Guess you missed this post....

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=826901.msg11475406#msg11475406

If you only have 750s you don't need compute_52. As SP pointed out compute_52 will give
better performance on 9xx cards.

In case anyone gets tripped up with sm52 here's a link to cuda 6.5 with 9xx support.

https://developer.nvidia.com/cuda-downloads-geforce-gtx9xx

Thanks, I already compile for 35/50/52. Compile time is not a concern of mine. I was just wondering if you
had a specific reason for leaving it out, Seems not.

Quark seeing 6120 KH/s, up from 6050, on EVGA GTX750ti SC LP no aux pwr, default clocks and ccminer parms, Centos 6.

I noticed you don't include sm52 in the makefile. Any particular reason?

I don't think so.

http://cryptomining-blog.com/tag/gtx-titan-x-hashrate/

Might be worth waiting for the 980ti.

Throttling will reduce the potential for damage at the cost of performance. My 980 runs at 80C on default fan profile.
The clock fluctuates just above the base rate to maintain that temp. With the fan at 80% the temp fluctuates 4 to 8C lower
and the  clock is steady near the boost rate. I don't have actual hash rate comparisons but you get the picture.
The 750ti, which I believe your farm is mostly made of, seems to run cooler by default so it's the second card
in my Linux rig.

Another reason for high fan settings is that some cards start throttling before the default fan profile ramps up the rpms.
This is especially obvious on my 980 with default clocks. Nvidia has obviously chosen to prioritize noise over peak
performance. It was not configured to run hot for extended periods of time.

Nividia also messed up on Linux by only allowing custom fan profiles on monitor-attached cards. It would be in everyone's
interest to remove that restriction so we miners can get top performance while also benefitting from a longer MTBF on
cards used for mining.

I didn't know it was a competition but I'll concede. Well done.

There doesn't seem to be anything special about this coin, not in the ANN anyway, yet you
were able to turn a good profit.

I agree scale would decrease the time investment cost relative to payout. It would also allow
diversification where some of the hash could be earning income in a multipool while another
portion could take higher risks by playing the IPO side. If I ever get big enough I might just
dabble.

I presume you will be repeating the exercise, I wish you success.

Thanks for the very quick reply. When stats are available by balance jumps to where it should be.
Looks like it's just a problem with the stats page.

Since nothing seems to be lost I'll ride it out

Mining quark at westhash and my balance has been stuck for 30 minutes and the graph
shows the payout drop to zero. Is this just a problem with the stats page or am I hashing
for nothing?

Agreed, not a major issue and likely a pool issue. Just noticed the pattern and thought
I'd mention it.

The cards are EVGAs, OCed at the factory but not by me. Thanks.

Even if you mine a coin with low payout, as a believer your belief is that the coin will someday be
successful and you are contributing to that success. A believer's reasons may be different than
a skilled investor but both expect profit.

Even someone actually not mining a coin for profit, a coin's dev perhaps, would be invested in
the coin in other ways where they do expect a profit.

I noticed the following error a couple of times while mining quark at westhash
with ccminer 1.5.50-SP, default parameters, seen on both Linux and Windows.
I don't know if it's the same reject reason everytime but it's always the first
share submitted after the stratum set nonce. They seem to be very rare.

[2015-05-20 18:04:02] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 970, 15904
[2015-05-20 18:04:02] accepted: 6820/6863 (99.37%), 27426 khash/s yay!!!
[2015-05-20 18:04:03] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 780 Ti, 11438
[2015-05-20 18:04:03] accepted: 6821/6864 (99.37%), 27426 khash/s yay!!!
[2015-05-20 18:04:04] Stratum set nonce 77ffffc2f2 with extranonce2 size=3
[2015-05-20 18:04:14] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 970, 15922
[2015-05-20 18:04:14] accepted: 6821/6865 (99.36%), 27425 khash/s booooo
[2015-05-20 18:04:14] reject reason: Share above target.
[2015-05-20 18:04:16] stratum.westhash.com:3345 quark block 1678360
[2015-05-20 18:04:16] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 780 Ti, 11475
[2015-05-20 18:04:16] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 970, 16062
[2015-05-20 18:04:17] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 780 Ti, 11450
[2015-05-20 18:04:18] accepted: 6822/6866 (99.36%), 27416 khash/s yay!!

