|
going to run 500th at it for a bit.
|
|
|
|
|
@op
philipma1957 2% Bitcoin & Alts 2012
philipma1957 2% (12 usd min) Bitcoin & Alts 2012
please change
|
|
|
|
I know I’m just a noob, but here are some points to ponder:
No coin is ASIC proof. An algo is just a set of instructions that a CPU executes, and those instructions can easily be put onto a chip. Any coin that claims to be ASIC resistant just means they try to make it harder to build an ASIC.
What if the ASIC manufacturers built a box with interchangeable chips? Any time an algo was updated, they sent you a new chipset and the box was up and running again. What if they had an eraseable ASIC and you simply downloaded the new algo?
Just like CPU mining gave way to GPU mining, the ASIC will make GPU’s extinct in the mining world. Where big money is involved, somebody will always come out with a faster and cheaper way to do it.
Changing algos every few months is not the answer, as you’re treating the symptom and not the disease.
I can think of two ways to slow the growth of ASIC mining:
1) Create two different blockchains/networks for each coin. One for CPU/GPU and one for ASICs, with two different difficulty levels, giving the ASIC miners no real advantage.
2) Limit the hashrates on the networks. Each coin would have to be different, but say the max hash for any single IP on Ethereum was 500 h/s, who would build an ASIC for that? It would also more evenly distribute the workload.
What if a new coin came out where the algo actually checked the hardware in you system to verify you were using a GPU to mine and not an ASIC? I wonder what kind of reception it would get.
Just some thoughts...
no as fully new algos never done need fully new chips. and from drawing board to pcb = months not weeks you could set difficulty at x for a gpu and at 100x for fast gear but an asic can beat that if I recall you can spilt the hash on an asic the sp20 from spondoolies could point to multiple pools and mine part of its hash at each one. |
|
|
|
|
Just got back from an easter party had read access only.
tired drove 220 miles round trip for easter dinner .
Would have liked people to be more cautious buying from them , but to each their own.
It appears they are better then the s-9 somewhat.
maybe
15.1th 1489 watts T1
13.9th 1460 watts s-9
I can't do any testing
I want to mention the Avalon gui looks like bitmain gui
The dragonmint ti pcb heat sinks and fans look like bitmain s-9
The dragonmint controller is very much like the innosilcion.
If the t1 does 15.1th at 1489 watt and does not break much
It is better the the s-9 doing 13.9th at 1460 watts breaking a lot.
but actually the avalon 841 doing 13,575 at 1350 watts on a 1400 watt psu with a 2 year warranty may be the best of these three.
I really want to use a delta 2400 watt plat psu.
I think all three would give the correct power use a lot better on that psu.
The people spending cash whether for 1, 10 ,100 or 1000 machines deserve some idea of what they are paying for.
Hint (Halong) send me the sample already. You sold enough that even if you fail to do 16000 by 1400 you made money.
It is obvious you got bitmain's attention they under cut you like mad and crashed btc just to put a hurt on you.
Well maybe I will get a tracking number on Monday.
|
|
|
|
Set virtual memory to at least 16Gb. Emm.. Why you need 2x 1200W psu for powering 6 GPU's?  he set them to 100% power that is 6 x 250 = 1500 watts @ op set them to 80% |
|
|
|
Activity: 2058 Merit: 1136 Politeness: 7304 fMerit: 90 Imagination: 6410 Virtue: 11 Coins: 1444 Karma: 289 Posts: 26417 I guess this is april fools above might be answered already but if most popular coin algos go to gpu, and say 6 gpu coins dominate with all gpus coins more or less evenly split gpu hashpower wise, whats to stop people suddenly taking the gpu mining power from say 4 coin algos, switching to 5th (very easy to switch algos on gpus) and 51%ing one of the others? take a lot of bad actors and coordination but the possibility is there. it could effectively kill the attacked coin.
at least with asics that are dedicated to a coin you cant use them to attack another coin on a different algo.
just playing devils advocate here. i am all for getting rid of asics, at least until there are many more manufacturers (like dozens) that play fair (ie not limiting supply, mining on them for months before release etc).
