was offline, still intrested.
How to sign a message with my adress?
My offer still stands. |
|
|
|
|
Your flawless eBay history is why I'm willing to trade with you. If you'll take a look at my crypto trading reputation thread in my sig you'll see that there is nothing but positive trades. I can also provide you with my eBay feedback via PM.
I'm heading to bed soon, let me know if you want to make this trade before then. I won't send first due to your Jr status, but sending in multiple transactions should make you at ease with sending first.
|
|
|
|
|
I can make this trade for you if you'd like. Feedback is in my signature, and I can also provide alternate feedback if you'd like. (eBay, heat, etc all 100% positive).
My conditions are that you send first, and we can do multiple smaller transactions if you prefer. Don't mind escrow, but the fees are at your cost.
PM me if interested.
|
|
|
|
New page, same question. I know that each coin has their own share difficulty configurations, but would it be possible to lower the max from 1000? On fast coins like WDC (current round) my fastest rigs often don't even have time to submit a share, and when they do have time it's only from 1~3 GPUs out of 6. Makes me feel like I'm burning electricity for nothing. Perhaps until (if?) ASICs come out for scrypt, a worker's overall speed/difficulty calculation should be limited to the fastest GPU available, roughly 800KH/s. My 4.5MH/s rigs get hit the hardest since they are being treated as one single 4.5MH/s number cruncher instead of the 6x 740~800KH/s number crunchers that they really are.
|
|
|
|
I know that each coin has their own share difficulty configurations, but would it be possible to lower the max from 1000? On fast coins like WDC (current round) my fastest rigs often don't even have time to submit a share, and when they do have time it's only from 1~3 GPUs out of 6. Makes me feel like I'm burning electricity for nothing. Perhaps until (if?) ASICs come out for scrypt, a worker's overall speed/difficulty calculation should be limited to the fastest GPU available, roughly 800KH/s. My 4.5MH/s rigs get hit the hardest since they are being treated as one single 4.5MH/s number cruncher instead of the 6x 740~800KH/s number crunchers that they really are.
run 6 instances of cgminer for the time being if you think you're getting penalized by unnaturally high vardiff. If all the cards take the same settings, it's amazingly simple to create a batch file and use a variable from the command line to choose a specific device when firing it off. Eh, I suppose I could do that but it would be a huge pain in the ass considering my CGWatcher and CGRemote setup I have going on. |
|
|
|
Sold my 2 290x cards, just didn't have time to mess with them right now trying to find better settings. I was expecting someone to have found settings for 1+MH/s when I got back to check the thread, thankfully my 920/1500 is still the best.  |
|
|
|
|
I know that each coin has their own share difficulty configurations, but would it be possible to lower the max from 1000? On fast coins like WDC (current round) my fastest rigs often don't even have time to submit a share, and when they do have time it's only from 1~3 GPUs out of 6. Makes me feel like I'm burning electricity for nothing. Perhaps until (if?) ASICs come out for scrypt, a worker's overall speed/difficulty calculation should be limited to the fastest GPU available, roughly 800KH/s. My 4.5MH/s rigs get hit the hardest since they are being treated as one single 4.5MH/s number cruncher instead of the 6x 740~800KH/s number crunchers that they really are.
|
|
|
|
Watching this card is a waste of time unless someone can show it beats an ATI 7950: 160€, 700 Kh/s, 150W
If you think a 7950 only draws 150w while running 700kh/s you're sorely mistaken. |
|
|
|
|
My best setting so far is 882KH/s. 920/1500 TC 32765 -g 1. Still havent had time to mess with -g 2, but the only way I can get -g 2 to work without hw errors at 800kh/s or more is with TC at 22550ish or higher. -g 2 needs intensity of 19 or 20 with this card, not 13 like a 7970. These don't configure like previous cards at all.
|
|
|
|
I think those numbers are way off...scrypt mining yield close to 1150kh/s, min 850kh/s with a 290x. The 290 non x shouldn't be much slower, same memory bandwidth slower stock clocks (who runs stock?)
Where do you see 1150 on scrypt? Settings, please? I haven't had time to tweak more since my last update. |
|
|
|
I'm not sure if this is a bug in the software, or whether there is some funky things going on with the card's themselves, but voltages seem to set themselves where they please. My 2 cards have fairly comparable ASICS qualities, one is 78% while the other is 74%. Setting voltage to 1.25v on them = 1.031v for 78% ASIC and 1.063v for the 74% ASIC card. Here's another weird thing I noticed, the card running 1.063v actually pulls 5w less at the wall while hashing at the same settings. Seems like the higher ASIC card actually has more leakage. Increasing clock speed will also increase the GPU's voltage by it's self. Let's say for example: 1.25v set 1000mhz clock = 1.063v after vdroop using gpu-z. Up the clock speed to 1100mhz and now gpu-z measures 1.120v or so. To get back to 1.063v,youll have to lower voltage in GPUTweak to 1.15 for example. Those aren't actual numbers, but you get the gist of it. What's worse is that both cards behave differently!
