|
Hello, I'd like to join.
BTC address in my signature.
|
|
|
|
|
Novaexchange: "We will first test deposit and withdrawal and if it works we will open markets and enable deposits and withdrawals." :-)
|
|
|
|
|
...and remember that the minting method is only a part of the story, when talking about distribution.
Proof of capacity may bring less miner centralisation, but it's still something that can be developed to a professional level.
|
|
|
|
|
@gnasirator: your ideas are interesting, but to create a block you will still need to solve some kind of "problem", otherwise you would have a lot of blocks created together and no way to tell which one to keep. Also every time a transaction is made, the nodes would generate a block, making too many of them.
|
|
|
|
New blockchain snapshot: https://mega.nz/#!EEB3CRbQ!X85fLbdUXjFb2mx3gsJdBYcZJeg1QGBRukLau8jxKXQ |
|
|
|
Hey There,
just a question the digibite core wallet is now running for one day and telling me the the synchronizing with the network will take about 10 Year?
This is not normal right?
And it is not on topic either, you should ask in the digibyte thread. |
|
|
|
GDDR5X GPUs still have issues with compatibility. A 1080 for instance will sometimes get the full 30% speed increase over a 1070, but often times it wont. About half the algos worth mining right now have problems with GDDR5X. You'll get anywhere from 10%-30% (usually around 15%). A 1080ti is no different. It's a shitshow, skein doesn't have problems.
why "half the algo", i only have bad result on ETH and feathercoin, all other algo i'm doing 60-70% more versus a 1070, with my 1080ti and 80-90% on skein/jha You should be getting +30% compared to a 1070 with a 1080 and +85% compared to a 1070 with a 1080ti according to cuda counts and pricing. If you're getting 60-70% more then a 1070 with a 1080 you have something misconfigured with your 1070 as it's underperforming. A 1080 and 1080ti will underperform compared to a 1070, but not the opposite direction unless you have something setup wrong. GDDR5 is quite mature, algos have problems with GDDR5X. As far as what algos are having problems, you've quoted someone of them. I'm not going to tell you about them though. i said 70% more than a 1070 with a 1080ti not a 1080, 90% only on jha and skein, i'm not aware of any algo as bad as ETH and feathercoin, for a 1080ti, which i don't care anyway they are far from being the best algo to mine They aren't 'as bad', Dagger is crippled. There are a couple others, but you're still going to be getting a speed boost, but instead of +85%, you're getting 40-50%. what are those other bad algo with 50% only, i'm curious, i see that bitcore algo timetravel 10 is another one with 60%, which is not good Timetravel (8 or 10) is just like x11, almost no ram usage. If it looks slower on gddr5x, is just because of too low intensity. Even with higher intensity (which I've already tried) it doesn't run at full speed. Protip, 1070 is also running at too low of intensity, so it doesn't change anything. Yes it does. The 1070 and 1080 have the same ram size (the 1080ti has a little more, but not enough to increase intensity sensibly), but the 1080 has more cuda cores and slower ram, hence why it needs higher intensity. That doesn't necessarily mean you can take advantage of it, but I know it's true because I tried it myself. |
|
|
|
GDDR5X GPUs still have issues with compatibility. A 1080 for instance will sometimes get the full 30% speed increase over a 1070, but often times it wont. About half the algos worth mining right now have problems with GDDR5X. You'll get anywhere from 10%-30% (usually around 15%). A 1080ti is no different. It's a shitshow, skein doesn't have problems.
why "half the algo", i only have bad result on ETH and feathercoin, all other algo i'm doing 60-70% more versus a 1070, with my 1080ti and 80-90% on skein/jha You should be getting +30% compared to a 1070 with a 1080 and +85% compared to a 1070 with a 1080ti according to cuda counts and pricing. If you're getting 60-70% more then a 1070 with a 1080 you have something misconfigured with your 1070 as it's underperforming. A 1080 and 1080ti will underperform compared to a 1070, but not the opposite direction unless you have something setup wrong. GDDR5 is quite mature, algos have problems with GDDR5X. As far as what algos are having problems, you've quoted someone of them. I'm not going to tell you about them though. i said 70% more than a 1070 with a 1080ti not a 1080, 90% only on jha and skein, i'm not aware of any algo as bad as ETH and feathercoin, for a 1080ti, which i don't care anyway they are far from being the best algo to mine They aren't 'as bad', Dagger is crippled. There are a couple others, but you're still going to be getting a speed boost, but instead of +85%, you're getting 40-50%. what are those other bad algo with 50% only, i'm curious, i see that bitcore algo timetravel 10 is another one with 60%, which is not good Timetravel (8 or 10) is just like x11, almost no ram usage. If it looks slower on gddr5x, is just because of too low intensity. |
|
|
|
GDDR5X GPUs still have issues with compatibility. A 1080 for instance will sometimes get the full 30% speed increase over a 1070, but often times it wont. About half the algos worth mining right now have problems with GDDR5X. You'll get anywhere from 10%-30% (usually around 15%). A 1080ti is no different. It's a shitshow, skein doesn't have problems.
