Whitepaper has issues.
It claims equihash is the Ethereum algorithm (an easy confusion to make, but a WHITE PAPER should have had plenty of time to get checked before it was published).
It claims "ASIC resistant" but there really is nothing in the component algorithms that makes it more ASIC resistant than any of the OTHER "X series multi-algorithm" algorithms that ALREADY HAVE BAIKAL ASIC for them.
The "rotate component algo order based on the last hash" is not going to be hard to set up in an ASIC - Baikal is already most of the way there with how their EXISTING multi-algo miners are set up, just need to add a matrix switch and control logic for it to connect the "process each individual algo" parts in the right order.
I'm not saying it's a bad coin - but some of the underlying assumptions don't stand up to fact checking.
Is it possible that with this ALGO the developers have the ability to flip the matrix around. Just an example: today the sequence is0=blake 1=bmw 2=groestl 3=jh 4=keccak 5=skein 6=luffa tomorrow it could be modified to be0=bmw 1=blake 2=groestl 3=skein 4=keccak 5=jh 6=luffa Would that be one measure that could be put into place to prevent ASIC? It does not need to do that at all, ASIC's are specific to a certain algo in regards to hashpower/watt, so no ASIC manufacture can make a ASIC chip that is efficient at all 16, they are vastly different for a reason... The only way they could make an ASIC for RVN, it would have to have a generalized cpu like a GPU, so it would have marginal if any benefit over GPU's... The time it takes an ASIC to be researched, cut, and placed into manufacturing is easily 1yr or more, so in that 1yr timeframe newer GPU's will be out and possibly onpar or better in regards to generalized cpu chips.... |
|
|
|
phil what were your overclock settings for RVN.
4 of my rigs are SMOS, 2 are windows. I'm having stablity issues with my windows boxes.
11 of 16 algo's are heavy core intensive, so +Core -Mem works well remaining 5 are random between +Core and +Mem, so getting unstable results on windows is probably either +Core to high for 1 of 16 algo's or intensity is to high, the stock miner trys to run like 21 intensity i think |
|
|
|
Are you guys getting wild hashrate fluctuations on RVN?
My 1080 tis go from 17-22-15.. they're just all over the place.
EDIT: They're all reporting 28MHs now O_o
RVN is made up of multiple Algo's all tied into one, it switches algo's every 2mins and 30 seconds roughly, the miner currently is set to average out the hashrate over a 30second period, so your seeing the differences in algo's mining and being combined together |
|
|
|
|
im using this miner on RVN
goo.gl/9QSF2n
-20 on all rigs, super stable....
avg ~19.33MH/s per 1080ti 70pwr/163core/-200mem
Currently mining on Suprnova @ 2,431.58MH/s average rate
|
|
|
|
If I'm reading this right, RVN difficulty is upo 48% in the last 24 hours.
awesome.
Its because so many of the top youtube miner guys have posted videos on how to mine it when some showing how profitable it is... basically they got in early over a month ago when the mining was good, now that its starting to taper off quickly, they are making videos on it to catch that youtube money off of it.. Honestly i have kinda stepped back on my further development of mining and research in mining, i have been spending more of my time learning to trade as of lately and have been doing pretty dang good, i have been limiting to myself to the amount i mine each day in my trade funds, since btc is not really been stable in any direction to trade, so i have been trading alts and buying more NEO for my portfolio... i recently broke 1,000 neo staking, now im trying to push for 2,000.... reasoning behind it is i truly think it has a lot to offer in the future and the passive income is nearly on par to buying another rental property for my portfolio. im averaging right at 13 GAS a month, so when it goes back up in value i can cash out on the GAS, since its a finite token that is gone when its consumed for a project or ico TabTrader has made it very handy to have a working life and still trade on the go. |
|
|
|
@ citronick
thanks for putting this all in one place
i tried that sgminer , but it seems to only support stratum only
there is a nvidia solo miner im testing which works great
Need a solo miner for my vegas too
Hit the bitcointalk page for RVN... I last read the solo discussions over there, some have already tried solo mining succesfully and getting 5000 RVNs per block but this was almost 2 months ago.... I doubt a few GPUs can make a dent doing solo mining at present day but .... this RVN block cycle is every 60 seconds so who knows an array of Vegas or 1080tis would be an interesting project to setup. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2752467.msg28125249#msg28125249BTW, there is only 1.8M RVN coins for grabs ... so please leave some for us mere mortals... :-) Goodluck on solo mining, about a 3 weeks ago i pointed 100+ GPU's in solo mining, after 8 hours i had nothing to show for it.. so i pointed to suprnova now |
|
|
|
This is what im getting with the latest Alexis x64 cuda 9 RVN mod ccminer...  |
|
|
|
Patrike,
Anyway we can do some brainstorming together on a way to improve the Profit Switching mode of the software?
