Didn't the consensus show that 1M sievesize was some kind of sweet spot ?
Can I pass in the sieve size, or do I need to recompile? You can pass it on the command line with the '-sievesize' parameter, or you can put sievesize=<size> in your primecoin.conf. |
|
|
|
Mikaelh. I have a question for you. My CPU's have 12MB of cache each. Is that advantageous for primecoin mining? I have noticed I have been getting significantly higher primespersec than most of my friends when we use larger seivesizes, even when they have newer processors! Well, it might run a tiny bit faster if you have a large L3 cache. I wrote most of the code to run fast using the L1 and L2 caches, so the L3 cache is actually not that important. But of course it never hurts to have a big L3 cache.  GPU architecture also has a big impact. Running hp4 on a CPU with a 10M L3 cache, I found that if I set the sievesize any larger than 4M, the program would crash within seconds of startup. What should be the maximum sievesize? I am using hp5 now, but I have not checked to see if it still crashes. Is this a question so stupid that it just doesn't deserve consideration? I've asked about this crashing with large sieve sizes twice now, but have had no reply. I've verified that it happens with hp5 as well. I wish I could provide more details about the crash, but Windows just pops up a dialog saying the program stopped working, and doesn't include much useful debug info. |
|
|
|
Mikaelh. I have a question for you. My CPU's have 12MB of cache each. Is that advantageous for primecoin mining? I have noticed I have been getting significantly higher primespersec than most of my friends when we use larger seivesizes, even when they have newer processors! Well, it might run a tiny bit faster if you have a large L3 cache. I wrote most of the code to run fast using the L1 and L2 caches, so the L3 cache is actually not that important. But of course it never hurts to have a big L3 cache. GPU architecture also has a big impact. Running hp4 on a CPU with a 10M L3 cache, I found that if I set the sievesize any larger than 4M, the program would crash within seconds of startup. What should be the maximum sievesize? I am using hp5 now, but I have not checked to see if it still crashes. |
|
|
|
I anticipate a crash in the XPM price when the difficulty spikes in anticipation of the dumping from gpu miners.
I disagree with your post, but I love your avatar  Neuromancer was one of my favorite games back in the day... I own signed copies of all books in the series. Amazing books! Wow, lucky guy  |
|
|
|
I anticipate a crash in the XPM price when the difficulty spikes in anticipation of the dumping from gpu miners.
I disagree with your post, but I love your avatar Neuromancer was one of my favorite games back in the day... |
|
|
|
Have you been reading no understanding anything at all so far? Of course someone or several people are going to release GPU miners, that's not an argument. I just think the obviously greedy idea of "send me bitcoin and get early access" is a shitty one.
If OP need money so bad he should just use the GPU miner for a day or two by himself and then release it freely. Soliciting payment for early access is just dirty, stupid and will lead to GPU clusters being the first to run it, possibly unnecciarily forking the coin.
Mr. TheSwede: The point is that it doesn't MATTER what you think. You can cry and caterwaul all you like on here, but it ain't gonna change reality. I'm sorry that you disapprove of people doing things you don't approve of, but it's gonna happen from time to time. You are lucky in this case that you know that the development is taking place. This gentleman could have easily just developed the miner and used it himself quietly and very, very profitably. Someone else may already have for all we know. That's life - spend it crying, or spend it playing the game - it's your choice. He's voicing that he disagrees with something. That's a lot different from whining. The difference between those two is purely one of tone, and the tone I hear is crying and moaning. As I have already pointed out, it doesn't matter if you disagree with human nature. You will always lose that battle. It does occur to me though, that I don't really care if you guys continue beating your heads against the walls of reality. I leave you to it. |
|
|
|
Have you been reading no understanding anything at all so far? Of course someone or several people are going to release GPU miners, that's not an argument. I just think the obviously greedy idea of "send me bitcoin and get early access" is a shitty one.
If OP need money so bad he should just use the GPU miner for a day or two by himself and then release it freely. Soliciting payment for early access is just dirty, stupid and will lead to GPU clusters being the first to run it, possibly unnecciarily forking the coin.
Mr. TheSwede: The point is that it doesn't MATTER what you think. You can cry and caterwaul all you like on here, but it ain't gonna change reality. I'm sorry that you disapprove of people doing things you don't approve of, but it's gonna happen from time to time. You are lucky in this case that you know that the development is taking place. This gentleman could have easily just developed the miner and used it himself quietly and very, very profitably. Someone else may already have for all we know. That's life - spend it crying, or spend it playing the game - it's your choice. |
|
|
|
Does the difficulty scale in a linear way or is it hard to predict?