This is really weird, higher ASIC usually have better quality output and you can lower the voltage lower compare to others and thus saving more energy. At least thats how it works for my 4 GPU... Yep, higher ASIC should mean less leakage. Who knows. Hoping to get somewhere with 2 threads today. Are they both running at the same temps even with the voltage difference? Well CGminer is set to keep them at max 80c, so they're both at 78c right now but the 1.063v card is running it's fan 200RPM higher to keep it there so it is giving off a little more heat. |
|
|
|
So still no info on solo mining? All i want to do is point a bunch of my mining farm to a single system, and mine the coin lol.
Same as any other coin. Hope you've got some power if you're going solo. |
|
|
|
I'm not sure if this is a bug in the software, or whether there is some funky things going on with the card's themselves, but voltages seem to set themselves where they please. My 2 cards have fairly comparable ASICS qualities, one is 78% while the other is 74%. Setting voltage to 1.25v on them = 1.031v for 78% ASIC and 1.063v for the 74% ASIC card. Here's another weird thing I noticed, the card running 1.063v actually pulls 5w less at the wall while hashing at the same settings. Seems like the higher ASIC card actually has more leakage. Increasing clock speed will also increase the GPU's voltage by it's self. Let's say for example: 1.25v set 1000mhz clock = 1.063v after vdroop using gpu-z. Up the clock speed to 1100mhz and now gpu-z measures 1.120v or so. To get back to 1.063v,youll have to lower voltage in GPUTweak to 1.15 for example. Those aren't actual numbers, but you get the gist of it. What's worse is that both cards behave differently!
This is really weird, higher ASIC usually have better quality output and you can lower the voltage lower compare to others and thus saving more energy. At least thats how it works for my 4 GPU... Yep, higher ASIC should mean less leakage. Who knows. Hoping to get somewhere with 2 threads today. |
|
|
|
Having a really hard time finding proper settings. I thought I might have a bum card so I picked up a second 290x today, same results. Right now my best result is 850KH/s @ 885/1250 TC 32765 -g 1. I tried duplicating the settings in the OCN thread Ivan linked, but they don't work for me.
885mhz is super slow for the core...up that thing in the 1000-1100 territory and man up :p You really think I didn't try that before going out to buy a second card to make sure the first wasn't a dud? These cards are very weird. Might be that cgminer isn't fully compatible, I have no idea what to think. I spent about 12 hours fucking around with both today with -g 1. My best result so far is 885kh/s @ 920/1500. Going to try and get -g 2 working properly tomorrow. Having a really hard time finding proper settings. I thought I might have a bum card so I picked up a second 290x today, same results. Right now my best result is 850KH/s @ 885/1250 TC 32765 -g 1. I tried duplicating the settings in the OCN thread Ivan linked, but they don't work for me.
Did you try using GPU-thread 2 instead of 1? Yes, and I think figuring out -g 2 will be key on these cards. Speed jumps between 830 to 1150kh/s with 2 threads, but averages about 850kh/s. In comparison to 7970 which could use just about any TC settings and absolutely needed -I 13 for 2 threads, these cards will spit out nothing but hardware errors with TC any lower than 22500 or so. Running -I 13 is no good, about 500kh/s max. These cards need -I 18~20 to get anywhere with either 1 or 2 threads. RandomQ,
Have you tried to go higher then intensity 13? Also is the card voltage locked? I'm thinking about ordering a couple myself.
No, I've always run my cards at I13 I'm pretty sure its voltage locked, But not 100% afterburner needs an update its still showing is as a 7900 series Not locked...you have to use GPUTweak, a modded version for voltage unlock. You can also flash other modded bioses, for higher voltage which isn't smart for mining though. Be warned, Asus GPUTweak is complete garbage compared to afterburner. While normally buggy and just about useless, this hacked version is even worse. Don't get me wrong, I'm extremely grateful that it's available, but it can be a real pain in the ass. I'm not sure if this is a bug in the software, or whether there is some funky things going on with the card's themselves, but voltages seem to set themselves where they please. My 2 cards have fairly comparable ASICS qualities, one is 78% while the other is 74%. Setting voltage to 1.25v on them = 1.031v for 78% ASIC and 1.063v for the 74% ASIC card. Here's another weird thing I noticed, the card running 1.063v actually pulls 5w less at the wall while hashing at the same settings. Seems like the higher ASIC card actually has more leakage. Increasing clock speed will also increase the GPU's voltage by it's self. Let's say for example: 1.25v set 1000mhz clock = 1.063v after vdroop using gpu-z. Up the clock speed to 1100mhz and now gpu-z measures 1.120v or so. To get back to 1.063v,youll have to lower voltage in GPUTweak to 1.15 for example. Those aren't actual numbers, but you get the gist of it. What's worse is that both cards behave differently! |
|
|
|
|
Having a really hard time finding proper settings. I thought I might have a bum card so I picked up a second 290x today, same results. Right now my best result is 850KH/s @ 885/1250 TC 32765 -g 1. I tried duplicating the settings in the OCN thread Ivan linked, but they don't work for me.
|
|
|
|
Preliminary results: Took an hour and 15 minutes to get the drivers to install.  |
|
|
|
|
Just picked up a 290x, going to mess around with it tonight and post results.
|
|
|
|
just a shitcoin
never buy this coin
After contemplating your profound analysis, I just bought more. |
|
|
|
pool down
Yep. Time to try my luck solo. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