If i understand NemoMiner, basically its logging the 24hr est, 24hr actual, and Current est, then its doing a calculation to figure out a running offset.. then applying it to smooth out the outlier spikes in profit that result in poor actual pay.
Example:
x17:
Current: 0.01523 *which is based on current sharerate and exchange price
24hr Est: 0.01853 *which is a projection of the next 24hrs based on the current exchange rate
24hr Actual: 0.01544 *which is based on actual payouts from past 24hrs of exchanged coins
Trust:
(3/26/2018 0500EST 24hr Est:) - (3/27/2018 0500EST 24hr actual) = Trust 24hr Offset
Example:
(0.01853)-(0.01544)=0.00309 Difference of 16.7%
So on the profit switching list,
it will compare the current price with a running offset to determine if its worth switching to, because if the current est... greater than the 16.7% current offset, than its more likely it will actually payout more.
Then the next day lets say the new next 24hr trust offset is 17.0%, it does an averaging
16.7 and 17.0 for an average running offset of 16.85% and so far as time of the software collects data.
One thing i noticed on nemo's is if the offset places the coin below the 24hr actual, it defaults to 24hr actual price on the list for profit switching.
Basically, the trust offset in nemo miner is just saying hey, this is the expected amount of drop in value on this algo after all the peeps switch over to catch the spikes in high current payout and its actually exchanged for payout to peeps. The part i dont know how it does it is how it is taking into account current prices to this trust offset to mix those values into the calculations, thus why i suggest some brainstorming by the masses to figure out a good way of doing this.
Thanks for your feedback. I'm very much open for a discussion on this topic. Awesome Miner already have access to these numbers, so making some adjustments to the profit switcher should be possible. Please give me a little more time to investigate before I get back with a longer response. What I had in mind since before was that the Awesome Miner cloud could help out here to build this statistics trend, so you don't have to run Awesome Miner for a longer period of time to build the trust-level. It could be provided for you. I've tested and used for several days Nemos Miner 3 and I do think that: 1) Nemos Miner has a lot more miners (10 ccminer forks for various miners and cuda versions to maximize hashrate+ high prfitability RVN x16r mining) and to select the best miner for each algo it will benchmark them all and use the best one with highest hash-rate (for 300 seconds and bench-marking is done in in mining mode, so earnings are nt lost, and important is that mining begins after benchmark is complete, and this is very useful when compared to AM that doesn't have this feature). 2) Nemos Miner has a better algorithm switching implementation using BrainPlus and EarningTracker with past statistics Patrike, I recommend you to check their sourcecode and statistics files from /statistics folder to improve performance. I started on the same pool both Awesome MIner and Nemos Miner and after 48 hours Nemos miner had a better real BTC payout than AM (never trust inflated statistics, always compare real BTC payments). How you managed to get v3.0, ive only seen as high as 2.5.2 on his gethub I am here to stick with AM, but for now im only using it mainly as a monitor for my rigs, this is a feature that nemo doesnt have currently that AM does, i just hope we can improve AM and make it way better so everyone comes to AM to help build up this community, i feel this software has far more potential. Future things that would help AM is the ability to run it on Linux, this is something that 3 other common miners are already transitioning into, NemoMiner, MultipoolMiner, and WatchdogMiner are all partnering up with HiveOS to run on linux.... I think if a linux version of the remote awesome miner would be the first step in the right direction, still use the main program off windows, but allow the rigs to be on linux and communicate |
|
|
|
Does anyone else have had trouble purchasing?
I upgraded my license from premium to professional.
It took the money but order didn't went through.
The support is very slow as well.
Can someone here help?
You cant expect it to be instant service bud, its basically a 1 man show running this software development in his spare time, if i recall this is just a hobby and not his actual main source of income. So you have to give him time to respond and allow him to sleep as well. |
|
|
|
|
Patrike,
Anyway we can do some brainstorming together on a way to improve the Profit Switching mode of the software?
