290/390/290x/390x are 512 bit.

 280x/380x are 384 bit (I was confusing them myself in another thread).

 I believe the 280/380 would also be 384 bit.

 290(x) / 390(x) have a much wider bus to make up for the slower speed RAM.
 They do NOT hash at the same hash / watt ratio as the RX 470/480 - closer on ZEC than on ETH but the newer cards ARE still more efficient. R9 290s in particular are SERIOUS power hogs even with undervolting and BIOS strap mods via TheStilt.

 On the other hand, most folks that have R9 2xx and many that have R9 3xx cards have long since paid them off so anything they're making now is pure profit.
 HD 78xx/79xx cards mostly are even bettter off, most of THOSE in mining use were probably paid off by Litecoin (and general Scrypt) mining back in the day, or worst case by Darkcoin (now DASH, X11) mining after that.



 Currencies that are NOT memory-hardened are where a RX 480 might match the 290/390 and possibly even the 290x/390x - close on core count, quite a bit higher clock - but there are very few if any profitable GPU-mineable coins that fit that description any more.
 If X11, Scrypt, or SHA256 were still GPU mineable the RX480 would probably be a bit faster on those than the 290/390 and possibly the 290x/390x.

 Technically, Gridcoin would qualify NOW if you are working the Moo Wrapper project, it runs the distributed.net client which is well known to almost not use memory at all and is TOTALLY compute-bound - but trying to make money via Gridcoin just don't happen, you're doing quite well if you manage to pay the electric from Gridcoin income.

I've got one rig with a pair of R9 290s (which soak a bit more power than 4x 480s) running comfortably on a Seasonic X-850 (gold).

 I suspect a good 750 would be plenty for your rig, or even a very good 650 (like the Seasonic X650 or EVGA 650 G2).

 1000W for that rig would be a waste of overkill, unless you PLAN to upgrade it to "RX 490" cards when those get released.


 I DO make a point when I am building a new rig to put it on a wattmeter though - the dual R9 290 rig is eating about 650 watts all up at the wall mining ETH, which is WAY comfortable for a quality 850 watt supply.

 Under ZEC it was eating more like 550 watts.

 Plenty of room for future upgrades as the R9 290 is quite a bit more power hungry than ANYTHING current short of a Titan (The Titan X Pascal is TDP of 275 which would be CLOSE but not more, the older Maxwell-based Titan X was 350 or 375 which would STILL work but would be a bit marginal) or the possibility of a dual-core GPU like the HD 7990 or Fury Pro Duo.


 Realistically though, I tend to run rigs 'till they die, or they become uneconomical - and even the uneconomical stuff I keep around for other usage and sometimes something new comes along that they ARE economical on. As a general rule a card or MB has to DIE before I'll change a rig once it's built.

I like my NVidia rigs, but right now and for probably the next year at least AMD is going to beat them hands down for most mining usage.
Nvidia excells on complex calculations (which is why they are dominant in projects like Folding@home and Seti@home) but for relatively simple stuff like cryptocoin calculations AMD can match or better NVidia at a much lower price point most of the time.


 Nvidia can argue with or better AMD on a hash/watt basis even in AMD-centric coins like ETH and ZEC (RX 470/480 vs GTX 1070 for example is a tossup on ETH mining on a hash/watt basis) but right now AMD has cards in the "sweet spot" mainstream market segment that NVidia is just barely STARTING to move down into on the current generation of technology for each.

I'm not sure about temp management (I do fan settings via aticonfig and don't worry about 'managing" the temp) but I'm pretty sure there's fallover pool capability. Check the instructions.

 1) The GPU side of a A10-7860K only uses about 15 watts.
 2) I'm in an uncommon situation on my lease where my power cost is fixed (as long as I don't run it up a LOT) due to why I ended up where I'm at right now.
 3) 11/s might not earn a lot but it's still a bit over $3/month right now.
 4) I'd be running that GPU on something else anyway, so the power usage isn't going to change even if I WAS paying for every watt specifically instead of generally.
 5) That rig also has a HD 7750 in it, so the total for the rig is almost 60/sec (it also has 2 GTX 1070 doing something else).





 As far as the 4x 280x rig - is the GPU 0 on a 16-bit PCI-E slot, or perhaps a PCI-E 3.0 while the others are on smaller/slower PCI-E?
 We need MORE INFORMATION to make an informed guess as to what the issue (if any) is.
 Among other things, is it more than a couple percent faster?

Yeah, I know - I still have a few older cards like the 3x R9 290 in my "big ETH rig" and the pair in another rig (I just swapped some cards around).

 Got both of my R9 280x in one rig now - THAT rig is much more profitable on ZEC hands down, as is the single HD 7870 rig I brought back up couple days back.
 Current projects are to get as many of my HD 7750 cards swapped over from MooWrapper to ZEC as I can (they're mostly in Windoze rigs) and get my other 7850 rig and my 7850 rig back up and running and Windozed....

 My credit union doesn't know what a "wire transfer" is (and the last one from before my move knew what they were but didn't have the capability to do one).
 Many banks don't do them either, even when they know what they are - they want to do ACH transfers any more instead, which is basically just a newer technology to do the same thing.

