousand dollar vehicle up to 110V and watch what happens (it's pretty awesome, by the way). Hook your cisco/linksys/d-link product up to reverse voltage or double voltage and see what happens.
ztex very clearly states that the boards operate from 4.5 to 16V. I don't see how the specifications could possibly be any more clear. It's like a vehicle tire - they have a speed rating - S, for instance means 112MPH. There is no further warning. The speed rating tells you that it's safe to operate the tire continuously at 112MPH. At 113MPH, the tire may explode, but there isn't a bright orange warning label on the side of the tire.. It's been stated, and doesn't need to be stated again..
I'm glad ztex added a wiki entry about power supplies, but I will defend his old specifications - they were plenty clear. He simply can't be responsible for you providing power far outside the specification - which from the burnt chips, you clearly did.
If you'd like to PM me, I'll even let you send me the power supply in question (3com) and I'll tell you beyond doubt whether it hurt the ztex board or something else did. I have hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of test equipment at my disposal, and I will be able to see if that supply is dangerous to the ztex power supply or not. Beyond that offer though, I'm ignoring this thread.
Enigma.
Nice (and humorous) summation.
I was going to respond to the nonsense drivel but you already took the time and did it well.
December 06, 2011, 06:51:42 PM
Got my FPGAs earlier this week and finally got my 12V adapter for individual testing. So far everything is working great, getting higher speeds than advertised!
UPDATE: Added a link to my performance graph thus far. Speed data points are using 2 hour average speeds on VALID SHARES ONLY. http://i.imgur.com/xj6xv.png
The variance shown is within expected norms. Peak is just over 220, low is just under 180, which means it has about a +/- 10% spread over the mean which is just under 200. This is the same variance you expect from any GPU miner when taking slices of 2 hours for your averages. I'll update again in a few days once I have enough data points to use 4 hour averages, which eliminate most of the peaks/valleys seen so far.
UPDATE: Added a link to my performance graph thus far. Speed data points are using 2 hour average speeds on VALID SHARES ONLY. http://i.imgur.com/xj6xv.png
The variance shown is within expected norms. Peak is just over 220, low is just under 180, which means it has about a +/- 10% spread over the mean which is just under 200. This is the same variance you expect from any GPU miner when taking slices of 2 hours for your averages. I'll update again in a few days once I have enough data points to use 4 hour averages, which eliminate most of the peaks/valleys seen so far.
December 06, 2011, 01:49:27 PM
Hmm, I'm not sure that's the right attitude to take gusti. ztex might be slightly at fault for not stating PSU requirements clearer and/or not integrating some "idiot protection" into the circuit, but I say the bulk of the responsibility lies with you, especially for frying the second board after you saw what happened with the first. I think his offer is more than fair.
Yes sorry, I consider it fair too, but I prefer not to have relationship with ztex anymore. December 06, 2011, 01:46:57 PM
Hmm, I'm not sure that's the right attitude to take gusti. ztex might be slightly at fault for not stating PSU requirements clearer and/or not integrating some "idiot protection" into the circuit, but I say the bulk of the responsibility lies with you, especially for frying the second board after you saw what happened with the first. I think his offer is more than fair.
Yes sorry, I consider it fair too, but I prefer not to have relationship with ztex anymore.
December 06, 2011, 01:30:15 PM
Hmm, I'm not sure that's the right attitude to take gusti. ztex might be slightly at fault for not stating PSU requirements clearer and/or not integrating some "idiot protection" into the circuit, but I say the bulk of the responsibility lies with you, especially for frying the second board after you saw what happened with the first. I think his offer is more than fair.
December 06, 2011, 01:18:40 PM
ztex, if I were you I'd replace the first board for two reasons:
I already wrote last week (https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.637094) what kind of discounts can be expected if board are damaged accidentally.
In order to stop this discussion, I offer a 50% discount for a replacement order. This is based on goodwill, see https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.641694.
If you consider that Gusti called my boards "crap" and me a "scammer" (already revoked) and a "plain liar" and announced to "make sure [I] will not sell a single card in the forum anymore" this is much more than Gusti can expect.
Thanks, but I will decline your offer, I don´t want any relationship with unsupportive and arrogant company like yours.
Maybe competition have a better product design / support. Discussion has ended for me, and my apologizes again to the whole community.
December 06, 2011, 12:55:32 PM
ztex, if I were you I'd replace the first board for two reasons:
I already wrote last week (https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.637094) what kind of discounts can be expected if board are damaged accidentally.
In order to stop this discussion, I offer a 50% discount for a replacement order. This is based on goodwill, see https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.641694.
If you consider that Gusti called my boards "crap" and me a "scammer" (already revoked) and a "plain liar" and announced to "make sure [I] will not sell a single card in the forum anymore" this is much more than Gusti can expect.
December 06, 2011, 12:40:35 PM
ztex, if I were you I'd replace the first board for two reasons
Also consider that if there is not so much demand in such boards, replacing one would cost ztex all his profit from other sells and may be even more. Jump to: