It truly is quite sad that there can be no other function used for these devices. Just imagine all the crap that will be in the garbage. Wonder how much copper/etc are in these for recycling? Maybe open up a bitcoin ASIC recycling company? LULz.
Kind of happens when you're dealing with Application Specific Integrated Circuit... they're sort of purpose built for execution of exactly one thing. That's probably why you're getting a bunch of comical answers on what to do with them other than mine SHA-256 coins. |
|
|
|
I swear there were reports of the KNC Neptune having issues with p2pool as well... Also, you can add the SP10 as hardware the works properly with p2pool. I'm not sure of the SP30 because I don't own one  |
|
|
|
OK so I have given up using my Terraminer IV for p2pool ... it's just 20% less effective due to unknown reason.
I have pointed my Antminer S3s to my node, no problem, hashing good... Perhaps I will just stick with S3 with p2pool, and Cointerra with traditional pools.
Now I wish to setup merge mining. Can someone please point me to any guide for Namecoin merge mining setup for Windows 7??? Thanks.
Sorry to hear that your Terraminer doesn't work with p2pool and suffers the same kind of performance degradation as the S2 does. I know it's a long shot, but you might want to open a support ticket with them (I KNOW it's a long shot... lol). Setting up merged-mining is pretty easy. First, download and install the wallet (or you can use the *coind) of a supported coin (NMC, IXC, I0C, DVC, HUC, FSC... any I missed?) and get it all synced up. Second, edit your coin's configuration file. For example, here's my NMC one (changed the user and password): server=1
daemon=1
listen=1
rpcuser=SOMEUSER
rpcpassword=SOMEPASSWORD
rpcport=7333
rpcallowip=10.0.1.*
Please use different values for user and password - these are just examples. Also, for the rpcallowip, use a range that makes sense for you. My local network is 10.0.1.*. Yours might be 192.168.1.*. Of course, you could always just put in * if you don't want to restrict it. Now, when you fire up your p2pool node you just add the values. Here's the snippet from my startup showing NMC: ./run_p2pool.py --merged http://SOMEUSER:SOMEPASSWORD@10.0.1.14:7333 ...
10.0.1.14 is the IP address of the machine where you put the NMC wallet. That's it... you're merge mining BTC and NMC. |
|
|
|
Thanks JB, so it's not just me then. I'll investigate further........ Edit: I notice forrestv made a change to the p2poool repo (  !) 7 days ago, increased maximum worker difficulty 1000x, that wouldn't be the cause......would it? Edit2: Tried running namecoin on rav3n_pl fork with the same results, so it's not a p2pool issue. Had to close the namecoin wallet as it was eating cpu as well. Oh well, that'll have to stay off then..........  Very strange. There have been some huge blocks recently aggregating a mass of tiny inputs. This seems to lead to getauxblock taking a very long time. We are looking into it but it might take a while. BTW: As far as I know Namecoin mining reward variance is very high with P2P. We would be happy to support any plans to improve this, maybe with a bounty. The reason the variance is so high is because each node that is merge-mining is effectively trying to solo mine the blocks for the coins (NMC, DVC, etc). It would be nice if the entire hashing power of the pool, or at least the hashing power of the nodes that are merge-mining, could be applied rather than individual nodes attempting to solve the blocks. |
|
|
|
It's crazy to see that people just blindly continue to add power to the network regardless of what the price/difficulty are doing. I think part of this is yet another negative of the pre-order disease BTC suffers from. If you ordered from Company XYZ three+ months ago and the box shows up on your doorstep today what are you going to do, not plug it in? But would you order that same piece of hardware for the same price today even if it would be delivered tomorrow? Too often I think the answer to that question is a big fat NO.
Until people truly keep their hands in their pockets and stop financing the development for h/w Co's. two, three quarters away I don't think it will change.
Even Bitmain who had one of the best reps out there have really left a bad taste in people's mouths with the S3, now they want you to wait until September 20th for the next round to ship and pay .66BTC for it TODAY.
