i7 6900K@4,2, ddr@2800, win 10 : around 50h/s (a little bit more if no other programs running), 600h-630/s @cryptonight  if no others programs running, else 580 with gpu mining.

return to nvidia zcah : GTX1080 : around 185-190 @100W with mem +1000, tdp @50% (msi gaming x)

Impressed by this project on many points. The only major drawback is the need to "buy" or "mine" an account to be able to use pascalcoin : this looks like opening a bank account paying some fees, which is a sort of regression in comparison to crypto coins.

One should find a way to create an account within the wallet without mining.

This is my proposition ( I don't know if this is easy to implement) : one can create an account inside the wallet with a small negative amount to prevent users to spam acccounts.

Profit on calculators are frequently a little bit overestimated...
Nicehash profits are linked to the demand/offer on their hashrate market I believe: which doesn't react as quick as the zcash rate on poloniex and is a little bit below (who will buy hashrate with higher price for estimated mining coins lower than direct buy in markets ?): with the recent increase in price, mining in zcash pool is more profitable for the moment, supposing there is no dump before you moved the coins to poloniex and sell your coins.

No this is the reverse : your psu should provide 1300W on the component side. I will then consume around 1445 on the wall.

See http://www.jonnyguru.com/modules.php?name=NDReviews&op=Story3&reid=349 (on AC 110V).
If your AC voltage is 220 you will have better efficiency.

This is a Tier 1 psu : using 1150W with it is OK for mining (at wall) : is this wall consumption or software based ?


http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/id-2547993/psu-tier-list.html
https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/406160-psu-ranking-and-tiers/

and what about nano/fury ? They have 512 gGB of bandwith...

I have a little bit above 110mh/s with the skminer 0.1 on GTX 1080 (not the mumus one, the original one):
http://www.cestballot.fr/downn/nexus/Niro_miner/GPU-solo-Miner/

Hello,
spmod with GTX 1080: the limiting factor is probably memory latency.
Oveclocking the core and memory (real gpu freq around 2088, mem around 11500) : around 110-120 sol/s.
Underclocking memory: less than 90s/s
Underclocking gpu @1500  and overclok mem @ 11500 : around 110S/S (almost the same than both overclocked).

This is a very different story than GTX 1070.

With core +100, powerlimit at the minimum (around 40% I think) (which leads to real core freq arount 1500mhz , mem@11500) : around 110 sol/s, power usage (hwinfo) decreased to 88W.

To be compared to the fury x @1100/500 which gives 220 s/s @180W : we have similar hashrate/power ratio. 

Faster public miners don't kill coins! Private miners which could concentrate hash power in a few big farms may be nocive for the coins if they are a lot faster than public ones.
Faster public miners on the contrary, help with a more diversified distribution, lowering the impact of private miners.

The price is declining because zcash was overpriced due to the low initial mining rewards which leads to a very low initial supply.
The total emission will be 21 millions of coins like bitcoin or like monero in 2040: Expecting the price could be maintened around 1 btc is unreasonnable for short/medium term. I would expect price going in the 0.005-0.05 range.

Hello,
I suppose these roms doesn't work for a fury-x?
Maybe I will try to mod a bios by myself ...

So quick to judge people ...
Why not just believe Claymore's version of the facts ?
Claymore has made its own version of the code now and this is faster, as he promised.
I give him the benefice of the doubt and believe this was not intentional.

Win10 64  home

Someone can help me on this ?

Hello,
I have the following problem with the opencl miner (cuda one works fine): when the miner start, trying to compile the opencl kernel, it fails with the following message:


C:\Miners\PascalCoin_OpenCL_ProxyMiner_v1\PascalCoin_OpenCL_ProxyMiner_v1>PascalCoinOpenCL_ProxyMiner.exe d0 p1 i23 c50
Found 2 platform(s) on your computer.
Devices on platform 0, "NVIDIA CUDA":
        Device 0: GeForce GTX 1080
Devices on platform 1, "AMD Accelerated Parallel Processing":
        Device 0: Fiji

Error -11: Failed to build program executable [ ]
Build Status: CL_BUILD_ERROR
Build Options:
Build Log:

error: 64-bit kernels not supported on a 32-bit executable
Frontend phase failed compilation.
Error: Compiling CL to IR


Does someone met similar problem ? (driver 16.10.1, windows 10)

He used to have a signature saying something like : I speak bullish when I short XMR and bearish when I am long. He plays with forum members...

Hello,
What is your miner for xmr for XEON E5 please ? and OS/ setting ?
Thanks.

