The easiest (and dirtiest) way is to have your miner batch file run in a loop:
:start
ccminer.exe ...
goto start

and have another batch loop running which restarts ccminer periodically:
:start
timeout -t 1800
taskkill -t -f /im ccminer.exe
goto start

That will restart ccminer every 1800 seconds (30 minutes).



Yeah, I think I'm going to use win7 until the end of times.

I apologize, for some reason I thought you were looking for Palit Bios files, my bad. Unfortunately I couldn't find any Gainward bios files.
Maybe you could ask the folks over at overclock.net to give you one: http://www.overclock.net/t/1469814/nvidia-gtx-750ti-750-maxwell-owners-club

I don't have Palit cards but maybe this might help: http://www.techpowerup.com/vgabios/index.php?architecture=&manufacturer=Palit&model=&interface=&memType=&memSize=&did=10de-1380--

Evga Precision 4.2.1 looks like this. 4 cards on one panel and with a button it jumps to the next page where it shows the rest. Unfortunately newer versions only support up to 4 cards (last time I checked).
You may want to delete or rename EVGAVoltageTuner.exe if it's choking a CPU core 100%. On some rigs it does, on anothers it doesn't and you only lose the voltage options.

If it's about precision, can I recommend the benchmark ignoring hashrate results in the first few minutes or so? Giving time for the cards to ramp up (temps/fan speed).

I don't think any of these coins offer anything special that bitcoin isn't capable of.

Btw, you forgot MaryJ.

Thanks, it does. I have similar prices but personally, I don't find that to be worth it and I'm much more comfortable spending that ~50 USD into better PSUs.


You should probably disable boost in the bios of the card. Or even set custom fan speed/clock speeds if you want.

Poolmining is never completely reliable, especially if there's vardiff which will always fluctuate. But even with fixed diff you'll have to run it for a long time to be sure.
--benchmark had plenty of issues in the past so I've stopped using it so I'm not sure how it is recently.

For checking speed only, I personally like to just solomine to any local wallet, doesn't even matter if the algo is different and just check the reported hashrate.
Stable clocks and fix fanspeed recommended.

Regarding aluminum cases, I'm also curious how much people who own them paid for them.

To each his own I guess but I'm absolutely confident the wood wouldn't make any difference that aluminum would in case of major failure.

I can't take pictures at the moment but it's similar to this random picture but bigger and mine doesn't have a wood panel on the bottom: https://i.imgur.com/njJH6sT.jpg

No, they aren't connected to anything even remotely hot. Besides, I use 65°C temp target limit on all my cards and measured pretty much every inch of the rigs with an IR gun a few times.
Even with the limit, VRMs are around 70°C which is still low considering.
I think plastic would melt way before wood catching on fire.
And these crates are big and breezy as I have plenty of space. But of course the main pro was that wood is dirt cheap unlike aluminum.

Looking at the BIOS of that card it has an absolute maximum of 366W power consumption limit if I'm reading it correctly which aligns perfectly with a techpowerup review.
Of course that's with some crazy synthetic test like FurMark and the usual peak consumption is about 300W. But even that is a lot.

I think these bigger cards are all about scaling; they get somewhat inefficient hash per watt at full speed but get pretty great if you decrease the power target like I found with the 970 a while back (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1091755.msg11636995#msg11636995).
With downvolting it could be much more significant but I haven't tried it. So on one hand low profit margins warrants efficiency with lower power target but then the initial card price is too much but from another point of view if the profit margins were to increase in the future pushing the cards to hash as fast as they can would be more profitable. Also, different prices; in my case with the prices I'm presented with it doesn't worth it for me to go for anything above 970s.


As much as I love Gigabyte OC cards I hate their cheap plastic toy quality fans especially on the 780 Ti's.
They don't deform in my case and they are pretty good at cooling but damn they slow down and get noisy in a few months.
Cleaning and oiling them every few months is making them as good as new... but only for a while. I don't have the same problem with any other fans.