+1 difficulty == 30x harder to mine a block +2 difficulty == 900x harder etc. |
|
|
|
Schwede65 has no basis to declare there will be a single GPU cluster capable of 51% attacking the network. He's just doing what he only knows how to do, spreading FUD and attacking any coin he's not invested in... (if you don't believe me read through his last 100 posts here and see for yourself).
For all we know there could be GPU miners out there already. Lukejr and his friend seemed to imply they already have something working.
There is no evidence of a working GPU miner yet. And I think XPR could have a bright future. My point is just that the possibility of a fork due to GPU being VASTLY more effective then CPU in solving Marsenne prime (CUDA in particular) is real and it's not in the interest of anyone (except for the one being the first) to have massively cheap and controlled hash power. Mr. TheSwede: Someone IS going to make a GPU miner for Primecoin. Probably several people will eventually do so. THIS WILL HAPPEN. They MAY or MAY NOT share with you. You should accept this. The world is what it is. These development either WILL or WILL NOT destroy Primecoin, or perhaps hurt your feelings. That's just the way it is. Embrace life, don't fight it. |
|
|
|
A GPU miner unreleased to the public will likely destroy the price of XPM. No one likes a coin being instamined by a small group.
For once, I agree with you. Nobody wants a small group of miners getting all the coins and driving the diff up, then dumping them on exchanges, destroying the price. That's one of the best ways to kill a coin, right there. How is GPU mining any different than botnets targeting XPM? ASICS didn't destroy BTC, GPUs won't destroy XPM. We'll find out soon enough. Over and over we see the same process, and over and over we see the same 'Chicken Little's running around and screaming about the sky falling at each step in the process. It's just one of the cycles of nature. Embrace it, smile, and mine on We're not saying a GPU miner is bad. We're saying having a GPU miner available to only a small group is bad. Every innovation starts with a small group, or a single individual. BS. The entire concept of cryptocurrency and open source is dependent on group effort and colaboration. If ONE person with a GPU mining cluster turns on 50 million PPS the coin dies. One person with a GPU/cluster is the mining equivalent of a monopoly. There's a reason regulatory agencies' sole purpose is to ensure non-monopolistic business practices in the private sector. It's unfair both from a competitive standpoint as well as from an open source/p2p standpoint. Was I thrilled about spending $6k for my 10mh GPU setup so to stay competitive with other miners, earlier this year? No, but I wanted to get involved with cryptocoins as more than just a hobby. The technology and agorist motivations resonate with me. The point is, the opportunity to expand into GPU mining was open, financial prerequisites notwithstanding. It's not a monopoly if there is nothing stopping you or others from duplicating the effort yourself. Anybody with sufficient technical expertise could do this if they chose to do so, and others will - regardless of what happens with this effort. Even if there may be a short while where one party has a GPU miner, and no one else, that situation will only persist briefly until someone else with the necessary skill finds it worthwhile to make the effort to change that. I can only assume you have never heard of a 51% attack or what happens when a coin forks. A single GPU cluster = 51% instantly. Have fun with that. Why didn't that happen to bitcoin when the first GPU miner was created? It sounds like you believe that the very existence of any crypto-coin is dependent on the technical elite being good people who are not greedy. If you are right, there is no way any crypto-coin can last over time. Better sell all you have right now. History lesson time: BTC WAS FORKED! And if you take a look at the price/BTC for the first 2 years I bet you can figure out a few events. Strangely enough, though, last time I looked, Bitcoin was still doing fine. It survived all that. |
|
|
|
Schwede65 has no basis to declare there will be a single GPU cluster capable of 51% attacking the network. He's just doing what he only knows how to do, spreading FUD and attacking any coin he's not invested in... (if you don't believe me read through his last 100 posts here and see for yourself).
For all we know there could be GPU miners out there already. Lukejr and his friend seemed to imply they already have something working.
+1 This. |
|
|
|
A GPU miner unreleased to the public will likely destroy the price of XPM. No one likes a coin being instamined by a small group.
