Latest posts of: bathrobehero

Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 [142] 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 ... 244 »

2821

Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: what if a new cryptocurrency had this new feature?!?!

on: August 25, 2015, 09:20:19 PM

So essentially the transaction fees would be stupidly high which prevents mainstream use. Quote from: SubversiveTech on August 25, 2015, 09:01:32 PM If there's a premine of 10% and an IPO I would put my pension fund in. Such as the way of gamblers.

2822

Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: UBS and Barclays Experimenting with Ethereum Platform

on: August 25, 2015, 08:48:40 PM

Quote from: Robin,Hood on August 25, 2015, 08:44:41 PM First of all Ethereum is not a crypto currency coin but a open source software platform. Why wouldn't be Ethereum *also* a cryptocurrency?

2823

Alternate cryptocurrencies / Mining (Altcoins) / Re: CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded NVIDIA Maxwell kernels.

on: August 24, 2015, 10:30:48 AM

Quote from: sp_ on August 24, 2015, 07:41:33 AM Quote from: chrysophylax on August 24, 2015, 07:31:32 AM hi sp ... initial results of fresh compile and mining at givemecoins using only -X 15 and --diff .5 with no oc or firmware tweaking ... just stock ... * ccminer 1.5.61-git(SP-MOD) for nVidia GPUs by sp-hash@github * Built with the nVidia CUDA SDK 6.5 Based on pooler cpuminer 2.3.2 and the tpruvot@github fork CUDA support by Christian Buchner, Christian H. and DJM34 Includes optimizations implemented by sp , klaust, tpruvot and tsiv. [2015-08-24 16:56:18] tid(0x0000047e) XIntensity set to 15, 983040 cuda threads [2015-08-24 16:56:23] tid(0x00000515) Starting Stratum on stratum+tcp://mining-ace.granitecoin.com:6001/ [2015-08-24 16:57:55] tid(0x00000515) accepted: 358/360 (99.44%), 24145 kH/s yes! [2015-08-24 16:57:55] tid(0x00000515) accepted: 359/361 (99.45%), 24145 kH/s yes! [2015-08-24 16:57:55] tid(0x00000515) accepted: 360/362 (99.45%), 24145 kH/s yes! [2015-08-24 16:57:55] tid(0x00000515) Stratum difficulty set to 4 [2015-08-24 16:57:56] tid(0x00000519) GPU #2: GeForce GTX 750 Ti, 4068 Temp= 59C Fan= 47% [2015-08-24 16:57:56] tid(0x00000515) accepted: 361/363 (99.45%), 24145 kH/s yes! [2015-08-24 16:57:56] tid(0x0000051a) GPU #3: GeForce GTX 750 Ti, 4001 Temp= 59C Fan= 46% [2015-08-24 16:57:56] tid(0x0000051b) GPU #4: GeForce GTX 750 Ti, 4080 Temp= 62C Fan= 49% [2015-08-24 16:57:56] tid(0x00000518) GPU #1: GeForce GTX 750 Ti, 3989 Temp= 57C Fan= 45% [2015-08-24 16:57:56] tid(0x00000515) accepted: 362/364 (99.45%), 24145 kH/s yes! [2015-08-24 16:57:56] tid(0x00000515) accepted: 363/365 (99.45%), 24145 kH/s yes! [2015-08-24 16:57:56] tid(0x00000515) accepted: 364/366 (99.45%), 24145 kH/s yes! [2015-08-24 16:57:56] tid(0x00000515) accepted: 365/367 (99.46%), 24145 kH/s yes! [2015-08-24 16:57:57] tid(0x00000517) GPU #0: GeForce GTX 750 Ti, 4010 Temp= 61C Fan= 48% [2015-08-24 16:57:57] tid(0x00000515) accepted: 366/368 (99.46%), 24145 kH/s yes! [2015-08-24 16:57:58] tid(0x00000519) GPU #2: GeForce GTX 750 Ti, 4092 Temp= 60C Fan= 47% [2015-08-24 16:57:58] tid(0x00000515) accepted: 367/369 (99.46%), 24146 kH/s yes! [2015-08-24 16:58:01] tid(0x0000051c) GPU #5: GeForce GTX 750 Ti, 4012 Temp= 61C Fan= 48% [2015-08-24 16:58:01] tid(0x00000515) accepted: 368/370 (99.46%), 24146 kH/s yes! when the mining stabalizes in the next 15-30mins - that will show a more accurate figure ... i like the temp and fan displays too - nice ... why not shorten T=xx F=xx ? ... what is this new part also - tid? ... #crysx Thread id. I think I should remove it. The temps and fanspeed is only working in the linux version. The changes in the output is written by t-nelson, and I have merged his changes into my fork. I know it's a dead horse by now, but have you tried having the first few lines of ccminer fixed instead of scrolling and put some info like temp and fan speed there, like sg/cgminer? The issue with the first approach was that linux wouldn't support it but surely there's another way.