The reasoning against this is simple enough. Trading in exchanges is very important. Having lots of coins to trade drives trading. Think of a 4 coin exchange vs a 400 coin exchange. Diverse availability from gpu mining allows a guy in the middle of nowhere Earth mine and trade coins. To squeeze out the chance at 1 billion little gpu miners is moron stupid. Asics will do it. Bitmain shows they are trying to do it. |
|
|
|
I would be skeptical of that even if it wasn't April 1'st. Intel and AMD in a partnership yeah April fools and happy Easter all in one |
|
|
|
|
Giving my 100$ ones away.
To all i escrowed for a lot of coupons sold.
Be careful buying and selling these coupons .
I just gave a $100 away I have more
|
|
|
|
|
how long is the ethernet cable?
is it cat 5 or 6 or 7?
|
|
|
|
Hi Guys i am renting a 1200 ft warehouse and i have 18 Antminer s9s i only have a 4 or 5 inch exhaust to get rid of the hot air i have tried the following for heat management: 1- installing an exhaust fan to the opening( building a box around the exhaust fan of the antminers to directly suck the hot air out ) 2- i have tried to install a y-exhaust tube to the 4 or 5 inch opening the the roof for an ac and the exhaust fan 3- i moved the machines into a separate room with their exhaust faced outside the room(AC in the room) and had the box stated in number 1 outside the room THE WAREHOUSE TEMPERATURE IS STILL 42 DEGREES CELSIUS now i am thinking of evaporator cooling but i need suggestions on how to solve the heat issue any suggestions? which is more important 1-cooling the room 2-getting rid of the hot air ? okay there are some laws of physics. you have 18 s-9's each have about a 120mm hole and strong fans 120mm = about 4.8 inches the area of a circle is pi r squared or 2.4 x 2.4 x 3.14 + 18 square inches and you have 18 of them so 325 square inches is the smallest size for you exit hole you have 2 x 2 x 3.14 = 12.56 square inches so you need to increase the hole 25 x and have fans to suck the air out. you need 2 of these https://www.homedepot.com/p/Master-Flow-1600-CFM-Power-Gable-Mount-Attic-Fan-EGV6/205924917I suggest you move the gear. |
|
|
|
|
@ op if you need an escrow I am willing to escrow these sales.
|
|
|
|
Hello. Newbie planning on listing a miner and wanted to use local - East Coast USA forum or recommended Escrow.
Any thoughts or quick links? Anyone interested?
I do them. read my trust. I live in New Jersey |
|
|
|
replying to subscribe to this thread due to interest.
good I would love to see how this plays out. |
|
|
|
Coupons sent please confirm and replay to phillip that you received the coupons.
That's good, i recieved all 25 pieces. Also ready to buy all the remaining 400/420 coupons, if they are still left. If you agree - say, how money pieces you have and give me your LTC-wallet;) I say to Philip what all good. Missed this. I will send ltc to sarakuka I think sarakuka may be sold out. |
|
|
|
The wattage and Hashrate numbers you quoted are accurate but how it was paired up may have been wrong.
Here are TH/s & wattage for 4 rigs I am looking at right now:
#1: 15.15TH/s @ 1647w (Myrig PSU). 108.71w per TH
#2: 15.42TH/s @ 1586w (Myrig PSU). 102.85w per TH
#3: 15.51TH/s @ 1477w (Myrig PSU). 95.23w per TH
#4: 15.24Th/s @1680w (EVGA 1600 G2). 110.24 TH
Hashrate is fairly stable when raising room temps from 70 degrees F to 80 degrees F
Wattage is taken from APC AP8641 PDU display on #1, 2, & 3. Wall outlet meter being used on #4
board temps range from 66-75 degrees, not sure why so much variance from one rig to the next but hopefully new firmware will improve power consumption and hashrate.
I just swapped out rig #1 Myrig PSU with Bitmain 1600watt PSU and saw no improvement in numbers. Wish I had some larger PSU's and try what Phil suggested.
Rig #5 is at home and I ran it in a much cooler room temp over night to see what would happen and the hash rate dropped from 15.40 TH/s to below 13.0TH/s. I warmed up the room and will check back later to see what has happened.
