Impressive but the CPU load is still >12W.  The CPU is contributing to the idle wattage. Maybe 30W-40W total? What are the rest of system specs. I am curious for guestimating the "rest of system" load. 2 x 4GB 1.5v 1600MHz DDR3 1 x 7770 1 x Wifi card (PCI) 3 x 2000RPM Yate Loon Fans 1 X Hitachi 320GB hard drive It's probably around 30W total if I had to guess, the dual cores at ~1.4v with the same architecture pull 45W |
|
|
|
|
Idle wattage: 82W
Load Wattage: 94W with Prime95, small FFTs
1055T in an Asus M5A99X EVO, 4 cores disabled in BIOS, CPU set to 2GHz and 1.0V
Measured with a kill-a-watt, going to play with the board voltages later
Do I win a prize? :p
|
|
|
|
|
I may code a python script sometime at the end of next week that calculates profitability with both litecoin and bitcoin and then hops between mining them based on that... is anyone interested in that?
|
|
|
|
|
Can you please add market cap to the table? The calculation is very easy, [total block number] * 50 (BTC/LTC) *[average price in USD].
|
|
|
|
Which involves a double spend...that's the whole point of a 51% attack....
Someone is going to lose some BTC/USD....
You don't have to double spend if you don't want to. You can just run off with your extended lower difficulty chain and invalidate all the mined blocks/transactions in those blocks on the original chain. You can keep an eye on whether or not the chain has been forked by looking at the debug.log file -- you'll see it as "REORGANIZE" there. |
|
|
|
|
We're all the trust node. The person or pool with the majority of the hashing power will most likely never fork the chain because that would destroy the value of the chain. The only people who make a million pounds to set it on fire are British synthpop bands.
Okay, think about it like this. You own 75% of the gold production in the world and also a lot of the gold itself. One day, you decide that you don't ever want anyone to have gold anymore because you've lost your head, so you hire an army to destroy every gold market in the world. This will never happen. Like you, no one is dumb enough to even spend $200,000 forking an altchain because they could just as easily spend 1/5th of that and profit from it like crazy by hoarding the currency as you mine it, thereby constricting supply.
|
|
|
|
could Z have also been behind the other bitcoina "hacks"?
No, none of the hacks was performed by me. Thanks for this useful post. can't stop laughing |
|
|
|
Thats on a 7770? does that need a power cord from the psu?
That's correct. It has a six-pin connector because it occasionally draws >80w when overvolted or in things like Furmark. The rated TDP is 80w. I'm running 1100MHz core and 651MHz RAM with my power control (limiter) setting at -9%. The power control setting is kind of neat, the card throttles if it gets above a certain power usage in watts. Using diablominer with -v 1 -w 256 -f 10 It's actually a great card for $100, essentially it's 1/3 of a 7970. |
|
|
|
That performance is to be expected, it shows how gpu architecture as bottomed out since it is the same performance as 5770/6770.
Eh, I'm only pulling 60w at 200MH/s, I'm happy enough with 3MH/s/watt. |
|
|
|
|
Please do, my 7770 pulls 20kh/s max on cgminer. I tried playing with it for an hour and gave up. Reaper gets 140kh/s, which also kind of sucks. Mining BTC I get 200MH/s easy.
|
|
|
|
|
coblee will set a check point. if the chain gets forked, it can be rolled back to that check point and we'll lose three or four days of ltc history i guess.
|
|
|
|
|
It's not altchains without the drama.
|
|
|
|
I wish there was a facepalm face I could slap onto this post.
 My coins are 160 days old. |
|
|
|
|
I wouldn't worry about anything. There are checkpoints built into LTC to roll back to even if the chain gets forked. Nothing is going to happen.
|
|
|
|
My hash rates look good...but is Solo Mining broken by chance ? .........either that, or my luck just took a huge turn for the worst, especially considering the hashing capabilities I have at the moment...lol
<EDIT>
..and of course, as soon as I return back to my miners after posting this, I get a block...LOL
Everything looks good over here.
What I have noticed:
- 5/6xxx Cards like -I 14
- 7970 does not like Intensity over 13.
