|
I got an RTX 2060 GPU. I was testing it using Jean_Luc's vanitygen and kangaroo. With the vanitygen the speed was at least +900 MKeys and the kangaroo speed was doing between 500 and 600 MKeys. Is this normal or do I have the wrong configuration with kangaroo?
|
|
|
|
|
So what does 256 bits look like stored in a work file, I need to see an example.
|
|
|
|
Expected RAM is 135431276999271530496 MB
The Executable is running into OOM (out of memory) and silently fails?
So that's why the bits are shaved off that's causing the range to seem like its smaller? It doesn't fail, it does hash. It just the range is smaller. |
|
|
|
Anybody else see this:
What is problem detail? try test compare with binary windows .exe release and you compile version Did both have problem? I can only use the windows.exe, I can't compile because I don't have a gpu. I used 2 different laptops, 1 had reduced range and the other had doubled the range. On top of that I couldn't use my work files with the kangaroo 256. |
|
|
|
Anybody else see this:  |
|
|
|
All talk and no examples of anything, getting tired of all this theory talk.
There are dozens of steps & modules in this process, its like cooking gourmet meal for a 1,000 people Your the type of person that wants a GUI, and his hand held going to the bathroom. All my stuff is cmd-line, like any hacking of cryptography its a long and tedious process, I have no intention of automating and black boxxing for morons. I will provide components and explain in detail how to use each component, but I will only do this with people who are not morons. Obviously, if you ain't already got a MS in physics or math, and ain't a python/c++ guru, and if you ain't got 10+ years experience in LINUX, no source on earth is going to help you, nobody helped me get this stuff going I did it on my own, and if smart people want to take this to the next step, that's good with me. If you didn't spend 20+ years as a sw developer doing networking, os, graphics, device-drivers, .. then you aint' going to get any of this ever. What moron 'talk' the entire thing is to teach people to think the right way about hacking bitcoin. GARWIN had a great quote "The hardest thing about dropping a-bomb was that once it was dropped they couldn't deny it existed", same here once everybody know's how easy it is to hack bitcoin, then the mythology is game-over.Garwin was the presidents advisor on atomic physics for 50+ years, he's probably dead now. Theory is way more interesting to me than 'code', you say your tired of 'thinking' you must be a first class un-educated fool. Why are you even posting? Don't you have a computer game to play? Dude you are a scammer, and your programs have malware in it. Those little projects that you just uploaded that probably don't even work cause you was trying to sell those same ones over a year ago. Now they are free, I wonder why.....still talk that same gibberish theory with those crappy programs you got and I don't remember trying to use your programs because you was trying to sell them. Now all of a sudden uploading them for free. Keep talking crazy, your account will be gone. You the one brought up the word moron, I could go on and on about you. |
|
|
|
So what exactly does your fork do? Make it able to search in a 256 bit range? Anything else? Yea that's it, just make it able to search in a 256 bit range. That's all he was working on. |
|
|
|
All talk and no examples of anything, getting tired of all this theory talk.
You can lead a moron to water, but you can't make them drink, funny how this works. I see I triggered you real good, you know you spam the same thing over and over. You will stop posting for a while and start back. You do it every time. |
|
|
|
|
All talk and no examples of anything, getting tired of all this theory talk.
|
|
|
|
I only have 660 ti and this gives me a speed of 80 raw, 45 both addresses, 25 with tens of millions of addresses loaded. Can I count on anything or wasting my time? I see there are a lot of owners here for 4x3090, etc.
You're probably not going to find an address with a large search range using a single 660Ti or even four GPUs. What's the ideal speed to find an address, small and large search range? |
|
|
|
None of what you said makes sense....if you could run one 2^60 keyspace range in 1 second, how many days would it take to run 2^60 ranges??
Random = starting point for each tame and wild then they jump uniformly.
You should really stop comparing the two programs, they are different.
I just think if still run kangaroo all keyspace 2**120 still can not solve his puzzle I not have power with Tesla V100 or any GTX 30xx I just got new GPU GTX 1080 (not ti) for working graphics 3D render just looing for strategy for small card can do. and can run on some free time if method notworking I change to other method can possible You don't suppose to search all the space of course you won't solved it that way, that's what the DPs is for. |
|
|
|
Ok, the 204.56 MK/s and 165.57 MK/s are those 2 speeds are added together to equal 370.13 MK/s?
No. The first value on the left is the combined speed of both the CPU and GPU. The second value (165) is measuring the GPU speed only. it means the CPU speed is actually about 39 MK/s. Oh ok then, so what gpu's can go at least or close to 1 billion keys with kangaroo? A single RTX3090 can do 3 or 4 gigakeys/s, so it's not unreasonable to assume the other RTX 30s can search in excess of 1GK/s too. What about the RTX 20s? |
|
|
|
Ok, the 204.56 MK/s and 165.57 MK/s are those 2 speeds are added together to equal 370.13 MK/s?