2824

Alternate cryptocurrencies / Mining (Altcoins) / Re: CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded NVIDIA Maxwell kernels.

on: August 23, 2015, 12:56:38 AM

Quote from: crsminer on August 22, 2015, 10:07:17 AM --ethminer and 750ti on windows-- In a rig with one 970 and one 750ti: Loading only the 970 with -t 1: - when running -M (benchmark mode), memory controller load is at 100%, rig is hashing at 18.4Mh/s; - when running without -M (mining mode), memory controller load is at 100%, rig is hashing at 18.4Mh/s; Loading 970+750ti with -t 2: - when running -M, memory controller load for both cards is at 100%, rig is hashing at 27.2Mh/s thus giving 8.8Mh/s for the 750ti; - when running without -M, memory controller load is at 100% for 970 card and 11%! for 750ti, and rig is hashing at 19.4Mh/s, thus giving only 0.968Mh/s for 750ti (exactly 11% from 100% memory controller load). I have to say that I have no coding skills, I just noticed this while playing with the switches and looking at Afterburner & GPU-Z readings. Maybe some of the great coders from here can make something out of this so we can hash at full speed with the 750ti on windows. EDIT: when adding another 960 memory controller load (for 750ti) drops one bit to 10%, with two 960 stays at 10% and when adding the third 960 (with -t 5), memory controller load for the 750ti drops to 5%. Funny thing is a few weeks ago I had no problem mining with 2 cards per rig at 8.7mhs per card (that was the max because of CPU usage , 750 Ti's) and literally nothing happened other than block number, newly generated DAGGER files and timestamp and I started to mine with 1-2 mhs per card even with 1 card on all of my rigs. It's not even about disk I/O as I have SSDs in my rigs and their monitored usage is very low - although windows 7 is notorious about terrible file caching.

2825

Alternate cryptocurrencies / Mining (Altcoins) / Re: CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded NVIDIA Maxwell kernels.

on: August 21, 2015, 06:04:32 PM

Quote from: scryptr on August 21, 2015, 04:59:48 PM Quote from: bensam1231 on August 21, 2015, 04:36:53 PM Ethereum is still going strong. New pools make it possible for smaller miners now too. Still no interest in adding it to CCminer? NON-STRATUM ALGO-- I am thinking that the difficulty lies in the communication protocol. SP_ modded the hashing protocol, and it is in the latest Ethminer build. --scryptr True, but Ethereum is here to stay and its volume can support a huge amount of miners and everybody know what Ethereum is by now and it's safe to say that it will get forked many times so while I can't code to save my life so I'm not sure about the difficulties, it might still worth implementing it long term. Most people with 750 Ti's on windows have a bug heavily gimping the hashrate for some reason (8.7 -> 1-2 mhs).

