|
Yanz (OP)
|
 |
May 26, 2011, 04:46:25 PM |
|
Hi I just got started into mining for Bitcoins a few days ago at btcguild. I've been tweaking my hardware and trying out different miners on my 6950 2GB. Now according to the hardware wiki ( https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Mining_hardware_comparison) my 6950 should get between 295-360 Mhash/s. I have my 6950 at 960/700 @1.2V with unlocked shaders. I get about 405-410 Mhash/s. Is this weird? The other 6950's on the wiki are clocked higher than mine and get lower hash rate. I've tried poclbm.exe -w 64 -v phoenix with -q 5 -k poclbm VECTORS BFI_INT FASTLOOP=false AGGRESSION=13 DEVICE=0 WORKSIZE=64 They both give about the same results. I'm thinking about expanding my mining operations and getting another 6950 and maybe 2 5830's. Do you guys think that's a good idea? Thanks, awesome forum btw! |
With great video cards comes great power consumption.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"If you don't want people to know you're a scumbag then don't be a scumbag." -- margaritahuyan
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jaime Frontero
|
|
May 26, 2011, 04:52:04 PM |
|
Hi I just got started into mining for Bitcoins a few days ago at btcguild. I've been tweaking my hardware and trying out different miners on my 6950 2GB. Now according to the hardware wiki ( https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Mining_hardware_comparison) my 6950 should get between 295-360 Mhash/s. I have my 6950 at 960/700 @1.2V with unlocked shaders. I get about 405-410 Mhash/s. Is this weird? The other 6950's on the wiki are clocked higher than mine and get lower hash rate. I've tried poclbm.exe -w 64 -v phoenix with -q 5 -k poclbm VECTORS BFI_INT FASTLOOP=false AGGRESSION=13 DEVICE=0 WORKSIZE=64 They both give about the same results. I'm thinking about expanding my mining operations and getting another 6950 and maybe 2 5830's. Do you guys think that's a good idea? Thanks, awesome forum btw! you missed the last entry for 6950s: 417 mh/s. running like this: unlocked shaders, +20% overdrive, mem @ 1250, fan @ 77%, temp 64C, -v -w128, gpu core @ 1145mV |
|
|
|
|
|
Yanz (OP)
|
|
May 26, 2011, 04:58:23 PM |
|
That's weird, I swear that wasn't there before  Still how come a majority of the people are running far slower? This is making me not trust the wiki and makes buying hardware trickier. |
With great video cards comes great power consumption.
|
|
|
Strom
Newbie
 Offline
Activity: 14
Merit: 0
|
|
May 26, 2011, 05:00:21 PM |
|
That's weird, I swear that wasn't there before Still how come a majority of the people are running far slower? This is making me not trust the wiki and makes buying hardware trickier. Everything is in changing all the time. New optimizations come out constantly. |
|
|
|
|
|
Yanz (OP)
|
|
May 26, 2011, 05:09:11 PM |
|
That is true. Though this makes picking new hardware a pain.  |
With great video cards comes great power consumption.
|
|
|
|
m4rkiz
|
|
May 26, 2011, 05:44:31 PM |
|
Still how come a majority of the people are running far slower? This is making me not trust the wiki and makes buying hardware trickier.
majority of people don't overclock (or they doing whatever ccc let them - which is usually 5-10%) default 6950 have 900/1250 and 1408 shaders now, you adding 10% in shaders, 15% in gpu clock and you wonder why your hashrate is 410 instead 360? |
|
|
|
|
|
Yanz (OP)
|
|
May 26, 2011, 06:33:44 PM |
|
Still how come a majority of the people are running far slower? This is making me not trust the wiki and makes buying hardware trickier.
majority of people don't overclock (or they doing whatever ccc let them - which is usually 5-10%) default 6950 have 900/1250 and 1408 shaders now, you adding 10% in shaders, 15% in gpu clock and you wonder why your hashrate is 410 instead 360? That's what I thought initially but looking at the wiki there are people running unlocked shaders around 325 and one 295. There's even one guy is at 970 core pulling 360. |
With great video cards comes great power consumption.
|
|
|
|
m4rkiz
|
|
May 26, 2011, 06:38:49 PM |
|
there is many other factors - miner, settings (worksize, vectors, etc.) - if it is dedicated machine and how heavily used, connection quality, how long (and how) one measures before declaring "i got xxx mhsah/s" etc. etc.
|
|
|
|
|
Dyaheon
Member
Offline
Activity: 121
Merit: 10
|
|
May 26, 2011, 06:45:36 PM |
|
Most of those entries are pretty outdated, done with older versions of miners without BFI_INT support etc. And OC+unlock of course affects greatly too  |
|
|
|
|
|
bcpokey
|
|
May 26, 2011, 06:48:24 PM |
|
Still how come a majority of the people are running far slower? This is making me not trust the wiki and makes buying hardware trickier.
majority of people don't overclock (or they doing whatever ccc let them - which is usually 5-10%) default 6950 have 900/1250 and 1408 shaders now, you adding 10% in shaders, 15% in gpu clock and you wonder why your hashrate is 410 instead 360? Default 6950 is actually 800Mhz core, so he is adding 20% on top of the default freq, with the unlocked shaders. Anyway, you need to look at the date when those entries were added, most were 3/11, the newer miners got a significant hashing boost with newer routines. Outdated entries are outdated. My 6950 unlocked at stock clocks got about 350-360MHash/sec after using the updated hashing routines. |
|
|
|
|
|
Yanz (OP)
|
|
May 26, 2011, 06:49:31 PM |
|
Yeah, all those are a bit outdated. Thanks for the help guys. I guess I jumped on the boat too late. Everybody here is talking about buying now rather than mining. |
With great video cards comes great power consumption.
|
|
|
acamus
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
|
May 26, 2011, 07:11:18 PM |
|
you might recoup the cost depending on how much you paid for that card. It might take a few months depending on difficulty acceleration and/or jerk
|
|
|
|
|
|
