this wont change the world of mining.. yet.. 5000 usd of 1070s, mined 310 LBC yesterday.. 0.04 BTC...24usd... 210 days ROI only for the cards...  you should take resale value into account. Right! Totally agreed. I´m not complaining, but I expected a "game changer" and it´s only an excellent card. For small miner (yes even with 10 GTX1070 you are a (medium) small miner - I have two cards), we can't make significants profits with the process of mining the most profitable coin and selling asap. I have made significant profits with : - mining coins which are not publicly visible on whattomine or others comparometers : especially those which have no pools yet or not been listed on market place yet. - mining coins which have good chance to see a significant increase in price and waiting the rise to sell For instance, I have mined siacoins during may, june with two fury-x when there was no pools, and sell during the rise from 10 mbtc to 100 mbtc and up: and gain around 2 BTC... |
|
|
|
Hey. Its been long time since i have actually mined bitcoins with my own hardware. It just became not profitable.
So i wanted to ask u guys, when i was comparing the hash power for price of the cards back then.. AMD cards always showed real nice results as compared to nVidia ones. Is it the same now or then have new processors which put nVidia card better at mining?
please shed some light on this
HELLO guys.. can anyone tell me something about it. ? or just link me to the information. Since maxwell architecture, some key integer operation for mining is done in one cycle of operation and the gap between nvidia and amd has somewhat disappeared. Now, depending of the card, kernel algo amd or nvidia is better. For memory latency sensitive kernel (ethereum mining, xmr mining) amd was better till the arrival of pascal, where GTX 1070 is now as good as best amd cards with a lower consumption (the GTX 1080 is not competitive due to latency for GDDR5X). Nevertheless, with dual mining (ETH + SIA), amd nano or fury has better performance than GTX 1070 (GCN architecture is more adapted for dual mining). See claymore miner. new amd card RX 470-480 is competitive too. For others kernel (without dual mining) (decreed, sia, lbry) pascal architecture is now generally ahead in perf and far better in perf/power than amd. |
|
|
|
When Monero reaches the parity with bitcoin and goes beyond, please do not come here to post bearish posts.
1. I'd be way too rich if that happens 2. I'm not making bearish posts It's a risky game you are playing. Your calls are gambling, nothing else. I think many with the same mindset were locked out for good after selling at 008 thinking that this was for sure the top and they would rebuy lower.
I hope the same happens to you, cuz I don't like your condescending tone towards investors/holders, you need to accept that not everyone is a trader.
And nobody gives a fuck about the success of your trades, so take your boasting somewhere else.
Agreed, but when you have 90% permabulls someone needs to balance things out. And I'm not even bearish on monero longterm +1 As somewhat monero (quiet) supporter almost from the begining, I really appreciate your posts here to temper the somewhat over-enthousiast tone. |
|
|
|
Coiling up for decision time. We have 20 hours max looks like before it breaks one way or the other.
It is quite much shorted, so the stakes are high. Hi, I'm new in that business here. Can you tell me please what you exactly mean with that? Thanks  My interpretation : - shorters (the bears) have invested a lot thinking it will go down (this is obvious when you see the xmr lending market on poloniex) : they will pressure down the price : some people seing price going down will panic sell (especially if some resistance line is broken around 18) - others (the bulls) may try to squeeze the shorters (push the price with enough btc to force the auto-close of the shorts positions which will automagically push the price higher and force close others shorts and so on Either way this could be explosive : pop corn advised |
|
|
|
It's a pretty poor show when a 750ti gets around 850 h/s using less than 150w but a 280x gets a measly 470 h/s using near 220w! The 280x is the more powerful card......  are you sure a GTX 750 ti can reach 800h/s ?: I think one is under 300h/s... |
|
|
|
I would have to say I have a difference of opinion of the hashrate of the 290x beating the fury x. First, the fury x is more power efficient, stays cooler, and has 4000 cores at the same speed as the 290x with 2800 cores. The fury x also has higher overclocking ability. The fury x definitely outperforms the 290x but its not due to the HBM. A pro duo has 2 fury x gpus with 8000 total cores where as its predecessor the 295x2 has 5600 cores with 2 290x GPU's so the core difference is a noticeable increase in speed in terms of GPU mining especially with the newest mining software.
