Bitcoin Forum

which is more stable and gives you more hashrate ? shortly which is better ?

Which car is faster and more comfortable? Mercedes or BMW?

Everything depends, and there isn't one single good asnwer. There are variables. But IMO I tend to vote for Linux.

You cannot find many miner softwares for Ubuntu OS and I don't think your hash rate depends on the OS you are using. You have to use the best best mother board, processor and high gaming console graphic card to get the high hash rate while you are mining any coin. Try using windows itself to get the s/w supported to you.

I does depend on OS, or rather on drivers. So OS might give different results (hashrate and power drain).

Also don't state wrong statements. You don't need best motherboard and best processor. In fact you need the cheapest processor and MB with enough PCI-E lines.

 Most major mining software writers support Ubuntu.
 In fact, I can't think of one that does NOT (though Claymore was anti-LINUX for a while he changed his stance when he finally realized how much he was LOSING by not doing so).

 Hash rate generally isn't OS specific - the differences are minor at most, and are normally DRIVER dependent issues not OS specific ones.

 The main tradeoff is that LINUX is more stable, but the tools for overclock and undervolt are a lot more primitive and don't work as well as Afterburner for Windows.

 You do NOT need a high-end processor AT ALL for mining, and mining motherboards don't tend to work well as high-end gaming motherboards as mining doesn't NEED the throughput to the GPUs that gaming does.
 I ran my triple R9 290 based ETH rig on a Sempron 145 low-end single-core CPU for many months, and saw ZERO hashrate change when I upgraded that rig to a Athlon X2 240 dual-core (the only difference is that ETH's DAG file generation went quicker, but that normally happens BETWEEN blocks and doesn't affect hashrate).

The answer is very simple : Ubuntu :
 - more stable
 - more secure (no viruses)
 - more speed
 - no automatic or issues reboots
 - no very long updates
 - and so on...

If it isn't a case that you're going to run 8+ same cards for mining or having a issue with windows lisence
,Windows is easier with troubleshooting and supports many additional helper tools.
There's no additional stability with using ubuntu.

Linux is more secure and open source, security should be a priority. but windows is also safe if we use good security. updated antivirus and also windows using the original software.

I think Ubuntu should be better for mining on stability and higher hashrate. I just use window because of its user friendly, I do the remote mining, and I'm sure my old friend will get mad if I ask him reset or do sth else in Ubuntu or Linux.

I used both, and Ubuntu is better and much stable compared to Windows in mining rig, but it requires some configurations to OC your GPU, it is not as easy as Windows by using Afterburner or other utilities.

if you are after "user friendly", then you should just use ubuntu and some ready to use os. In simplemining you just create and usb stick and turn it on. No drivers, no gpu instaling, no antivirus, no msiafterburner, no wattman, no overiding drivers, no problems with 8+ gpus and so on... Ethos is a little bit more advanced to start with, but still if you read FAQ can be done faster than any windows...

i make win10 rigs with 100% uptime...  I have seen linux rigs with impressive similar uptimes as well.  It's all about adding what you need, and removing what you dont need.

ill be doing a linux OS machine for purely mining soon, and ill have more to input as a comparison.   But i have had very reliable and stable windows machines.

Both are just fine for mining and the differences are marginal most of the time. After you get BIOS issues and all that out of the way, just pick whichever you like more. Windows is usually not free and although you can get licenses for under $5 nowadays, I still prefer Ubuntu for its simplicity and compatibility with pretty much all mining software.

agreed.  either that or high gpu density needing linux for that, or if you have limited network bandwidth and dont want win10 machines doing their own business as they tend to do....

Where are you getting a $5 Windows license?

Seuss

I get free.

Install 7;  activate.
Install 10 as upgrade after SP1 updates on 7.

Automatically Licensed/activated copy of 10.

Just don't use a blacklisted 7 install; or janky autoKMS.

 100% uptime over how many years?
 "100% uptime" by itself is a MEANINGLESS claim.

