So, What are the guesses with how long it'll take before the miner will actually mine? Anyone got a guess to throw up there. My guess is 2 more months.
42 days. |
|
|
|
Currently i have 4 machines 1.5, 1, 2 x 0.25 running 24/7 for the last 3 days but no luck
I am building a "largish" litecoin farm with GPU's (working on an pci-e fpga card for litecoin also) and wanted to see if i can use the cpu's of the farm to mine another crypto-coin in parallel.
At the moment my "free-cycles" for going over the details of primecoin miners and looking for optimizations are rather limited but will look into it at first chance.
Even with low process priority I found that primecoin generally reduces system performance possibly due to memory or bus bandwidth limitations. It was limiting my kh/s of my graphics cards as they mined and so I had to give them higher intensities to compensate and get them back up to normal kh/s. |
|
|
|
As-is, TRC probably won't sort itself out using this algorithm until sometime after BTC's difficulty increase pushes TRC profitability up even at the higher difficulty level. If it does raise to 400K, then it should eventually settle around the point the profitability is similar to BTC's.
A shorter retarget window (with smaller max changes) is probably called for.
not sure about that : current estimations shows an estimated difficulty at next retarget block of 44059 (in 161 blocks) (this varies a lot, due to the insane increase in hashrate seen yesterday) This is higher than previous decrease, where it went down to 20k diff. The next 2160 blocks after this retarget will be quite crazy, but then diff should increase to 160k or so, a much more reasonable value imho, with current hashrate (i saw more 3TH/s at coinotron recently). Actually in the process of rewriting a pool engine (actually, pool engine is rewritten, website and extra tools on their way), this puts quite some stress on the infrastructure, and more will come in a few more blocks (123 at the moment). Hopefully, things will stabilize right after the next 2160 crazy blocks we're gonna see in a few hours. But i agree, profitability/markets will play an important role there. On a short-term range, reducing the retarget window may indeed help, but on the long-term it shouldn't change anything. Hopefully, hashrate will stabilize once at 160k diff. EDIT : new estimated diff : 43887 (in 67 blocks) ; this is gonna hurt :p 43783 (in 19 blocks) Pretty much what you predicted happened last night. Diff dropped to 40-something k and my cgminer was literally just endless lines of "Stratum from pool 1 detect new block" (solo mining). The block times were about 5 to 10 seconds. Somebody made a lot of TRC! As of this morning I wake up to find diff raised to 175k to compensate. Now its going to be a very slow march to get it back down. Still ~11 TH/s on the network... wonder how long it will stay. |
|
|
|
What's the CPD you are getting ?
Want to see if the formula used to "predict" blocks has actually any meaning, although variance can be a bitch
FWIW I have a total of about 3 chainsperday on HP11 across many machines. At current diff I only see about one block per day or less. That would be about 1 block every 2.5 days per machine or about 12 blocks per month How many machines are you running? looks like it takes around 5 to get 1 block per day 6 machines mine 24/7 the fastest (unfortunately) is just a Core 2 Quad @ 2.93 GHz. I have some rackmount servers that come and go as I repair and test them, but most of those are not very new so are unlikely to exceed 1 CPD. |
|
|
|
Go to the site!! There have been many accounts that got hacked. I warned you not to trust that site..
Go now and get your money out!
Huuuuurrrr durrrrrr. A database had been stolen from an unknown source. Usernames and passwords from the unknown site/source have been run against mcxNOW (and probably many other sites) looking for foolish users who have used the same usernames and passwords on multiple websites. If you are foolish enough to be one of these people you should immediately change your passwords and look into enabling 2 factor authentication (and perhaps a review of the way your use and store passwords in general...). If you are a mcxNOW user you should go to your account page and check your security center box for failed login attempts that have occurred recently and report them to realsolid ASAP. Keep calm and carry on.  And trading is already resumed. GEEZ. |
|
|
|
What's the CPD you are getting ?