I also get an initial retry message when connecting to  the same pool, most
of the time but not every time. It always connects after the timeout. It's odd
because there is no associated error message, just the retry message and the
30 second wait. Again seen on both Linux and Windows.

I don't know if they are related or are related to the CTRL-C crash but they all
seem to be recent regressions. Seems more likely they would be related to
tpruvot's changes that SP's.

Edit: I don't recall ever seeing the first error on yaamp. I khow the second error
did not occur on yaamp. The CTRL-C crash occurs every time anywhere.

Any thoughts?

Update: a rejected share does not occur every time there is a stratum set nonce.
I have also seen job not found following stratum set nonce

Essentiallly what makes an altcoin, any crypto currency, good is acceptance and the ability to grow into a mainstream currency.
If the market can only support a small number of such coins the odds are stacked way against the hundreds of altcoins
that exist.

It reminds me in some ways of the highly speculative junior mining industry here in Canada. There is a stock exchange
that caters specifically to them with looser regulation and financial requirements. It's full of "corporations" that are
nothing more that a guy that owns some property that might have gold on it. They have no operations and often no
exploration of any kind, they are essentially dormant stake holders. They are also targets of pumpers but that's
beside the point.

Most of these junior mining properties' only hope is that gold will be found nearby and some operating gold mining
company will buy them out. They never have a hope of ever becoming an operating mine on their own.

A similar phenomenon occurred during the dot com bubble of the late 1990s. Tech startups with no revenue and just
a geek with an idea were going public just so they could get bought out by one of the big guys. It got so competitive
companies were buying out startups just to prevent their competition from getting them.

I don't see that kind of opportunity with altcoins. Is Bitcoin going to buyout DASH so they can implement anonymous
transactions? I don't think so. The only way the flooded market will thin out is for the weak to just fade away.

Now I'll actually try to answer your question. What makes a [Suspicious link removed]d, or have potential to grow and become
relevant. I won't pretend to have any insight on this but a few things come to mind. I assume legitimacy is
a given, no shit coins.

Essential features such as the previously mentioned anonymous transaction support, more robust blockchain
that is more resistant to forking, double spends,  51% attacks, etc, faster confirmations without sacrificing security, etc.
There are also convenience features like messaging support that could be appealing to some.

I don't know if it makes any difference but some backing or linkage to physical assets. URO amd Amber come to
mind as attempts to do that. I read that Amber actually paid out dividends recently.

Strong marketing to get the coin accepted by financial institutions, merchants and the public. This requires a
strong management team which seems counter to the concept of decentralization.

And last, but not least, competitive mining returns.

That last one is the only one that applies to mining. The others apply regardless of how the coins are acquired.

Acceptance by the establishment is a bit of a wedge issue with many preferring crypto remain underground.
It can only do that by remaining small and irrelevent. Darkcoin chose to "sell out to the man" so to speak
when they changed their name to DASH. Ultimately they had no choice if they wanted to grow beyond the
darkweb. Time will tell it it is successful.

These are essentially the things I would consider to mine and hold for the long term. I would also like to see
significant market cap and trading volume but that's not to be found in a new coin. And that's why I don't hold
new coins.

The following rant drifted off from the main question in the subject line, buit I guess the
short answer is whatever is most profitable at the moment.

The process for investing in a coin is very similar to choosing a stock and basicaly depends on your investment
goals.

If you want to pick a new altcoin for the purpose of holding it for the long term you really need to invest a lot of
time doing your homework. It's a lot more difficult than picking a stock. Stock trading is heavilly regulated and
requires companies to file reems of docunebts about the company's assets and operations. There is no such
documentation crypto coins.

The lack of regulation also attracts a certain sub-class of people who don't like to play by the rules. Although
pump and dump schemes are common in the stock market the scammers have a much easier time in crypto.

Most long term stock investors buy large established stable companies with predictable growth and steady income.
There aren't any crypto coins that even come close. 

