Lowest you can go is 900 MHz. The only 'easy' workaround is editing the bios using Radeon Bios Editor (on Windows I'm afraid).
That's not true (at least not for a 5970) Here's output of my tool using adl calls to modify the 3 performance levels. Adapter 0 (slave):, index 3: got ODParameters
number performance levels: 3
number performance levels: 3
engine clock range: [8000..100000] step 500
memory clock range: [15000..150000] step 500
voltage range: [950..1050] step 5
GOT 3 performance Levels
performance level 0: engine: 300.00 Mhz, memory: 150.00 Mhz, core: 1.038 V
performance level 1: engine: 725.00 Mhz, memory: 150.00 Mhz, core: 1.038 V
performance level 2: engine: 870.00 Mhz, memory: 400.00 Mhz, core: 1.050 V
SET performance level successfully to the following values:
performance level 0: engine: 300.00 Mhz, memory: 150.00 Mhz, core: 1.038 V
performance level 1: engine: 725.00 Mhz, memory: 150.00 Mhz, core: 1.038 V
performance level 2: engine: 880.00 Mhz, memory: 400.00 Mhz, core: 1.050 V
After that, I can even use aticonfig to set the ramclock to 150: goldesel ati_control # aticonfig --adapter=0 --od-getclocks
Adapter 0 - ATI Radeon HD 5900 Series
Core (MHz) Memory (MHz)
Current Clocks : 880 400
Current Peak : 880 400
Configurable Peak Range : [725-1000] [150-1500]
GPU load : 0%
goldesel ati_control # aticonfig --adapter=0 --od-setclocks=880,150
Adapter 0 - ATI Radeon HD 5900 Series
New Core Peak : 880
New Memory Peak : 150
goldesel ati_control # aticonfig --adapter=0 --od-getclocks
Adapter 0 - ATI Radeon HD 5900 Series
Core (MHz) Memory (MHz)
Current Clocks : 880 150
Current Peak : 880 150
Configurable Peak Range : [725-1000] [150-1500]
GPU load : 0%
you may ask: why is the "configurable peak range" "[150-1500]"? answer: the lower limit of the range is given by the next-lower performance level's value (in this case the value of performance level 1, 150, which I set with my tool earlier) Before I modified the performance level data, it was not possible to set ram-clock below 1000, aticonfig reported "configurable range [1000-1500]" (I never set any clocks or performance level data in my BIOS) |
|
|
|
molecular how long it's been running like that?
Do you live in the Arctic circle? lol What are you going to do in the summer; move the case inside or are you still going to leave it outside? Leave it outside, of course. We don't use AC in our flats in germany, so it will be same temp inside and outside in summer anyways. Ah yeah good point. Hopefully this summer won't be all that crazy. Do you intend to add more airflow in the summer or just leave it as it is? Wood is an insulator though so I'm wondering won't the system overheat? How many fans you got in that thing? I already removed one resistor from the fan (I'm throttling that using resistors). There's 2 10cm fans at the intake of the inner metal case and one bigger one at the exhaust (white hose on wooden case), nothing fancy, though. Note that basically, the wooden case is open on the bottom ("open" in the sense, that there's only a frame so support the inner case and the center is a hole). There seems to be sufficient airflow, temps look like this:
/sys/devices/platform/via_cputemp.0/temp1_input: 22000
/sys/devices/platform/w83627ehf.656/temp1_input: 40000
/sys/devices/platform/w83627ehf.656/temp2_input: 21000
/sys/devices/platform/w83627ehf.656/temp3_input: 44500
Don't know which is what, but the highest never goes beyond 50 °C. So it gets pretty warm in there, but wouldn't call it overheating. Lets see what happens in summer  |
|
|
|
Also, for any noobs to Bitcoin like me, just realised, I can set my miners to two different servers one with a lower aggression level so when one server goes down, it just picks up on the other. At the moment I have my cards pointed at the eu server with aggression 13 - but also another 2 instances of Pheonix miner running pointing to the US server with aggression 4 - works too  Wish id known that before! uh, how cool is that! Thanks for the hint. No more fiddling around with the "flexible pool proxy" |
|
|
|
molecular how long it's been running like that?
Do you live in the Arctic circle? lol What are you going to do in the summer; move the case inside or are you still going to leave it outside? Leave it outside, of course. We don't use AC in our flats in germany, so it will be same temp inside and outside in summer anyways. |
|
|
|
Also, you will not see a bitcoin ASIC. Complex ASICs required highly skilled (read: expensive) engineers and even more expensive processes to put them into place.
ArtForz designed and ordered himself some ASICs (het put two rounds of sha256 unrolled plus H==0 logic on them, if I got that right, and I don't think one would call 2xsha456 "complex") around January and already received the first 2 batches (100+100) (this might even be old info by now, I think he might've been planning for 1000, not sure). Some weeks ago the first 96 where already online. They each do 200MHash/s using only 8W. He controls, I think, 8 of them on a small board with an fpga to feed the work and receive the solutions, which he plugs into a backplane of some sort. All 96 fit in a 4U casing. So your assertion "you will not see Bitcoin ASIC" is wrong, it's already here, ask him on #bitcoin-dev. And yes: the guy is highly skilled. But "expensive process to put them in place", I don't know: he said he used a modified toaster to do contact soldering |
|
|
|
Thanks for the replies. What I'm asking is where did the 233 in the first post come from? How do we know it's a constant? Is it a calculation related to the difficulty? If the difficulty goes up, does the shares per Thash go down?