For once, I agree with you. Nobody wants a small group of miners getting all the coins and driving the diff up, then dumping them on exchanges, destroying the price. That's one of the best ways to kill a coin, right there. How is GPU mining any different than botnets targeting XPM? ASICS didn't destroy BTC, GPUs won't destroy XPM. We'll find out soon enough. Over and over we see the same process, and over and over we see the same 'Chicken Little's running around and screaming about the sky falling at each step in the process. It's just one of the cycles of nature. Embrace it, smile, and mine on We're not saying a GPU miner is bad. We're saying having a GPU miner available to only a small group is bad. Every innovation starts with a small group, or a single individual. BS. The entire concept of cryptocurrency and open source is dependent on group effort and colaboration. If ONE person with a GPU mining cluster turns on 50 million PPS the coin dies. One person with a GPU/cluster is the mining equivalent of a monopoly. There's a reason regulatory agencies' sole purpose is to ensure non-monopolistic business practices in the private sector. It's unfair both from a competitive standpoint as well as from an open source/p2p standpoint. Was I thrilled about spending $6k for my 10mh GPU setup so to stay competitive with other miners, earlier this year? No, but I wanted to get involved with cryptocoins as more than just a hobby. The technology and agorist motivations resonate with me. The point is, the opportunity to expand into GPU mining was open, financial prerequisites notwithstanding. It's not a monopoly if there is nothing stopping you or others from duplicating the effort yourself. Anybody with sufficient technical expertise could do this if they chose to do so, and others will - regardless of what happens with this effort. Even if there may be a short while where one party has a GPU miner, and no one else, that situation will only persist briefly until someone else with the necessary skill finds it worthwhile to make the effort to change that. I can only assume you have never heard of a 51% attack or what happens when a coin forks. A single GPU cluster = 51% instantly. Have fun with that. Why didn't that happen to bitcoin when the first GPU miner was created? It sounds like you believe that the very existence of any crypto-coin is dependent on the technical elite being good people who are not greedy. If you are right, there is no way any crypto-coin can last over time. Better sell all you have right now. |
|
|
|
A GPU miner unreleased to the public will likely destroy the price of XPM. No one likes a coin being instamined by a small group.
For once, I agree with you. Nobody wants a small group of miners getting all the coins and driving the diff up, then dumping them on exchanges, destroying the price. That's one of the best ways to kill a coin, right there. How is GPU mining any different than botnets targeting XPM? ASICS didn't destroy BTC, GPUs won't destroy XPM. We'll find out soon enough. Over and over we see the same process, and over and over we see the same 'Chicken Little's running around and screaming about the sky falling at each step in the process. It's just one of the cycles of nature. Embrace it, smile, and mine on We're not saying a GPU miner is bad. We're saying having a GPU miner available to only a small group is bad. Every innovation starts with a small group, or a single individual. BS. The entire concept of cryptocurrency and open source is dependent on group effort and colaboration. If ONE person with a GPU mining cluster turns on 50 million PPS the coin dies. One person with a GPU/cluster is the mining equivalent of a monopoly. There's a reason regulatory agencies' sole purpose is to ensure non-monopolistic business practices in the private sector. It's unfair both from a competitive standpoint as well as from an open source/p2p standpoint. Was I thrilled about spending $6k for my 10mh GPU setup so to stay competitive with other miners, earlier this year? No, but I wanted to get involved with cryptocoins as more than just a hobby. The technology and agorist motivations resonate with me. The point is, the opportunity to expand into GPU mining was open, financial prerequisites notwithstanding. It's not a monopoly if there is nothing stopping you or others from duplicating the effort yourself. Anybody with sufficient technical expertise could do this if they chose to do so, and others will - regardless of what happens with this effort. Even if there may be a short while where one party has a GPU miner, and no one else, that situation will only persist briefly until someone else with the necessary skill finds it worthwhile to make the effort to change that. |
|
|
|
A GPU miner unreleased to the public will likely destroy the price of XPM. No one likes a coin being instamined by a small group.
For once, I agree with you. Nobody wants a small group of miners getting all the coins and driving the diff up, then dumping them on exchanges, destroying the price. That's one of the best ways to kill a coin, right there. How is GPU mining any different than botnets targeting XPM? ASICS didn't destroy BTC, GPUs won't destroy XPM. We'll find out soon enough.
We're not saying a GPU miner is bad. We're saying having a GPU miner available to only a small group is bad. Every innovation starts with a small group, or a single individual. BS. The entire concept of cryptocurrency and open source is dependent on group effort and colaboration. If ONE person with a GPU mining cluster turns on 50 million PPS the coin dies. Dude, you haven't even been around long enough to witness much. You registered in June, and now you're an expert on what's good for a coin? I wasn't in Rome when when Caesar was killed, but somehow I know about it. Go figure. I don't claim to be an expert on crypto-coins, but as I have already pointed out, all this whining is old history. You can study up on it too, if you make the effort. |
|
|
|
A GPU miner unreleased to the public will likely destroy the price of XPM. No one likes a coin being instamined by a small group.