2826

Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Any altcoins with 8mB blocksize limit out there ?

on: August 21, 2015, 01:01:06 AM

Not sure what you're after but it's worth noting that the time between blocks for most coins is 1 minute so even with 1 MB block size limit they can handle 10 times more transactions than bitcoin.

2827

Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Does xt REALLY log your ip address?

on: August 20, 2015, 01:37:55 AM

Another question; does your IP address really matter?

2828

Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin XT topics

on: August 20, 2015, 01:36:56 AM

Quote from: hendra147 on August 19, 2015, 04:12:38 PM bitcoin XT is'nt altcoin bitocin core is Beta so bitcoin XT is alpha Not sure if /s but that's the dumbest thing I've heard all day.

2829

Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [LHC] Pentaquark accidental launch

on: August 17, 2015, 01:23:15 AM

If only the algo would be quark.

2830

Alternate cryptocurrencies / Service Discussion (Altcoins) / Re: Is bittrex dead after they applied for bitlicense?

on: August 15, 2015, 03:11:56 PM

Quote from: Este Nuno on August 15, 2015, 02:30:08 PM People should be moving all their volume to Poloniex now. It's the perfect time to consolidate all of the community's volume on a solid trusted exchange like Polo. They even have margin trading now too. I, along with probably many others outside of the US will not use an exchange that depends entirely on US laws.

2831

Alternate cryptocurrencies / Mining (Altcoins) / Re: Is it safe to connect jumper wire to x1 powered(active) riser

on: August 15, 2015, 02:41:57 AM

Do not use ribbon risers. Use powered USB risers, those don't need any shorting that could potentionally burn your mobo.

2832

Alternate cryptocurrencies / Mining (Altcoins) / Re: CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded NVIDIA Maxwell kernels.

on: August 14, 2015, 09:38:31 AM

Quote from: djm34 on August 13, 2015, 08:22:45 PM Quote from: bathrobehero on August 13, 2015, 07:04:03 PM I minded a few Eth blocks but abandoned it after the dump and looking at it again the same cudaminer fork with the same config is only doing ~1.7 mh/s instead of 8.1 mhs per 750 Ti on all of my machines. I'm completely perplexed. do you know where is that fork, can't find anything... they dumped all internet in their release... The link is about halfway: https://forum.ethereum.org/discussion/comment/12163/#Comment_12165 Git: https://github.com/Genoil/cpp-ethereum/commits/cudaminer There are a few versions the dev (Genoil) sent me before but my issue persist with every version. And the biggest issue with the miner (before it went from 8 mh/s to 1.7 mh/s inexplicably) is that it requires pretty decent CPUs. All of my 750 Ti rigs have dualcore Pentium G3420 CPUs and mining with only one card resulted in 8.1 mh/s and mining with two cards were around 16 mh/s. But, with three cards the hasrate was 19-20 mh/s and with six cards it was roughly around 20 mh/s with huge fluctuations. And with blocktimes being ~16 seconds, fluctuation is not welcome. Both with 2 cards and 6 cards the CPU usage was at 80% all the time (not 100%) so there's something wrong with the miner but we couldn't figure it out with the dev. Another rig with an i3-4130 could drive 4 x 970's and 2 x 750 Ti's without any speed loss (~85 mh/s). Best scenario I could come up with is to mine Eth with 2 cards on every rig and mine something else with the rest of the 4 cards per rig.

2833

Alternate cryptocurrencies / Mining (Altcoins) / Re: CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded NVIDIA Maxwell kernels.

on: August 13, 2015, 07:04:03 PM

I minded a few Eth blocks but abandoned it after the dump and looking at it again the same cudaminer fork with the same config is only doing ~1.7 mh/s instead of 8.1 mhs per 750 Ti on all of my machines. I'm completely perplexed.