1E6 / 2 32 = 0.000233 |
|
|
|
molecular how long it's been running like that?
since end of January that is freaking awesome. what kind of enclosure is that? is moisture in teh air a problem? It's made from wood. I'm not afraid of moisture, because the temp inside the case is always about 15 °C higher than the outside temperature. I was afraid, though, that little droplets might get sucked in when there's heavy rain and winds, so I put 3 layers of insect-stopping gaze at the air-intake (bottom), spaced about 1 cm apart. It survived a couple of windy nights with heavy rain, so I'm not worried any more. Also: there's very little dust buildup. I live in a city, but not near a big road or anything that has high traffic volume (so no diesel shit). This surprised me, but it makes sense: of course the inside of a room with people and carpets and all kinds of shit in it will have more dust than the outside. In spring some very fine pollen got inside the case, don't know if that does any harm, guess not. |
|
|
|
molecular how long it's been running like that?
since end of January |
|
|
|
""
So, Krugman didn't say anyting? |
|
|
|
Thats great your working on that, but what is everyone using now?
Probably amdoverdrvctrl |
|
|
|
2. 10 000 MINERS & TRADERS SPREAD WORLD-WIDE IS NOT THE SOCIETY FOR THE CURRENCY.
3. CURRENT DIFFICULTY ALGORITHM DOES NOT ALLOW FOR NUMBER OF MEMBERS TO GROW EXPONENTIALLY.
If by MEMBER, you mean mining operator, that might be true. But: did everyone mine gold from a gold-mine back in the gold-rush days, or only 10.000 people? How many people *use(d)* gold? More than 10.000? Yes! Also: of course people can still get into mining business: use a pool, you'll get your fair share, just as the old miners. |
|
|
|
I got some code that does this using adl. No commandline-stuff, though, it's all hardcoded currently  I could make it into a cmdline-tool, maybe with the following switches: -l (list cards and display clocks) -c <card number> (select card) -setcore <clock in mhz> (set core clock) -setram <clock in mhz> (set ram clock) example usage: aticontrol -c 0 -setcore 880 -setram 350 note: setting ram-clock using the method I use involves manipulating "performance levels" how about that? maybe we could crowdfund this, any pledgers? |
|
|
|
I wonder if I could just set my GPU to generating all possible addresses... no wait, that won't work.
It'll work fine. You can even proove it will finish. It'll just take a loooong time. |
|
|
|
Yeah, you said it comrade. Keep the red flag flying high Hey, so I'm a capitalist communist? Cool! |
|
|
|
those guys that were talking about the fpga clusters were talking speeds at multiple terahash/sec
if someone was getting those kinds of speeds we would start seeing the complete value, difficulty and everything else change completely
its a big jump but its expected, mining is profitable and people are sinking money into it, I doubt its any kind of government agency - BTC is getting big at a fast rate and this is the price we have to pay.
Price we pay? Guys, this is good for bitcoin. Makes us even harder to attack. It protects the value we have mined so far. Don't complain about new people getting in, they're helping the economy, spread the word and strengthen our security. If difficulty was dropping... now that would get me worried. I, personally, am not here to make a profit (I didn't even sell the bitcoins I would need to recover my miner cost), but am hoping to make the world a better place (however romantic/idealistic that might sound). Bitcoin is a money of (by and for) the people. |
|
|
|
I would prefer a single server too, but having two with a failover mode like deepbit would be cool. BTW: It's almost two days I get no rewards from the pool, and I see no new blocks found, is it normal? I suppose that's due to the fact that the total hash rate of the network is so huge, and still rising very fast!? It's just bad luck. It doesn't matter at all where the total hashrate goes between difficulty adjustments. We wouldn't find more blocks even if everyone else stopped their miners. |
|
|
|
Hey Luke,
thanks for setting up this pool, just have switched over from deepbit to even out the pools a bit.
same here. This pool is cool. One thing though: Could you please point out in your initial post that payments wont be valid until further 120 blocks have been generated? Not that I have a problem with that but I did not quite understand this until I've searched the forum for some time (was used to the instant payouts from deepbit).
Hehe, but don't you just love to see "generated" instead of "received", reminds me of old solo-mining day, oh what a joy it was to see those entries |
|
|
|
Private institutions can be set up to issue bitcoin based paper money. The paper is printed by the same companies that print government tender, making it prohibitively expensive to forge believable copies of these notes in the long run. Security features on the notes can include a barcode that can be scanned/entered to confirm that the note has not yet been redeemed for the underlying bitcoins at the backing institution.
I like the idea. The barcode security-feature you talk about could actually be the address owning the amount of bitcoin this note is being backed up with. That way, users can always verify the backing is actually present (to avoid possiblity of fractional reserve banking). Good idea? |
|
|
|
Are we using a 160 bit hash (which provides for the possibility of a collision) vs a 224/256 bit hash (no possibility of a collision) so that bitcoin addresses can be shorter in length? If so, is it possible for us to transition to using a 256 bit hash at some later date?
I don't buy the argument that it's TOO computationally expensive to intentionally create a collision. We have already seen the use of GPUs radically alter the bitcoin mining paradigm. In the future, we may well see devices designed specifically for the task of performing hashing functions. Perhaps those devices already exist.
Why build the opportunity for fraud into bitcoin? I don't think we need to be concerned about the number of characters of a bitcoin address when we're copying and pasting them or using QR codes anway.
Don't worry, "If you were to intentionally try to make a collision, it would currently take 2^126 times longer to generate a colliding bitcoin address than to generate a block.". This means, if you have a computer that is 1 million times as powerfull as all current miners combined, it will still take an average of 1,618,542,460,620,902,128,345,579,373 years to generate a collision. Even if Moores law holds true in the most generous way, we still have over 100 years left before this becomes feasable. And also: yes, devices designed specifically for performing bitcoin mining exist (Artforz had himself some ASICs (custom chips) made) |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