Try the bitmain psu with controller and two boards Try the Halong psu with controller and two boards Lastly try the Evga psu with controller and two boards. In those three cases the three psus will have good overhead
Moderator's note: This post was edited by frodocooper to remove multiple nested quotes. |
|
|
|
You can do it yourself:
Updating Miners to Latest Versions
Update ethOS.
Make sure your GPUs are not in a crashed state. It is best to proceed immediately after a reboot.
Run: sudo update-miners && sudo service ethos-miner-monitor restart
Search Google for your miner version to get configuration options that can be set in /home/ethos/*.stub.conf files
You can check your current miner versions with cat /var/run/ethos/miner.versions
The following miners are currently available to update:
ccminer 2.2.5-tpruvot-et
claymore 11.4
claymore-xmr 11.2
claymore-zcash 12.6
dstm-zcash 0.6.0.1
ethminer 0.14.0.dev2
optiminer-zcash 2.1.2
sgminer-gm 5.5.5-a
NOTE: If you have many rigs, use the above as a guideline for your own distribution method.
If any problem occurs and you would like to revert, run: ethos-update reupdate
so I have a 16 x 1060 rig and I want to change to raven from zec can someone show me a local conf file to mine raven? tia
I will poke around here and come back to this thread http://ethosdistro.com/ |
|
|
|
Can someone who got their Dragon take high res picture of chips without heatsink ?
if I was willing to kill off 1 board I could. also if I ever get the test demo. PCB designer here... When I look at the side by side boards I see something that was shared. No one would spend so much time to accidentally make a board look that similar. It would take much more effort than just designing from scratch. When we see similar boards we count the things that are the same in terms such as "a few", not the ones that are different.  If they were designed independently someone would have had to go to a lot of trouble to make them so similar. I've had PCBs copied and reproduced. This doesn't look like that. This looks like someone had access to inno designs and made slight modifications, and routed the modifications. This is far different than the car examples, or both boards are green memes that people have been posting on twitter. The examples of both intel based motherboards having the same chip-sets just don't apply. The level that boards are identical is just embarrassing. For a couple grand they could have reverse engineered the PCB, turned it into a schematic, made their own layout, and at least made it look like they were trying not to copy someone. There are lots of contractors who perform this service in China. Of course the US has them too, but they are more expensive and typically prefer to do it on designs a company owns but lost to obsolesce. Occam's razor guys... It's a prototype Innosilicon BTC miner. How Halong has obtained these is anyone's guess? Even the Web UI is just re-skinned/re-shuffled from an existing Inno one: https://i.imgur.com/KzC3RoP.png. If Innosilicon wanted to compete with BITMAIN through Halong as their proxy, surely they would make better effort to hide the association? Do you guys think there is even any ASICBOOST in the chips? We are not seeing the kind of performance and efficiency gains one would expect. We need some experienced people to reverse engineer this hardware and see what is happening. Something is not adding up here. this interests me lets say the numbers give at the wall are correct 15.13 th and 1489 watts the 14 th s-9 does 13.9 to 14 at 1500 watts on a bitmain psu and 13.9 to 14 at 1450 watts on a delta 2400 watts psu so 1489/15130 = 0.0984 at the wall T1 vs 1500/14000 = 0.10714 at the wall s-9 that is 8.88% better with the T1 unfortunately Halong has yet to send me a unit so I can do proper comaprasion of power savings. the ones above are only partly mine the s-9 numbers are accurate. the t1 may be accurate but it is with a different psu. I can do side by side tests with 5 different quality psu's which will let us see if 8.88% is your savings or improvement. I reached out to Halong today via text and got a fast reply they apologized for not shipping gear to me. they said "soon and sorry for delay" Maybe Monday or Tues is my hope |
|
|
|
I support the idea of protecting coin algorithms from the use of asics. But how can we force developers to do that. For them, it does not matter who will be able to mining. But for decentralization mining and survivability of the coin is of great importance. How to explain this to the developers, I don't know.