It's 0.58 BTC... but I'm just nitpicking there. I agree with your post. Try to tell somebody they can purchase a 600GH/s miner for $4000 and they'll tell you to go pound sand. Same stuff I have posted elsewhere. According to my calculations, even with a sub 10 cent/kwh electric rate you are not making money at these difficulties if BTC is below 650, 650 being about break even after 3-4 months. And thats assuming (big assumption) that you did not overpay for the hardware (another set of calculations).
PS Forget most online 'profit calculators'. Pie in the sky, not real world earnings by any means. But better than nothing.
You need to stop thinking in terms of fiat here. You need to consider whether or not the miner you purchase will ever make back the BTC it cost to purchase it. If you are going to invest fiat in the hardware, instead of BTC, you need to look at how much BTC that fiat can buy you at the same time you are going to purchase the hardware. For example, if BTC is $100 a coin and your miner costs $3000, you can either buy 30 BTC or the hardware. If you choose the hardware, you need to determine whether or not that hardware will ever get you back the 30 BTC during its useful lifespan. Same applies if the cost of a coin is $10,000. You can buy 0.3 BTC or that miner. If the miner will earn you back more than 0.3 BTC, then pick up the miner. Not true for any USA miner that is declaring the btc on his tax return. I'm confused by your reply. In both cases I have a choice to make: buy BTC or buy hardware I then use to make BTC. I'm declaring the BTC on taxes in both cases. The US treats BTC as property and it is subject to capital gains tax just like a stock. I suppose you could argue that you're able to defer the tax by purchasing hardware but eventually you're gonna have to pay the man. |
|
|
|
Glad I could help and I hope my answer was snappy enough to satisfy |
|
|
|
Hosting advantage goes to the SP30 - it's less rack space and less power consumption.
Professional hosting is about $100/kw. SP30: $300/mo S3: $350/mo So you need to run the SP30 for 20 months to make up for the price advantage of the S3. Good luck with that. 10 s3's are now more than $1500 cheaper than an sp30 so it would be 30+ months. If we're talking about right now, this very moment, then the S3 is infinitely cheaper than the SP30, since you can't even order an SP30. Obviously at this point the advantage is to the S3 for everything. The SP30 is a standard rack-mountable design with included PSUs. Throw it in a rack, plug the two power cables into the PDU and the network cable into the switch. Done. You get charged standard $100/kw rates. The S3 requires external PSU. It won't fit into a standard rack, so requires shelves of some sort. If I walk into a data center with an SP30 and say I need space for this, it's going to use about 3kw, they're going to say no problem. I walk into that same data center with a bunch of S3s and say I need space, they're going to look at me funny. Then they're going to charge me for custom space and setup fees and whatever else they want to handle my non-standard servers. My point in all of this is that from a purely hosting standpoint the SP30 is going to win. It's a single unit. It's a standard rack size. It's easy for the data center to deal with. I already gave the S3 the price advantage for up front costs. I did not amortize savings across the board, as that wasn't my intent with the comparison. I considered each bolded section individually, and gave the advantage to whichever unit deserved it for that section. Full disclosure: I own S3s. I also owned an SP10 that I sold recently and replaced with S3s. I've owned an S2 and S1s and U2s. I do not own an SP30 because the unit came in far under the promised specs at a higher power usage than what the initial specs claimed. |
|
|
|
You don't need to download a local wallet for namecoins to merge mine them. I just send mine to an exchange such as Cryptsy or BTC-e. I frequently Exchange them for BTC so I'm not worried about losing them if the exchange vanishes. Namecoins add about 1% to your total. DVC and IXC add virtually nothing and will never amount to much unless you're mining with multiple PH.
On the other hand, never use an exchange address for your mined bitcoins. Always use a local wallet.