If i understand NemoMiner, basically its logging the 24hr est, 24hr actual, and Current est, then its doing a calculation to figure out a running offset.. then applying it to smooth out the outlier spikes in profit that result in poor actual pay.
Example:
x17:
Current: 0.01523 *which is based on current sharerate and exchange price
24hr Est: 0.01853 *which is a projection of the next 24hrs based on the current exchange rate
24hr Actual: 0.01544 *which is based on actual payouts from past 24hrs of exchanged coins
Trust:
(3/26/2018 0500EST 24hr Est:) - (3/27/2018 0500EST 24hr actual) = Trust 24hr Offset
Example:
(0.01853)-(0.01544)=0.00309 Difference of 16.7%
So on the profit switching list,
it will compare the current price with a running offset to determine if its worth switching to, because if the current est... greater than the 16.7% current offset, than its more likely it will actually payout more.
Then the next day lets say the new next 24hr trust offset is 17.0%, it does an averaging
16.7 and 17.0 for an average running offset of 16.85% and so far as time of the software collects data.
One thing i noticed on nemo's is if the offset places the coin below the 24hr actual, it defaults to 24hr actual price on the list for profit switching.
Basically, the trust offset in nemo miner is just saying hey, this is the expected amount of drop in value on this algo after all the peeps switch over to catch the spikes in high current payout and its actually exchanged for payout to peeps. The part i dont know how it does it is how it is taking into account current prices to this trust offset to mix those values into the calculations, thus why i suggest some brainstorming by the masses to figure out a good way of doing this.
|
|
|
|
Mining Dutch seems to be most profitable Pool for my Rigs (7).
However, Mining Dutch keeps failing for Not Producing any accepted shares within the config time. I set this to 10min.
This is happeneng on all 5 workers that use the pool.
Any Suggestions ?
The only solution is to have every day test miners (with a single gpu each - you get the same results if you use 12 gpus for each) all pools with different wallets for each pool. The wallet for the pool with the best BTC payment performance will be used for the rest of the rigs. Any other statistic that is either current, 24h estimate or 24h actual has no relevance when you compare with this method. Pool administrators must respond in minutes to forks or issues and the pools that are failing to do this have bad BTC payments when you compare with statistics that made that pool be in the top of estimates when mining. Pool fee has zero relevance also, because besides visible fee, there is another parameter that is called EXCHANGE_FEE and some pools have high values for it (it is 6% and 10% for others, and some might have it at 0%, you can not know, you must see real payments). I hope everyone use this method because it's the best. To use it, you just have to select just one GPU, because if you use 1 gpu or 12 gpus for this test, the difference between pools is exactly the same. With this method you do not waste your money and with 6 gpus you can test 3 pools with both current and 24h estimates. This method is also bulletproof to any trick pools might use like: inflating estimates, editing the code (you only have to edit one line of code and pools can steal 10% from all your income) , changing database values, and many others. I also suggest to Patrike to implement a variation of this solution besides others he has in mind, because pools are not fair, and real payments are the only fair part you can check and evaluate pools. Let me know if you find better solutions. I guess you have made your own tests. So what is the most efficient pool for you between those predefined in online services in Awesome Miner ? The pool that has the best real BTC payments today will not be the best one tomorrow and the only solution is that everybody that invested his own money and has more than 10 or 20 gpus should have at least 3 gpus testing the pools with separate wallets all the time and simply disable pools that have the lowest profitability. You should only trust the real payment values, never the estimates. Not doing so you are loosing large amounts of your money that you paid to purchase the hardware and do not forget that you also pay for electricity, not the pool administrator that should only take care about having the best profitability for his pool . I completely agree with this step, i have a dedicated pair of rigs at home that i use to for testing purposes on a regular ongoing basis like this. This way i can assure my 120+ 1080ti's can be mining the correct path for the most money in my pocket. Example right now i have the following test going on Both rigs are watercooled, so GPU's see same thermal temps during mining... Test Rig 1, I have GPU0 profit switching Nicehash, I have GPU1 profit switching Zpool, I have GPU2 profit switching Ahashpool, and GPU3 profit switching Zergpool.... Been running this rig for a few weeks nonstop and have been using this data to alter the profit factor numbers in Awesome Miner. Test Rig 2, I have GPU0 clear so the computer can be used for normal use, GPU1 is running Awesome Miner profit switching all available algo's on Ahashpool, GPU2 is running NemoMinerv2.5 profit switching all available algo's on Ahashpool. The interesting thing is i took the extra step and changed all the miners Awesome Miner uses to match the ones NemoMiner uses by adding them in as custom miners per algo, but the trust system the Nemo has going is somehow pulled ahead by 6.7% over a 47day period of running. This is why i currently have all of my farm still mining using NemoMiner, but i have them all turned on for API so i can track them in Awesome Miner, truly love AM over Nemo, just need some extra love to the profit switching side to be more competitive. Good Example, i just looked over at Rig 2, AM is showing C11 as more profitable and currently mining it based on 24hr average stats, but Nemo is currently mining X17 and showing C11 down as the 15th spot on profit.... |
|
|
|
The one thing I would worry about is that solar and car alternator systems are NOT in fact +12VDC, but 13.6 "nominal" and commonly up to 15 VDC when charging.
