Its 170mhs on LBRY and 650khs neoscrypt both at 120w
If Founders edition so expect more from custom editions both in hashrate and power consumption..
I have 1040 kH/s neoscrypt using 1070 at 150W. I don't think 1060 custom editions will reach 830 kH/s at 120W. So in kH/J - 1070 is better Of course it wont and it will draw more than 120w with custom editions Which miner/os/settings are you using to get 1040khs? KopiemTu 2.1 beta (not released yet  ) with ccminer-vert-1.5.80.1-vert In fact, I have 1050kH/s...
[2016-07-21 07:21:25] accepted: 44/45 (97.78%), 3151 kH/s yes!
[2016-07-21 07:21:35] coinotron.com:3337 neoscrypt block 1305925
[2016-07-21 07:21:35] GPU #2: GeForce GTX 1070, 1076 (T= 67C F= 37% C=1803/3802)
[2016-07-21 07:21:35] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 1070, 1010 (T= 66C F= 36% C=1792/3802)
[2016-07-21 07:21:35] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 1070, 1063 (T= 67C F= 37% C=1787/3802)
[2016-07-21 07:21:55] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 1070, 1020 (T= 66C F= 36% C=1792/3802)
[2016-07-21 07:21:55] accepted: 45/46 (97.83%), 3153 kH/s yes!
[2016-07-21 07:22:04] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 1070, 1071 (T= 67C F= 37% C=1791/3802)
[2016-07-21 07:22:05] coinotron.com:3337 neoscrypt block 1305925
[2016-07-21 07:22:05] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 1070, 1075 (T= 66C F= 37% C=1783/3802)
[2016-07-21 07:22:05] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 1070, 1019 (T= 66C F= 36% C=1796/3802)
[2016-07-21 07:22:05] GPU #2: GeForce GTX 1070, 1074 (T= 66C F= 37% C=1806/3802)
[2016-07-21 07:22:09] GPU #2: GeForce GTX 1070, 1068 (T= 66C F= 37% C=1803/3802)
[2016-07-21 07:22:09] accepted: 46/47 (97.87%), 3154 kH/s yes!
[2016-07-21 07:22:30] coinotron.com:3337 neoscrypt block 1305926
root@kopiemtu:~# nvidia-smi
Thu Jul 21 07:24:40 2016
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| NVIDIA-SMI 367.27 Driver Version: 367.27 |
|-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| GPU Name Persistence-M| Bus-Id Disp.A | Volatile Uncorr. ECC |
| Fan Temp Perf Pwr:Usage/Cap| Memory-Usage | GPU-Util Compute M. |
|===============================+======================+======================|
| 0 GeForce GTX 1070 Off | 0000:01:00.0 Off | N/A |
| 35% 66C P2 151W / 150W | 1157MiB / 8113MiB | 88% Default |
+-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| 1 GeForce GTX 1070 Off | 0000:02:00.0 Off | N/A |
| 36% 66C P2 150W / 150W | 1157MiB / 8113MiB | 96% Default |
+-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| 2 GeForce GTX 1070 Off | 0000:03:00.0 Off | N/A |
| 36% 65C P2 134W / 150W | 1157MiB / 8113MiB | 96% Default |
+-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Processes: GPU Memory |
| GPU PID Type Process name Usage |
|=============================================================================|
| 0 13336 C ...miners/ccminer-vert-1.5.80.1-vert/ccminer 1155MiB |
| 1 13336 C ...miners/ccminer-vert-1.5.80.1-vert/ccminer 1155MiB |
| 2 13336 C ...miners/ccminer-vert-1.5.80.1-vert/ccminer 1155MiB |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
root@kopiemtu:~#
|
|
|
|
Its 170mhs on LBRY and 650khs neoscrypt both at 120w
If Founders edition so expect more from custom editions both in hashrate and power consumption..
I have 1040 kH/s neoscrypt using 1070 at 150W. I don't think 1060 custom editions will reach 830 kH/s at 120W. So in kH/J - 1070 is better |
|
|
|
I think its very hard to know what will be happen in the future if ethereum will be not profitable in the future.. i think you can choose many premined in coinmarketcap where you can choose old altcoin that still alive as of now..