Want to see if the formula used to "predict" blocks has actually any meaning, although variance can be a bitch
FWIW I have a total of about 3 chainsperday on HP11 across many machines. At current diff I only see about one block per day or less. Did you try beeeeer.org to compare profitability? Yes but it seems to pay less than solo. There's an extra problem with beeeeer: it's still underdevelopment. This means regular server downtime (at least while I was using it) which means miners eating power until you check and restart them. Then again that also can happen with solo mining: i've found that network interruptions can cause the software to stop detecting new blocks and it simply sits there at 100% load, but it only does this sometimes. |
|
|
|
A bit necro but there arn't many TRC threads on BCT. I have noticed that on most days the network hash rate is ~400-600 GH/s. I was surprised to see that no matter how many blocks pass, it seems now that the network difficulty has remained constant at 104K diff. I suppose there could be something wrong with my client/miner but it seems to be the case on multiple computers so perhaps not. However, yesterday I saw that the network hash rate climbed to about 4500 GH/s. Right now ( http://cryptocoinexplorer.com:3750/) it's being reported at over 17000 GH/s (17 TH/s). http://coinchoose.com/ indicates 15 TH/s. But the diff is remaining at 104K despite block times down to between 30-60 seconds (supposed to be ~2 min avg). Were there changes made to the difficulty adjustment algorithm to prevent the previous 'time-warp' attacks described in this thread? I see that its now set to adjust ever 30 blocks ( http://www.coinwarz.com/cryptocurrency/coins/terracoin) however it seems strange it always goes back to 104K diff given the hash rate variance (at least between 400-600 GH/s if not more with this T-hash boost). Also, 15+ TH is a lot. I suspect either the coin is once again being exploited OR a profit-switching pool has aimed in terracoins direction, although I had thought those were always only scrypt based. Are there switching pools for ASIC miners too?  |
|
|
|
What's the CPD you are getting ?
Want to see if the formula used to "predict" blocks has actually any meaning, although variance can be a bitch
FWIW I have a total of about 3 chainsperday on HP11 across many machines. At current diff I only see about one block per day or less. |
|
|
|
https://i.imgur.com/3GDcG0N.pngWell, No wonder my rack server was mining so many blocks! Although it's from 2006 the CPU beat even the fastest i7 at prime numbers. Interesting stuff! I think for primecoin integer math is also important. IIRC mikaelh has mentioned this before (specifically in regards to integer / floating point ops). I don't think that cpumark prime score translates directly to primecoin performance. How many watts on your rack? In my experience servers are not very efficient but if I recall correctly your server (from previous pics) was mostly just motherboard+CPUs so perhaps its more efficient than most systems from the big vendors (HP, IBM, Dell etc). I see a lot of rackmount servers that use 200+ watts of juice while idling and I wonder where exactly that power is going... Oh and keep in mind that a 3770k can overclock 25-40%+ without much effort or additional cooling. I think that cpumark disregards submitted results where an overclock is present to prevent skewing of the results. |
|
|
|
|
Those connectors look like John Guest fittings, the kind used in caravans and camper trailers for water systems, and kitchen water filtration and reverse osmosis systems too. However, there are also many 'generic' style quick fit connectors based on the same design that are more affordable.
|
|
|
|
-hp11 is out! Download links are on the first page as usual.
Changes in -hp11:
* Fixed a bug in the BiTwin filter that was inflating the chains/day estimate and reducing the chances of finding a block
* Slightly improved the accuracy of the prime probability estimate with regards to the 'sieveextensions' parameter
* Other small fixes and improvements from cabin
This is mainly a bugfix release without any new features. The chains/day number does go down with this release now that the bug in HP10's sieve has been fixed. Nevertheless, the actual chance of finding a block is improved. Furthermore, the reduced chains/day estimate is actually a lot closer to reality now.
