I am here to report that not one person sent me any bitcoins.  At least I follow through Elvis.

You don't really need to send me a bitcoin.  Just jokingly making the point to all in the TechSupport forum that we all compete with eachother.  As to crashing and/or freezing, I don't believe it has anything to do with the fact that you don't have the monitor plugged  into the second card.  First off, you can verify in Afterburner which card is crashing (or just see the one blowing cold air) and start over and plug the monitor into that card when everything is running.  That makes it active, but it doesn't matter.  Windows does not need for it to be designated active for the program to continue to run.  I have run for months on such a setup so I would consider the following:

You are overclocking to get 305mhps.  Try stock until you are satisfied.  Then play with the settings, which I will give you for one more bitcoin :-)  Nevermind, the settings are 1100, 850, 1025.  Start with the clock no more than about 800 for starters.  I leave the core voltage lower, as Dingus says, because it can run 800-850 and gives a little cooler VRM(?) temps.  These are temps you don't see in Afterburner and need to look at Sensors tab in GPU-Z. 

I have found that what happens is, even if your temps are okay and about 90 degrees, the card will begin to falter with the program as you increase heat (either just warmer case, or heat increase by voltage increase).  There begins to be dropouts when it looks like a heartbeat monitor in Aterburner.  You want a flat line, even if it is a lower flat line, becase each time there is a dropout (like a heartbeat) it costs you dearly in hashes for the duration (on average you get LESS than by going a little slower/cooler).  The dropouts happen at higher heat.

You likely have an earlier motherboard that does not support the crossfire, but not to worry.  You do not need the crossfire in your situation.  I have an earlier ASUS A8N32-SLI with this problem.  Plug the monitor into one card, either port..  That enables the CARD in CCC.  Run the program.  Promptly switch the monitor cable to the other card.  That enables the other card on the SAME device numbers but does not stop the program from running.  Now re-run the program.  If the windows just sit there blank after a few seconds, close ALL windows and restart the program.  Now that will run the program on the current card and you can see in Afterburner that such is the case.  Switch the cable back to the other card and try again.  Keep repeating until you have all four windows running.  If this doesn't work after five or six times switching, restart the computer and try again.  If that doesn't work, reinstall Stream SDK.  Have patience.  It will work.  Now send me a bitcoin from the first block generated on the additional card since I have just advised you on how to compete with me.

Sorry, no clarification possible.  I had a few beers and was just amusing myself spewing total nonsense.  But, look at the bright side.  When you consider the time and electricity spent on this thread, Bitcoin generation does not seem such a waste of resources.  And the Milkshake analogy is adequately explained on YouTube . . .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKQ3LXHKB34

Double like I said.  So you do agree then that Satoshi drinks your milkshake? 

Crypto IS a disease.  And my four ATI 5970's are the cure.

Let me explain it in a way you all may understand it.  It's as if Satoshi has a really long straw, all the way from Japan.  Satoshi drinks YOUR milkshake.

No, it is simply that the odds do not increase from 1 in 3 to 1 in 2.  They increase from 1 in 3 to 2 in 3.  You double your chances by switching, instead of the mere 50 percent increase that everyone supposes.  Now look at the increase in difficulty of the Bitcoin generation and apply that.

So you agree with the prior two posters then as to the odds?

You are on the TV show Lets Make a Deal.  There are 1000 Bitcoins that Monty has placed behind one of three doors.  He lets you choose a door.  Then he opens one of the other two doors that he knows does not have the prize behind it.  Now, he asks you whether you want to switch doors or keep the door you first chose.  Statistically, should you stick with your initial choice, or switch?

Does anyone see the correlation between this scenario and Bitcoins?

I'd like to see how many people are willing to send 1/2  BTC to me, out of their wallet. I'm using this as a way to make money. Thus, I am charging half as much and being honest with you.  I will also post a detailed report in seven days.  The report will emphasize the fact that unless I get more than half of what he does, most people on here are stupid.

There are 3 rules:
1. Please DO NOT mix trash.  If you want to send me money, you have to promise to separate your  recyclables from other trash for one week.
2. Please DO NOT drink and drive.  I did and now I have to take a class every week.
3. Please DO NOT send more than 100 Bitcoins total to  influence the "outcoming".  You may send more than 100 for any other reason.  100 coins buys you 200 votes (201 acutally, because you will have my vote that you are a lunatic.)

I will post a detailed report on what I have found out in a exactly 7 days.

1Bo9uvaUbXZnNAWFnVBZUJ4iPtZ8gEG3D


LE: This is just the first step. Each step takes a 6 days. To whole thing has a span of the amount of time until you get bored sending me money.