2834

Alternate cryptocurrencies / Mining (Altcoins) / Re: CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded NVIDIA Maxwell kernels.

on: August 13, 2015, 11:40:24 AM

Quote from: djm34 on August 13, 2015, 01:55:27 AM Quote from: bathrobehero on August 12, 2015, 09:00:14 PM Wti h Quote from: djm34 on August 12, 2015, 07:47:27 PM Quote from: Zels on August 12, 2015, 07:45:23 PM Lyra2rev2: 750ti: 4750kh/s reported by ccminer rlz60 But only 2500 - 2700 reported by nicehash after some hours Who's correct ? --diff 2 (and no it isn't a good idea to make it as default... for reasons explained on vtc thread...) (this is a never ending story) Diff 2 explains perfectly why verters (and probably a couple of other pools) is so bad at finding blocks compared to the reported hashrate thrown at it. Verters is using diff 1 but accepts diff 2 shares as well while it shouldn't. Meaning that miners using -diff 2 have twice the reported hashrate and get paid twice as much at the expense of diff 1 miners. the problem with verters is that if you use diff 1, the pool reports only half of the hashrate of the miner. So something is badly wrong in his setting... (could be the hashrate report as well....) Threw some rigs at verters to check, each doing ~25.5 mhs as per ccminer. Pool reported hashrates with; diff 1 - 20-22 mhs diff 1.5 - 30-33 mhs diff 2 - 31-39 mhs Anything above 2.0 will cause rejects. Verters is mining 43% of all the blocks and they can be abused with -diff 2. Or more precisely, they could be abused if they weren't so inefficient at finding blocks, but as it stands that 31-39 mhs translates into 19.3-24.3 "real" mhs due to their terrible luck at finding blocks.

2835

Alternate cryptocurrencies / Mining (Altcoins) / Re: CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded NVIDIA Maxwell kernels.

on: August 12, 2015, 09:00:14 PM

Wti h Quote from: djm34 on August 12, 2015, 07:47:27 PM Quote from: Zels on August 12, 2015, 07:45:23 PM Lyra2rev2: 750ti: 4750kh/s reported by ccminer rlz60 But only 2500 - 2700 reported by nicehash after some hours Who's correct ? --diff 2 (and no it isn't a good idea to make it as default... for reasons explained on vtc thread...) (this is a never ending story) Diff 2 explains perfectly why verters (and probably a couple of other pools) is so bad at finding blocks compared to the reported hashrate thrown at it. Verters is using diff 1 but accepts diff 2 shares as well while it shouldn't. Meaning that miners using -diff 2 have twice the reported hashrate and get paid twice as much at the expense of diff 1 miners. Meanwhile I'd guess nicehash is both working with and require diff 2 by default to be in sync with ccminer. So as usual, different pools use different configs and most of them doesn't understand the implications of their difficulty setting but change them anyway. Which is why serious miners should always do some calculations based on nethashrate and difficulty to estimate how many coins they should be earning and compare that to what the different pools are paying. Or people could just always solomine to keep things simple.

2836

Alternate cryptocurrencies / Mining (Altcoins) / Re: CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded NVIDIA Maxwell kernels.

on: August 12, 2015, 02:59:25 PM

Verters are not particularily lucky or well set up because they need 160.24% shares on average for the last 24 hours to solve blocks (can be seen on "blocks" page). On the other hand, nicehash added Lyra2Rev2 which should pay well.

2837

Alternate cryptocurrencies / Mining (Altcoins) / Re: CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded NVIDIA Maxwell kernels.

on: August 12, 2015, 04:48:04 AM

Quote from: bensam1231 on August 12, 2015, 04:11:56 AM Watching the mining scene rebalance now after a strong coin has been reclaimed from botminers, it makes me really wonder how the mining community as a whole would function if other big coins were liberated as well (Feather, Monero especially). There was definitely a LOT of mining profits being funneled into whoever was operating the Vertcoin botnet. While I agree that botnets are taking a big chunk of profit from miners, I also think that most of the current profit is coming from lazy/late miners who haven't reconfigured their miners so it's all temporary. Even though I'm not mining VTC, I watched the difficuty rise from around 170 to the current difficulty which is 212 at the time of writing and it's safe to say that it will increase until it reaches an equilibrium. If I had to guess that difficulty would be roughly around 500-600.

