There is no 'maximum' we should all be doing the same speed on the same kernels at the same clocks as long as we aren't limited by TDP. This is why your logic is bat shit insane, you don't even have any idea how mining actually works. There is no way for someone to do faster with the same hardware unless their clocks/tdp/drivers/OS are different and in weird cases memory types (such as with Ethereum). Most cases Windows 7/8 are all the same, occasionally W10, but usually it's just slower.
Which is why on the last page rednow corrected himself and fell inline with speeds everyone else is getting. The only other thing that could possible effect it is intensity, but default intensity is almost always spot on.
This completely puts aside that you're comparing apples to oranges. rednoW isn't magically going to get the same speed as another guy on the other page running at 290Mhs, nor is it magically going to be 5% higher unless everything I posted above is the same, but it isn't... Mentioning hashrate without clocks or other information is dumb... even more so when people try to 'pad' their scores.
i know that you actually shot crap on purpose just to talk with someone, but you are again wrong on everything, if someone can do 290 with heavy oc, this must be considered as example, and the % or boost should be added on top of that not on the lowest possible, that would be dumb like your post, so please go ahead and stop with this bullshit propaganda that you are doing My test card is this one: http://www.inno3d.com/products_detail.php?refid=248The opensource does 245MHASH on the default clock wich is around 1830 In the latest mod I have increased that to 260 MHASH on the same clock, but then the card start to trottle and the speed decline. Normally overvolting / increase TDP will fix this, but the single 8 pin connector on the card is the bottleneck. The pascal kernel is still in development. New hardware, new possibilities. Looking forward to it, thank you  @bensam: indeed, but regarding profitability, as you can see tonight it's a real pain to guarantee something. Good for us  @amph: I've got 30 of them so I can talk due facts, and statistics. On average 265 it's even an high standard for an overclocked 1070 Proof (Open source 1.8.1 from tpruvot)  it does not amtter how many you have, you just need one to test, and my g1 gaming 1070 can easily do 276, i can post a screen if you want so saying that 265 is the base value is plain wrong  and i'm not even using your core |
|
|
|
sp can you post screen about 1070 +5% boost, which would put a 1070 around 300 already
265 *1.05 = 278.25 (on average, not considering too high settings, that are simply useless in a multigpu environment given the absence of rock solid stability) @bensam: you're not the only one with a "decent" amount invested in cryptos, but there's also a thing callededucation and mutual respect. I understand your frustration in such discussions, but it should be better if you both ignore each others; it's a nonsense to continue like this in every thread you both collide. @sp: would you be so kind to post hashrates with a human, achievable, frequency? A common 1070, even custom, barely reaches 2000MHz in stability without thermal and power throttling (in a multigpu setup obviously, due thermal complications). Interesting findings about the memory controller btw. Have you measured the difference between the reference values (TDP 150) and TDP to 170 + forced p0 state? Such tests would be much more interesting with watt measures. What's you model of 1070? Thanks no that is wrong, you need to check the maximum which is 290MH done by a guy here and with 5% is above 300MH just see few posts back, and anyway i'm at 280 with mine also, which would put me at around 295.... |
|
|
|
|
if you can simply put a fan in the middle between the two, it should lower the temp pretty well
|
|
|
|
|
sp can you post screen about 1070 +5% boost, which would put a 1070 around 300 already
|
|
|
|
it's underperforming compared to this version, jesus you are not even able to read right, really a waste of time talking with you
and again with this "regurgitating" no sense, keep repeating it like a retard will not make it true
Compared to what version? this current version that sp is releasing for fee + donation |
|
|
|
|
it's underperforming compared to this version, jesus you are not even able to read right, really a waste of time talking with you
and again with this "regurgitating" no sense, keep repeating it like a retard will not make it true
|
|
|
|
This is incorrect, a 980ti DEFINITELY does not perform on par with a 1070. It's about 10-15% slower. Maxwell was never under performing, you never took time to tweak the intensity settings.  i don't have a 980ti or any maxwell, if it was only about intensity then this whole sp-mod is useless, but since it is not, it was underperforming others also said so after trying this version(there is a screen of someone doing more), as usual bensam shooting crap everywhere no surprise |
|
|
|
newegg
and you can pay by BTC
does newegg ship outside US ? I live in Italy use caseking, they are in german you can pay directly in bitcoin, shipping is also very fast |
|
|
|
It's not profitable for me anymore, the difficulty is too high,I generate about ~$6.50 a day mining Eth.dwarfpool  almost $200 net per month with a single rig is good enough, people tend to forget that a single rig should not produce so much, hell a single rig is beating the crap out of an s9 right now, be proud of it |
|
|
|
Sorry for hijacking your thread but I have some problems with my mining rig too..
My problem is when I sometimes run a ccminer my whole rig starts to lag and when I close the miner it drops a bluescreen, it happends every time I switch coins to mine..
I am running 4 1070 on asrock B85 anniversary mbo on win 10 32bit anniversary update.
