|
Title: Mining results far worse than expected Post by: PulsedMedia on March 08, 2012, 09:45:06 PM I use Slush's pool almost solely, but the rewards has been far worse than expected always.
Before i didn't really care, just few Ghash/s worth for fun running. Currently i have on Slush 1.77Ghash worth of capacity and the yield is 0.95BTC/day while expected is ~1.2BTC/day. This has always been true of Slush's pool, and deepbit seems to be even far more worse. All my systems are properly cooled, have good PSUs, only mild OC if any and efficiency (stales etc.) travels at around 97.8 to 99.2%. I use Linuxcoin, and even after updating to latest Phoenix which increased hash rate ~7.5% i saw actually a decrease on reported hash rate @ Slush's pool, and it made absolutely no effect on yield. Generally my GPUs are running under 100% utilization, somewhat below the average expected by the hardware comparison charts, except for some cards, ie. 6770s i'm running at 242Mhash/s average! (890Mhz, stock 850, temps ~65c, stock air cooler) About to change to BAMT (Linuxcoin has always sucked, but it was most convenient to use last summer) and see if that changes things. But anyone know why my returns are roughly 20-21% below the expected? Direct Ghash/s comparison to pool total should yield 1.214BTC/day. According to: http://www.alloscomp.com/bitcoin/calculator.php should make 1.19BTC/day and after taking into account pool luck should still be 1.1186BTC/day. Also someone mentioned that 1Ghash/s stays at around 4$ per day value on average over the long term, How the hell does one achieve that kind of results? :O Title: Re: Mining results far worse than expected Post by: the joint on March 08, 2012, 09:56:52 PM I mine on Deepbit with around 1.8 G/hash.
Some days I get 1.5 BTC. Others I get .95 BTC. Variance is a part of mining. Also depends if you're doing PPS or proportional. If you're doing PPS, then the only thing that varies is your own individual hash rate. If you're doing proportional, then your payout will be affected not only by variance in your individual hash rate, but also by the pool's hash rate. Title: Re: Mining results far worse than expected Post by: PulsedMedia on March 08, 2012, 10:21:46 PM I mine on Deepbit with around 1.8 G/hash. Some days I get 1.5 BTC. Others I get .95 BTC. Variance is a part of mining. Also depends if you're doing PPS or proportional. If you're doing PPS, then the only thing that varies is your own individual hash rate. If you're doing proportional, then your payout will be affected not only by variance in your individual hash rate, but also by the pool's hash rate. My average is .95BTC, variance is small: 0.93-0.98 And i'm not really using deepbit at all anymore EDIT: I'm expecting variance, but the variance currently is a constant -20% vs. expected average. Title: Re: Mining results far worse than expected Post by: the joint on March 09, 2012, 03:57:59 AM I mine on Deepbit with around 1.8 G/hash. Some days I get 1.5 BTC. Others I get .95 BTC. Variance is a part of mining. Also depends if you're doing PPS or proportional. If you're doing PPS, then the only thing that varies is your own individual hash rate. If you're doing proportional, then your payout will be affected not only by variance in your individual hash rate, but also by the pool's hash rate. My average is .95BTC, variance is small: 0.93-0.98 And i'm not really using deepbit at all anymore EDIT: I'm expecting variance, but the variance currently is a constant -20% vs. expected average. Could be pool hoppers. Edit: And P2Pool is immune to pool hopping. Title: Re: Mining results far worse than expected Post by: DeathAndTaxes on March 09, 2012, 04:15:19 AM Variance. She is a bitch.
If you can't handle the ride then go PPS. Deepbit is hopped regularly so you are just being raped of your profits by foolishly mining in any prop pool (no Deepbit isn't "special"). Slush algorithm has hop protection but it isn't foolproof I have no idea why Slush didn't change to an equitable system a long time ago. PPS = no variance & fair PPLNS, SMPPS, ESMPPS, & DGM = variance but fair Score = hop resistant but given 4 fair proven algorithms anything less than 100% hop proof is antiquated. Prop = I like getting robbed blind daily. Your choice. p2pool is PPLNS (hop proof) and pays a subsidy. Think of it as a negative fee. Title: Re: Mining results far worse than expected Post by: PulsedMedia on March 09, 2012, 04:19:04 AM LOL!
Bitcoin pyramid in your sig was funny :P This has been always happening, getting far lower results than expected. It's odd. Oh well, got to see after upgrade to BAMT on all my rigs. Are pool hoppers hoping to gain bigger gain for their Mhash or why is that even happening? P2Pool subsidy? maybe i ought to setup P2Pool, took a glance and it seems a little bit more involved. To me it's starting to sound like P2Pool definitively gives the best pay, while being fair to other miners out there? Title: Re: Mining results far worse than expected Post by: DeathAndTaxes on March 09, 2012, 04:22:48 AM Are pool hoppers hoping to gain bigger gain for their Mhash or why is that even happening? They aren't hoping. Wishes are for fishes. They know! They get paid >100% PPS, you get paid <100% PPS. It is as simple as that. No different then them earning 1 BTC and you earn 1 BTC and then they sneak into your account and move 0.2 BTC from your account to theirs. Prop pools are simply a stupid tax. You are choosing to get paid less than fair value for your shares. Mining is zero sum if someone is getting paid more, then someone else is getting paid less. I hope that wasn't too harsh but I am blunt when it comes to hopping and prop pools. I hope it doesn't come off as too mean. Title: Re: Mining results far worse than expected Post by: trouserless on March 10, 2012, 01:43:16 AM I mine on Deepbit with around 1.8 G/hash. Some days I get 1.5 BTC. Others I get .95 BTC. Variance is a part of mining. Also depends if you're doing PPS or proportional. If you're doing PPS, then the only thing that varies is your own individual hash rate. If you're doing proportional, then your payout will be affected not only by variance in your individual hash rate, but also by the pool's hash rate. My average is .95BTC, variance is small: 0.93-0.98 And i'm not really using deepbit at all anymore EDIT: I'm expecting variance, but the variance currently is a constant -20% vs. expected average. Try p2pool + 1 p2pool is the only way to avoid fees...unless you mine solo, which is loco these days... Title: Re: Mining results far worse than expected Post by: Tittiez on March 10, 2012, 03:11:42 AM P2Pool subsidy? People support the others using P2Pool so much they donate btc to the miners. Title: Re: Mining results far worse than expected Post by: Chlorine on March 16, 2012, 08:56:51 PM Although there are many factors that can influence mining performance, you may have a look at this real-time chart, which compares the performance of different clients.
http://www.abcpool.co/mining-software-comparison.php Title: Re: Mining results far worse than expected Post by: -ck on March 18, 2012, 02:44:25 AM Although there are many factors that can influence mining performance, you may have a look at this real-time chart, which compares the performance of different clients. Interesting data. Nice to see cgminer be the most popular client. Just a heads up, it's "paid" not "payed". Dunno why just about every single miner and pool seems to misspell it this spastic way.http://www.abcpool.co/mining-software-comparison.php Title: Re: Mining results far worse than expected Post by: Miner612 on April 19, 2012, 09:38:29 PM STOP USING THE BIGGEST POOLS.
STOP USING DEEPBIT STOP USING SLUSH You people are freaking clueless. Jesus. |