 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 »
|
Sell MSDN ADMIN ACCOUNTS
Payment only with BTC
Price 100$/ account NEGOTIABLE
Payment before, or after ONLY if you are a trusted member.
a newbie account asking for trusted member only  yeah right |
|
|
|
Cheers for the reply, atm there's actually about 2 people less that are mining? Can't get my head around it. I'm using exactly the same settings etc.
Did you check the total pool hashrate before and after? That's more important than the amount of miners. +1 also the difficulty might have increased, meaning more miners may be mining the coin as well. |
|
|
|
guess you forgot to read (as usual) what you are quoting...
if it isn't profitable to release then it isn't released, and the fast code may be eventually used elsewhere
(other coins, other algorithms) to keep the edge... hence no hurry as far as I am concerned
And you missed the part where if you don't release anything you're neither profiting nor helping anyone else... As you've done in the last six months. There is no 'ROI' on code. It's not the same thing as hardware. You can sell as many copies as you want and the demand for it is only reduced by the desire to want it. So if there is a competing product or they can get it for free. But since there are 'no' products available, you aren't really accomplishing anything. You can sell as many copies as you want until you sell to one jackass, and then it's worthless. You can disprove an idiot's argument, but you can't change his opinion... Same statement can be said about some of you tards. It spells "devs" D E V S while tards is rather spelled "bensam123" which can also be spelled "troll" but thanks anyway ps: and you wonder why we don't want to sell to you |
|
|
|
QUARK: 86.4Kh/Watt (average card power consumption, at the wall, including %computer: 70W)
LYRA2V2: 71.6Kh/Watt (average card power consumption, at the wall, including %computer: 60W)
PSU used, dual conversion, 80 Plus bronze at 40% load.
what is yours?.
You can get 7MHASH@quark with the latest public miner on the EVGA cards with a light overclock. @50watt. (win32 builds windows release 78). You can get 5MHASH@lyra2v2 with the latest public miner on the EVGA cards with a light overclock. @43watt. (win32 builds windows release 78). QUARK: 116Kh/Watt (average card power consumption, at the wall, including %computer: 60W) Lyra2v2: 116Kh/Watt (average card power consumption, at the wall, including %computer: 53W) If you switch to windows, run with the fastest of the sp-mod opensource miner, and overclock your cards (stable) your hash/watt can improve as much as: Lyra2v2 +62% Quark +34% This fork is optimized for windows 64bit. (x86 builds). Works on linux too, but sometimes slower. And changing bronze PSU for gold one will give 5-10 % on efficiency. And that cost less than 0.1 BTC :-) less than 0.1btc ?? your bicycle ? (or are you planning on a large increase of btc price ?) |
|
|
|
bro i thank you.but i want yescrypt algo  In principle, there is no technical problem in porting it to cuda 2.1, however it will be utterly ssssssllllllloooooowwww and you will probably get a higher hashrate with your cpu. |
|
|
|
sp_ how much do you want for your quark private miner? or DJM? or even x11 and Lyra2REv2
Not for sale. But if djm34 sell his kernal I might sell it. lol, you might have to wait a bit before selling then Just to summarize a bit the way I do things, for me for a sell to be profitable it has to reflect, somehow, the time I spent in coding (regardless of the coin value ) hence if the coin value is low, it wouldn't be profitable for a miner to buy from me or it wouldn't be profitable for me to sell below my time/money equivalent (and would be bad business practices as well since when I work for a coin dev I charge along that time/money equivalent). so for the moment, it isn't for sale... also as already said multiple times: trust is important for me... (private miners are sold in priority to people I can trust) Just wait till it's unprofitable then release it for free or for a very low price. I bet that will appeal to the majority of miners and makes sure you maximize your profits! XD You have to consider you guys aren't the only ones making miners. Private kernels devs exist, especially for big farms. Whole reason people still mine x11. guess you forgot to read (as usual) what you are quoting... if it isn't profitable to release then it isn't released, and the fast code may be eventually used elsewhere (other coins, other algorithms) to