 THAT is why some of us have "a hard time sending wire tranfers" - we CAN'T.

 They had that option - but they're discontinuing it due to low interest in the option.

 That's what their recent "we're shutting down our ZCash pool" announcement was about.


 They make their money through how their pool works - and it's a LOT more reliable than counting on a "miner fee" that can easily be circumvented at least part of the time if not entirely bypassed through a bit of clever hacking (as nanopool already DID once with nheminer).


 They don't care about "support ZEC" except as far as folks will mine it via their pool - and do keep in mind that you CAN mine on Nicehash without using their actual miner, as of the last time I checked.

A10-7860k  bit over 11/s
Not going to reboot the machine just to see if it's at 757 Mhz or 800 clock. Memory is DDR3-2166.


Not exactly impressive but I get a bit more out of it than on Gridcoin.

 When someone from another pool reverse engineers it again - like nanopool did with an earlier version.

 Or just run Claymore direcly.


 NiceHash has ZERO incentive to make a version that supports other pools, and would be cutting their own income to do so, asking them to create such a version is just DUMB.

There is a difference between a "fraud" (where you don't get what is advertised) and a ripoff (where you get what is advertised but it is not worth what you paid for it and there never was a chance of it being so) and a "massively speculative venture" (where you get what is advertised but conditions beyond the control of the seller render the value of what you paid for quite a bit less than you anticipated it being worth).

 IMO most cloud mining is a ripoff, though sometimes it might be countable as a msv.

 It has been VERY VERY RARE for any cloud mining investment to be profitable, based on what I've seen to date.

 If this cloud folding is connected to the Curecoin team, this is a slap in the face to the rest of us folding for Curecoin that will just make the coin even less profitable and LESS worth working with than it already is.

 If this cloud folding is just for folding and NOT taking part of the Curecoin distribution, I'm all for it.


 The annnouncement is so vague and the "pictures" are TOTALLY unreadable, makes it very difficult to even figure out what this announcement is announcing.

 Still dependent on specific details, like what cards you're running and power cost.

 It looks like many of the older AMD cards are still quite a bit more profitable (HD 7870 hands down, R9 280x) while others have gotten back to more even.


 That's what the basket is all about - one coin bumps up on profitability, the others have folks move out to that one coin, and the profitability evens out.

 I have NOT run into this issue with the environment variables set.

 Yet.

 I suspect it will become a real issue in a few months or so - and a lot of lower-end cards will move into ZEC or XMR or something where it's not an issue.


 It IS kinda funny watching one of my HD 7750 cards with 1GB mining ZEC just fine - 44/sec isn't impressively scary but not bad for a card that paid for itself via LiteCoin mining years ago.


 [edit] it's even funnier watching one of my A10-7860K mining ZEC - at a whopping 11/sec with only 512 MB allocated to it. Not really WORTH enough to leave it that way but I decided to experiment in the hopes it would be closer to the HD 7750 on performance (same # cores, newer GCN version, but much slower RAM).
 Funny part - it's probably closer to making up the electric usage on it's GPU section than the 7750 is.

Michigan?

 How bloody high is the cost of electric there?



 ALso, that fiscal sponsorship announcement link DOES NOT WORK in Chrome - apparently you need to update your web server to use a more recent crypto version on it's secure links as I'm gettting a "no compatable crypto" error when I try to go there.

I'd be reasonably content to see something for LINUX that's within 5-10% of Claymore on Windows.

 I really don't understand his hatred for LINUX, I'm pretty sure he's cutting his own throat to spite his face by ignoring the probably MAJORITY OF RIGS that are set up with LINUX.

Hmmm, guess I should try at least one of my 7750s then.

 For that matter, I'll have to see what it does on the A10-7860K in the rig I'm currently working on.

The BF pods are definitely interesting, might pick up a few depending on what other options show up by then.

Claymore v8
Windows 7
Catalyst 15.12

 HIS IceQ HD 7870 (the huge-blower-style thing)

Afterburner settings (I prefer the custom fan profile option but do have -tt 5 set to keep an eye on temps)
900/1450 clock
-20 power limit (lowest it will go)

 appx. 110 h/s (I'm guessing h/s is actually solutions/sec)


 Clock anywhere from 900 to 1020 had no noticeable effect on hashrate, maxing out memory clock from the 1250 stock added about 10 h/s


 Card mis-identifies as a "R9 270/270x" in the miner but that's the AMD "recycled most of the HD 78xx/79xx cards to become R9 2xx cards" generational shuffle at work and is not an issue that needs addressing.


 Same card managed 10.5 Mh/s on Ethereum while running noticeably hotter.


 I was hoping to run the R9 280x that was originally in this rig but it appears to have died during my last move.

 Looks like time to reconfigure a couple rigs, 1x R9 280x and 1x R9 290 doesn't seem like a good choice any more on 2 of my old "spare parts" rigs.


 It would be interesting to see what my HD 7750s would manage but it looks like they don't have enough RAM to run this?