Best GPU's For Mining?

[Amph]

new gpu are out, so wait before buying old one, 1080 is 2x faster than a 980 and 1070 the same 2x faster than a 970 and consume less and they cost around the same, 10% more it seems, so this is a no brain if they have the same boost in mining

[Satlite]

new gpu are out, so wait before buying old one, 1080 is 2x faster than a 980 and 1070 the same 2x faster than a 970 and consume less and they cost around the same, 10% more it seems, so this is a no brain if they have the same boost in mining

That power consumption is from the gaming. It is not necessary for the mining. But it will be more efficient that last generation.

[QuintLeo]

 Uh, no. Release date on the GTX 1080 is late May (25th? I forget offhand) and GTX 1070 on June 10th (I HATE that delay between the 2).

From the benchmarks I've seen to date, the GTX 1070 should be a little faster than the GTX 980ti, the GTX 1080 30-40% faster than that - BUT they need some architecture changes that might not have happened for some of that to translate to Ethereum mining.
 The increased clock rates should translate directly which would make them at least 40% faster.
 The move to a new node appears to be most of the reason they're also a LOT lower power consumption despite their significant performance jump.

 
 For reference, my GTX950s hash at almost the SAME rate as my GTX960s (the 960s are right about 10% faster) at essentially identical clocks, even though the 960s have a LOT more CUDA units and more memory.


 Folks that use NVidia cards where they are efficient (they're not real efficient on Ethereum for some reason, possibly for similar reasons to why a Nano doesn't even come close to scaling vs lower-end AMD cards on Ethereum when factoring Stream units x clock rate) should find the new 10xx cards kick some serious numbers for relatively low power usage.

[Tascon]

So far, the 1080 is not the fastest to mine the Ethereum. It might need further optimisation to make it faster.

[QuintLeo]

Yeah, been seeing the posted 1080 benchmarks - very underwhelmed, it SHOULD do better than a 960 at least!

 I suspect the drivers need some serious optimisation, but I'm sure NVidia is already working on "in general" optimisation for Pascal in their drivers.
 Just gotta hope the "in general" stuff makes them work better on Ethereum SOON.

[Amph]

Yeah, been seeing the posted 1080 benchmarks - very underwhelmed, it SHOULD do better than a 960 at least!

 I suspect the drivers need some serious optimisation, but I'm sure NVidia is already working on "in general" optimisation for Pascal in their drivers.
 Just gotta hope the "in general" stuff makes them work better on Ethereum SOON.

it's because of the memory access, nvidia can not be pushed like amd, the bus was doing 50%

i suspect that if the 970 was not limited, it would have been piushed to 30MH, like the 390

if nothing will change i think i'm going to go with amd at this point, 490 polaris look more promising...

[mandica]

Yeah, been seeing the posted 1080 benchmarks - very underwhelmed, it SHOULD do better than a 960 at least!

 I suspect the drivers need some serious optimisation, but I'm sure NVidia is already working on "in general" optimisation for Pascal in their drivers.
 Just gotta hope the "in general" stuff makes them work better on Ethereum SOON.

it's because of the memory access, nvidia can not be pushed like amd, the bus was doing 50%

i suspect that if the 970 was not limited, it would have been piushed to 30MH, like the 390

if nothing will change i think i'm going to go with amd at this point, 490 polaris look more promising...

490 could be good if it still has the 512 bit memory bus like the 390.

But why 390x is the same speed as the 390 in Ethereum mining?

[Bemerand]

Yeah, been seeing the posted 1080 benchmarks - very underwhelmed, it SHOULD do better than a 960 at least!

 I suspect the drivers need some serious optimisation, but I'm sure NVidia is already working on "in general" optimisation for Pascal in their drivers.
 Just gotta hope the "in general" stuff makes them work better on Ethereum SOON.

it's because of the memory access, nvidia can not be pushed like amd, the bus was doing 50%

i suspect that if the 970 was not limited, it would have been piushed to 30MH, like the 390

if nothing will change i think i'm going to go with amd at this point, 490 polaris look more promising...

490 could be good if it still has the 512 bit memory bus like the 390.

But why 390x is the same speed as the 390 in Ethereum mining?

Yes. If it has wide memory bus and more efficient than the 390, we think that is good for Ethereum mining.