Our god has spoken. Bow down and receive His gift graciously. |
|
|
|
I've spend the day yesterday going over this thread (all 113 pages of it  ) trying to figure out optimal settings. (People mention several times in the thread that the defaults are pretty much the best settings) I have a number of old dual Xeon 3.4Ghz servers with 16k L1 and 1MB L2 and 2GB ram and i am not sure if the defaults are actually the best option for them, as newer cpu's have much bigger L1 and L2 caches. As far as i understood without going over the code, sievesize is the pool of primes we look at, sievepercentage is the % of the numbers we look from the sieve for candidates for the chains. I am not sure what the sieveextensions parameter means (there was a mention but can't locate it) What is not clear to me and i would be great full if someone could explain, is how sievesize translates to actual memory footprint ? Cause i believe that if that does not fit in the L2 cache things would slow down considerable (then again i might be wrong) Thanks for your time While I can't answer your question re cache optimization, I can tell you that those CPU's wont break even against electricity costs unless you have almost-free or free electricity. I have a pile of 10 rackmount servers behind me with those kinds of CPU (release dates roughly 2003 - 2007) and they're simply not worth mining on. An i7 4770k is about as fast of ten of those older single core xeons and only uses <120 watts even before you overclock it. My work laptop (i5-560M) gets 0.8 chainsperday and uses 40 watts from the wall, it's faster than about 500 watts of my old rackmount servers (not to mention essentially silent and 1/100th the size). |
|
|
|
http://imgur.com is a great image host and there's a range of plugins / programs that integrate with it: http://imgur.com/appsThe image host is practically the image hosting backbone of reddit.com, and with tens of millions of unique site visitors each month that is not a small undertaking.
|
|
|
|
Why do you think the move up from megahash to gigahash is 1024 and not 1000? We're talking an absolute value of the number of hashes done, not a data size. 333 mhash = 0.333 ghash
+1 |
|
|
|
It is a dual processor Xeon X5650. I think it should be performing better than this.
author=magnificat_mafia link=topic=255782.msg3114986#msg3114986 date=1378745514]
What are the best settings for Xeon processors? I'm running 2x 2.66 GHz Xeon's and getting pretty low chains per day:
{
"blocks" : 157519,
"chainspermin" : 10,
"chainsperday" : 1.18470870,
"currentblocksize" : 1000,
"currentblocktx" : 0,
"difficulty" : 9.86931497,
"errors" : "",
"generate" : true,
"genproclimit" : -1,
"primespersec" : 1754,
"pooledtx" : 0,
"sieveextensions" : 6,
"sievepercentage" : 10,
"sievesize" : 1000000,
"testnet" : false
Yes something is wrong, those CPU's each get about ~7500+ on the passmark scores ( http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php ) I have a single Core 2 Quad Q9550 which gets up to 1.5 CPD yet it is only ~4000 in the passmark scores. This might be a silly question, but are you sure that you are using the 64-bit version of HP10 and you have it running on all cores on both CPU? |
|
|
|
You'll have to tell us your electricity rate, my crystal ball is broken.
Heh, yah. And those aren't cheap to fix. Just about .10 / kwh - usd In my opinion, XPM is only worth doing anymore if you've already got a computer sitting there on but not fully utilized.
GPU miners, so probably meets that definition. I am roughly at break-even against electricity with my older Core 2 Duo and equivalent Xeon CPU's. However I pay 3x more for electricity than you. So you are off to a good start. If you have newer CPUs like i5 / i7 or any Xeon from the last 3-4 years or AMD equivalents then you should be well past break-even. |
|
|
|
Price is dropping like a rock. I don't think it matters anymore.
Because BTC is back up to $140+ USD/BTC. Keep your panties on. |
|
|
|
Hope some v 1.0 will be released and the source code as well.
+1 |
|
|
|
Anyone know offhand, if XPM is worth mining on say, 5 celeron G530s (~900 PPS each?) at the current price, taking into account electricity? Or perhaps there is a calculator for this?
You'll have to tell us your electricity rate, my crystal ball is broken. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
