What % of blocks are orphaned? I presume it's lower than the fee%.
.06% - 1.2% depending on luck. Also keep in mine with deepbit there are no stale shares which currently account for .06% of my submitted shares. In reality fees are only 1.5% or so... |
|
|
|
my 3 months worth of stats show that I got 296 btc for reporting back only 5 blocks
And I'm @ 3 blocks and 82BTC @ deepbit. I guess I've been a lucky addition to the pool.  |
|
|
|
|
Pictures, and location would be helpful....
|
|
|
|
Pool will be going down for approximately 1 minute to get the new pushpool deployed. The long rounds have shown the weaknesses in the current DB scheme when it comes to providing real-time statistics. This new update is addressing that issue, which may have been the culprit for some miner idle errors earlier during our 2.8m round.
Thanks, let us know when everything looks good and I'll bring my rigs back. In the past couple hours I only got 10-20% less M hashes reported in btc guild, because of all the idle problems and random connect / disconnects. |
|
|
|
|
Having problems now....
Every few minutes in the last couple hours I get one of these errors:
"Warning, miner queue is empty, miner is idle"
"Disconnecting to server"
"Connecting to Server"
The other error I just started getting quite frequently is:
"Unhandled error in Deferred: Unhandled Error
Trackback <most recent calls last:
Failure: twisted.internet.error.TCPTimedOutError: TCP connection timed out: 1006
0: The operation timed out:"
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks guys, quite helpful.
My PSU is a thermaltake 775W w/ 64A 12v rail. Current load on it is only 370W. Assuming 85% efficiency, its only using 315W (2x 5850's + sempron 140).
So I know it can take the extra load easily.
I don't know if i'll bother with the dummy plug... The system has not been rebooted in about 10 days.
|
|
|
|
|
I would say go solo when you think you can find a block or two in a week. You'd need like 4-5G hashes to get a block a week on average with the current difficulty level...
|
|
|
|
|
I have 2x 5850's in an existing miner machine.
I have a spare 5830, and I'd like to use it, but need a ribbon cable to PCI-E 1x.
My main question is, how do you manage overclocking different cards?
MSI afterburner only has 1 slider. Any tips or tricks?
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
What program can overclock and overvolt sapphire xtreme 5850's? Sapphire Trixx can adjust the voltage but only works for the first 5850, and it is hit and miss on overclocking both of them.
I recommend using MSI Afterburner with the extreme oveerclocking mode enabled Guide on how to unlock ASI Afterburner http://bitclockers.com/forums/index.php?topic=5.msg6#msg6Afterburner can't adjust voltages on most AMD cards FYI.... |
|
|
|
|
12.6c / KWhr. Redding, CA.
|
|
|
|
|
I have 4 on a MSI 5 PCI-E board. But no case.... I think it might work in a Lian li case. A lot of those have 8 slots instead of the normal ATC standard of 7.
|
|
|
|
you can go to 950 core with no voltage adjustment.
As if every card can do this.... right.... I have mine @ 850Mhz right now. 860Mhz and the display driver crashes after a couple hours. |
|
|
|
Your comparison is occuring during a period of bad luck. We've been going at 20-30% above average for this difficulty in the past 48 hours, and close to average prior to that. This is standard variance and can hit any pool including DeepBit (and has in the past). If you had tried about 2 weeks ago at BTC Guild we were averaging about 30% -under- the average for the difficulty.
Larger pools do not eliminate variance, it only helps smooth the effects of variance. The only relevant factors when comparing pools are: Fee %, Stale %, Downtime %. Those are the only 3 items that can be measured which have an effect on your payouts, everything else is chance.