keep the edge... hence no hurry as far as I am concerned And you missed the part where if you don't release anything you're neither profiting nor helping anyone else... As you've done in the last six months. There is no 'ROI' on code. It's not the same thing as hardware. You can sell as many copies as you want and the demand for it is only reduced by the desire to want it. So if there is a competing product or they can get it for free. But since there are 'no' products available, you aren't really accomplishing anything. This is why a open market for kernels would be a really great idea for alt-coin mining. Hopefully Nicehash will eventually do this. It wouldn't require that much development time. ... and you missed my last sentence there isn't a ROI on code per se, but it is up to me to decide if it is worth (money-wise/time-investment) to release new code. New coding technique, new developpement are lost to me, as soon as they are released, I lose the advantage I have over the competition. (take an industry they publish patent over new tech long in advance, in order they do not lose the time they spent in R&D regardless if they use it in a new product or not). Hence, what I do here is more or less the same. (that was exactly what I said in my last sentence, in my previous message you forgot to read ) |
|
|
|
So sad it appears the fellowship of rigs has broken, turning on each other to prove who has the ultimate kernel of power.
the fellowship in on #ccminer channel and is doing rather well (even though there isn't much activities except from epsylon3 and his cpuminer) and for info we asked several time sp to join in (and he just ignored us... so...) but it is clear that he would like to rule us all (well... good luck with that ) |
|
|
|
I just think there should be no such discussion.
People wonna donate to sp_? Do it.
People wonna pledge djm34? Do it.
People wonna buy private AMD kernels from me? Do it! :-D
I've done so much opensource that I'll never feel guilty for selling some software ;-)
well sure, you can always make a donation to me (djm34... since I use my other name) however don't do it as pledging for something, as I have no real plan to release anything for the moment (will let you know if I decide to release something don't worry ) djm34. |
|
|
|
considering, I never worked on quark, your comparison is irrelevant as usual
Your Lyra2v2 kernal is slow on the gtx 950 and the gtx 960. I have improved it. It is faster on all the maxwell models. My modded kernals are 100-200KHASH bether on the 750tis' Around 5%. It's enough to prove that my work is faster. you just tweaked kernel parameters (which were adjustable by the user in my version btw), so no there is no real difference... (except the huge overclock on your cards) No. I have done more. My kernel compiles down to 110 registers and no spillbytes. Yours is 213 regs. Do a filecompare and check for yourself. doesn't make any difference, you should know it... as long as there is enough registers (and it is clearly not 213 reg either... but hey I am happy to keep your thread on top of the mining forum... so you can get donation... for a last time) Typical troll. Disprove a argument > switch the topic. Do it over and over again till the person you're arguing with gives up. I like how you talk about broken software and yours is, then you say 'it doesn't matter cause a earlier release wasn't broken'. Same thing could be said about SPs software when things break. But oh it's different because it's a different version of cuda? That's like having software that only works on XP when everyone is using W7 or W10, then stating it works on XP so everyone should stay on it. GG hypocrite "Typical troll. Disprove a argument > switch the topic. Do it over and over again till the person you're arguing with gives up." yep and you are an expert on that matter, as your little text prove it... |
|
|
|
considering, I never worked on quark, your comparison is irrelevant as usual
Your Lyra2v2 kernal is slow on the gtx 950 and the gtx 960. I have improved it. It is faster on all the maxwell models. My modded kernals are 100-200KHASH bether on the 750tis' Around 5%. It's enough to prove that my work is faster. you just tweaked kernel parameters (which were adjustable by the user in my version btw), so no there is no real difference... (except the huge overclock on your cards) |
|
|
|
except we know that nothing noticeable comes out at the end...
so as far as I am concerned, these are just baseless promises...