Any help would be appreciated.. Thanks
if the drivers crash the problem lie on the gpu setting, otherwise it maybe an HW problem |
|
|
|
you are telling me that i'm talking about assumtions and speculation, when there is no guarantee either that it can be improved, nice argument you have there, you are contraddicting yourself
actually it's the opposite, there is no proof that it can be improvement with a great % of optimization
and no he didn't improve anything beyond 1-2%, he was talking about maxwell card(and i don't care about to be honest), not pascal, read again what he said
WTF are you talking about? He literally said there was a 10-15% improvement and people have been confirming it the last couple pages, including a guy on this page. So Maxwell doesn't count now? You're trying to make a moving target here. He literally specified that line of cards. No one knows what you 'care about' until you mention it. It's not my responsibility to read your mind or type out your responses for you. That aside, I have no idea why you think 10-15% improvement isn't also possible on Pascal, it's very similar to Maxwell and pretty much all other algos except for weird ones (like Ethereum) show about the same improvements from Maxwell to Pascal (around 90%). it's not possible for pascal only because it was maxwell that was underperforming in fact a 980ti should be very akin in speed to a 1070 and the previous hash was 190MH for it now it's 300 which make more sense since the 1070 is near that too pascal on the other hand is on its limit on this algo, and again i don't care about maxwell yes, my whole argument was about pascal since the beginning, but you ignored it and because of this you were talking crap thinking that i was wrong |
|
|
|
|
share above target is strange? the invalide cpu thing it's normal if you have the last driver, it need to be fixed, for now use 369.09 drivers
hashrate on hashimoto is 20+30 not 35MH for a 1070, for reaching 50MH you need to tweak the 1070 to +600 mem and 120 core
|
|
|
|
Please trash those ribbon risers and buy some powered USB risers. They are better in every respect (longer, more reliable, sturdier, easier to use, safer to use, you name it).
i never had a single problem with standard risers, dunno why many hate them, i think the problem lie on the quality and on the shitty dual psu side, which i will never use |
|
|
|
|
you are telling me that i'm talking about assumtions and speculation, when there is no guarantee either that it can be improved, nice argument you have there, you are contraddicting yourself
actually it's the opposite, there is no proof that it can be improvement with a great % of optimization
and no he didn't improve anything beyond 1-2%, he was talking about maxwell card(and i don't care about to be honest), not pascal, read again what he said
|
|
|
|
0.1 with fee is insane for the 1070 owner, unless you can pull off a crazy 20% or something, and i really doubt you can it's not optimizable anymore, pallas wolfo and epsylon all agree on this...
Because 20% is crazier then 15%. "I know nothing about coding, but I'm going to flat out say you can't improve this algo." You're dumb. you are surely retarded, 20% was just an example, and no i actually coded something in the past, if 3 dev tell you that it cannot be improved anymore, that's it 1-2% of improvement it's not what i call a real improvement it's a joke And 15% is actual. 1-2% improvement wasn't listed anywhere, you're just regurgitating random shit you found in the thread instead of what SP is saying and other members who own a copy of the miner. Not sure if I should even bother correcting you on using assumptions and hypothesizes as fact anymore, as you seem pretty happy being ignorant, but when it comes time to have a actual meaningful discussion about something of merit you'll have to take it else where. you don't even follow, just shooting retarded sentece like "regurgitating" and crap like that, sp said himself that the code is already good enough and it is hard to improve it so unless he can pull of a miracle his miner is not worth it for pascal, not sure what the hell we are arguing about, you are as usual the one making random claim just to begin a flaim it seems like you are that one guy that always seek for attention |
|
|
|
You know, I prefer a good old Genoil miner, that I near never updated and that never had any problem, than a 10% faster miner that has a 2% fee. Question of mind. I don't like to be obligated to donate.
same i don't like fee, and that's why i'm not using claymore, i prefer to donate one time and get support for that algo we already need to pay for the pool fee and for the electricity, that's enough for my taste And that got a lot of changes in miners which have donate? Donate does not encourage the writing of new versions. when you do the first release, then you have only to tweak it, i think the donation can cover that easily, we are talking about one algo only i can agree if it where a full new release that improve many algo, that's a different story and require a donation far higher |
|
|
|
Guys, I'm having a hard time getting my new rig to boot  MOBO: Asrock H81 Pro BTC GPU: 6 x Rx 480 Sapphire Nitro 4Gb PSU: 2 x Corsair 850 W OS: Win10 x64 I have two molex connectors powering the mobo with extra juice and I'm not using powered risers. Everything was running great with the previous video cards (R9 270) but now I can only get the mobo to boot with 3 video cards, and one has to be directly connected to the 16x PCIe. Isn't it strange? I have extra power available and besides, the old video cards were consuming more power than these new ones. Any ideas? Change UEFI settings? Anyone messing with the Gen1/Gen2 setting? Anything else? I have another 6x480s coming soon! Any help will be greatly appreciated  Thank! C'mon guys, a lot of you are using the 480 + H81 BTC Pro. How do you manage to use 6 x 480 on this motherboard? use normal riser, but plug the two molex, but since the 480 is bad in the pci department i'm not sure with that, unless you have a custom one with a 8 pin connector |
|
|
|
You know, I prefer a good old Genoil miner, that I near never updated and that never had any problem, than a 10% faster miner that has a 2% fee. Question of mind. I don't like to be obligated to donate.
same i don't like fee, and that's why i'm not using claymore, i prefer to donate one time and get support for that algo we already need to pay for the pool fee and for the electricity, that's enough for my taste |
|
|
|
Just wanted to let you guys know that I've been working on an important part of the algo (the multiplication routines) and used many different approaches to try and improve them. Unfortunately I couldn't came with any measurable hashrate increase: the code was already pretty good. I have some ideas left to try and will let you all know.
but is certain that the 1070 need improvement, it is even slower than a 980ti, maybe it need some "code trick" like the famous killer groestl from christian |
|
|
|
0.1 with fee is insane for the 1070 owner, unless you can pull off a crazy 20% or something, and i really doubt you can it's not optimizable anymore, pallas wolfo and epsylon all agree on this...
Because 20% is crazier then 15%. "I know nothing about coding, but I'm going to flat out say you can't improve this algo." You're dumb. you are surely retarded, 20% was just an example, and no i actually coded something in the past, if 3 dev tell you that it cannot be improved anymore, that's it 1-2% of improvement it's not what i call a real improvement it's a joke |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