That is some great advice, to be completely honest with you, we didnt even think about the voltage being that high when we ran it off the diesel engine. The GPU seemed to not have any issues with it, atleast the one we are testing it out on. Im shocked we didn't damage the GPU trying to run it this way, because the alternator ramped up to 14.7v under load of mining.... In regards to hooking up the GPU, the gpu is plugged directly into the mobo of the test pc currently... no riser at all being used for this setup. The GPU itself is getting its 12v and grnd from outside of the atx psu. Im pretty sure the solar controller is capable of adjusting the max voltage down closer to 12v, just need to look further into it. It can't go TOO low or it doesn't charge the batteries. Standard lead-acid batteries (which are still the norm in solar/wind power systems 'cause they're CHEAP for the capacity, and the weight isn't an issue) require a good bit more than 12 VDC to charge them - and tend to deliver a bit more than 12 VDC under light-to-medium load when fully charged. No we want to lower the voltage because the intentions of this system is a setup that will use 100% of the solar+more... the rig is still mining, we decided to run it another night with the solar controller turned down on the max battery voltage some. We have it setup in Lithium Battery mode, which produces a max voltage of 12.6 according to the manual, we are saw as high as 12.5v during peak of the day. |
|
|
|
Test 1:
since true sinewave inverters are so expensive and the PCIE connections are just +12dc and GND, we ran power cables directly from the post his solar controller is wired into and i soldered them to a PCIE pigtail and plugged it into the GPU in a DC to DC configuration, ran the PC off normal 120v, but the GPU would be powered by the solar controller/battery circuit. PC booted up fine and it mined without a single hiccup the 20ish minutes we ran it for, no issues at all, just the solar controller adjusted to the load.
The one thing I would worry about is that solar and car alternator systems are NOT in fact +12VDC, but 13.6 "nominal" and commonly up to 15 VDC when charging. If you're just feeding the risers and the GPU with that, it PROBABLY won't be an issue as they use on-board power conversion circuitry to regulate it down to the voltages they actually use, and their caps are probably rated for 16 VDC - marginal but as long as you don't get voltage spikes probably OK. I'd be inclined to put a pair of 15 amp silicon diodes in series on each riser feed, and the same on each +12VDC line to a PCI-E power connector, to drop the voltage a bit just to be sure you don't overvolt the GPUs and risers. Might be able to get away with 10 amp diodes instead, if you leave the diodes out in the air enough for them to get decent cooling. That is some great advice, to be completely honest with you, we didnt even think about the voltage being that high when we ran it off the diesel engine. The GPU seemed to not have any issues with it, atleast the one we are testing it out on. Im shocked we didn't damage the GPU trying to run it this way, because the alternator ramped up to 14.7v under load of mining.... In regards to hooking up the GPU, the gpu is plugged directly into the mobo of the test pc currently... no riser at all being used for this setup. The GPU itself is getting its 12v and grnd from outside of the atx psu. Im pretty sure the solar controller is capable of adjusting the max voltage down closer to 12v, just need to look further into it. Neither of us are experts on this solar controller. Its an outback flexmax unit that he upgraded to because it is capable of charging lithium cells vs his older controller he had previously. He replaced the onboard battery bank when it failed with an diy 18650 setup. He built it out of these really cool kit connectos he bought from china a while back.. they work amazingly well. I built both of my 30ah packs for my electric bicycle out of them and those diy packs have over 2 years of riding on them...   |
|
|
|
|
Phillipma,
Some info that may interest you, my friend has solar on his RV and he wants to get into crypto mining to maybe earn a few coins while he travels the country, i told him it is a little late right now but he insist on it. He travels the country as a travel nurse and he thought of the idea of building a small rig to run in the generator spot on his RV, currently its missing the generator, but its big enough for like a 4-5 card rig and has good ventilation if setup correctly, so i talked him into trying the idea out on his personal PC he currently own in his home, which has an GTX 960ti.