[Seast]

Yeah, been seeing the posted 1080 benchmarks - very underwhelmed, it SHOULD do better than a 960 at least!

 I suspect the drivers need some serious optimisation, but I'm sure NVidia is already working on "in general" optimisation for Pascal in their drivers.
 Just gotta hope the "in general" stuff makes them work better on Ethereum SOON.

it's because of the memory access, nvidia can not be pushed like amd, the bus was doing 50%

i suspect that if the 970 was not limited, it would have been piushed to 30MH, like the 390

if nothing will change i think i'm going to go with amd at this point, 490 polaris look more promising...

490 could be good if it still has the 512 bit memory bus like the 390.

But why 390x is the same speed as the 390 in Ethereum mining?

Yes. If it has wide memory bus and more efficient than the 390, we think that is good for Ethereum mining.

The memory should also be fast for the random access for the Ethereum mining.

[Liquid71]

XMR doesn't use a lot of power and the cards don't produce a lot of heat mining XMR. That said since there's so little profit and even unprofitable at times to mine I suspect there are FPGA's mining it so you'll never be able to mine more than you could just buy if you spent your money on coins instead of GPU cards.

[Marvell1]

Yeah, been seeing the posted 1080 benchmarks - very underwhelmed, it SHOULD do better than a 960 at least!

 I suspect the drivers need some serious optimisation, but I'm sure NVidia is already working on "in general" optimisation for Pascal in their drivers.
 Just gotta hope the "in general" stuff makes them work better on Ethereum SOON.

it's because of the memory access, nvidia can not be pushed like amd, the bus was doing 50%

i suspect that if the 970 was not limited, it would have been piushed to 30MH, like the 390

if nothing will change i think i'm going to go with amd at this point, 490 polaris look more promising...

But why 390x is the same speed as the 390 in Ethereum mining?

Yes. If it has wide memory bus and more efficient than the 390, we think that is good for Ethereum mining.

The memory should also be fast for the random access for the Ethereum mining.

I still think nano will be king

1024 memory bus and only one fan 26mhs out the box for 80-100 watts i cant see even the 490 beating that efficency and the 490 will cost like $599

[Amph]

Yeah, been seeing the posted 1080 benchmarks - very underwhelmed, it SHOULD do better than a 960 at least!

 I suspect the drivers need some serious optimisation, but I'm sure NVidia is already working on "in general" optimisation for Pascal in their drivers.
 Just gotta hope the "in general" stuff makes them work better on Ethereum SOON.

it's because of the memory access, nvidia can not be pushed like amd, the bus was doing 50%

i suspect that if the 970 was not limited, it would have been piushed to 30MH, like the 390

if nothing will change i think i'm going to go with amd at this point, 490 polaris look more promising...

it would be on par with the consumption if not lower, we are talking about 14nm, no way the nano will still consume less than that

but the hashrate would not be that high, perhaps in the end the same as nano, also the cost would be around $400 because itneed to match the 1070, which is mainstream level not high end


But why 390x is the same speed as the 390 in Ethereum mining?

Yes. If it has wide memory bus and more efficient than the 390, we think that is good for Ethereum mining.

The memory should also be fast for the random access for the Ethereum mining.

I still think nano will be king

1024 memory bus and only one fan 26mhs out the box for 80-100 watts i cant see even the 490 beating that efficency and the 490 will cost like $599

490 could be good if it still has the 512 bit memory bus like the 390.

[QuintLeo]

For reference - my GTX 950s are legitimate 10-11 MH miners per card, NOT overclocking them (just letting them boost themselves).

 970s should be more like 40MH if they scaled lineraly with clock x CUDA cores.


 On the other hand, my slightly-damaged 7850 (can't clock it much over 600Mhz or it crashes) is pulling about 8 RIGHT NOW despite the major underclock on the GPU - the MEMORY I can clock up but it doesn't see to help much past stock.


 I'm going with Genoil's comments and theory about it being at least in part limitations in the TLB hardware, it's NOT just the clocks, NOT just the memory, NOT just the cores, it's something deeper.

[Amph]

For reference - my GTX 950s are legitimate 10-11 MH miners per card, NOT overclocking them (just letting them boost themselves).

