why even bother to run a jupiter at todays difficulty?
Because each Jupiter costs ~$100 per month in electricity to run at 15 cents per kilowatt hour, and will bring in between 2 and 3 bitcoin in the next month. We're still a long way from a Jupiter being unprofitable to run, and it's fairly power efficient compared to most other hardware on the network at around 1.3W/GH. Aren't Jupiters still right up there in terms of power efficiency? If not, can someone please show me a more efficient miner? My batch 1 (October) Jupiter is 1.2 W/GH/s. MegaBigPower Bitfurys are typically 0.9 W/GH/s. I have run them as low as 0.7 W/GH/s when undervolted (375 GH/s @ 260W for 16 cards). Thanks, so Bitfury-based miners are the most power efficient. Bitmine desk rigs run at 1(TH/s)/1kW at the wall socket as standard and can be down-volt'ed to improve efficiency. Also the rig versions they are soon to release is supposed to be even more efficient. |
|
|
|
in 2-3 months (...)
Learn the math first. or maybe you should research stuff before mouthing off - try some of advanced mining calculators which take into consideration difficulty rise - you're looking at jun-july tops, to be in green, after that you will not generate enough to even cover electricity cost. if you got access to free electricity good for you, but most people dont. You are mistaken if you think 28nm chips will not even pay for their own electricity use for an average kWh cost by June. Otherwise the network hashrate would shrink dramatically as even the most efficient chips couldn't even cover their own power costs  I remembered hearing this last September when average difficulty growth was much higher than now and said the same then. 28nm chips will stay profitable until a much smaller fabrication size chips is the majority of the network hashrate. Why the obsession with process node size? Asicminer 40nm will be twice as efficient as bitmines 28nm chips. Basically means there is much room for improvement/optimization left with 28nm chips before the efficiency has reached its limit. Proof or go home. Unless they use immersion technology on their hashing chips, they have no chance at all of even just being as efficient as Bitmines chips at 40nm. You should read about Moore's Law and why the race to use smaller fabrication sizes has so many billions spent on it. Edit: The only reason ASICMiner is using 40nm and not 28nm is to save money on fabrication costs, fact. |
|
|
|
You are mistaken if you think 28nm chips will not even pay for their own electricity use for an average kWh cost by June. Otherwise the network hashrate would shrink dramatically as even the most efficient chips couldn't even cover their own power costs I remembered hearing this last September when average difficulty growth was much higher than now and said the same then. 28nm chips will stay profitable until a much smaller fabrication size chips is the majority of the network hashrate.How long have you been a bitcoin miner? I've been following it for over three years now. I've seen the changes from CPU<GPU<FPGA<ASIC. The change from CPU to GPU was much more aggressive than the change from FPGA to ASIC. Edit: Depending on the bitcoin and fiat prices you've paid for your miners. Although 28nm will easily cover its own electricity costs to at least the end of the year, even at current bitcoin prices alone at $0.12kWh. Which is the cost my 2TH/s March fourth week rig pre-order will hash at. Which I bought at ~$800/BTC. |
|
|
|
You are mistaken if you think 28nm chips will not even pay for their own electricity use for an average kWh cost by June. Otherwise the network hashrate would shrink dramatically as even the most efficient chips couldn't even cover their own power costs I remembered hearing this last September when average difficulty growth was much higher than now and said the same then. 28nm chips will stay profitable until a much smaller fabrication size chips is the majority of the network hashrate. While I'd like to believe this argument, it does not add up with the reality that a lot of vendors are dumping more and more equipment on the market in the following months, all of it still 28 nm. While they may cover the electricity costs, the hardware investment we paid was far too expensive. In a few months, they will sell off old designs for a fraction, just look at the price evolution of the USB miners ASICminer sold. And there is only BTC 3600 / day to be shared amounts all these hungry mouths If you remember the GPU and FPGA days you will remember that power costs were a big factor in mining profitability. Hence expansive FPGA's coming out with the same hashrate as a high end GPU only much less power consumption. Power costs will become a factor again sooner rather than later. Unless there is another major rally in bitcoin price. Bitmine chips are the most efficient chips released to date so have a major advantage. Also, please remember that network hashrate growth follows price growth. The current drop in price though, won't have a major effect on network hashrate growth for at least three months yet. Or six months for the full effect of reducing ASIC production. Who know's what the bitcoin price will be in six months. Although I can't really see it dropping much further any more. The price could bubble to $5k by the end of the year. While you may think that sounds extreme well last spring a high of $500 was floated to be reached before the end of the year and most people laughed. Then bitcoin went >$1k before the end of the year. I think reaching $2k is a very real possibility within the next six months. While a bubble reaching $5k within the next twelve months is a very real possibility going off historical bitcoin price rises. |
|
|
|
in 2-3 months (...)