Regarding ribbon risers, I only had terrible experience with them and I personally would never use them again - of course that just might have been a bad batch or something.
And I love that I can put my cards fairly far from each other with USB risers, keeping everything nice and breezy with DIY wooden crates. And if you buy powered USB risers in bulk they're not much more than ribbon risers.

About PCI-E splitters, someone said a while back that it would most likely require modding the BIOS to be able to handle it which is not very promising but one can dream.
While I'm at dreaming... imagine if we could connect cards with simple USB ports without PCI-E. 

What I mean is how do you connect them in terms of actual trading assuming by p2p alt to fiat you meant trading fiat and crypto on in a p2p environment.

I wouldn't really call it super random. On a short term basis it is random, but long term the interest rate is exactly 802.25% since that is the average of all (16) of the potential stake rates.

https://github.com/SuperRandomProject/SuperRandom/blob/master/src/main.cpp#L979

How do you connect credit card/bank account/paypal/etc to a p2p platform?

MonetaryUnit (MUE)
Exchange volume (24h): 0.02 BTC.

No offense, but I still chuckle everytime when I see a multipool picking up coins with 0 volume.

If I ever launch a coin it will have coin maturity of about a week and it will change the algo every few weeks just to throw multipools off.

ICO = "buy my worthless coins because I said so"
POS = "everybody get free coins so in reality, nobody really earns anything"
placebocoindev = lol

Nah, it's too easy to monitor hardware usage so they can't hide using the CPU/GPU. But information is also very valuable, maybe even more so than botnet mining so they are collecting all kinds of data on users. Probably not just metadata.

At this point I think anything is better. I mean we have nothing but the random beer system and even though I try to donate frequently to most of the devs it's a really crappy and inconsistent system and I don't think I'm saying anything new when I say that some of the devs are also not very happy about it...

Anyway, I didn't mean pool restrictions but if you take into consideration how much issue something as simple as the difficulty difference caused with lyra2rev2 while the solution was as simple as -f 2 or -f 0.5 which should be pretty obvious for seasoned miners, I'm pretty sure a lot of people would just join a multipool that is guaranteed to work with the latest ccminer releases. Some potential centralization there but that could be fixed somewhat easily.
And if it would be transparent and not bot-ridden I'm sure more miners would join. And of course knowing that it makes the coders happy would also motivate people to join.
And motivating new coders to try and join the race would also be pretty good for everyone. Or just motivating the usual coders to implement something new that could earn some decent money (*khm*... hashimoto) would also be beneficial.

I think unfortunately this will remain a child's dream as it would require a lot of work and collaboration but one could hope as I think something like this would be needed to solidify the future of open source nvidia mining.

I really don't think a united green team would case an issue related to centralization but even then, we could cross that bridge once we get there.
I think I'm just talking to the wall once again as I got used to being ignored when it comes to serious discussions but what the hell, I'll bite once again; so really as many people are working on optimizing (cuda based) miners there really isn't any improvements towards monetizing it. Personally, I'm using a closed source ccminer fork for about six months now so I'm not really bothered by what's going on with the open source scheme but still, I think there should have been some improvements regarding monetization. Unfortunately there was none.

There's always the argument towards open source fee based miners but there wasn't even a (major) release to at least try the freaking thing. In reality, we, in this thread are in the tiny minority when it comes to nvidia based mining and sites like cryptominingblog and several other sites are the ones distributing the software towards potentially thousands of miners who might not even know what BCT is or might not even speak English. Surely, an open source fee based miner would at least worth a try by now to see how much would it earn from both dedicated and imbecile miners - even if it's a compelte failure - but there wasn't any (major) release of it. Just look at how many people would donate to tsiv towards his/her lyra2rev2 miner.

And then there's yaamp which got open sourced not so recently and even that opportunity got ignored. Maybe I'm just oversimplifying it, but a yaamp based multipool with decent fees and full transparency would really motivate coders to improve code especially if their fee was based on their measured improvements (%) on a per algo basis after an established baseline.

I really think the coders of the community should put their heads together and come up with something reasonable because I'm sure appreciative fans wouldn't mind paying for improvements.

That's a terrible analogy and as much as I dislike Ethereum, it's still a cryptocurrency by definition.