- 4096 and LESS (by either 512 or 1024 increments) as low as 2048 seem to work well for anything from a 5770 to a 6950.
Anything *might* be broken still at this early stage. You tell me how often you'd get a block and whether it's about right or not. If other cards like intensity 14, then I should change the scale. my 6870 mined fastest at aggression 17 or 18, for reaper anyway |
|
|
|
lets say they are "easy" to make......it will cost millions for production to start.
I answered my own question in the android miner thread. even running the optimized neon code from pooler an a9 isn't power competitive. still, settings for scrypt using 32-128mb would have been better I think -- gpus have faster ram than most any other consumer or industry device. edit: okay, sorry to be OT but if you wanted to make it CPU mining only, why wouldn't you just set the memory requirement to be 1 gigabyte per thread? Most computers right now have 4-16GB of RAM --> 4-16 threads, which would be terrible on a GPU with only 1-2GB of RAM. You could make the blockchain halving occur every 18 months and then with the blockchain halving increase the amount of RAM required by 2 eg (1GB -> 2GB). In accordance with Moore's law, that would keep the quantity of RAM being used on target for a CPU and most likely always above that provided for by a GPU. So why didn't artforz do this in the first place? |
|
|
|
The ARM core on Kindle Fire has 128-bit registers in addition to the usual 32-bit registers. This could give a 2-4 times speedup, depending on the exact details of the core used.
Unfortunately not. I have already written a version of the scrypt core that uses NEON (it will be released in the upcoming cpuminer 2.2.3), and the speedup is only about 40% in the best case. There are various technical reasons for this, most importantly the lack of an instruction for bitwise rotation and the fact that current NEON coprocessors can only execute one instruction per cycle, with rare exceptions. The basic ARM instruction set, on the other hand, is pretty optimal for implementing this kind of hashing functions (thanks to the barrel shifter), but of course it cannot compete with the SIMD implementations of performance-oriented architectures. An example: a Samsung Galaxy S II (dual-core Cortex-A9 at 1200 MHz) can do about 1.64 khash/s with the current cpuminer code (hand-written ARM assembly), and about 2.3 khash/s with the to-be-released NEON implementation. The speedup is even more modest on Cortex-A8 processors. this is important stuff, and I guess shows how an arm based system designed to mine litecoin might perform. at 125w, about 166 arm cortex a9 cpus could thus mine only approximately 210khs if I'm doing the math right (cortex cpu ~ 750mW when running neon code fully loaded). |
|
|
|
Are you running the cards all on the same rig? LTC mining is GPU memory bandwidth intensive, if all 4 cards are running at only
1x or 4x or even 8x you'll probably be bottlenecked.
Try using only one GPU in running at 16x.
I have my 5770 on an x1 and it's mining ~200kh/s just fine. So memory bandwidth has nothing to do with it, at least over the southbridge... Someone should really post a chart that plots performance in kh/s with the speed of the memory for the GPU. I'm really wondering if it's linear or not. This implementation of scrypt is small enough to be done in the L2 cache, so I have always been wondering how the GPU implementation required megabytes. I wish someone would break down the algorithm for us or something, but I guess it's in the source code. N=1024,p=1,r=1 -> 128KiB i.e. each thread requires 128K or RAM e.g. in a GPU with 128 parallel processes running at the same time that 128KiB each becomes 16MB shouldn't an asic be easy to make then? I mean arm cortex a9s can carry up to 1m level 2 cache... they're slow but they're also cheap and energy efficient. I think they only use about 500mW per cpu |
|
|
|
Are you running the cards all on the same rig? LTC mining is GPU memory bandwidth intensive, if all 4 cards are running at only 1x or 4x or even 8x you'll probably be bottlenecked.
Try using only one GPU in running at 16x.
I have my 5770 on an x1 and it's mining ~200kh/s just fine. So memory bandwidth has nothing to do with it, at least over the southbridge... Someone should really post a chart that plots performance in kh/s with the speed of the memory for the GPU. I'm really wondering if it's linear or not. This implementation of scrypt is small enough to be done in the L2 cache, so I have always been wondering how the GPU implementation required megabytes. I wish someone would break down the algorithm for us or something, but I guess it's in the source code. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