You cannot force anyone to do anything. In fact, a great many developers are ASIC pro, not against, due to the high volume of hashrate that can be achieved to secure network through PoW. My firm belief is that GPU mining will ALWAYS have a place, and that the largest component to this is the home user. However, for assurance that this will be the future, there needs to be stability in the GPU mining systems, and the current state of affairs in the GPU market is abhorrent. Almost NO decent GPU can be had, and the manufacturing giants are elevating the prices of GPU's much higher than they are actually worth. This is a side effect, and a negative one at that, of the market at play here. We know, we buy and supply the GPU's. Shortages are not the only problem, though price is a major one. So ASIC's become much more attractive in that case, as they come close to the price of GPU's in the medium level ASIC market. What does this mean on an overall level? Simply that NO ONE can kill ASIC's, just like NO ONE can kill GPU's. I believe there will be a balance of all mining hardware, and that this balance will be maintained WELL into the future of mining. The fact that the head of nVidia himself believes that mining will be a core aspect of the business proves that the GPU mining will be alive and well MUCH deeper into the future than what anyone can conceive. As for the Algo change, that is not difficult at all. We know, we have designed a few ourselves which will appear shortly in our coins. Getting around an adaptive ASIC/FPGA miner is! #crysx Dont have the misconception that high hashpower = secure. I for one would rather a lower hashrate but many more people on the network. And hashrate is reletive to the machines available to mine. Wrong ... That is where 51% attacks come from. Security is a hashrate phenomenon, whether you or I like it or not. If the network is a GPU hashed PoW and has 25MH, while we come along with our 'theFARM' and thrash the network at 250MH, then the network has a massive issue. MH or GH, the figures stand. #crysx So you are saying when bitmain developed the x11 they couldnt have 51% the dash network....they crushed the network....i.e. asics. What phil is saying is to be adaptive and change algos. You have stated that there might be adaptive asics coming out, i am no tech guru but i dont believe thats how asic chips are designed...they do one thing and do that one thing very well I could make a 4 board miner like the L3 with 4 sets of asics and a good controller (fpga) It would be decent and be able to adapt , but at a certain point of complexity it would fail. My skill set is looking at economic factors that make coins work. |
|
|
|
I support the idea of protecting coin algorithms from the use of asics. But how can we force developers to do that. For them, it does not matter who will be able to mining. But for decentralization mining and survivability of the coin is of great importance. How to explain this to the developers, I don't know.
You cannot force anyone to do anything. In fact, a great many developers are ASIC pro, not against, due to the high volume of hashrate that can be achieved to secure network through PoW. My firm belief is that GPU mining will ALWAYS have a place, and that the largest component to this is the home user. However, for assurance that this will be the future, there needs to be stability in the GPU mining systems, and the current state of affairs in the GPU market is abhorrent. Almost NO decent GPU can be had, and the manufacturing giants are elevating the prices of GPU's much higher than they are actually worth. This is a side effect, and a negative one at that, of the market at play here. We know, we buy and supply the GPU's. Shortages are not the only problem, though price is a major one. So ASIC's become much more attractive in that case, as they come close to the price of GPU's in the medium level ASIC market. What does this mean on an overall level? Simply that NO ONE can kill ASIC's, just like NO ONE can kill GPU's. I believe there will be a balance of all mining hardware, and that this balance will be maintained WELL into the future of mining. The fact that the head of nVidia himself believes that mining will be a core aspect of the business proves that the GPU mining will be alive and well MUCH deeper into the future than what anyone can conceive. As for the Algo change, that is not difficult at all. We know, we have designed a few ourselves which will appear shortly in our coins. Getting around an adaptive ASIC/FPGA miner is! #crysx Dont have the misconception that high hashpower = secure. I for one would rather a lower hashrate but many more people on the network. And hashrate is reletive to the machines available to mine. Wrong ... That is where 51% attacks come from. Security is a hashrate phenomenon, whether you or I like it or not. If the network is a GPU hashed PoW and has 25MH, while we come along with our 'theFARM' and thrash the network at 250MH, then the network has a massive issue. MH or GH, the figures stand. #crysx wrong but tricky to make this wrong Phil16r already has Phil18r Phil20r Phil22r Phil24r developed and ready to fork could do a fork every week this means no asics can ever het a foothold |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
or april foolz 