Test 1:
since true sinewave inverters are so expensive and the PCIE connections are just +12dc and GND, we ran power cables directly from the post his solar controller is wired into and i soldered them to a PCIE pigtail and plugged it into the GPU in a DC to DC configuration, ran the PC off normal 120v, but the GPU would be powered by the solar controller/battery circuit. PC booted up fine and it mined without a single hiccup the 20ish minutes we ran it for, no issues at all, just the solar controller adjusted to the load.
Test 2:
Since running this PC wouldn't be viable off the batteries, we decided to try running it off the alternator off the diesel engine in the RV, he claims it has like a 160amp alternator... fired the engine up and the computer was able to mine just perfectly off the voltage coming from the car alternator. We decided to run this setup through an old audio capacitor i had laying around, but it worked and i couldn't see a reason it couldn't mine this way while he driving, since the alternator would place very minimal load on the diesel engine, probably not even change the mpg....
Test 3:
Since running this PC wouldn't be viable off the batteries while not driving, we decided to try running it off solar alone, cut the switch to the battery bank and started mining, the rig would mine perfectly tell a cloud caused voltage to drop to low and computer would grey out the GPU tell we rebooted the PC, which it came back and worked as normal again.
Test 4:
We tried Test 3 again, but we added a server PCU and soldered the +12v and GND from the server PSU to the +12v and GND wires on the makeshift PCI cables we hacked together. We booted the PC up and started mining while watching the load on the server PSU, what we did was we went into the controller and setup a custom battery charging config, setup the charge to a max of 14.7v. The server PSU would see literally less than 2watts of use while it would mine in this configuration, as soon a cloud would drop the voltage on the solar controller output, the load would shift to the server PSU flawless, no hiccups and it did this numerous times over and over without stopping the mining action...
Currently we have it running this way on a test, we let it mine solely off solar the rest of the afternoon tell the voltage levels dropped the load over to the server psu and its been mining all night off the server psu. We are going to run it all day tomorrow to see if we experience any issues with this setup. I thought it was something you would be interested in since your trying to do something with solar and mining DC to DC may be a cheaper alternative for you in the future on some rigs.
The plan going forward is to setup multiple circuits on his current PC. We are going to setup a circuit for when he is driving, allowing him to supply solar+alternator voltage, then we are going to setup a circuit for server psu+solar for when he staying at a campground or rv lot with power.
The idea is to allow it mine off grid/driving during periods of no solar, then use as much solar as it can to mine with during the day with the seamless transition.
|
|
|
|
Kayden, do you have performance for P102-100 in Skein, X17, Lyra2z, Lyra2v2, EQHash and Phi? Eth isn't profitable anymore... Thanks! P102 eth performance from my factory source. $700 usd, but have to pre-order now and receive in early May.
...
Seems less efficient in terms of hash/watt compared to P104 which can do 37mh/s at 120w.
This is tempting, but I'm holding off expansion till end of GTC. Next gen just around the corner.