2838

on: August 12, 2015, 04:27:05 AM

Quote from: Wolf0 on August 12, 2015, 04:23:54 AM It's got a cost - and the cost is higher the less skilled the bot herder is... which it's common for them to be idiots. Executables need developing, then crypting on every change, either the zombie systems must be bought, or an exploit must be found and automated to create/expand the botnet... Also, even if you turn the miner's CPU usage down when someone's on the system, it's possible for them to notice lag. Happy bots stay bots - if the user's experience is harmed too much, then they will reinstall or get the help of someone who can. Another reason GPU mining on bots isn't wisely done... not if you want to continue having a botnet, that is. I get that and I don't pretend to know much about botnets, but if someone is (was) earning 15 BTC per day I'd imagine they weren't exactly incompetent.

2839

on: August 12, 2015, 02:53:27 AM

Quote from: djm34 on August 12, 2015, 02:33:31 AM Quote from: bathrobehero on August 12, 2015, 02:15:25 AM Quote from: jamesl22 on August 12, 2015, 01:58:55 AM Yeah but GPUs are different, you've seen here how difficult it can be to get them mining smoothly on the array of different configurations. Imagine trying to write some malware which does that. Second, most people who own expensive enough GPUs for mining will probably notice that their computer is infected since they'll be unable to play games. That argument flies out of the window once you earn 15 BTC per day for weeks if not months. You can easily deploy a small army of pretty decent coders for that kind of money to overcome any of the difficulties you have mentioned. Quote from: bathrobehero on August 12, 2015, 02:15:25 AM Quote from: jamesl22 on August 12, 2015, 01:58:55 AM Yeah but GPUs are different, you've seen here how difficult it can be to get them mining smoothly on the array of different configurations. Imagine trying to write some malware which does that. Second, most people who own expensive enough GPUs for mining will probably notice that their computer is infected since they'll be unable to play games. That argument flies out of the window once you earn 15 BTC per day for weeks if not months. You can easily deploy a small army of pretty decent coders for that kind of money to overcome any of the difficulties you have mentioned. botnet are still illegal (with jail time if convicted I think) and a small army of coder keeping it quite for long... this will never happen. Also it is highly unpractical to set up a malware for a large variety of software, gpu's etc... targetting cpu is a lot easier, most of them belongs to non IT personal who won't even notice they are mining. High end gpu, becomes noisy are owned by people more experience with computer and they will notice something wrong and will probably reinstall everything getting rid of the malware. It isn't a good solution in itself. botnet are targetting your grandparents computers not ours... for a good reason... not limited to the password in 4 letters That's beside the point I feel. Illegality I feel is irrelevant because I'd imagine botnet masters would have the common sense of hiding behind proxies. Also, obviously we won't get infected but plenty of corporate computers and personal computers belonging to computer-illiterates (grandmas) will. Obviously the number of infected computers decreases over time as more and more people realize there's something wrong and reinstall the whole thing or delete it with an antivir - if it's finding it that is. I see your point but I think that huge botnets can control so many CPUs that they can effectively compete with GPUs when it comes to the net hashrate of a coin because at the end of the day botnet CPU mining cost nothing.

2840

on: August 12, 2015, 02:15:25 AM

Quote from: jamesl22 on August 12, 2015, 01:58:55 AM Yeah but GPUs are different, you've seen here how difficult it can be to get them mining smoothly on the array of different configurations. Imagine trying to write some malware which does that. Second, most people who own expensive enough GPUs for mining will probably notice that their computer is infected since they'll be unable to play games. That argument flies out of the window once you earn 15 BTC per day for weeks if not months. You can easily deploy a small army of pretty decent coders for that kind of money to overcome any of the difficulties you have mentioned.

Pages: « 1 ... 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 [142] 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 ... 244 »