How are you merge mining NMC? Are you running your own pool with your own custom code to do so? To merge mine any coin along with BTC, your pool must be able to call getBlockTemplate and generateTransaction for each of the coins you're merge mining. It needs to look at the current coin's block and see if the share being evaluated will solve that block. It's not just point to some wallet address, or you could merge mine every single SHA-256 coin out there. I don't need to do any of what you said, the pool does it for me. Why are you trying to make this so complicated? I mine on a pool (BTCGuild) that merge mines namecoin. I generated a NMC address on BTC-e and when my minimum payout is reached, BTCGuild sends the coins to the address. I wasn't trying to make it complicated - I just misunderstood you  . You're absolutely right. A number of pools already merge-mine NMC: Eligius, GHash, BTCGuild... probably others. All you need to do is supply your NMC address, which you can certainly do by creating one on an exchange like BTC-e or by downloading and installing NMC. Sorry about the confusion. |
|
|
|
Hosting
10 S3s, plus PSUs, lots of cabling, non-standard design
1 SP30, 1 network cable, 1 power cord, standard rack design
Advantage: SP30
For data center deployment, the SP30 is the flat out winner. The standard rack design works very well with high-density cabinets. There's only a single machine with a power cable and a network cable. The data center only needs to worry about managing a single IP address and providing remote access to the web-based configuration interface and direct SSH access can be controlled easily.
With the current price of Bitcoin SP30s hosting requirement may now be considered a disadvantage. In less than 90 days it wont even be able to pay the hosting fee That's relevant to both the SP30 and the S3 equally. The advantage still goes to the SP30 regardless of what the price of BTC does. The SP30 requires less space and less power in the hosted environment. No, You are incorrect. Sp30 needs to be hosted for most people, s3 does not I am comparing the cost of hosting the SP30 to the cost of hosting the S3. The SP30 is going to win because it is a single rack-mountable unit that needs less power than the S3s for the same hashing power. I already gave the advantage to the S3 for home usage, precisely because I can spread the load around to different circuits, whereas the SP30 can only be put on 2 circuits at most. |
|
|
|
That's relevant to both the SP30 and the S3 equally. The advantage still goes to the SP30 regardless of what the price of BTC does.
No, because Bitmain prices the S3 in BTC. Currently the S3 is significantly cheaper. I agree that the 0.58 BTC per unit price of the S3+ currently is cheaper, but it also works in reverse. BTC shoots up to $800 a coin and it's not. In any case, that's not relevant to hosting. Hosting advantage goes to the SP30 - it's less rack space and less power consumption. |
|
|
|
Hmmmm...Has anyone else's namecoind borked since updating Xubuntu with the latest security updates? I'm getting "timeout getting getauxblock" all of a sudden......  Seem to remember getting the same after upgrading from 12.04 to 14.04 a while ago due to a change in the Ubuntu kernel. I didn't do a thing to my node and noticed namecoind was taking up large chunks of CPU and also timing out on the getauxblock calls. Noticed it this morning. I ended up just getting rid of the merge-mining altogether on my node at this point. The only coin I actually have a ton of is FSC (well over a million of them), but that coin is deader than Elvis. EDIT: I'm running my node natively on OSX Mavericks 10.9.4, so it's definitely not limited to Xubuntu. |
|
|
|
Would like to find out more information about Cloud Mining. If anyone with experience with Cloud Mining, your input would be greatly appreciated.
Did you not even bother to search? There are a good number of these threads already available discussing exactly this. Let me sum it up for you: Cloud mining companies exist to make cloud mining companies profit. Not you. Why would they sell you a dollar for seventy-five cents? |
|
|
|
I have a S2 they are better than the S3's and extremely underclocked there will be an upgrade to upgrade it to nearly 2th/s
Um, what? 2 S3s will get you 882GH/s for 680W at the wall. Good luck getting that from your S2. There is currently no upgrade for the S2. Bitmain may have discussed it, but it does not yet exist. I'm not sure where you got that 2TH/s value, either. |
|
|
|
It's crazy to see that people just blindly continue to add power to the network regardless of what the price/difficulty are doing. I think part of this is yet another negative of the pre-order disease BTC suffers from. If you ordered from Company XYZ three+ months ago and the box shows up on your doorstep today what are you going to do, not plug it in? But would you order that same piece of hardware for the same price today even if it would be delivered tomorrow? Too often I think the answer to that question is a big fat NO.
Until people truly keep their hands in their pockets and stop financing the development for h/w Co's. two, three quarters away I don't think it will change.
Even Bitmain who had one of the best reps out there have really left a bad taste in people's mouths with the S3, now they want you to wait until September 20th for the next round to ship and pay .66BTC for it TODAY.
