Re: Batch 4 S9s to be clocked at 550MHz, Achieve 11.8THash/s?

So if there is no link for batch 4 firmware where did you find the info?

That screenshot is from the bitmain firmware site; the file description next to the blank field is:

Quote

S9 firmware-20160608-650M
s9firmware-20160608-600M,12.93T
s9 firmware -20160608-550M,11.85T

The last line showed up most recently. Like I said - speculation, but it is pretty suggestive.

yeah and based on some reports about early batches and under clocks working I think the gear was a ting bit too hard on the

[antimatter < fuck you spell check]

antminer psu's . I had the feeling they would need to slow the clocks up based on heat from summer mining and the psu being rated a bit higher then it really is.

There is still nothing to backup APW3's not working. I am 2 for 2 on working with APW3's. There are others out there using them as-well. I just want to see actual test's showing this before we accept it as fact.

I just have not seen hand's on showing this. It seems to be speculation that is not backed up by testing. And that is just my opinion and I realize I'm one user. Again i'm not meaning this is a rude way (i hate how there is no emotion in posts). I just think we should have actual tests showing this which I have not seen.

I think they work if it is not too hot and all my guesses on this are antecdotial not backed up by any good tests at all.

The best I have is antminer reduced the draw on the miners from batch 1 to batch 2 and batch 3.
I never owned an antminer psu but they spec to the charts below

now look at the scale they put it is very deceptive the oval covers 30c the rectangle covers 10 c

the psu drops a ton of amps in that 10c range the angle is shown far less steep due to the scaling they put. that drop off is a lot and very steep not my graphs these are bitmaintech's graphs. Please remember how the psu would fail in the s-2 as it was a 1000 watt psu and should have been a 1200 watt psu.