And if you want to choose what setup you want better to choose gpu mining instead of asic.. gpu is better for me to mine..
old altcoin, with an escape from N-scrypt ASIC danger long time ago - is Vertcoin (ASIC resistance embedded) |
|
|
|
I've decided to give you some insight to what perf looks like on stock 1060  and what about power consumption? 1060 vs 1070 TPD is 120W vs 150W so it seems 1070 may looks better in efficiency... |
|
|
|
27 MHz at 105W on the wall, is very similar to the R9 Nano. However, 480 is less than half price of Nano, it is still good.
but you are writing about 1070, not 480 |
|
|
|
It depends on the power consumption. If that is 24 MH or 90 to 100 W, then it is quite good. If it is 120W, not so. |
|
|
|
Something interesting: "One option is to “buy in” to an existing, public blockchain. A postal operator would first have to acquire some coins."http://www.coindesk.com/us-postal-service-blockchain-digital-currency/MobileCash has unique potential - it's better prepared than other coins for providing tokens for some nice business case. Sooner or later we should meet the proper one |
|
|
|
You need the latest version of the wallet if you want to synchronize with the blockchain. Are you using Linux or Windows? If you are using Apple, I have no clue what to tell you.
I was using Linux, and then I tried in Windows, too. The result was the same. where is the latest version of the wallet, then? |
|
|
|
hi, I'm trying to synchronize my wallet, but I see such error: received block 00009c7550d4f4597823f789084c90f2ae2bad44522828176e7ab5cebb5baf7d
SetBestChain: new best=00009c7550d4f4597823f789084c90f2ae2bad44522828176e7ab5cebb5baf7d height=35742 log2_work=32.563722 tx=201365 date=2014-05-14 01:16:37 unixtime=1400030197 progress=0.126627
ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED
received block 000092cbe1686ce914a0355c251a8db984adfa2f5a1827e07214a0ddc728aa31
SetBestChain: new best=000092cbe1686ce914a0355c251a8db984adfa2f5a1827e07214a0ddc728aa31 height=35743 log2_work=32.563737 tx=201366 date=2014-05-14 01:16:08 unixtime=1400030168 progress=0.126628
ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED
received block 000092c21bee31298cb9c991f5b49fe73cf6a9e4e3fc98e5d6fb761256d397f2
ERROR: AcceptBlock() : incorrect proof of work
ERROR: ProcessBlock() : AcceptBlock FAILED
Misbehaving: 91.204.214.254:1968 (0 -> 100) DISCONNECTING
disconnecting node 91.204.214.254:1968
received block 000099c7630146e26808b91d73a4ba2af46e6c4dde46b6b2930ee28505d8e635
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK, prev=0000aa89000e0dd60acf269a223df8ac0cbdfffaf538ff3ec3cfb72895400811
received block 00008588d2dab6ecdc7b0db91c48d3986108e0b0a3c551f6ab249e01a9067b64
my client version is: v0.8.583.0-unk-beta how should I correct that failure? |
|
|
|
|
I made Google Play apk update:
"New checkpoints added and unnecessary permissions removed:
SEND_SMS, READ_CONTACTS, WRITE_CONTACTS"
It could be a bit strange, that SEND_SMS permission is removed...
But it's possible - I decided to invoke plain SMS application instead.
Such route is equal to the only SMS method allowed in iOS.
|
|
|
|
Well I am not surprised that transactions are now mobile, the world is going cashless. India will not be left behind
exactly, I have found such article some time ago: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-35341971I think the revolution is just behind the corner, and MobileCash idea is well suited for it. in MobileCash: you can install mobile wallet, but... you can also immediately fill your empty mobilewallet with first coins, just by sending one domestic SMS and you can immediately start to "play with your friends", what is quite cool |
|
|
|
not same like you say..  many people in my home only receive 1 MBL, not 10k or 1k MBL  not many, but you only - are trying to fraud the giveaway engine and lying about that like in your posts above - is even worse so my advice to you: do your best to make 1MBL worth $1  |
|
|
|
In the giveaway link we were only asked to enter the phone number and how to receive a coin while there do not enter the wallet MBL?
Hi, giveaway link is only for verifying if giveaway is waiting. that's MobileCash, most important is wallet for smartphones - so you will receive a coin from wallet on Google Play, here: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=hashengineering.mobilecash.wallet |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