 I have owned and maintained a LOT of LINUX machines (some Ubuntu but mostly Slackware and some Redhat) that achieved uptime measured in YEARS between power outages, physical moves of the machines, HARDWARE failures (usually the hard drive), and such - and some of them might have exceeded a DECADE had I stayed put in the same place long enough and had no power outages that exceeded the runtime of the UPS some of those systems were on.
 Most of these have been doing Crypto work (keep in mind that at it's root, Cryptocoin Mining is crypto work) on the distributed.net RC5-72 project.
 This is the SAME sort of workload Cryptocoin mining puts on a GPU, and very similar stress levels - the Dnet client used to be widely-used AS a "stress test" tool by review websites for both CPUs and GPUs.

 I have seen exactly ONE Windows machine (it was running NT 3.51 SP 5) that managed ONE year of uptime under the same conditions - and nothing since that could even get to the one year mark without a crash.


 Win 10? I gave up on it entirely due to the crashyness - even on the one mining machine I tried it on it never managed one MONTH of uptime without a bluescreen, and that was running the SAME AMD driver version (15.12) I used on the same hardware under LINUX with long uptime.
 Don't get me started on the "crashy" level of Win10 on my gaming rig - it was SO bad I reverted to Win7 despite the performance hit of "no more DirectX 12" in the highest-end game I usually play.
 I can't remember if I ever had more than a 3 day period without a crash - no matter WHAT driver version I tried.


 I do agree that Windows is more user friendly (and that's said as a 25+ year LINUX veteran), but it's not even in the same COUNTRY when it comes to stability, much less the same ballpark.


 As far as I know, ALL of the "mining specific OS" are based on Ubuntu.

You don't even have to go through all of that if you have a valid Windows 7 key as the Windows 10 activation will accept those keys as well on a fresh install. I have done this on several of mine as well as several friends PCs already and it has worked every time.

I think installing Windows 7 for the sole purpose to upgrade to Windows 10 will have the potential to cause more issues with stability down the road versus a fresh Windows 10 install.

Also if you look around there are free options for Windows 10 as well such as the Assistive Technology Users Free Upgrade found here: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/accessibility/windows10upgrade

as-in, they only shutdown or reboot if my power goes out;  I personally shut them down, or they process updates that require updates.

the OS itself is pretty stable, and easy to configure.   Ubuntu is pretty close to easyness... but I digress....   I have prefect uptimes on my machines.  I wont settle for less.

Anytime they start becoming unstable, a PSU is failing, or the caps on a device are going bad.

We are far from the XP days...... reliability speaking.   10 is pretty solid.  It just has bloat built-in that people dislike.  Nothing much else to complain about.  Especially since its always free for me.

In my experience, XP was MORE stable than 10 is - once it got enough service packs under the hood.

 Still wasn't anywhere close to 2000 stability, much less NT4 SP6 or NT 3.51 SP5.

 For that matter, *7* seems to have turned out eventually to be able to match or SLIGHTLY exceed XP stability - and 10 is nowhere NEAR 7's poor stability level.

 Then there was the combination of Windows for Workgroups 3.11 with QEMM 7.54 - which wasn't NT level stability but could argue with 2k and definitely beat 10.


 Still waiting on a "how long they have stayed up at a time" mention.

 Perfect uptime for a couple months at a time is NOTHING.

Performance really comes down to the miner and GPU drivers.  The disk, CPU, and network see far lower loads.

They both have their advantages.  Personally, I like Ubuntu over Windows for mining because it better fits what I am doing with my setup.  

A lightweight AMD Ubuntu build (minimal services, no X) takes less than 2gb of NFS space and can run near forever with backup power.  My rigs only go down if the GPU overheats/crashes or the server loses a drive (I changed it to RAID 1 so that's no longer a problem).

Remember, your concept/perception of an uptime's scale is probably not the concept of a new member whom is asking these types of questions as he did.  

Crap;  you have to babysit some antminer S7's... which their system is based on what OS again?  

It comes down to fallibility in the person configuring it and the hardware being used.  Before or during use.
Most miners need maintenance;  inspections, etc.  How many GPU rigs and asics do you have on for an extended period of time over this "many month" figure you speak of?  Does it matter?  Nope.  Its just data.