These are not issues, but "GDDR5 X features" bandwidth is up, but latency/access for smaller chunks is not, thus algos that do not depend on bandwidth (skein), or can use memory in fully cached chunks scale with cores. Algos which are critical with latency or non-cached memory access doesn't scale well What? That's common bogus developer rhetoric. GDDR5X is broken for about half the algos. It needs to be fixed. It's not a feature until it actually does something remotely beneficial. And no it's not a 'oh it's latency and it's broken 4evarrrr' thing, algos need to be tuned to it. Go read about GDDR5x It uses same chips as simple gddr5, but with wider 64b per access (32b for gddr5) Memory latency, access times, its all same. GDDR5X memory rated 10GBps uses chips which are rated 1.25GBps GDDR5 memory rated 5GBps uses same, rated 1.25GBps chips. Bandwidth is up, latency and time to access are same. Think sdram-ddr-ddr2-ddr3-ddr4 Compare 1080 with "9000Mhz memory" with 1070 using "8000Mhz memory" 1080 uses 1.25GBps chips, 1070 uses chips rated for 2.0GBps. They have way lower latency Think about how Ryzen fails is some tests, because it s cache latency is much higher Yeah, still have no idea what sort of a point you're making here. I in no way, shape, or form said that GDDR5X is terrible (it works well for some things, such as gaming), but when it comes to mining it doesn't work well. You essentially made all the points for me. It's terrible in any algo that actually has to use it and while some of them can be fixed (there are algos that utilize memory that don't take a hard hit from using GDDR5X, Equihash was fixed, Lyra2v2 was fixed), there are a decent chunk of them that can't, such as Ethereum. Calling something a 'feature' when it's broken in the application we're talking about is silly. equihash and lyra2v2 memory usage is not "fixed" for gddr5x, has just been reduced to almost 0 :-) |
|
|
|
I just wrote to my btc38 contacts, and asked if they would add the XCN/CNY trading pair, will let you know the answer  |
|
|
|
Still no exchanges in sight?
I had several email conversations with novaexchange yesterday, they said they had problems to sync the wallet, I offered some help and provided the latest bootstrap file to them. No reply yet. Not sure why they have sync issues. I can sync fine even from scratch without bootstrap files... Anyway let's cross our fingers. Yobit never replied my queries, so I guess they may not be interested or too busy. In any case, I'll try to provide my best supports to the coin. They had troubles adding XCN as well: looks like they are slow adding coins which have some sensible difference with standard bitcoin. |
|
|
|
On joincoin, after the fix, you could run multiple wallets just by using different conf files with different ports (rpc and p2p); plus you need one "master" tor wallet, and the others who point to it via the -tor option. Both verge and digibyte probably don't even need the fix. I think the issue is with coin confusion somewhere in the yiimp code. |
|
|
|
I am trying to get my hash rate up on x17 algo. I am trying to mine verge coin.
i have a 1070(stock settings for now). Getting about 10mh/s. I tried it on both alexis and sp mod. On Yiimp it says the averages are closer to 30-40mh/s
What about I doing wrong?
thanks
the averages are per-worker, your speed is fine. look at the benchmarks. |
|
|
|
How long to sync XCN, I've been going 3 days now, very slow.
Can you send coins before fully synced?
It should work but I wouldn't do it. Try with the blockchain snapshot in the first post. |
|
|
|
|
skein is just about cuda cores, that hashrate is normal: 1080Ti has 40% more cores than 1080, which in turn has 33% more cores than 1070, IIRC.
|
|
|
|
pallas can you send a request to btc38 and ask them to transfer xcn from btc market to cny market?
I'd rather say "to add xcn/cny market" |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