Another factor to consider is what can you buy with the coin. Well not much. You can play poker and go shopping
on the silk road but that's about it right now. I haven't seen any take up by online retailers. In fact a local pub
hosting the only Bitcoin ATM in town stopped accepting BTC for beer purchases. Very sad.

That doesn't leave a lot of ways to invest in crypto. Whether mining or buying on an exchange the fact remains
what do you do with the coins once you acquire them? you could choose to hold the largest, most established
coin but that is still highly speculative. You could trade in and out of fiat or altcoins based on technical analysis.
There isn't any fundamental analysis possible due to the lack of verifiable information.

Considering the typical lifecycle of most coins, as you noted, the sweet spot is when a coin is new. The
obvious strategy is to mine and instadump before the initial hysteria wears off. This is what multipools
excell at, except that the time between mining and exchanging coins results in a reduction in payout.
 
It's a lot of work to keep on top of every new coin that gets released, setting up a wallet, making
sure there is an exchange where you can trade it, determining which coins have better mining payouts, etc.

I don't mind paying a fee for someone else to do all that work. This reduces my time investment but not my
profit because time is money.

We all hope that crypto catches on in the real world but even if it does I don't see a future for altcoins. At most
I see 2 or 3 coins possibly rising up and becoming mainstream.

Online electronics retailers should be at the forefront of crypto currency adoption. They already have a large
geek client base and provide a gateway between the geek world and mainstream. But how would they manage
currency exchange? They don't have to now because the credit card companies take care or if. Any mainstream
acceptance of crypto currency would require buyin from banks and credit card companies and that would
attract the attention of government regulators which could be both good and bad. Will it ever happen? Who knows?

And one final note, don't forget about the tulips.

Myagui, your handle is well chosen, very wise.

It seems like what you are complaining about is simply Darwinism, survival of the fittest. I say let the fittest
survive and to hell with the rest, It will make the whole crypto industry stronger in the long run.

Anyone old enough to remember the dot com stock market boom in the late 1990s should understand.
Tech startups were going public in droves, most with zero revenue, let alone any earning. But people bought
in because it was the internet and the internet was going to change everything. None of those companies
are still around because none of those companies deserve to be around.
It wasn't until a few years later as the industry matured that companies with a real business plan
like Google and Amazon popped out of the mess and never looked back.

I'm looking for that Google or Amazon to pop out of the altcoin mess. In the meantime I'll profit where I can mining
and dumping altcoins that will likely disappear regardless.

Multipools are just like mutual funds, a natural part of an open market. If crypto
really takes off be prepared for options, futures and other derivatives.

Well, it now seems official, yaamp is dead.

https://twitter.com/yaamp1

I only have a small balance pending so I'm not too concerned about it.

Trademybit's web site is still alive and they did leave a teaser in their shutdown message. I thought
they might have acted on it with quark's performance in the past several weeks.  Maybe yaamp's
demise will provide some more incentive to them. Just wishful thinking.

My problem with solomining is I'm not a speculator. I'm not interested in trying to find promising
new altcoins, avoiding the scams,  to mine for a short in and out. I never did this in the stock market
either. There aren't many coins that are practically mineable and are worth keeping, meaning they
have a substantial market cap and trade volume, and aren't likely to fade into oblivion. Only DASH
comes to mind. Then there is the hasssle of maintaining multiple wallets. I'm too lazy for that.

I could go for another service like nicehash where miners and buyers are brokered. Most rental
services rent out their own mining equipment and/or only mine sha256 or scrypt. You just have
to look at the x11 volume on nicehash and how fast quark ramped up to see it would be popular.
It would also address the complaint about auto-exchange pools, that they kill coins with their insta-dumps.
With fewer pools to mine most of the rentals would be solomining, as I suspect they already are.

I haven't observed this problem. I haven't specifically tested it but I have noticed the GPU cooling fan roll back
when the stratum connection drops.

This could be used as a form of backup, running two instances of ccminer on the same card but mining different
pools. If one disconnects the other picks up the slack. This would work as long as the combined hash rates of
the 2 instances add up to the hash rate of a single instance.

I've also wondered about running two instances but on different algos. I'm curious whether the different algos
would better utilize all the resources available or whether the constant context switching would kill cache
performance. The choice of algos could make a difference. I might give this a try but not for a while.