Learn the math first. or maybe you should research stuff before mouthing off - try some of advanced mining calculators which take into consideration difficulty rise - you're looking at jun-july tops, to be in green, after that you will not generate enough to even cover electricity cost. if you got access to free electricity good for you, but most people dont. You are mistaken if you think 28nm chips will not even pay for their own electricity use for an average kWh cost by June. Otherwise the network hashrate would shrink dramatically as even the most efficient chips couldn't even cover their own power costs I remembered hearing this last September when average difficulty growth was much higher than now and said the same then. 28nm chips will stay profitable until a much smaller fabrication size chips is the majority of the network hashrate. |
|
|
|
|
I heard the 280X Toxic is one of if not the best 280X for mining.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm thinking of setting a P2Pool node up for around 2MH/s on Vertcoin. Can you still auto donate 1% to the dev's?
|
|
|
|
As I said, they're not runnig at my home. But I'll ask my friend for some screenshots...
But first he has some problems to solve...according to eligius.st the two miners deliver only 377 Gh/s. At ghash.io it was around 600 Gh/s....which is very strange. There are no HW errors and they should deliver at least 1200 Gh/s :/
I think the stats of the pool take the average of some last rounds maybe - on slush it`s like that. Let it run for a few hours & look again. They've been running for over an hour now and still showing the same numbers...it's strange. The numbers on the display and the webinterface are correct. I always had some differences between cgminer and the pool stats in the past using my GPU miners....but 377 Gh/s vs 1200 Gh/s.....I don't know...something seems to be wrong... damn, not very encouraging.... you are the first guy I see reviewing an actual bitmine device... please go on testing the shit out of it... we need you. Bitmine remains silent. You guys are obviously new to mining. It can take a long time for your recorded hashrate on a pool to level out. Unless they offer hourly averages. On P2Pool it can take up to seventy-two hours. No XD As I said, we tried it at eligius which shows stats for multiple timeframes including 128 seconds. Btw, a round usually takes about 10 minutes and it was already running for more than an hour. I was also looking at the actual round times at backchain.info. I'm not new to mining  And the problem is already solved...it was because of that strange webinterface XD To sum it up: The hardware is running fine in normal mode  Cool I'm glad to hear, but if the miner says 1TH/s the pool rate should be the same minus HW errors. While HW errors would be quoted by cgminer unless conman has not been given early access to the hardware. Has conman or whatever they call him, had access to any Bitmine gear does anyone know. So that he can fine tune cgminer for it? Plus had anyone with Bitmine gear tried P2Pool yet? |
|
|
|
As I said, they're not runnig at my home. But I'll ask my friend for some screenshots...
But first he has some problems to solve...according to eligius.st the two miners deliver only 377 Gh/s. At ghash.io it was around 600 Gh/s....which is very strange. There are no HW errors and they should deliver at least 1200 Gh/s :/
I think the stats of the pool take the average of some last rounds maybe - on slush it`s like that. Let it run for a few hours & look again. They've been running for over an hour now and still showing the same numbers...it's strange. The numbers on the display and the webinterface are correct. I always had some differences between cgminer and the pool stats in the past using my GPU miners....but 377 Gh/s vs 1200 Gh/s.....I don't know...something seems to be wrong... damn, not very encouraging.... you are the first guy I see reviewing an actual bitmine device... please go on testing the shit out of it... we need you. Bitmine remains silent. You guys are obviously new to mining. It can take a long time for your recorded hashrate on a pool to level out. Unless they offer hourly averages. On P2Pool it can take up to seventy-two hours. |
|
|
|
None. Difficulty will be far too high by the time you receive it. You'd be lucky to get 10 btc. Sad but true. I think that tomorrow I'm going to aks for a refund ... I'm sad In my opinion, Knc grossly violated the spirit of their miner protection by building a massive private Jupiter farm. I also had day one Neptune orders that I cancelled once the writing was on the wall that they would most likely not be profitable. The miner protection statement says the following:"We will ship no devices in December 2013, January 2014 or February 2014. Meaning that once we have taken the difficulty up at the end of November we will not release any more hashing power for 3 months. We will then release our new generation of devices, which will begin shipping in March 2014. These devices will also have a much higher GH/$ rating than any of our current offerings.