No. The first value on the left is the combined speed of both the CPU and GPU. The second value (165) is measuring the GPU speed only. it means the CPU speed is actually about 39 MK/s. Oh ok then, so what gpu's can go at least or close to 1 billion keys with kangaroo? |
|
|
|
When you run kangaroo what are the speeds on the GTX 1060 and GTX 1050Ti?
I use GTX 1050 not Ti on laptop speed 120-150M [204.56 MK/s][GPU 165.57 MK/s][Count 2^30.02][Dead 0][07s (Avg 01:28)][34.6/68.0MB] GTX 1050 and GTX 1050Ti is difference right GTX 1050Ti may be double speed to high more 50% Ok, the 204.56 MK/s and 165.57 MK/s are those 2 speeds are added together to equal 370.13 MK/s? |
|
|
|
I don't know anyone mass buying V100s; it is just the example used to solve #120 because that is the type and number of cards that were used to solve #110 and #115.
I feel like #120 is going to be solved by large numbers of older cards lying around in people's garages somewhere, rather than with anything that can be rented with AWS or Vast. Even 100 of any high-end card just seems too expensive for someone with deep pockets to rent in the long run and you can get better results searching with a few thousand of people's Maxwell and Pascal cards (and even Radeons if Kangaroo ever gets ported to OpenCL). Well, it will be me so I can tell you they are all RTX 20xx and 30xx, but I am using 1 GTX 1060 and 1 GTX 1050Ti to do the tedious work.  EDIT: I'm not running it full time, just here and there, so anyone really has a chance. When you run kangaroo what are the speeds on the GTX 1060 and GTX 1050Ti? |
|
|
|
last night I test run kangaroo python script version all night with puzzle #120 it is not work good Did you really think you would solve it overnight running a slower python script?? For each tame, there is a wild to solve the key. If you would stop mixing hex with decimal I would try to explain it better but I'm not going to convert them back and forth. I'm still not 100% sure what you do not understand or what you are trying to figure out. But I will tell you, you may get lucky and solve the key using python script only using a CPU but the odds are low; on average it would take thousands of years to solve. Do you know how many pairs of tames + wilds can solve a key in a given range or is it just 1 pair that can solve a key? |
|
|
|
256 card x Tesla V100 32GB is close to or around 300 billion keys per second. I'm going after a 256 bit key with cpu now.
Can 256 card x Tesla V100 32GB try with 64 bit puzzle #64 still can not crack in one day. and still can not crack 120 bit puzzle #120 by kangaroo need to discover other algorithms more No, it would take up to 2 years or a little bit more to search the whole space of 2^64 with 256 card x Tesla V100 32GB. |
|
|
|
Range is too high and too wide for a reason...Billions of dollars in wallets/private keys. If it was too narrow of a range, no one would use Bitcoin.
It's all relative to your GPU/CPU power. You can't have one GTX 1050 and expect to find keys in 120 bit range over night, or over a decade. But if you have many GPUs, then you have a chance to find keys after time, depending on your GPU power.
challenge is too big for 256 bit it is can not possible find challenge what maximum we can do on records, will be stuck with 120 bit forever same 256 bit or not? if can do 120 may be can use up to 140 bit or some 2-3 level, do far from 160 bit I think all random method is stuck on too high range, next method may be concern about calculate or mix last records is 256 card x Tesla V100 32GB right, How many power for GPU need to solve I try kangaroo cpu only is difference with GPU over 12-15 time, kangaroo require to use with GPU 256 card x Tesla V100 32GB is close to or around 300 billion keys per second. I'm going after a 256 bit key with cpu now. |
|
|
|
|
How much RAM is needed to solve key #120, #125, and #130 with BSGS?
|
|
|
|
This is just not true. The RAM consumed/used is not dependent on the bits being search...it comes down to your DP setting and how often you save the work file. I don't see your settings/flags when starting the program but you are using a very low -d setting or that plus using a long save to file time.
I can see now that searching a 256-bit interval will become feasible if we use 128+ bits of DP mask  How feasible are you talking? So you are working on searching 256-bit interval using 128 + bits of DP mask too?
I forgot about this thread - sorry about that. Yeah I am, so far I have the actual program running on GPU, it's running at ~260MKeys/s with the expanded dpmask on my T4 though but it's making quite a large number of same herd collisions and dead kangaroos. I had actually expected the speed to be much faster, like around ~1500MKeys/s given that I saw someone's V100 do ~1100MKeys/s. I doubt checking three more uint64's for equality within the main loop is what's causing this speed drop but it's a good opportunity to peek into the CUDA accelerated Int class and see what else can be sped up. NotATether, Did you ever work on the 128 + bits DP mask? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
