thanks - but isn't that the purpose of fault protection X11 boards?

https://www.parallelminer.com/product/x11-breakout-board-adapter/
https://www.parallelminer.com/product/x11-breakout-board-fault-protection-cable-kit/

Sorry for the misunderstanding, this is the PSU I am referring to:

https://www.parallelminer.com/product/hp-1200watt-high-efficiency-platinum-hot-plug-power-supply-dps-1200fb-1-a/

Hi guys,

I have 2x 1200W common slot PSU that I want to use on the same mining gear.

I have similar things in the past back in the early days of overclocking over 15 years ago and back then there were some things to do to get this running correctly.


Specifically:
* Do I need to connect the grounds from each PSU together? or is that done automatically through the hardware (MB, GPU's, etc.)
* Same question for the 12V, should I connect the GND and 12V lines together through a couple of 6 pins connectors. What happens if I do?

The goal of connecting 12V and GND would be to streamline what goes where, so that I don't have to really pay attention too much about how many GPU's should I connect to each PSU's. Maybe I am overthinking it, but I know some current is going through the PCI-E riser boards, and some through the 6-pin Power connect on the GPU itself. But what's the balance? that's highly dependent on the cards themselves.

from my point of view connecting 2 PSU together (linking 12's and GND's lines) would be ideal - though the question of much current will be going through the "bridge cable". If that's too risky (through cable), why don't manufacturers of PDB/Breakout boards don't do DUAL boards with all the linking done through the PCB where it's a lot easier to get through high current?

thanks

took mine ~ 6 hours (38 confirmations) before it actually showed up
just be patient I guess

I would say the 1000W PSU with backplane is your best bet - not expensive and will do the job cleaner (i.e. less cable management)

cheers

of course the pump will add some power draw but not as much as what you are gaining from the lower GPU temperatures.
plenty of GPU reviews that show power draw and temperatures you'll see the correlation. a quick search shows that on a R9-290X, 20C differences can reduce the power draw by up to 30W (on load of course). Multiply that by a few graphics cards, add a CPU in the loop and you can see relevant drops in power draw.
Note that LC pumps are typically 12-15W at full speed, but you'll see if you actually get into it someday that you don't need the pump running higher than half speed - especially on a GPU.

no need for exotic cooling. Any liquid cooling solutions will easily bring the GPU temperature by 30-40C or more depending on the block / gpu.
not only this is noticeable reduction power draw in general, but this is especially true when we're talking about a rig working 24/7. Helps with the life of the GPU and it'll make the PC a lot less noisy.

(just in case noobs with AIO coolers for their CPU come in claiming there is no 30-40C difference between their air cooled CPU and their now liquid cooled CPU: we're talking about GPU's here and that's completely different (if you don't know, just read about how widely different CPu and GPU thermal fluxes are).

Lower die temperatures => lower electronic impedance => lower heat generated = lower current consumption (hence power draw).

in case anyone is interested, I fixed the problem by using a stratum proxy
220 GH/s locally and on pool side

nevermind I guess I figured it out.
we'll see how this works, just hoping for a smaller number of stales..

Hi
I've got a few block erupter miners that need the stratum proxy to run - working fine.

I've had some strange discrepancies in the hash rate of my avalon 200 clone (which uses cgminer) between local hash rate and pool rates (tried a few different pools).
Anyway, I've got no high hopes in this "idea" but if possible I'd like to try to see if it makes any difference.

So, is it possible to configure cgminer to connect to the stratum proxy hosted on a computer on the same LAN?

thanks

-S

set your laptop to 192.168.0.99 (for example)
connect the avalon to your computer directly with a ethernet cable.
use angry grip again and scan from 192.168.0.1 to 192.168.1.254.. basically redo steps 3 through 6 in my first response.

It probably reassigned a different IP when you switched to wireless.
Use angry grip scanner again to get the new IP and use that IP to log in with your web browser.
When you're logged in just go to the CGminer status page to see if it's hashing. If not you may have a problem with some of your network settings, or some of your pool settings. But if you're on DHCP your router probably assigned the correct network settings, so it's probably your pool settings that are incorrect.

Use Angry grip scanner again and you should be able to find its IP. then use that IP in your web browser to log in.

hey there - I have the same unit and ran in the exact same problem.
Mine was setup on a completely different network (although it was brand new).

Anyway, here's your fix:

1. Download: http://download.cnet.com/Angry-IP-Scanner/3000-2085_4-10045978.html
2. No need for extraction, you can run it from your OS directly. (you may need to download JAVA - if you don't have it, it'll prompt you to do so)
3. type in the IP range: from 192.168.0.1 to 192.168.1.254
4. It'll take a few minute but it'll find it.
5. Setup your computer with a compatible IP, 192.168.1.XXX or 192.168.0.XXX depending on the IP the miner was using.
6. Browse to the miner IP
7. Go to the Network tab, then the Interface sub tab, then click Edit
8. Adjust the network config to match your router
9. Click Save and Apply - close browser.
10. It'll restart the unit - while it does reset up your computer network adapter to your original settings
11. restart your web browser, browse to the new miner IP
12. setup your pool configuration: Status tab, CGminer configuration sub tab
13. save and apply
14. profit

upping this one last time in case some had an idea?

no matter stock or o/c'ed to 1400 it's hashing with a ratio (DiffS / Local Work) of 12-15% no matter either pool (only tried BTCguild and BTCdig).
API log shows very consistent numbers throughout the 16 miners (all within 1% of each other).

Local hashing rate (Cgminer status page) is on spec (200 stock) - (215/220 @ 1400).

yes looks like you have problems with some of your miners.
I have the same miner and had problems too - different kind though: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=438714.0
as far as I can tell I have a huge amount of stales which I can't seem to fix. Overclocking seems to make the number of stales increase. Overall ~ 13% of stales when running at 1300. Kind of sucks

good luck fixing your problem - I wish I went with S1's. bahh

odd - cgminer status now says the btcguild server is dead.
I thought it was another problem with this unit but I just added the btcdig info again and it's connecting/hashing fine with btcdig.
my other miner on btcguild is still working fine though. like I said - odd.

I've got a crazy high number of stale shares which is costing me about 25% loss on hashing speed.

Does anyone have any idea what could cause that and if there is a way around this?
If not I am afraid I will have to return the unit.

here's the thread where I explained my problem.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=438714.new#new

thanks

Are these numbers what gives an idea of the number of errors?

(17 hours 35 mn)
LocalWork: 2,870,281
DiffA: 2,050,944
DiffR: 29,824
DiffS: 729,728