+1 to this guy. Sadly AMD has not released any 7xxx info basically. Well except the 7xxx mobility, showing proposed die-shrink, but that doesn't tell you much about the full scale versions. if they are tweaked 5/6xxx that will likely not be a good sign looking at the 6xxx vs 5xxx in terms of $/MHash (though good in $/Watt).

Since these cards ARE primarily gamer cards, expect a lot of focus on non-mining features like tessellation and DOF shader effects and other things that take up PCB space and don't contribute to hashing.

actually just the opposite.

Anyway, please stop these freak out threads. Hash rate "dropped" down to 11THash agan, or a better explanation, it was never much hgher to begin with.

SP is stream processors. 1600 s the number of them. its not that important, all 5870s are the same that way. 450MHash is reasonable wth 1040, i get about 440 MHash on my 5870 that can do 1000 stable, but i'm on air for most of my cards.

Must we all play so fast and loose with the truth? 6 months ago there was almost no growth in computing power, then 2 months ago an explosion of computing power. Averaging nearly nothing with something huge to get a middle number is just sloppy. Try going back and looking at the root of why such things would occur.

it should be noted that for that to make any sense the quantity X needs to be a function of time, which it is not.

I'm confused as to why you chose 1000 hours? I mean it's a nice round number but how to does it relate to profitability exactly? I'm not trying to prove you wrong, I'm just trying to work out where the numbers are coming from.

What is 41,908?

The units of your ratio are ($ / kWh) / (Mh/s / W) = $ / kWh * W*s / MH =  $ / MH, so it's a little confusing as difficulty isn't really a measurement of MH (at least not directly).

Curiousity: Are you just wrong all the time, or are you purposefully putting out misinformation all the time? Difficulty/hashing follows price, but not immediately. That's why it's been repeatedly called a lagging indicator. It takes days/weeks for people to get their mining equipment delivered, all together, unboxed, put together, installed, up and running, stable and overclocked. The Price Jump to $30 was the biggest bitcoin had ever seen, and with a slurry of news reports inspired a huge rush of people to overextend themselves buying machines (look at beeph for example, dropping > $10,000 because bitcoin was free moniez forever!). Difficulty jumped *right* afterwards. It will jump again, THEN we will start to see price/difficulty effects as people decide whether or not its worth their investment to continue or return based on price vs. difficulty.

A side note, 2THash/sec used to be a lot, now it's 20% of the network power.

I've been on multiple pools with a lot of hashing power for a couple months now. I've found 0 blocks total. It's possible I just have really bad luck, but I'd still be one sad puppy if I had been hashing away on my hashpower and had nothing to show for it after all this time (I've gotten something on the order of 400BTC from pools, wish I had sold less @ $7 ).

Angelus Stats:

Total Posts:   230 posts
Total Topics Started:   41 topics

Jebus. 5:1 Post:Topic creation ratio.

Yeah the OP basically made a post showing off that he's a huge asshole. He's "loyal to newegg" as long as it doesn't cost him anything, basically he's loyal to them to screw over other customers. He wants to call up newegg and tell them whats going on after his own refund has been processed. Genuine Class that one.

And for some reason it's turned into a stupid debate about fans afterwards. The MTBF for gpu fans is 50,000 hours, the concept that spinning it fast reduces this by a factor of 10 or more is retarded. Let's not discuss this anymore shall we?

Well most people that read MtGoxs site know its not a real email, so probably wouldn't reply. A reply-to is easy to fake and obviously wouldn't point to the hackers real email address. The people that don't read MtGox wouldn't read that it goes to them either.

That's not really true. People are used to the growing exponential properties of bitcoin. What if mining became so unprofitable after a series of difficulty increases spurred on by a super cluster coming online for a brief period of time then shutting off? Say it was only 1/3rd of the network even, and suddenly we have a difficulty pointed at 1/3rd higher than the hashing rate? Transactions being to slow to a crawl, instead of a transaction being solved every 5-6 minutes, we have a transaction every 15 minutes, 6+ confirmations take 1.5+ hours, mining profitability drops to disgustingly low levels. People who are fed up with trying to earn coin and see their transactions taking forever start to drop out as well, hashing rate continues to decline, and the bear of it is that instead of lasting for two weeks, this lasts 3 weeks, then a month, escalating peoples impatience and causing more to drop out as they see their costs catching up to them without returns to show for it. Etc.

A bit of a nightmare doomsday scenario to be sure, but one that is possible, and certainly a way that a crash could happen in mining before a crash to bitcoin itself (though that would likely result as well).

Total bullcrap. There have been stories of "exploding harddrives" since time immemorial, from virus or power or whatever. The fact is that a hard drive is one of the most solid components in your computer, it's just a big fat heavy hunk of magnetic metal encased in a solid block of hermitically sealed metal.

Maybe if the user had removed the casing and jarred the drive head and then applied an overvoltage spinning the now offtilt platters at super speeds maybe it could hit some physical object and splinter, but it would never have been functional in the first place.

MtGox does not set price, buys and sells do. Likely the rollback is being done to the point where the prices were centered around 17.5, but people are free to revoke/remove/change their bids/asks when mtgox goes back up. And since there is such a huge disparity on tradehill, well... I feel bad for anyone who isn't paying attention to what is going on and forgets to change their trade data on Monday (or if they have to reset their account and can't do it fast enough).

Eventually the two exchanges will reach parity again though and will resume business as usual.

EDIT: I noticed the last tradehill trade was done 40+ minutes ago.

I'm not sure what their definition of simple is. I can't remember if I used an email addy on mtgox, and if I didn't my password was pretty complex, so hopefully I can get in and get mah moniez.

This has been discussed in the various other threads already devoted to this exact topic, but I think it's worth noting that MtGox dictates the price only on its own exchange. MtGox never said "Tradehill has to trade at xxx value". If you don't like it, no one is forcing you to use this exchange. That's what a free market really is if you're such a free-market enthusiast.

I thought I already went over this, but anyway. You can't use a select portion of data and claim that it is correct. Every one of those huge jumps in difficulty followed (FOLLOWED) a huge jump in price. The small stagnation of 30% was following a moderate trend up of price after a huge jump of difficulty. Difficulty has followed the money as it should. We are still in the throes of the largest price increase in bitcoins relatively short history bringing in a flux of the largest amount of miners in the history of bitcoin. It is not a coincidence that after a huge trend upwards of mining power around the the difficulty time change (lag time in buying / installing new parts) the hashrate of the networks upward trend slowed significantly. There still is inertia and this will likely cause a continuation of reasonable increase into the next difficulty due to lagtime of mining response, but unless something drastically positive happens (bitcoin price jump or something) the increase will almost certainly level out again until the next big event.

I've already told you specifically what is wrong with those spreadsheets. They enlist static numbers, based on only a very select group of data used to prove the point they are trying to make. That is called selection bias. I'm still not arguing that mining is the best thing since sliced bread, profitability is way way way down due to a number of factors, but all these projection claims that don't include the tag "btw I have no idea if my assumptions will hold true because there is not enough data to allow for any kind of reasonableness" are fallacious.

Warnings: Good. Claiming speculation as fact: Bad.

I guess whichever body part you choose to look at, big things WERE coming up.