|
Are the earnings accurate now or not?
|
|
|
|
|
Also, servers seem to be having problems again. I can't connect via GUI Miner.
|
|
|
|
|
When you say the estimate is off, is it too high or low? Because based on my calculations I'm earning almost exactly how much I should be.
|
|
|
|
I hope it goes down more.
Lol? |
|
|
|
|
I know I'm not selling my coins until it hits $30 USD. It reached that point and then backed down. No one in the right mind is going to sell right now when it's $25 USD.
|
|
|
|
Sigh, look at the x axis. My graph started on July 2010, yours started at the beginning of 2011.
Herp derp, setting different graph parameteres on bitcoincharts...  My argument still stands. And not to mention that the scale of your graph is completely off. The distance between $20 and $50 is the same as between $0.2 and $0.5. Nice try. You are showing yourself to be quite dumb, or ignorant. This IS the point of log scale, and it apply to many things (not only economics). For example, the pitch of the center key on a Piano is 440Hz. (also known a A4). A3 (one octave below), is 220Hz, A5 (one octave above) is 880Hz. thus, a graph of "A" notes in a piano would be: 55, 110, 220, 440, 880, etc... The volume also works that way, when you say something is 100 db, and sound twice as louder as 50 db, actually 100 db is MUCH more than twice, because dbs are in log scale. Population increase, also happen in log scale. Popularity increase (the driving force behind bitcoin price increase) is also in log scale. 1 person, informs 2. If those 2 persons, inform more 2 each, the result is 4 persons. If those 4, inform 2 each, now we have 8. Then 16 32 64 128... Ok, that's cool. By putting the data in a logarithmic scale you've intentionally creating misleading data like the other guy said. Use a linear scale, that's what it should look like. If you had a linear line over a logarithmic scale you'd be assuming exponential growth, which is extremely misleading. |
|
|
|
|
350 MH/s on each GPU is what you should be getting...
|
|
|
|
|
Getting the same number of stales on main.simplecoin.us as simplecoin.us
|
|
|
|
|
Is anyone else getting a ridiculous number of stales...
|
|
|
|
Shouldn't we have found a block by now?
We can find a block in 1 share, or 2.5 million, or 5million. I believe average is around 600k right now. Looks like we are a little behind then |
|
|
|
|
Shouldn't we have found a block by now?
|
|
|
|
One card couldnt oc as much as the other
...That's what we've been telling you |
|
|
|
|
If you're getting higher rejected shares than normal then yes your overclock is unstable.
Ideally it should be stable all around but if it is accepting shares and getting low % stale then you should be fine.
|
|
|
|
also consider the power cost of the cards, heat generated and fan noise. the 5830 supposedly can pull 200+ watts each the 6870 cards can easily hit 280Mh without underclocking mem, cost about 180 bucks and use about 160w (with stock memory/core clocks). if you space them apart a bit they only run at 70º when overclocked to 975 and the fans at 60%
if you only have a few cards in a machine it wont make much of a difference but if you have 4+ cards on a motherboard it starts to add up (more wattage every day, more expensive power supplies, more heat, more fan noise/ more power to the fans, etc)
Please show me where you got that data from. |
|
|
|
|
Any of the 5000 series cards are good for MH/s/$ anyways...especially when you factor in how much you will make back.
My current 5850 is 2.33MH/s/%
|
|
|
|
|
The only downside is you have to be committed and patient. Unlike deepbit where they solve blocks every hour and you can only mine for an hour and get a payout, on smaller pools you have to mine for a far longer time to see a reward.
To extend on what I mean by mining for a longer time:
Assume that in one round (the duration of time it takes to solve a block) there are 5 shares, and you submit 1. You would thus be contributing to 20% of the effort, and you would receive 20% of the block reward. If the round lasted 50 shares and you only mined for part of the round (5 shares) your earnings would decrease as the denominator increases as the numerator stays constant--so your earnings would shrink from 100% (5/5) to 10% (5/50)
I am aware that there is more than just what is above, with weighting and cheat-prevention, but it provides an approximate estimate at how much you would potentially be earning.
|
|
|
|
Firstly, AMD designs GPUs with many simple ALUs/shaders (VLIW design) that run at a relatively low frequency clock (typically 1120-3200 ALUs at 625-900 MHz), whereas Nvidia's microarchitecture consists of fewer more complex ALUs and tries to compensate with a higher shader clock (typically 448-1024 ALUs at 1150-1544 MHz). Because of this VLIW vs. non-VLIW difference, Nvidia uses up more square millimeters of die space per ALU, hence can pack fewer of them per chip, and they hit the frequency wall sooner than AMD which prevents them from increasing the clock high enough to match or surpass AMD's performance. This translates to a raw ALU performance advantage for AMD:
* AMD Radeon HD 6990: 3072 ALUs x 830 MHz = 2550 billion 32-bit instruction per second
* Nvidia GTX 590: 1024 ALUs x 1214 MHz = 1243 billion 32-bit instruction per second
This approximate 2x-3x performance difference exists across the entire range of AMD and Nvidia GPUs. It is noticeably visible in all ALU-bound GPGPU workloads such as Bitcoin, password bruteforcers, etc.
Secondly, another difference favoring Bitcoin mining on AMD GPUs instead of Nvidia's is that the mining algorithm is based on SHA-256, which makes heavy use of the 32-bit integer right rotate operation. This operation can be implemented as a single hardware instruction on AMD GPUs, but requires three separate hardware instructions to be emulated on Nvidia GPUs (2 shifts + 1 add). This alone gives AMD another 1.7x performance advantage (~1900 instructions instead of ~3250 to execute the SHA-256 compression function).
Combined together, these 2 factors make AMD GPUs overall 3x-5x faster when mining Bitcoins. It's the AMD architecture--it has more stream processors than Nvidia's architecture |
|
|
|
|
I'd like to second the idea that it is not a problem with the PSU
Your first 6870 that (supposedly) did 1040 core on stock volts is of a very clean and good fabrication batch.
Your second 6870 is more than likely from an "average" or "below average" batch that cannot get high clocks without the volts.
You can overclock each card separately. The good card you can run at 1000 stock volts and you can leave the other one at stock. All this can be accomplished in Afterburner, just make sure each GPU has a separate clock control.
If your second 6870 is of reference design, you can bump the volts to try to get it as high as the other one.
Also, mining and gaming are NOT good stress testers in the first place. Get a real stress tester like Furmark to verify if your overclock is truly stable. Just because you can play games and not crash does not mean your overclock is stable.
|
|
|
|
|
How are you cooling all of that?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