...longest time without a power failure or rebooting myself is a tad over 6 months in the last years time.  I live in the cuts;  outages are somewhat regular depending on season.  My old 7 machine (before moving out to here) was online for over 2 years before I moved from there to where I am now.  Gamed on it every day.  It was my media center, security DVR and NAS as well.  It still is.  And, It got upgraded to 10 and remains the same as much as it can.

if you think XP is stable;  then, props to you I guess.... It was buggy as shit; right up to the end...  I likened it to being a more colorful version of WinME that was capable of staying operational for longer than a day or two at a time without crashes.  I still don't know how they were able to milk it for soooo long.

As far as the OS is concerned when speaking of Microsoft (root system operation and especially the HAL); hands down 10 is light years above XP.  The list goes on...... But I digress...

This topic isn't about how long my pc remains powered on and functioning properly... Nor is it a place to discuss the lack or presence of the future/current support's decision on your choice  for any said OS's. (hardware and software speaking)   You can discuss it on another thread.  We are here to share our findings with the OP to give some insight on what route to choose because he asked us whats more stable,  and a other few questions as well; that showed he did not understand the OS's role in mining among other things.

Let that last sentence sink in.

 You have to babysit S7 miners due to the HARDWARE having low reliability and high error rates.
 That's NOT an OS issue.
 Same thing on the S9, but it appears to have even WORSE reliability at the hardware level given how many hashboards flat out DIE on them.
 Compare to the S5 that WAS a lot more stable and reliable because the HARDWARE had a much higher reliability factor and a lower hardware error rate per hash done.
 Ditto the Spondoolies SP20, or the Innosilicon A2, for other even better known "keeps working for a long time without issues" ASIC that happen to run a LINUX version on their controller.

 I didn't say I think XP is stable - I don't consider ANY Windows version to be stable.
 M$ didn't WANT to "milk XP" - they LOST money due to how long it lasted since UPGRADE sales were very low prior to 7 - but people stayed on XP because the alternatives were even WORSE prior to 7, and in many respects 7 was not as good (though it WAS better than "XP64" by a ton which is probably WHY 7 caught on where Vista failed miserably).

 Powered on and functioning properly IS at least part of the definition of "stable" for an OS.
 It's not the fault of the OS if the power goes out - but if the power is there it IS the job of the OS to function properly.

 And as YOU YOURSELF said in "that last sentence", "because he asked us what's more stable".

 Perhaps you should try reading your own words?

still; you "consider" your opinion to be higher than any else.   No more to be said.  Look at the bigger picture;  not a facet.

 My opinion is based on one heck of a lot of related experience working with a very wide range of hardware over decades of both professional AND personal experience.

 It's also a very widely held opinion by the large majority of folks I have EVER discussed the subject with or seen postings from.

 Have you ever considered why the majority of the World Wide Web and pretty much ALL of the backbone for it runs on LINUX, Unix or Cisco's old internaly-developed OS, NOT on Windows, despite massive Microsoft BILLIONS of marketing to change that and the much easier ability to find programmers for Windows?

 Here's a clue - it's the RELIABILITY, STABILITY, and PERFORMANCE (adherence to standards used to be a major issue as well, but Microsoft HAS cleaned up it's act for the most part there by lack of choice) - and this is WIDELY DOCUMENTED.

QuintLeo,

I respect your opinions on many things, but your OS stability rants are bordering on fanatical.  When Linux is used as a server OS, it's very stable... but so is Windows Server OS.  Millions of enterprise Windows Server OS installations are there for a reason... market momentum.  Internet services run on Linux and other Unix variants because they were the first to develop the standards and tools that brought the internet to life... once again market momentum.  Linux is slowly gaining market share in the general purpose server OS realm as more experience with the systems and tools are brought into the workforce.  Just like the old adage "no one ever got fired for buying IBM"... no IT manager or director will ever get fired for buying Windows Server OS.  Why?  Because it has great support and stability.

The consumer level versions of Windows contain tons of built in features and automation that can cause stability issues, but bleeding edge consumer level linux OS can also have stability issues.

I've never had a windows mining rig blue screen or "crash".  99% of the time, its the mining software itself that is unstable, or causes a driver exception... or a hardware issue like a riser card or GPU fault.