The two people mentionned in the first post are not really dev (but are /were proeminent members of various monero team).

The current dumping is due to the zcash hype (people buying zcash now for holding will suffer: the current price is due to very low current supply : mining reward is very low the first weeks to prevent instant mining, but will increase sharply after. Nevertheless, due to the rich investors behind zcash, this anonymous will keep high trading volume and keep some relatively high price).

No problem with my MSI GTX1080 gaming : the problem on msi 1070 may be linked to the vram used  (micron) : https://www.reddit.com/r/nvidia/comments/4wh8jc/msi_officially_announces_gtx_1070_quality/

This is well known by people who were around in this period: Bitmonero was a fork of bytecoin.
Bytecoin use the novative cryptonote tech but was probably instamined with the trick of the volontary slow hash mining included in the code.

When forked in Bitmonero,  the dev team which replaced quickly the initial dev of bitmonero  realize the problem and fix it but it took some time and some talented dev such as David Andersen took advantage of the situation with a private miner.

The developers of monero didn't benefits from this. The discussion on this topic between David and Vitalik (from ETH) in the link you provide (comment section) is very informative:



Vitalik Buterin :
 
> Yes - I think we all agree with that general statement, although there will always be situations where specific miners will have advantages.

IMO, correct mining algorithm ethics require you to disclose all information that you know about how to optimize a given algo implementation. But a looser standard is that you should not intentionally cripple an implementation that you release to the public.

From the evidence provided in the article, it seems as though Monero failed both tests, so it perhaps is indeed a premine scam. However, that is a grave accusation, and one that deserves giving the Monero devs a fair chance to respond.

David Andersen:
 
This would be a very reasonable thing to assert if I had anything to do with Monero.  I don't.  In fact, to the best of my knowledge, none of the people who profited from early optimized Monero mining had anything to do with crippling the code in the first place.

Think of it this way:  You step in and inherit a legacy codebase for a promising and interesting new cryptocurrency.  You're immediately beset with demands -- fix bugs, release binaries, answer help questions, etc.  In retrospect, it turns out that the code you took over had been de-optimized by its original creators.  Is that your fault?  Of course not.  What's the standard that we should hold the Monero developers to?  To fix any bugs or deliberate weaknesses as fast as they can after they become aware of it.  To get up to speed and review and understand the codebase they inherited as quickly as a reasonable developer can do.

You're picking your words very carefully, so I suspect you know exactly what game you're playing trying to hint that Monero is a scam while being able to defensively say "well, I only said perhaps", but it's very transparent.  And, personally, I find it mildly offensive that you're twisting what I wrote in the article and ignoring some of the substantive points.

Vitalik Buterin :

What am I twisting?

I have no pre-existing prejudices against Monero, I actually think the cryptonote family has some very cool technology. Of course I am picking my words carefully, it's exactly the correct thing for me to do. Making accusations of malfeasance is not something that I do lightly as part of some kind of competitive PR strategy; I do not "play games". I am merely trying to understand the truth. I also have nothing against you at all; I am completely and utterly perplexed as to the source of the sudden hostility.

So, there exists code that has been deliberately crippled. This is a fact. The only reason I can conceive of for writing crippled mining code is to profit off of your own uncrippled version. Hence, there has been malfeasance on the part of someone, malfeasance that I give the label of "premine scam" because it constitutes (1) dishonest behavior that (2) enables you to mine in large quantities well before anyone else can. If the current Monero developers were not involved in that, then awesome, they are completely cool and legit folks in my view.

David Andersen :

Apologies if I misread what you wrote, but I tried to be quite clear in my article that the developers of Bytecoin, who introduced the slowdown, are very unlikely to have relationships, financial or otherwise, with the current set of developers who've been responsible for bringing Monero to popularity.

I'm pretty sure that the Bytecoin version of this was pure evil, and that it was used not just to get an advantage in mining, but to fake the entire blockchain.  I wouldn't touch that one with a 10 foot bitcoin.  But, while I don't own any more Monero than is in transit from my hardware to the exchange, I don't think that same thing applies to Monero (because, first of all, there was no premine, and second, I know quite accurately who made the profit from the crappy miner, and I know that none of us were Bytecoin developers.)

It's possible that the initial fork-er of Monero, TFT, was complicit.  But he's also out of the picture, and while he might have had a week of fun mining, he wouldn't have gotten much more than that.

Insightfull, clear and informative post, as  your other post about the difference with gold: a must read. Thanks.