 970s should be more like 40MH if they scaled lineraly with clock x CUDA cores.


 On the other hand, my slightly-damaged 7850 (can't clock it much over 600Mhz or it crashes) is pulling about 8 RIGHT NOW despite the major underclock on the GPU - the MEMORY I can clock up but it doesn't see to help much past stock.


 I'm going with Genoil's comments and theory about it being at least in part limitations in the TLB hardware, it's NOT just the clocks, NOT just the memory, NOT just the cores, it's something deeper.

i'm curious at the consumption of your 950? just to have a clear look at the scaling about nvidia

right now 120w for 20MH with a 970 is possible, your is doing 10-11, at what wattage?

[digaran]

I hope this can help   https://www.nicehash.com/index.jsp?p=calc

[dumana]

Yeah, been seeing the posted 1080 benchmarks - very underwhelmed, it SHOULD do better than a 960 at least!

 I suspect the drivers need some serious optimisation, but I'm sure NVidia is already working on "in general" optimisation for Pascal in their drivers.
 Just gotta hope the "in general" stuff makes them work better on Ethereum SOON.

it's because of the memory access, nvidia can not be pushed like amd, the bus was doing 50%

i suspect that if the 970 was not limited, it would have been piushed to 30MH, like the 390

if nothing will change i think i'm going to go with amd at this point, 490 polaris look more promising...

it would be on par with the consumption if not lower, we are talking about 14nm, no way the nano will still consume less than that

but the hashrate would not be that high, perhaps in the end the same as nano, also the cost would be around $400 because itneed to match the 1070, which is mainstream level not high end


But why 390x is the same speed as the 390 in Ethereum mining?

Yes. If it has wide memory bus and more efficient than the 390, we think that is good for Ethereum mining.

The memory should also be fast for the random access for the Ethereum mining.

I still think nano will be king

1024 memory bus and only one fan 26mhs out the box for 80-100 watts i cant see even the 490 beating that efficency and the 490 will cost like $599

490 could be good if it still has the 512 bit memory bus like the 390.

So the 490 will cost the same as the nano? That is very expensive. I will buy nano when it is cheaper.

[Amph]

Yeah, been seeing the posted 1080 benchmarks - very underwhelmed, it SHOULD do better than a 960 at least!

 I suspect the drivers need some serious optimisation, but I'm sure NVidia is already working on "in general" optimisation for Pascal in their drivers.
 Just gotta hope the "in general" stuff makes them work better on Ethereum SOON.

it's because of the memory access, nvidia can not be pushed like amd, the bus was doing 50%

i suspect that if the 970 was not limited, it would have been piushed to 30MH, like the 390

if nothing will change i think i'm going to go with amd at this point, 490 polaris look more promising...

it would be on par with the consumption if not lower, we are talking about 14nm, no way the nano will still consume less than that

but the hashrate would not be that high, perhaps in the end the same as nano, also the cost would be around $400 because itneed to match the 1070, which is mainstream level not high end


But why 390x is the same speed as the 390 in Ethereum mining?

Yes. If it has wide memory bus and more efficient than the 390, we think that is good for Ethereum mining.

The memory should also be fast for the random access for the Ethereum mining.

I still think nano will be king

1024 memory bus and only one fan 26mhs out the box for 80-100 watts i cant see even the 490 beating that efficency and the 490 will cost like $599

490 could be good if it still has the 512 bit memory bus like the 390.

So the 490 will cost the same as the nano? That is very expensive. I will buy nano when it is cheaper.

no 490 will cost 400, it need to match the 1070, so it will be cheaper, and i presume that it will consume less than the nano

[Bemerand]

If the 490 costs 400, that is 20% higher than the today's 390 price. If it mines efficiently, I will buy some.

[RastoMan]

If the 490 costs 400, that is 20% higher than the today's 390 price. If it mines efficiently, I will buy some.

So there will be new arms race. The old cards like the 280, 280x or 370 will be out of the race soon.

[dumpida]

If the 490 costs 400, that is 20% higher than the today's 390 price. If it mines efficiently, I will buy some.

So there will be new arms race. The old cards like the 280, 280x or 370 will be out of the race soon.

I think so. these cards are just 28 nm technology. They are much less efficient than the 14/16 ones.