Where is he getting power that cheap?
 I've seen basic rates that low near where I'm at, but not overall TOTAL rates except perhaps for very very large industrial operations or perhaps on large contracts....

 ETH hashrate has actually flattened out a bit the past week - but I suspect there's still some "ETH vs ETC" slosh going on and I don't anticipate the flat spot lasting very long.


 Got the new rig up and running - usual PITA from running both AMD and NVidia graphics in the same machine ended up having to reinstall both sets of drivers once each (I do MooWrapper on the APU since it's too small to use for mining with) but got it working - and even finally dug up a copy of Genoil's latest to play on it.

 Pair of 1070s running about 59 MH/s with nothing more than a 600 Mhz memory bump in Afterburner and power limit set to 90% (nvidia-smi shows the cards aren't QUITE hitting that limit anyway almost all the time), might play with the settings more once I verify stability but it's right in the ballpark I was expecting.

 Nice part - I got to shut down one of my older Moo/Dnet specific Semperon machines, moved the HD7750 (low profile) card into the 3'd slot where it only blocks a LITTLE of the fan flow (pair of Gigabyte Windforces) - the #1 and #2 card clearance (they DO have one slot space between) seems to hurt the airflow MORE as the #1 card is running a couple degrees warmer than the #2. This allowed me to save a fair bit on power that was running the REST of that ancient outdated Semperon system while preserving it's primary function.

 8-)

Yes, 550ish watts might seem a bit high for a 2-card 1070 system - but I'm not doing "pure mining" and never planned to do so on it, the ETH mining is more in the nature of "pay off part of the cost so I can afford to build MORE systems to do the stuff I WANT to do on them".
 Technically my MooWrapper work IS mining - via GridCoin - but it's NOT profitable nor do I think it IS possible to actually mine Gridcoin profitably. The extra income DOES cover a significant part of the electric cost for stuff I'd be doing ANYWAY though.


 Oh yeah - open build, just screwed the MB into a 2' x 2' piece of plywood I use in my "home build multi-display/machine racks". Not even running an actual fan on it, plenty of random airflow as it is in this place with all the OTHER fans and the Evap cooler shoving drafts around.

 The new PSU I think turned out to be $260. Not bad at all for it's capabilities, *IF* it proves to be reliable.
 7 *PAIRS* of PCI-E 6-pin connectors specified, dunno if that's supposed to be 7 cables or 14 cables but it sounds like it might be 7 cables with 2 connectors per cable? VERY VERY unclear.



 Folks that are shutting down S7s are probably in one of 3 situations (1) HIGH summer electric rates, a lot of utility companies bump the rates a LOT during "A/C season" for 3 months or so out of the year, making an S7 unprofitable (2) High electric rate in general, making the S7 marginal to unprofitable with recent difficulty and price (3) unit died.

Go back and re-read.

 The spec is "190 watts per TH" not "190 watts per miner".

 The B11 is their old "S7 efficiency comparable" unit that they only have sold to large operators and used internally.

 For Ethereum, very much so - even counting core units AND clock rate has little to no relation to hashrate, as Ethereum is very reliant on the MEMORY SYSTEM on the card.


 There are many other usages where Number of Cores x Clock Rate *IS* a good indicator of performance, but even there differences in card design can have a major effect - just not usually the same way as on Ethereum.

 Folding@Home for example is dominated by NVidia cards despite AMD having more "cores" and competative clock speeds on "comparable" cards, as the design OF the "cores" in the NVidea cards works quite a bit better for the type of work F@H does.
 distributed.net RC-5 and OGR work favors AMD cards very heavily, as for those projects the AMD "cores" are pretty much identical efficiency per core/clock vs NVidia but "comparable" AMD cards normally have a LOT more "cores" at comparable clock. This also applied to SHA256, Scrypt, and X11 mining back in the days that those were viable to mine with GPUs and applies to at least some degree to many other current "GPU mineable" algorythms.




 As far as the current Polaris vs. Pascal battle - keep in mind that AMD *STARTED* with a card intended for "mainstream" usage, NVidia "STARTED" with a card intended for VERY HIGH END usage - the expansions of both lines are only just starting to overlap, and even with that the RX 480 is still apparently aimed at a slightly LOWER performance point than the GTX 1060, though the announced GTX 1060 is FINALLY aiming into the same price point range as the RX 470/480 are at.
 It's still early days, way too early to predict how this battle is going to turn out since neither manufacturer has put out anywhere near a "full range" of cards in the current generation YET.