In that case you may want to consider posting the pools "luck" stats in an easy to find place. Deepbit posts it + or -%. I'll be making that a part of block statistics shortly. For the record, our luck has been the following: Past 24 hours: 546k average per block = 25.5% bad luck Past 48 hours: 587k average per block = 35.1% bad luck Past 72 hours: 567k average per block = 30.4% bad luck Past 96 hours: 527k average per block = 21.2% bad luck Since current difficulty of 434882: 481k average per block = 10.6% bad luck So if your time frame was the last 4 days, the payouts were 21.2% worse than the expected average for your machines. If it was the past 2 days, it was 35.1% worse. For comparison, our average shares at the last difficulty (244112) was 212437, which is 13% ahead of expectations. Meaning the average between this difficulty and last difficulty, the pool is still ahead by about 2.4% (this is overly simplified and wrong to just compare two luck percentages for rounds which vary in length, but the point behind it is still valid). Thanks. I'm still new to this, and I was not aware that there was such a HUGE difference in luck from day to day. I just assumed it would be about 10% max for a decent size pool. In addition to posting the average "luck factor" I also suggested in an email that you add 24hr BTC generated stats to the my account page. |
|
|
|
Your comparison is occuring during a period of bad luck. We've been going at 20-30% above average for this difficulty in the past 48 hours, and close to average prior to that. This is standard variance and can hit any pool including DeepBit (and has in the past). If you had tried about 2 weeks ago at BTC Guild we were averaging about 30% -under- the average for the difficulty.
Larger pools do not eliminate variance, it only helps smooth the effects of variance. The only relevant factors when comparing pools are: Fee %, Stale %, Downtime %. Those are the only 3 items that can be measured which have an effect on your payouts, everything else is chance.
In that case you may want to consider posting the pools "luck" stats in an easy to find place. Deepbit posts it + or -%. |
|
|
|
|
First off, I've been mining for about 4 weeks now.
I started off at deepbit, but then switched to BTC guild when deepbit had the DDOS a few days ago.
During the same difficulty level (current level) I've been getting about 10-20% less over at BTC guild than I've been getting @ deepbit.
I've not noticed a single minute of downtime, yet I've noticed downtime at deepbit, but not much.
What I did as a test is:
I left my 2x 5850 rig (640M hashes) @ BTC guild for the last 24hrs. It generated about 1.25 BTC including unconfirmed blocks.
I put my 2x 5830 rig (550M hashes) @ deepbit for the last 24hrs. It generated about 1.49 BTC.
So deepbit wins, even though my mining rig @ BTC guild has more than a 15% faster hash rate.
When I had both rigs there for 3 days prior, I was only getting 2.2 BTC a day average. When I was at deepbit averaging 2.4-3 BTC at the same difficulty level.
I know there is some "luck" to mining, but with 4 days of testing and getting poor results at BTC guild, I'm quite skeptical...
Are we being scammed at BTC Guild? Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
|
A couple years ago, I experimented with a PCI VGA card that you could extend the signal up to 30ft through the use of a Ethernet cable.
The interesting thing was in some cases if the cable was too long, like 50ft or so, this would cause some elements of the windows desktop to not load properly. (Desktop background, icons etc.)
This also caused CPU usage to spike significantly.
In short what was happening is the timing signal for the PCI device was off, and this caused the PCI VGA driver to freak out, causing excessive CPU usage and causing some graphical elements to fail to load.
I believe this is exactly what is happening in your case. Too much resistance in the PCI-E slot, screws up the timing signal and freaks out the GPU driver.
|
|
|
|
|
On a 4x 5830 system we got about an 80W decrease in power usage by going from 1000Mhz to 250Mhz.
Some cards behave differently, but every 5830 I've DC'ed the memory has used less power, run cooler and slightly improved hash rate!
|
|
|
|
|
Why does it say: "0.00 MH/s
Average speed in last 10 minutes"
When I've been hashing at 560M/hashes with no downtime in the last 4 hours?
Miners are working fine, just deepbit.net is not reporting my hash rate. I hope I'm getting credit for these shares...
|
|
|
|
How hot is too hot?
I try to keep temps <80C. |
|
|
|
Damn, I didn't expect replies that fast! Ati's are better at raw integer calcs, while nvidia cards are better at floating point calcs. The former is a better fit for bitcoin hashing, the latter a better fit for scientific simulation. Ahh, that would explain things a lot - guess ATI is the way to go then. For the next three years or so power expenditure will be zero, so I guess it would be wise to make the most out of it! That said I'm not going to go and blow a load on an entire new rig, will probably just invest in a couple of new GPUs - it looks like the ATI 58XX models are the way to go? Thanks for the quick replies everyone  5850 is the most cost effective card, in terms of performance/$, but they're rare, even more rare than 5970, or 6990. 5830/5870 are the next best cards. use 5830 if you don't have much money to invest with, or 5870 if you have lots of cash. 5830's are far more cost effective than 5850's. I got some 5830's for $90 after rebate. 5850's cost me $160. I'm doing 288M hashes with 5830's and 318M hashes with 5850's. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