whats the minimum qty for pre-order? I asked pricing for 80pcs and was quoted $700. It should get slightly cheaper (expensive) if the quantity increases (decreases). Didn't ask for the minimum qty though. It's good density, but 2x 580s is a better deal imo. It needs to be $600 or lower, unless resale value is no issue for you then it can be seen as a msrp 1080ti with better eth performance. You could try mining ravencoin, ive been mining it the past week with no cashouts since the market is in a bloodbath at the moment for mining earnings and based on my shares... im doing pretty good, but my hopes are for the value of it to climb... gonna HODL for these coins... my 1080ti's are averaging 125-140/day currently, which puts it around $2.50/day per card..  |
|
|
|
Some interesting info floating around... Rumor floating around that Genesis Mining is in partnership with Bitmain, that Genesis Mining owns up to 60% of GPU's from the last 5 latest GPU releases... This info is actually interesting, ive never understood why Genesis Mining has stuck to GPU's for most of the expansions they have done to the warehouses.. It just seems more economical to purchase ASIC's for the contracts as they would be able to maintain them and operate them at a more dense operations, but it seems they mostly structure around the use of GPU's. So the rumor is that Bitmain is using its deep pockets on new GPU releases to buy out most of all supply for the first months, then using this period to push ASIC's to the public, which are marked up high enough to cover the cost of monopolizing the GPU supply in which they are able to sell them at a huge profit over time as the prices of GPU's skyrocket due to supply and demand. Bitmain is splitting part of its business to Washington State...... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3g726QtaM0 |
|
|
|
Phill i have a question for you,i follow your threads and most of the time you say that you either point your rigs towards nicehash or you mine zec but dont see you mentioning mining other coins that bring more profit like signatum bitcore and raven durring that period.So i was wondering is there some special reason behind that like you think zec will be huge or you just dont love shitcoins  Can't speak to phil, but I've found that those "higher profit" coins only tend to be higher profit for a day or two, then everyone "discovers" them swarms them and swamps the profitability back down to the "basket" range. Too much work for me to "chase the profit" any more, as a general rule. Yeah i get that part but still mining zec is on the lower part of profit..how about using multi pool/algo switchers like sniff dog or nplus miner,what do you think about them or is too much stress on gpus? In my experience, you lose too much while switching to make up for any gains, most of the time. The stress on your GPU would be lower, as it would have periods of just sitting around not actually mining while the algorithm gets initialized during switches. that is where most people dont understand, if you set it up correctly there is literally nearly a flawless transition from algo to algo... you need to command line the intensity and difficulty level that your cards are stable at and the way you find these numbers is through tuning and letting it sit on an algo for lots of time to so how far it goes when it tries to auto change... i set all my intensity levels and diff levels, so when my cards change algo's im less than 5 seconds up to mining fully again and not starting over on diff and ramping back up.. in regards to diff level tuning, most pools only accept shares between 20-25/min, so when you start over at diff 1 and sending hundreds a minute, that is why you get those rejected shares and when you drop below 20/min typically you will start getting duplicate share or already been computed errors, so i static mine to the 24/25 range myself. and in regards to profit switching, im not the type that chases the drastic spikes on coins, that shit is for the birds... i tried it once and my cards were switching every 2 minutes.. I have my switching setup based on 24hr actuals, i dont try to chase the most profitable spiking coin, i just want steady income on the highest algo possible. just taking a glance at one of my rigs, uptime: 71 days 4 hrs, switched count 107..... so its only switched 107 times in a 71 day period, so it averaged a switch every 1.5 days basically.... my 7 day average right now is $3.41 per 1080ti per day with the most time spent on x17 |
|
|
|
Phill i have a question for you,i follow your threads and most of the time you say that you either point your rigs towards nicehash or you mine zec but dont see you mentioning mining other coins that bring more profit like signatum bitcore and raven durring that period.So i was wondering is there some special reason behind that like you think zec will be huge or you just dont love shitcoins Can't speak to phil, but I've found that those "higher profit" coins only tend to be higher profit for a day or two, then everyone "discovers" them swarms them and swamps the profitability back down to the "basket" range. Too much work for me to "chase the profit" any more, as a general rule. Yeah i get that part but still mining zec is on the lower part of profit..how about using multi pool/algo switchers like sniff dog or nplus miner,what do you think about them or is too much stress on gpus? personally i dont think its to much stress on the gpu, i run all my gpu's on profit switching with awesome miner, once you get your settings setup per algo correctly and not try to push the limits to the max on everything, then you get reliable service from switching, i get weeks to months between hiccups on my rigs, most of the time the hiccup is due to some sort of windows update hijacking my rigs even tho i turned off updates and such. just annoyed with windows on this... |
|
|
|
All this talk on ASIC's is really pissing me off, AaronSauce told me that a new ASIC labeled Antminer F3 has showed up on MiningPoolHub as a miner this week mining ETH @213MH/s....
Im worried there is going to be a mass exit on GPU farmers soon, just unsure whats the best way to go anymore...
Baikal N specs.... 20KH/s at 60watts per unit Currently, the fastest Monero GPU the Vega64 at 2k/s ..... You need 10 x Vega64 to match 1 Baikal N .... Pointless to compare wattage - FPGA and ASICs will be efficient many folds hands down. Given the above.... I dont think GPUs will be feasible for long term crypto mining. I agree, just sucks because the profit is moving from the miners to the Chinese companies, because when i had 3 asic's years ago, when 2 of them broke it took months to get warranty repairs and i lost hundreds in the time it took to get them back.. so that is why ive been all for GPU's over Asics... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
