Agreed, but then I wouldn't see their BS to point out that @kano knows more about the pool stats than he/sheit could ever imagine knowing!  One can only "point out" based on the things that Kano doesn't delete proving him wrong (unless you actually believe Kano knows more than the Stanford Department of Mathematics).  |
|
|
|
....
Any more posts by you that include statistics I will delete.
Here's some stats that you can delete (or not): - 100% of my personal opinion of you is such that it cannot be posted in a PG forum
- 100% of your fanboy stats are worthless and skewed
- 0% is the statistical probability of you having any input in any conversation that has to do with Bitmain or Antminers that is not skewed by your opinion of the company and it's practices
- 0% is the statistical probability of you convincing anyone that passed a grade higher than 3 that 6:5, 12:10, 120:100, and 600:500 aren't all the same thing -1.2:1
- 0% of your deletion threats are given a shit about by anyone over 12 years old
|
|
|
|
I don't know about you but, my ROI is 4.87 months. Is that good enough?
Given that I bounce the whole space (mining BTC, mining a couple altcoins, and trading), mine is usually a little bit less than that; but I'll sit back and watch the naysayers call us liars. |
|
|
|
...When the resale value exceeds the reasonable expectation of what you can possibly mine with the device - you should get rid of it (or not buy it to begin with) - wouldn't you agree? Unless it's a hobby. In which case none of the ROI talk matters anyway.
To coin an '80s phrase, "There ain't no half steppin'!" When the resale value of S9s exceed what one can get out of them,either: you don't own enough of them; a more efficient rig has been put on the market (and you're going to dump S9s on some broke n00b); or you have no future vision of the value of BTC |
|
|
|
...The only real advantage of the S9 is its resale value, which for some inexplicable reason is still very high...
Unless you're dying and need quick liquidation or a more efficient model comes out, who cares about resale value?  |
|
|
|
...The S9 batch 1 across all miners as you see above by now should have found 110 blocks based on the total hashes they've submitted to this pool but have so far only found 82. This is by far worse than any other device that we can positively identify....
Yeah, no. As I posted before...... ... Name CDF[Erl]
S9v1 0.994766 103.6 BDR 79 Blocks
...
A7v1 0.772224 6.5 BDR 5 Blocks
...
... When extrapolated, 6.5:5 is virtually* the same as 103.6:79! If you absolutely can not upgrade to the new autotune firmware (my case until April) You can pull from this pool and point to Antpool or f2pool
Just point auto tune s9's here or in my case avalon 7's. At the moment I have all my avalon 7's here and all my s9 old firmware at f2pool.
I am hoping to get some bitfury and point here.
The goal is to get all old firmware s9's off this pool
or updated to auto firmware if you can.
See above and see why you should be making the exact same appeal to A7 owners! *< 1 block difference in 103 total blocks |
|
|
|
After edit: ...
OK, so using your revised set of numbers, for the same $ purchase, you get 8 S9's, 4 backup control boards, and 1 backup hashboard.... Which gives you 2 rigs on the shelf (to run when your imaginary "16.667% loss" takes place, twice...)... So, with the S9 package, we have spare parts for all of the controllers (2 from the shelved rigs plus the 4 for equal cost), 7 spare hash boards (6 from the shelved rigs), greater power efficiency (enough to buy a 9th rig just from savings, by your own numbers), and someone's still a fanboy?  |
|
|
|
...There were many people on this very thread that wrote "do not buy the first few batches of the s9. They will have problems just like the S5 and s3 did". And I did not buy until batch 5. Which must be the reason why I am not having any problems. So it sounds like other people did not use the same wisdom.
Like I said, I'm not saying that they are without issues (I have some from batch 4 that run ~10 rather than ~13, but I'm "OK" with it because the ROI on downtime and shipping would take 27 months to equalize). I'm simply saying that you have to be completely unconcerned with ROI, or just a complete fanboy, to say that the 2 rigs (S9 and A7) are even in the same market for comparison. |
|
|
|
your price is off on the a7 they are $888.00 before shipping not 1,222.29
I paid 2,032 for 2 with 1 controller so if you use 1016 not 1222.29 you total for 11 = 11176 that counts shipping and gives you 5 rasp pi's
Edit 2: *based on retail price in yxt's singature So, @ $1016, you only get to throw 4 unused S9s in the trash instead of 5 |
|
|
|
...Is that what you mean by hobbyist?  When I stop lmao, I will answer that. |
|
|
|
... It's just there are bad business people not treating their equipment right that make it seem that there is a high failure rate.
AKA hobbyists |
|
|
|
If you are a trucking company would you buy the truck that costs more and need more fuel but drive on the road all the time, making money. And if something is defective you have very good customer service.
Or the one that is cheaper, needs less fuel but you have troubles all the time, you have to argue with the customer service about very cheap spare parts even if you bought hunderts of trucks from them....
...
As for your analogy.... That's so flawed that I don't even know where to begin.... Since 66 is the LCM... | | Unit Cost | Power Usage | TH/s | Power/TH | (kWh) cost USD | Yearly Power Cost/TH | Yearly Power Cost @ 66TH | Purchase Cost for 66TH | | A7 | $1,222.29* | 1,000.00 | 6 | 166.67 | $0.10 | $146.39 | $9,661.87 | $13,445.19 | | S9 | $1,232.00 | 1,185.80 | 11 | 107.80 | $0.10 | $94.67 | $6,248.40 | $7,392.00 |
Edit: purchase price alone, you could buy 11 S9s (not counting the 1 that the power cost difference makes), throw 5 in the trash (having never used them) and still save $. Edit 2: *based on retail price in yxt's singature |
|
|
|
I talk about broken units. A unit stopped hashing can't be hashing for lower costs...
Now this may be the difference between hobby and income, but I'm not sure why anyone with more than 2 or 3 units wouldn't have spare parts.... Would you own 3 race cars and 0 spare tires at the track on race day? |
|
|
|
...I was just saying he can't compare just the A7 to just the S9 since the numbers are not there to do that.
...
They are there, and he's posted them, and I've even quoted his posting of them.... |
|
|
|
You ignore that the S9 seems to have a higher failure rate...
And you ignore that with that higher failure rate (which, by the way, is why I call them a steaming pile of bullshit), the difference is nominal and the costs are lower. |
|
|
|
Are you saying the bad luck this pool is having is not really bad luck, just S9 not finding blocks on this pool?
That's been the goto cry since the bad luck started. |
|
|
|
The problem is what is reported to the pool.
kano knows if it is an S9, because the miner tells the pool what it is, same with the A6+
He can only compare the numbers that he has access to, he can't (I think) separate out the A6 from the A721. Most likely because they are running the same software. Also the S7 (and older) does not announce itself like the S9s do.
No, the problem is that you have to do bullshit "tricks" with the numbers to in any way decide that an A7 is measurably better than an S9. You can fanboy fudge the numbers all day and I can knock them back to reality all day... S9s are a steaming pile of bullshit, but the cost less to run (in the long run [100+ blocks]) than A7s, and therefore have a better ROI... It's that simple! |
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure by A6+ kano meant A6 and newer. Yes, but since A6 < A7 and the convo was S9 vs A7 (not backwards generations), then "A6 and newer" would have to compare "S7 and newer"... |
|
|
|
|
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that S9s aren't a steaming pile of bovine dung; I'm saying that, dung or not, they pay the bills better than the current alternatives.
|
|
|
|
Interesting - Perhaps Bitmain send programmed bad luck S9 to the world so THEY can catch all the block them self ... :-)
...
That, or it could be that with a massively larger sampling, the "losses" are statistically less noticeable. Because, math... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