Do you have any experience with the card? my card won't go anywhere above 1125Mhz. while the stock clock is 1050Mhz. A 290's stock is 1GHz and it might clock to 1.2GHz on good samples. but the Fury X does beat the 290 and even the 390X in most of the games, but not in mining. I had very good profits with fury x on sia before pool mining. A fury x reach 1800-1900 mh/s, which more than a R9 390X (1100 mh/s), GTX 980 ti ( 1600-1750) and just a little bit under the GTX 1080. |
|
|
|
getting this error with a 1070
Using device: GeForce GTX 1070 (Compute 6.1)
Cuda error in func 'set_constants' at line 143 : invalid device symbol.
-U -S coinotron
Shouldn't the 1070 be Computer 8.0? Cuda version 8 with compute 6.x |
|
|
|
Or maybe you got hacked like me and many others.It appears when u mine on a server and your wallet is unlocked and ports are forwardedit is easy for someone to steal your coins. I got 90 SIA stolen from my wallet which is nothing I transferred them from polo and just left them there and 2 hours ago "I" initiated a -90 transaction, sadly the explorer isn't working so I cant show you.  I don't have any outgoing transactions so I doubt that is the case. One mined block just disappeared without trace. You may have mined an orphan : I had two block mined according gominer which didn't appeared on the liste of transaction on the wallet : either orphan, either a bug on the miner (my gpu was undervolted maybe too much), either a bug on the wallet |
|
|
|
Reverted to 0.5.2 but I still can't find blocks.
Is there a limit on how many miners can connect to a single wallet (similarily to maxconnections=x in traditional wallet configs)? I mean I'm mining to one wallet over LAN with a few dozen of cards (1 miner instance per card) and while each miner seem to work fine I'm not sure anymore. The logs are also not helpful. Is there a way to increase the verbosity level of the log?
I have found one yesterday with 0.6. What is your hashrate ? With around 3.5 gh/s, I have found 3 block in June, which is almost in line with the expected average. You have to take into account that variance increase with the difficulty/yourHashrate ratio : I have find 2 block the 03/06 and 1 the 23/06 and none in between. If you miner produce hash, it means it is well configured. One problem I had was with too much downvolting (or overclock with same voltage) : my miner find block which were not accepted by the wallet : I suppose there were calculus error due to too much downvolting. One other problem may be the miner software : but if it had produce one valid block once it should be Ok. |
|
|
|
Anyone else having terrible luck mining (compared to difficulty)?
I only got 2 blocks instead of 5.5 since I started mining (KlausT's Sia-CUDA-Miner using -s 1 parameter).
I have about 3.5 gh/x speed (two fury x with gominer, undervolted and underclocked) and didn't find block since the 03/06 (when I have found two in a day): I have stop the miner for short maintenance but I should have find around 2-3 block. With current difficulty and my hashrate, variance is very high... I wonder is there could be a problem with my wallet version : I have switch from 5.2 to 6.0 beta ... I had probably mined some orphans too since gominer has find some block which didn't appears on the wallet around the 10/06. |
|
|
|
And in the meantime, Ripple has been successfully operating a distributed ledger for over five years now. A ledger that has supported an unlimited block size and five second confirmation times from the beginning: https://ripple.com/AT isn't a ledger - I was comparing smart contract systems (i.e. "apples and apples"). (but if you want to add AT to Ripple then you are welcome to do so) The amount of money involved in the DAO/ETH has attracted high level hackers. The same can't be said for NXT/Burst : therefore, we can't conclude easily their smart contract features are more safe. |
|
|
|
DAO hacked, apparently using recursive calls to split (i.e. withdraw ETH). Interesting times ahead. Crypto never fails to disappoint.
If the hack is as big as it seems revealing a core deficiency in the dao protocol, it could crash eth and investors may fall back to more traditionnal / sure cryptos such as XMR... |
|
|
|
For some time SIA was very profitable to mine but there was no public pool existing and difficulty became very high. I believe it's because of the FPGA farms that can use Wolf's implementation. Idea was to have in parallel some mining that will cover the electricity costs and check the luck with SIA's high variance. I did mining of SIA before and I know that down clocking the memory doesn't change the hash rate but lowers the power spent, meaning that it is very relaxed on GPU memory and can be mined in parallel with ETH. Last week price peak of SIA and calculation of 3 times more profit than ETH was a signal to start. Three rigs used, first with one 280X and 7870, second with 4 280X and last one with 3 280X and one 290. Win, Claymore dual miner in mode 1, siad 0.6.0 and precompiled sia_gpu_miner. With sia miner intensity up to 27 there were very low sia hash rates (280X in range of 50Mh/s) but almost no change in ETH hash rate. Intensity 28 dropped ETH hash rate at 35% of normal level and gave 510+ Mh/s on 280X and 600+ Mh/s on 290. More than 3 days passed and I didn't solved a SIA block, SIA profitability went down close to ETH, difficulty continue to rise, ambient summer temperatures gone higher,... so I gave up.  If someone wants to try and/or believe more in SIA than ETH can share dual mining experience. Or maybe Claymore can make ETH-SIA dual miner where SIA intensity could be fine tuned. Here are some screenshots during and after unsuccessful try... Dun blame me! I never finished one for Sia; if someone has an FPGA farm and is interested, let me know, though. Nano /fury has good hashrate with sia. My fury-x (I have two) is doing 1800mh/s @stock with gominer and 1700mh/s with -40% powertune and -85mv : nano would be around @1500 mh/s Wolf0 has a better miner. I believe the recent increase of hashrate correspond to some major nano farm switching from eth to sia mining. The difficulty is so high now that I didn't find a block since more than 7 days. |
|
|
|
Look at Gensis Mining?