For once, I agree with you. Nobody wants a small group of miners getting all the coins and driving the diff up, then dumping them on exchanges, destroying the price. That's one of the best ways to kill a coin, right there. How is GPU mining any different than botnets targeting XPM? ASICS didn't destroy BTC, GPUs won't destroy XPM. We'll find out soon enough.
We're not saying a GPU miner is bad. We're saying having a GPU miner available to only a small group is bad. Every innovation starts with a small group, or a single individual. BS. The entire concept of cryptocurrency and open source is dependent on group effort and colaboration. If ONE person with a GPU mining cluster turns on 50 million PPS the coin dies. |
|
|
|
A GPU miner unreleased to the public will likely destroy the price of XPM. No one likes a coin being instamined by a small group.
For once, I agree with you. Nobody wants a small group of miners getting all the coins and driving the diff up, then dumping them on exchanges, destroying the price. That's one of the best ways to kill a coin, right there. How is GPU mining any different than botnets targeting XPM? ASICS didn't destroy BTC, GPUs won't destroy XPM. We'll find out soon enough. Over and over we see the same process, and over and over we see the same 'Chicken Little's running around and screaming about the sky falling at each step in the process. It's just one of the cycles of nature. Embrace it, smile, and mine on We're not saying a GPU miner is bad. We're saying having a GPU miner available to only a small group is bad. Every innovation starts with a small group, or a single individual. |
|
|
|
A GPU miner unreleased to the public will likely destroy the price of XPM. No one likes a coin being instamined by a small group.
For once, I agree with you. Nobody wants a small group of miners getting all the coins and driving the diff up, then dumping them on exchanges, destroying the price. That's one of the best ways to kill a coin, right there. How is GPU mining any different than botnets targeting XPM? ASICS didn't destroy BTC, GPUs won't destroy XPM. We'll find out soon enough. Over and over we see the same process, and over and over we see the same 'Chicken Little's running around and screaming about the sky falling at each step in the process. It's just one of the cycles of nature. Embrace it, smile, and mine on |
|
|
|
Absolutely. The prices of ASICS are not only capitalized, 80 dollars for simply a flimsy USB device, it is a complete gamble consequently, as you NEVER know if you will ever get a return on your investment because of all of the other big-rig ASIC miners as well as private ASICS.
Isn't that equally true for the rich 'fat-cats' you despise, as it is for all of us? Mining BTC is a big gamble. Full stop. |
|
|
|
Here is the simple solution.
DIY... best price.
If you don't want to do the work then you will probably have to pay a premium for chips that are fabricated into units and are available sooner than later.
Unless you are taking the risk of dealing with tens of thousands of chips and the volatility of the market place anyone who is selling these K1s will have to offer a competitive price. Then again why should anyone taking that sort of risk sell at 50% or 60% lower than what the market is for these units? Why?
Again there seems to be a real disconnect especially when some of us are actually offering much lower prices for larger volumes. Yet the same comment comes out that the PRICES are too high you are gouging people. If you want a great price then get a few people together and buy in volume. Silly to sit here and argue the value of something that has measurable ROI. If you think it is too high don't buy. If you think you can buy in larger numbers and get a reasonable ROI then do that. What bothers me is the idea that those willing to take a risk and produce a K1 that pays for BKKCoins development are some how evil for expecting it to be priced at the current market rate. Beyond me.
For the sake of clarity, *I* don't think you are gouging anyone or being evil. There is nothing wrong about charging what the market will bear. As I said before, I was just disappointed that the first OSS player in this game chose to set the same price point as an entity that has had a monopoly on this market. I foolishly thought that since this project was open source, it would be less expensive. I was wrong, and therefore disappointed - but I'm sure time will bring competition, and competition will lower the price. |
|
|
|
yeap it may surpass ltc, its getting harder and harder to find blocks and no pools yet... i dont trust ypools...
This does not necessarily mean price should go up. Difficulty follows price, not the other way around. Exactly! Not sure how reward works, if difficulty goes down, will reward per block increase? If it does, XPM may take ages to surpass LTC in price. The block reward is 999/(diff^2), so yes, if diff goes down, the block reward goes up. I don't see diff going down any time soon though. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