I just gave you 5% more quark on compute 5.2 devices(release 76). Everybody Know I have a faster private kernal. oh yes, I forgot the 5% stuff, we see all the time and nobody can notice 19-september 2014 (ccminer DJM34 version) http://cryptomining-blog.com/3503-crypto-mining-performance-of-the-new-nvidia-geforce-gtx-980/Quark was hashing at 12322 on the reference gtx 980 card (2048 shaders) Quark is now hashing at 12300 on a overclocked gtx 960 oc. (1024 shaders) and around 20MHASH on the reference 980 cards.(ccminer sp-mod release 76)' A total of 63% gain considering, I never worked on quark, your comparison is irrelevant as usual |
|
|
|
This is funny how when it comes to announce small and meaningless speed increase, you are there, and how it becomes everyone else fault when an algo gets slower Just different ways to work. I don't wait 6 months to publish my kernals. They are getting faster every week, and most of my work is opensource. no they're not faster... And your work is mostly to wait for other people to release them for you... (sorry for not playing by your rules... ) |
|
|
|
except we know that nothing noticeable comes out at the end...
so as far as I am concerned, these are just baseless promises...
Please restore the performance of your neoscrypt kernal on cuda 7.5. My 750ti is only hashing @ 60KHASH. 66% slowerNot my problem, this algo was developed for cuda 6.5 (the newest algo, still unpublished, which is a lot faster would be the only one I would consider for upgrade...). This is funny how when it comes to announce small and meaningless speed increase, you are there, and how it becomes everyone else fault when an algo gets slower |
|
|
|
except we know that nothing noticeable comes out at the end...
so as far as I am concerned, these are just baseless promises...
I just gave you 5% more quark on compute 5.2 devices(release 76). Everybody Know I have a faster private kernal. oh yes, I forgot the 5% stuff, we see all the time and nobody can notice |
|
|
|
Since quark was the focus of the most recent changes it proves that cuda 7.5 can perform better than 6.5. I hope these results translate to the other algos.
I have showed that it can be done with quark. I believe the other algos can be tuned faster as well with more work.. 0.01 BTC guys. This is all I am asking so you need donation because you believe it can be done ? Also called crowdfunding. except we know that nothing noticeable comes out at the end... so as far as I am concerned, these are just baseless promises... |
|
|
|
Guys, I have published 5% faster quark kernal for free and only recieved 0.05BTC in donations.
Do you want a continued opensource developement and a faster hashrate?
Or do I have to sell private kernals?
To keep the business profitable you need to support the developent.
0.01BTC from each of you would be nice.
The Myth of the 5% faster kernel continues... (infinite speed increase for infinite donation ) |
|
|
|
Does anyone know of a ScryptJaneNf16 cpu miner for Linux?
I have several large Linux servers in a datacenter with plenty of idle time I could put to use.
try to have a look in epsylon3 thread or distribution |
|
|
|
can anyone recommend a core temp app for a windows 10 PC. running some mining software and would love to know the temp?
hwinfo64 monitors pretty much everything in a pc (including temps) you know he is right |
|
|
|
hmm... heavy magic... (well magical stuff is just science which isn't yet understood ) The compiler has a bit a life on its own and depending how things are written you might see a few magical tricks... ) then a magician is just a scientist who is a bit ahead :-D yep |
|
|
|
So it would seem that the CPU needs enough virtual memory to match all the GPU memory in use. I can see a preallocation
strategy being better for speed but if the CPU is swapping to disk it would be slower than dynamic memory allocation.
this memory isn't used anymore once it has been allocated to the vram While this is technically correct I can tell from experience some drivers will still keep the address range as reserved, apparently this has some benefits for driver mangling (I can see how assuming different range <--> different resource can help). Beware, CUDA is way more than your GPU or CPU, sometimes it goes through some heavy magic. hmm... heavy magic... (well magical stuff is just science which isn't yet understood ) The compiler has a bit a life on its own and depending how things are written you might see a few magical tricks... ) |
|
|
|
|