Their coders wrote a Ethereum program called Enigma, which gives a significant boost to hash output - no-one is hate posting on their thread for them to opensource Enigma.
They've kept is completely secret; you can bet there are pieces of opensource coding in it.
SP_ was getting £16 donations in 2015, for a windows compiled version of ccminer, with tweaks and optimisations for small miners who cannot code and cannot compile from source.
People are being way to harsh on this thread to SP_
You are completely missing the point. Your example is the right way to do it. Presumably they did not use any open source, Their code is all proprietary so they are not obliged to publish it. SP is using open source code made by others adding a little bit of his own then not publishing the source. It has nothing to do with charging for it, it's all about how you use someone else's code in your product. See the difference? You are right about the license. But others have a point with sp_ having really helped small miners to stay onboard. |
|
|
|
Look at Gensis Mining?
Their coders wrote a Ethereum program called Enigma, which gives a significant boost to hash output - no-one is hate posting on their thread for them to opensource Enigma.
They've kept is completely secret; you can bet there are pieces of opensource coding in it.
SP_ was getting £16 donations in 2015, for a windows compiled version of ccminer, with tweaks and optimisations for small miners who cannot code and cannot compile from source.
People are being way to harsh on this thread to SP_
You are completely missing the point. Your example is the right way to do it. Presumably they did not use any open source, Their code is all proprietary so they are not obliged to publish it. SP is using open source code made by others adding a little bit of his own then not publishing the source. It has nothing to do with charging for it, it's all about how you use someone else's code in your product. See the difference? I believe Probability (Genesis program doesn't use GPL code) < 0.01 Of course I can't prove it. On the other hand, since they don't sell it and use "privately", I think they can do this |
|
|
|
1070 mh/s with ethereum ? , work on windows 10 x64 ? .
Read up - 27mhs at 100w Win 10 will be available with July update or Insider preview build next week... that hash is only where, on linux? what about win 7? Linux and Win 10 Dont know about win 7 - maybe they release the driver for that.. Very good! only 100w!!! Thanks! And Gtx 1080 ? . The GTX 1080 is slower than the 1070 in mining the Ethereum. There is no point in getting that for mining. You are confused. There is no way the 1080 can be slower than the 1070. It is impossible, 1080 has more cores, faster memory, and wider memory bus. Don't be an idiot. If someone tested a 1080 as slower than a 1070, then there are software issues. The AMD Nano/Fury line are all MUCH higher core count, faster clocks, faster memory, MUCH wider memory bus - and mine SLOWER than my 2-generation old R9 290s, which routinely see 30 MH and I've not pushed them as far as they CAN go (best figure I've seen for the Nano was 27). There appears to be more than just pure "memory bandwidth" involved in how fast Ethereum can be mined by a given model of GPU. Fury-x can do around 32mh/s on ethereum + 1700mh/s on decred simultaneaously with claymore dual miner. Nano just a little bit less (for nano http://mininghwcomparison.com/list/index.php?brand=amd) |
|
|
|
Hi I'm new here. I have 42 cards R9 390 nitro 8 gb. I want to ask if someone can help me to setup for solo mining because I'm girl and I don't understand what should I do. I mining etherium now my friend do everything install and make settings. But now I want to mining sia but he can't help me. So I looking for someone to help me to start solo mining. I will pay if someone want to help me. /Sorry for my bad english/ First install Linux (easier to compile gominer) or (far less easy) keep windows Install sia and let the sync run some hours. Unlock the wallet. Install git and go. Then install/compile gominer (you may need to install gcc libs and open cl libs : on windows, this is not easy). run gominer and wait for the next block found. Alternative : go with the miner from nebulouslab, but you need to launch one for each gpu : not very user friendly with 42 gpu. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