We would like to state that If any of our competitors continues to add large amounts of hashing power to the network during December, January or February. We will continue to release our devices as competitively priced as we can to protect our customers share of the network."https://www.kncminer.com/news?page=7A few months ago, I thought Knc was the gold standard in Bitcoin mining manufactures, and now I think they are just as dishonest and sleazy as most other mining hardware manufacturers. Hoarding Jupiters in order to build a massive private mining farm when they could have sold some of them to existing customers per their miner protection statement was the straw that broke the camels back for me... But this statement let us expect, that Neptunes B1 or the 3THt in the Cloud, has to be delivered in MARCH. After MARCH they are in DELAY!!! And Plan B is to cover us from Delays! Maybe this is going to be true!? And the Farm is for us!? (after they mined some weeks for them selve) all that don't ask for a refund hope this The more people that ask for a refund the quicker they'll bring batch #1 hashrate online IMO. |
|
|
|
link to KNC wallet. http://beta.kncwallet.com/I think they are trying to compete with their friend Josh at BFL and their wallet idea. I use to tell my friends that keeping their bitcoins at MtGox was as safe as any other choice. God does it look like I was wrong. How can giving ownership of your private keys to someone else be 'as safe as any other choice' |
|
|
|
Desk 8 Chips per Bord = 5 Bords pro Desk
Rig 12 Chips per Bord = And I believe 8 Bords pro Rig
Well that would mean that 29.167GH/s per chip is needed to reach the quoted maximum of 2.8TH/s. How much power would the chips need if you had good A/C to keep the room cool? Zefir pushed the A1 chip to 36gh/s, but power usage went to 2J/GH. 29GH/s won't be so severe, 16% increase of hashrate per chip, but power usage increase will be higher. Marto's boards with chips at about that speed have power usage of 1.2J/GH https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=476970.msg5259909#msg52599093.4kw for a rig at 2.8TH/s ? Guessing only, ofc. IIRC, they're using a 3kW PSU in the big rig so that would mean ~2.5TH/s tops. |
|
|
|
So does that mean that they're now using twelve chips per board in the Rig and ten boards in the big rig. So a total of 120 chips? Meaning you'd need to be able to get 23.3GH/s per chip to get the quoted maximum of 2.8TH/s. What kind of power would be needed to get 120 chips up to 23.3GH/s each?
Buy new glasses Matthewh3, there is only 8 and 10 chips per board and how would you put ten boards inside 4 U case ? Jebote budale ! No sandman_BA Desk 8 Chips per Bord = 5 Bords pro Desk Rig 12 Chips per Bord = And I believe 8 Bords pro RigWell that would mean that 29.167GH/s per chip is needed to reach the quoted maximum of 2.8TH/s. How much power would the chips need if you had good A/C to keep the room cool? |
|
|
|
|
So does that mean that they're now using twelve chips per board in the Rig and ten boards in the big rig. So a total of 120 chips? Meaning you'd need to be able to get 23.3GH/s per chip to get the quoted maximum of 2.8TH/s. What kind of power would be needed to get 120 chips up to 23.3GH/s each?
|
|
|
|
link to KNC wallet. http://beta.kncwallet.com/I think they are trying to compete with their friend Josh at BFL and their wallet idea. Wait, it's closed source and you can only download and install executable application? Who in their right mind would install that, instead of open-sourced and battle tested blockchain.info Android wallet? https://github.com/blockchain/My-Wallet-Androidhttps://blockchain.info/walletIt looks like KnC has trying to establish it's identity, floating between hardware manufacturer, software vendor and service provider (Datacenter). You can't be all things at once, even Google sold it's hardware manufacturing business (Motorola) to others. OT, but Google kept all the Motorola paintents in the sale deal and basically only sold the brand name. |
|
|
|
What if they give us 5Th/s hosted in mid April?
You're kidding, right? Q1/Q2 delivery is what was promised. There's 0% chance they're going to start a hosting plan before the end of Q2. If you read their ad for their latest batch it says Q2 shipping still. With batch 1(b) a month before while batch 1(a) is due to ship a few weeks before that batch. So that says mid May for batch 1(a) to start shipping at the latest by their own timetable. Although they promised Q1/Q2 delivery for batch 1 and they already have the hashrate in their datacentre to enable plan B for batch 1a. Unless you claim that they're intentionally lying and false advertising. To drive more sales when they're not even desperate for money. So you claim they're intentionally lying just to hurt their own reputation on purpose. To make sure they destroy their own valuable brand name when they don't need the funding for their current plans. Yeah that makes loads of sense. |
|
|
|
Currently in the planning stage of setting up a P2Pool node to merge-mine for a <2.8TH/s Bitmine Rig due to be delivered in late March. What diff should we set for the miner and is there and links to some good tips on setting up a good P2Pool node (to merge-mine)? Interested after reading this - https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/P2Pool#Useful_features |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