If they want to find "free money" like they do in their sofa, perhaps they should.  On a related note, one thing that occurs to me is that if the database can take hours to download now, what happens when there are 20 times as many blocks out there and it takes a day.  Moreover, if I understand correctly, the database we all share is an accounting of EVERY transaction that ever took place with bitcoins.  What happens if bitcoins gain wide acceptance as payment and it takes weeks to download the complete database?  Are we hoping for higher internet speeds?  Will someone mail out a bitcoin database DVD?

Yes, but when you finally do connect to the network, it should properly "balance your checkbook" so to speak.

So the updates coming in do not make sure that my block database perfectly matches what's out there?  There should probably be some function within the program to check the integrity of my database against what's out there, or a mechanism for updating all of the blocks without a complete delete and restore of the program.  Maybe it could check checksums of the block database instead of having to download the whole database again for several hours.  You say this is common, but I see it as a problem.  If I don't see my money in my wallet, it's almost as bad as not having it.  And people are going to scream someone is stealing money from them with minor errors like this.

I routinely got payments from a mining pool and immediately turned the funds into MtGox for immediate sale.  Thus, I run a 0 balance in my wallet.  I have not used the pool in a week and get no other payments from anywhere.  Yesterday, after reinstallation of bitcoin I took my backup of my wallet, which was made moments earlier and had a 0 balance, and placed the wallet back where it belonged.  The wallet showed all of the transactions and the 0 balance, but nothing had confirmations and bitcoin took some time to update on the network and collect all 108000 blocks or so.  During the process, the balance changes, of course because all of the prior transactions are being confirmed.  At the end of the process I had 3.37 bitcoins.  Where did they come from?  I had no new payments coming in from the mining pool and a 0 balance in my wallet prior, having been connected to the network 24/7. 

I did some cross checking and did see a payment that came in from the bitcoin mining pool on January 29 in the amount of 3.37 with 3000 confirmations.  Could be a coincidence.  I sent the 3.37 today to Mtgox and have 3/unconfirmed so I don't thing this is a double spend.  This 3.37 was sent to 1214fZQFKUMFmwGWusguY4qkRPJqsivwX8 at mtgox, for anyone that is capable of tracing the actual source of those funds in block explorer.

Some may say, well, a free 3.37.  But like those penny errors in accounting, favorable or not, this points to something being wrong.  How can bitcoins go missing and then just come back later assuming one has been connected to the network 24/7.

Respectfully . . . wrong on both counts I'd argue.  (1) If Bitcoins become 30% more difficult to generate then *I* as a miner value them more and want a higher price to cover the cost of the hardware, the electric bill etc.  Usability, value, price are all related but do not mean the same thing.  I am speaking of price.  I agree the value lies in Bitcoins as a trade facilitator.  But price is not strictly linked to value as a trade facilitator.  Gold's value is also as a trade facilitator but if it became 30% harder to mine tomorrow, I believe the price would increase. (2) The available goods and services currently obtainable with the bitcoin has almost nothing to do with the exchange rate.  People are not paying five times more this month than December because any new services are available.  The increase in price is tied to increased cost to manufacture a bitcoin along with a good deal of speculation that someone will pay more for it in US Dollars or Euros later.  That speculation is likely based upon the fact that bitcoin is a good method of secure private monetary exchange, as it is now, even if no goods or services are ever offered.  What goods and services can you go out and trade gold and stocks for?  

No.  Right now I can tell you that if a decent pair of shoes costs $40, then it will cost approximately just over 40 Bitcoins for the shoes.  I can even tell you how many Euros a decent pair of shoes will cost using my secret proprietary method.  But I'll save that for later.

I think simply trading is enough.  I don't care what the currency can buy.  It has value as a model for usuable currency with features built in.  As long as someone will pay US Dollars for them, what do I care as a miner?  I sell em and someone else can keep or spend them.  It's like stock in a company.  If someone will trade me dollars for it, what do I care that I cannot trade stock for beer at the local 7-11?

Quite to opposite really, much to my disappointment.  I have generated thousands of bitcoins but sold them all daily for as low as 20 cents.  I am not sorry though.  I had my own economic model to pay off my 4 5970's and it's going according to plan.  I see MANY more people on here very recently with the same idea.  But the spike in prices, leading to huge mining increases, leading to increased difficulty by now 30% justifies the price at a dollar now, when no more than 20 cents was justifiable a few months back.  I think some real smart people on here see equipment cost is high to compete and sell mining contracts instead of pegging their hopes on future dollars per hash.