Now, this is technical and i'm out of my element, but the Tonga cards should be able to workout 384-bit mem bus, problem is, after a bit of discussion i found out, you would have to pretty much write a bios from scrap, but, theoretically remove that bottleneck giving a 50% increase in performance, the 380x would suffer less if there are any bottlenecks, and the memory straps could also be modded in the way that certain ETH mods gave hashrates of 25+/s (mind you with wild results with regard to heat and stability the higher you went)

Basically, Radeon release the R9 285 at a strange time, and it was the first GCN 1.2, and only i believe, but they couldn't have it be too good as to remove from their 290/390s or the fijis they planned to release a few months later, as well as the 16nm stuff (RX series) So in theory the 380 is capable of a lot more, but AMD settled on a theoretical number they felt would be good for their entire line, and so the 285 meant to have 32 CUs had 4 of them locked,1/3 of it's memory bus knocked, put on PCBs meant to take their mediocre power draws and heat output. Honestly if they went full-pin and made a flagship with it, it would have fallen somewhere fiji and hawaii, closer to fiji. I'm sure they tested it too, but it was just good business.

Really strange, I've got a 390 that isn't being detected by the miner, it's fine in afterburner, and i'm sure I removed the -di flag just to be sure, restarts, re-sat my gpu, etc. nothing. And, this is a new problem, it was running v11.1 fine since it came out, save for a few freeze-up overnight usually within a half hour of starting.

512 bit actually

you're more than probably right, I'm just too lazy to order an overpriced wattmeter online or take a bus across town to some sketchy electronic liquidator on my "day off". either way i'm clearly well within my PSU's tolerance margin, and my temps are cooler than ETH, so it can't be THAT far from the truth but being off by 15+ () watts is hardly accurate either. i can see my 390s being closer to those temps than my 380, no way it's under 40 watts, but there's no way its anywhere near 220 either.

my 380 read ~38 watts on gpuz, my 390 is at about 120w and my OC 390 is closer to 200w. it's on a gold 1200w PSU, running in an ambient temp of ~14c, near an open window, VRM temps of 10c at idle.

this could be due to excessive overclocking or undervolting.

yes but honestly it's not recommended at all, most 390s are 6+8, only some are 8+8. if it's 850w gold or platinum, with a slight undervolt and near stock clocks, then yeah it should be fine, but the molex isn't a good idea, maybe someone else can explain better than I can, but it comes down to amperage on the rail, in short, if the PSU only comes with 2 8 pins, it should only handle that many.

I dont know if it's the same with an xfx 480 but with a gigabyte 380 you just have to take off the fan mounting and unplug the led wire, in winter it's just annoying, in summer it's a great way to cover your GPU in moth guts.

I think using V2.0 or something I had one fetch a nice 15% increase but after managing my layouts and trying stuff out i reverted to the original bios, can't hurt to try if you don't mind the downtime.

I haven't had an issue with them, maybe with another miner or the first few versions of claymore, but I see no difference. at least with powered USB risers.

I can't speak for the x versions but I have a sapphire nitro 390 (2x 8pin for serious overclocking space) and an asus strix, both seem to hover around 240h/s I don't like the idea of pacing them too hard, since I'd rather have them mine pretty quiet at ~60-65c and prolong their use -25mv and -40mv, 1100 core, nothing extreme. I think the 390x should get around 255h/s the 290x should fetch slightly less from what i've been reading. my guess is the power draw is quite polite but i don't have a wattmeter to verify. probably between 180-230 watts. my guess is with the right power mod bios you can get it lower if you're willing to do your homework.

I've come to understand the power draw is considerably lower than ETH, at least at the moment, meaning dual mining will still use 100% but ZEC alone, I don't know because i don't have a watt meter, but at present it's something like 40%-70% the power draw. if the temps are any indication.

I've been lurking a while, big ups to Claymore, his work is immensely appreciated.

not sure if this is thread specific but i'll go ahead and shit it up anyway.

I've got a club3d R9 280 and, it only has partial functionality, when it manages to boot, the entire screen is full of artifacts, barely able to make out my desktop. anyway, it crashes my rig when i start the miner or anything really, even if it's not plugged into a display. I have an identical one and i'm not sure which i had used to test bios flashing a while back but if my own memory serves, i got them both back to stock and mining eth without issue.

it's so annoying, it's there, on my desk, staring at me like "yeah. i'll kinda work, but i don't wanna....Cunt."

the coins aren't missing, when Bittrex is done their maintenance the coins will show up in your Bittrex wallet until then it'll show your old balance, which seems to be pretty standard, but then again you never know, I haven't got a clue what the hang up is usually it's a few hours, but Krypton too? odd. but they did tweet that it would be up to 24h.

This is what I love about shift, the devs and news folk are always on the ball, their response time is fantastic, I love it.

IMHO, the reward will drop back down after a little bit of evolution to the parameters of the ecosystem, but it isn't for me to say if or when.

No, it seems like I was right about a post I took down yesterday, it's just out of an abundance of caution I believe,
I noticed on the chain explorer that one pool had over 70% hashrate (supremacy), this is somehow bad for the chain and security. diversity is key. Now, the network hashrate is still low, I believe the amount of miners is in the 2 digits, so, if say one larger miner migrates or decides to mine ETH, or even a power or service outage, it can create a vacuum of hashrate distribution. Not necessarily malicious, and I notice a more diverse distribution this morning, a new pool, nice n' spaced out.

maybe we should get the miners to make an active attempt to monitor the network, create a few extra pool .bats, not like migrating should give you much of a balance hang-up. this is good for the pools too, because it's good for the chain.

*edited*

Someone claims to have been able to get their gridseed working, someone else a bitfury, so i went out and got a little gridseed myself just to experiment with, it was the same price as an old antminer but i figured i'd sort of make a lot of wake with that thing, anyway, long story short can't seem to get it working myself and I've been giving it a go a couple hours a night for the last two and a half weeks. so in short answer... nah man, but you're welcome to try?

cool, I guess i'll just leave it, 4-5 days and i haven't found a block though, yet my GPUs will find a few in that time, meh go figure, maybe it's just awful luck lol

I've got a gridseed running at 11.2gh/s, but it isn't mining anything and comes up with pool 0 not providing work fast enough. any suggestions? or no suitable long poll found. shows the network diff, if there's a new block etc. I'm stumped D:

thanks for the tip but there's no way it's working,
"no suitable long-poll found"

before it was mining along showing the hashrate and everything but it just wasn't mining anything. I'm using cgminer 3.8.5 with a bat of
cgminer.exe -o 127.0.0.1:50542 -u USERNAME -p PASSWORD --gridseed options=baud=115200,freq=800,chips=5,modules=1,usefifo=0,btc=16 --hotplug=1

it's the closest thing to work i've gotten it so far lol, had to order a power supply and mini-usb because of buyer beware, figured an outdated antminer for the same price would be overpowered with the current chain status and against my better judgement "didn't want to be that guy."