Swedish ASIC miner company kncminer.com

[plasmoske]

recommended. not required.

Your miners were working very well before yet you still decided to tinker with it anyway by updating the firmware.

The main rule of thumb when updating any drivers/firmware for anything is that things can break or go wrong.

[Rampion]

recommended. not required.

Your miners were working very well before yet you still decided to tinker with it anyway by updating the firmware.

The main rule of thumb when updating any drivers/firmware for anything is that things can break or go wrong.

This. If ain't broken...

[Phoenix1969]

recommended. not required.

Your miners were working very well before yet you still decided to tinker with it anyway by updating the firmware.

The main rule of thumb when updating any drivers/firmware for anything is that things can break or go wrong.

recommended. not required.

Your miners were working very well before yet you still decided to tinker with it anyway by updating the firmware.

The main rule of thumb when updating any drivers/firmware for anything is that things can break or go wrong.

I don't really appreciate the satire, especially since the two were underperforming to begin with... so everyone should just not update anything cause you said so, eh? Even when KNC recommends it.. .     I hope it happens to you as well.

[plasmoske]

I don't see any satire at all in my posts

Anyone is free to do whatever. Just know there are risks in doing so.

Underperforming miners eh? I thought your 3 were pretty good.

[Phoenix1969]

I don't see any satire at all in my posts

Anyone is free to do whatever. Just know there are risks in doing so.

Underperforming miners eh? I thought your 3 were pretty good.

they were 255, 265, and 275
the 255 sat is like a jup at 510... you call that good?
0.97 made it 220
it made the one with 265, now 260
the 3rd, one was 275, is 275

[cet]

does anyone know how to get the web interface to connect to the cgminer api correctly?  I just did an update from .95 to .97  and the miner status data doesn't display correctly.

Code:

Mining Status

CGMiner Status	Running (Connect to CGMiner API failed)
Last Checked	
Avg. Hash Rate	
WU	
Difficulty Accepted	
HW Status

ASIC slot #1	50.0 ℃
ASIC slot #2	-
ASIC slot #3	60.0 ℃
ASIC slot #4	53.0 ℃
ASIC slot #5	48.0 ℃
ASIC slot #6	-

Thanks,
/cet

[plasmoske]

I don't see any satire at all in my posts

Anyone is free to do whatever. Just know there are risks in doing so.

Underperforming miners eh? I thought your 3 were pretty good.

they were 255, 265, and 275
the 255 sat is like a jup at 510... you call that good?
0.97 made it 220
it made the one with 265, now 260
the 3rd, one was 275, is 275

255 265 275. For sats. Pretty good.

What are your expectations? 290 290 290?

[xyzzy099]

recommended. not required.

Your miners were working very well before yet you still decided to tinker with it anyway by updating the firmware.

The main rule of thumb when updating any drivers/firmware for anything is that things can break or go wrong.

This. If ain't broken...

I certainly understand taking a conservative approach, especially when money is involved - but in this case, it is literally a less-than-30-second job to revert to your old firmware if you don't like the new stuff, so why not just try it?

So far, it looks to me like the flushwork improvement in 0.97 is worth the effort.

[adrd]

does anyone know how to get the web interface to connect to the cgminer api correctly?  I just did an update from .95 to .97  and the miner status data doesn't display correctly.

Code:

Mining Status

CGMiner Status	Running (Connect to CGMiner API failed)
Last Checked	
Avg. Hash Rate	
WU	
Difficulty Accepted	
HW Status

ASIC slot #1	50.0 ℃
ASIC slot #2	-
ASIC slot #3	60.0 ℃
ASIC slot #4	53.0 ℃
ASIC slot #5	48.0 ℃
ASIC slot #6	-

Thanks,
/cet

You need to enable CGminer API and restart CGminer

[Phoenix1969]

I don't see any satire at all in my posts

Anyone is free to do whatever. Just know there are risks in doing so.

Underperforming miners eh? I thought your 3 were pretty good.

they were 255, 265, and 275
the 255 sat is like a jup at 510... you call that good?
0.97 made it 220
it made the one with 265, now 260
the 3rd, one was 275, is 275

255 265 275. For sats. Pretty good.

What are your expectations? 290 290 290?

No, and stop being a smart-ass, please?
What I expect, is 3 machines running around 270-275, just like the specs say.
255 is crap, 265 is nominal

[cet]

You need to enable CGminer API and restart CGminer

Thanks, that solved my problem.

/cet

[plasmoske]

Please point to me where the spec says a sat should run at 270-275.

Okay it does write that in the website but that's for the lucky. Not everyone gets those max speeds.

It should really say "runs up to a max of ###gh/s"

[Xialla]

is this good replacement for stock heatsink fans?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835608026

thanks for any advice.

[sbfree]

do you need to run enablecores bin file on .97?? Anyone

[r3animation]

I can confirm *on my Sat* that 0.97 is faster then previous firmwares. From 270gh/s to 278gh/s.

[Phoenix1969]

Please point to me where the spec says a sat should run at 270-275.

[FiatKiller]

275 is for new orders. When we ordered they only guaranteed 200!  :-D

[plasmoske]

Everyone knows that's exaggeration.

It really should be: minimum:## and maximum:##

Jup says 550+ but average people are getting is about 480-530

But that page is for November. Maybe they'll optimise things by then..

[ImI]

do you need to run enablecores bin file on .97?? Anyone

after upgrading to 0.97 alot of cores were disabled and are now being reactivated one by one

maybe a enablecore.bin would do the same job quicker, i dont know

[sickpig]

do you need to run enablecores bin file on .97?? Anyone

after upgrading to 0.97 alot of cores were disabled and are now being reactivated one by one

do you mean disabled by cgminer while running or disable since the beginning (just after the reboot)?