Doesn't matter what miner or coin you're mining, it matters how many watts of miner(s) you are using - they're all basically 100% conversion efficiency on watts to heat.


 Yes, heat pumps CAN be more efficient - but the up front cost on them is VERY high and they're NOT AN OPTION in many places folks live.
 Same thing on geothermal, but some places don't have the OPTION to install geothermal heat/cooling systems.

Charging almost identical price for this unit vs. the S9 is a non-starter.

 I was THINKING about buying some as the smaller power requirement would have made it a LOT more flexable than the S9, but DAMN they are massively overcharging for this thing.

The "silent fan" is NOT worth getting less than 70% of the mining capability FOR PRETTY MUCH THE SAME DAMNED PRICE as the S9.


 At the "testing page" price of $1000 it would have been a good seller, at the actual TOTAL BLOODY RIPOFF price it's not likely to sell squat.


 Looks like I'm back to "waiting for developments" mode, THIS thing isn't worth wasting money on at the current pricing OR EVEN CLOSE TO THE CURRENT PRICING.

Using a miner or multiple miners to heat with instead of an electric space heater or electric baseboard heat makes 100% sense.

 In essence, your "mining" electric is free 'till you get to the point you have more heat generation than you need.

 1300 watts isn't 5000 BTU but it's fairly close, works out to more like 4400ish.


 Last winter, my mining farm (at the time a mix of some A2s, some S5s, a single SP20) and some computers I used for non-mining purposes generated enough heat to make me keep 2 windows OPEN at least a crack all winter in a older mobile home with VERY POOR insulation.
 I also had a "time of day" rate there that made electric usage somewhat CHEAPER for heating than natural gas about 65% of the time, and only a LITTLE higher the rest of the time (I DID have a "high efficiency" furnace thanks to a Federal weatherization program but I never needed to fire it up that winter).

 I anticipate a similar situation where I'm at now, though the mix of miners has changed somewhat and the place I'm in now bigger but a LOT better insulated (for the most part).


 There are MANY areas that traditional gas-fired HVAC is NOT cheaper than electric heat - and miners are a lot more likely to LIVE in those areas. Natural gas isn't even AVAILABLE where I live 'cause the Electric rates are so cheap as to make gas non-competative.

 No real shock there, but good to have hard numbers to be sure.

 2 sides, not all - but that's STILL an odd design decision that one would think would reduce the fan efficiency.

 There is NO reason the R4 can't be run on a 110 circuit - it's actually a TON better for that than the existing S9 units that force you to push a common 15 Amp 110 circuit VERY hard. 8 amps or so draw is VERY easy on a 15 amp circuit, and 2 would be practical (using seperate OUTLETS unless the outlet itself is one of the less-common NEMA 5-20 type) on a single 20 amp circuit.


 One of the pages linked somewhere cited "515mm" width - that's a bit over 20" and will NOT fit in a standard rackmount space.
 It's a good fit for my homebuilt "made to fit A2 Terminator" wood shelving though - almost identical width, and a bit lower in height.
 8-)

Well, as mentioned in several OTHER threads, for the USA the best electric rates are in Central Washington due to large amounts of hydropower available and fairly low "local" populations, allowing the county-based PUDs that own several of the Columbia river dams to subsidise local rates at somewhat below their actual cost of production 'cause they sells the large quantities of excess off to outside areas for quite a bit more.

 But be warned, that subsidy might not continue forever.

 https://www.chelanpud.org/about-us/media-room/news/2016/07/19/pud-board-approves-new-rate-for-high-density-load-customers

 Plus side - this has no effect on a typical "small" farm - the "shop" space I'm in right now doesn't have enough electric service AVAILABLE to achieve that 250 KWH/year usage factor, though I could get to about 140 if I maxed out the existing service.

 Do note that Chelan county has a lot more population than the other 2 area counties with lots of local hydropower, which is undoubtedly a factor in WHY they were the first county to take "official" notice of this issue.
 The large majority of major Cryptocoin mining operations in the USA appear to be based out of Chelan county, or nearby Douglass and Grant counties.


 Canada electric costs VARY with the location, from what I've seen out of a lot of comments. Some areas with cheap hydropower, others rather high.

 Solar power is very expensive due to (1) COST of the actual solar panals (2) need to either grid-tie or have LARGE battery banks to compensate for the sun not providing ANY power at night and very little on highly cloudy days. The OPERATING costs tend to be low, but the amount you have to invest up front make it VERY costly, though that cost has dropped quite a bit over the last few decades.