It's 0.58 BTC... but I'm just nitpicking there. I agree with your post. Try to tell somebody they can purchase a 600GH/s miner for $4000 and they'll tell you to go pound sand. Same stuff I have posted elsewhere. According to my calculations, even with a sub 10 cent/kwh electric rate you are not making money at these difficulties if BTC is below 650, 650 being about break even after 3-4 months. And thats assuming (big assumption) that you did not overpay for the hardware (another set of calculations).
PS Forget most online 'profit calculators'. Pie in the sky, not real world earnings by any means. But better than nothing.
You need to stop thinking in terms of fiat here. You need to consider whether or not the miner you purchase will ever make back the BTC it cost to purchase it. If you are going to invest fiat in the hardware, instead of BTC, you need to look at how much BTC that fiat can buy you at the same time you are going to purchase the hardware. For example, if BTC is $100 a coin and your miner costs $3000, you can either buy 30 BTC or the hardware. If you choose the hardware, you need to determine whether or not that hardware will ever get you back the 30 BTC during its useful lifespan. Same applies if the cost of a coin is $10,000. You can buy 0.3 BTC or that miner. If the miner will earn you back more than 0.3 BTC, then pick up the miner. |
|
|
|
Hosting
10 S3s, plus PSUs, lots of cabling, non-standard design
1 SP30, 1 network cable, 1 power cord, standard rack design
Advantage: SP30
For data center deployment, the SP30 is the flat out winner. The standard rack design works very well with high-density cabinets. There's only a single machine with a power cable and a network cable. The data center only needs to worry about managing a single IP address and providing remote access to the web-based configuration interface and direct SSH access can be controlled easily.
With the current price of Bitcoin SP30s hosting requirement may now be considered a disadvantage. In less than 90 days it wont even be able to pay the hosting fee That's relevant to both the SP30 and the S3 equally. The advantage still goes to the SP30 regardless of what the price of BTC does. The SP30 requires less space and less power in the hosted environment. |
|
|
|
I was wondering what the best pool would be to be in that has the most income. I am currently in slush's pool but i am not sure if i am capitalizing the 7 antminers that I have properly by being in the wrong pool. Can someone help me out?
Pools with fair payout systems and low-to-no fees. Those are your best options. There are plenty of comparisons between different pools in here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=41.0Personally I mine on my own p2pool node. |
|
|
|
yeah I know that I did 2 same post, but I need faster response. Thank you for your advice.
Bitcoin mining is NOT A GET RICH QUICK SCHEME! You will not spend $3900 and turn it into $10000 overnight. By the way, you won't get that SP30 until September/October. If you want a get rich quick scheme, look elsewhere. Of course, you could take the advice given earlier: spend that $3900 on buying BTC directly and then sell it when the price increases. Instant profit. |
|
|
|
/1024 give you nothing, because current share diff is way higher.
See my earlier comments. While it means nothing to the node perhaps there is a benefit to the hardware by using static difficulty. As I stated I saw none at all on the S3. Maybe the cointerra rigs do... I doubt it but you never know until you experiment |
|
|
|
I'm going to try some different setting with my cointerras.
CT #1 I've set it to - {address}/1024+1536
CT #2 I've left it alone, meaning just the address.
I have restarted cgminer on both boxes at the same time to get a direct comparison over time. I'll report back later with what I see, if any difference either way.
Looking forward to your results. Hopefully you will see some improvement. |
|
|
|
BITMAIN
So is cgminer 3.12 something we should be swapping in or?
should we expect a firmware to do this?
Thanks
Fahlcor
This is the version that already comes with your S3. People have been demanding that Bitmain release the source code for their version of cgminer to satisfy the GPLv3 licensing in place. Now that the source has been released, I imagine Kano will likely be compiling Bitmain's specific changes into the latest version of cgminer and release an S3 binary (like he did for the S1/S2). When that happens, then you'll have to do some work to get it installed on your miner(s). Of course, Bitmain could actually upgrade their own version of cgminer to the latest instead of using the ancient 3.x version they currently do, and supply it as part of a firmware update. Then they could put their code on the mainline cgminer github and ask for a pull request. That would be the ideal solution. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