 SAME type of issue with wind power - the wind does NOT blow consistantly and regularly on a year-round basis, so you have to make some sort of arrangement to handle when it's NOT blowing - it's just not as CONSISTANT about when you are getting no power out of a wind generator.

 Yup, they're building PCI-E spec cards, so they are SUPPOSED to limit to the PCI-E specs.

 ASIC miner aren't PCI-E spec cards, they don't HAVE to limit to those specs.

 The real comparison should be to the R9 290 though, not the X, as the non-X mines at pretty much IDENTICAL hashrate to the non-X.

 The duo cards have higher hashrate due to having DOUBLE THE MEMORY SYSTEMS, not due to higher core count - the Fury hashes SLOWER than the R9 290 despite having ALMOST DOUBLE THE CORE COUNT AND MUCH HIGHER CLOCK SPEED.

 For many cryptocoin algorythms, the core count is critical - but Ethereum's algorythm seems to rely a lot more on ability to access memory efficiently, higher core counts past a certain point on the same archetecture DOES NOT HELP or the R9 290X would be a noticeably faster miner card than the R9 290 AND THE FURY WOULD BLOW BOTH OUT OF THE WATER, which is not even close to the truth.

 Yes, the Fury is more EFFICIENT - but it does NOT have a higher hashrate.


 Also, there is no reason for hashrate to "decrease for any gpu 74 degrees celsius or above" - trying to limit a R9 290 to 74C is almost impossible if you want to maximise hashrate as you have to UNDERCLOCK the cards too much to get there.
 Some cards are DESIGNED to have to run hot due to limits of their process tech at the time they were designed.
 Keeping the cards cooler for better longevity, SURE, that's a good idea - but the idea that there is some specific mythical "maximum temperature for best efficiency for ALL GPUs" is totally bogus BS.




 STOCK clock on the R9 290 varied - many early ones had a STOCK clock at 947 MH, not 1GH (and tended to overheat even THEN in mining usage unless you kicked the fans up to 100% or modded the BIOS) - and while I suspect some later models with high-end cooling might hit 1200 MH reliably, none of mine have ever managed more than 1120 with any stability (but they're Reference design with the early blower-model coolers) and they tend to like 1100 max for long-term stability.

Are you talking physical places, or pools, or what?
Your question is very ambiguous.

 Depends on if that $1000 price for the R4 turns out to be correct, I'd guess.

HBM is a tradeoff.

 The WIDE bus in theory can give better performance - but so far the clock rates on the actual chips are pretty low, making it little if any better than current GDDR5 implimentations.


 5 years down the road might be another story - HBM tech is quite new after all.

 There is no specific "sense" line used on a PCI-E connection, nor is such a line part of the PCI-E specification.
 Some PS use a seperate "sense" line TO the connector, but that's pretty rare in current designs, and even where used the "sense" line or lines is merged at the connector.

 There is NO BLOODY WAY you burned a connector that was only drawing 90 watts unless you had a VERY bad connection on it.
 Most likely you had a short-term short that drew a BUNCH more than 90 watts and caused the burnt connector.



 The actual PINS specified for the PCI-E connectors are rated at 13 amps EACH - but you have to derate them some when they're used in a multi-pin connector housing, they end up being good for somewhat over 8 amps each after that derating.


 The 288 watt figure comes from a discussion, and some spec lookup, in a Spondoolies SP20 thread, and is the ACTUAL RATING FOR THE CONNECTOR as used on a PCI-E 8-pin connection. A 6-pin connector housing should have the same or slightly LESS need to derate each pin as much as there's fewer load lines crammed in on top of each other.



 The 75 watt and 150 watt "ratings" are PCI-E design spec limitations, NOT connector specifications.

 The R4 is more about "quiet" than "low power consumption" - it's STILL a kilowatt-class miner, from what's been posted about it so far.

500 MH/s on the Scrypt side? I think you misread it, should be more like 500 kH/s

 The 40-chip "blades" only manage 2.5-3 MH/s depending on how hard you push them, your Lightning is only 5 of the same chip.


 6 GH/s on Bitcoin is tiny - the old Antminer S5 (which is outdated tech and a moneyLOSER for most folks today) did over 1100 GH/s, while current S9 units are commonly 10 TIMES that.

Only bought from them once, wasn't any particularly odd or difficult issues and the items were as advertised.

 They DO seem to have some significant issues on QC with the S9 models, and their "glued heatsink" design on the S7/S9 isn't one to inspire much trust though.