How will this change the world of mining?? GTX 1080 / 1070

[vaulter]

I am quite skeptical if this review is legitimate.

Please post pics + screenshots of the 1070 &&  27mh/s

I need to get wattmeter and several boards to get exact numbers for people following this topic - don't know when Ill have a chance
But just for the records - what happened to the term trust?

[1714711145]

1714711145

[1714711145]

1714711145

[1714711145]

1714711145

[1714711145]

1714711145

[1714711145]

1714711145

[vaulter]

The problem here is the memory bandwidth - you are going to see the same for 480
So hitting this limit you can ether go dual miner way and utilize the board to its max or drop GPU voltage and/or clocks to see if you have same hashrate
Basically you can hash at the same speed with less power used

So it was all about that 512 against 256 mem band? I guess there will be no cheap 290's anymore...

Not exactly - of course raw bus make an impact but its also dependent on algo - I think dual miner will be better for nv vs amd - we'll see if it happens in near future

Hmm.. for me it looks like dcr pow mining days are gone...

I thought dual mining was Amd only

Its entirely possible with ethereum - just needs some efforts from developers - amd is far more popular that's why you have dual miner
for 10xx series I think other algos are possible for dual miner (not dcr) - Dev Guys should comment here...

[greaterninja]

I am quite skeptical if this review is legitimate.

Please post pics + screenshots of the 1070 &&  27mh/s

I need to get wattmeter and several boards to get exact numbers for people following this topic - don't know when Ill have a chance
But just for the records - what happened to the term trust?

Vaulter, you have 0 reputation that I can see.  And you are asking me about trust on a site that has a high occurrence of disinformation and scams.


Your story certainly seems possible, but I'd like to see actual evidence of the video card / box (picture) and benchmarks screenshot.  I'm sure other people would like to see that for further validation.
I might be interested in purchasing a card if the benchmarks can be confirmed with some sort of evidence.

[Subw]

Yeap pics please

[Amph]

The problem here is the memory bandwidth - you are going to see the same for 480
So hitting this limit you can ether go dual miner way and utilize the board to its max or drop GPU voltage and/or clocks to see if you have same hashrate
Basically you can hash at the same speed with less power used

So it was all about that 512 against 256 mem band? I guess there will be no cheap 290's anymore...

Not exactly - of course raw bus make an impact but its also dependent on algo - I think dual miner will be better for nv vs amd - we'll see if it happens in near future

Hmm.. for me it looks like dcr pow mining days are gone...

decred is useless to mine even at a side mining at this point, so i would not care much about dual miner, would only increase consumption

[QuintLeo]

Have you seen anybody achieve the 40 MH/s on the 290 or 390?

Why the 390x is the same speed as the 390?

 My 5 x R9 290 cards right now are managing 24-25 MH/s each at best.
 1350 mem clock is optimal for them (Sapphire ref boards) - anything more DROPS the hashrate fast, anything less drops it but slowly.
 They stock clock at 947 - but when they thermal limit, they go down to about 900 before the hashrate gets impacted, so DEFINITELY memory system limited.

 Ballpark 300 watts - have not gotten around to undervolting any of them yet, Real Life keeps getting in the way.


 When Ethereum is no longer profitable, they're gonna ROCK RC5-72 - already did a bit of testing. 200kblocks/day out of ONE machine not too shabby for years-old tech.

[crysx]

Have you seen anybody achieve the 40 MH/s on the 290 or 390?

Why the 390x is the same speed as the 390?

 My 5 x R9 290 cards right now are managing 24-25 MH/s each at best.
 1350 mem clock is optimal for them (Sapphire ref boards) - anything more DROPS the hashrate fast, anything less drops it but slowly.
 They stock clock at 947 - but when they thermal limit, they go down to about 900 before the hashrate gets impacted, so DEFINITELY memory system limited.

 Ballpark 300 watts - have not gotten around to undervolting any of them yet, Real Life keeps getting in the way.


 When Ethereum is no longer profitable, they're gonna ROCK RC5-72 - already did a bit of testing. 200kblocks/day out of ONE machine not too shabby for years-old tech.

ROCK RC5-72? ...

im misunderstanding what you are saying ...

please clarify for me ... maybe with a link that explains what that is? ...

#crysx

[Marvell1]

The problem here is the memory bandwidth - you are going to see the same for 480
So hitting this limit you can ether go dual miner way and utilize the board to its max or drop GPU voltage and/or clocks to see if you have same hashrate
Basically you can hash at the same speed with less power used

So it was all about that 512 against 256 mem band? I guess there will be no cheap 290's anymore...

Not exactly - of course raw bus make an impact but its also dependent on algo - I think dual miner will be better for nv vs amd - we'll see if it happens in near future

Hmm.. for me it looks like dcr pow mining days are gone...

decred is useless to mine even at a side mining at this point, so i would not care much about dual miner, would only increase consumption

Hmm Idk bout that nano does 25mhs eth and 1200 dcr for around 140 watts mueasurd at the wall eth alone is 100 watts so that's only 40 more watts for 1200 dcr
390 and 290x does like 870 dcr for 50 more wat
Quite worth it Imo for the newer cards older cards not so much

[Amph]

The problem here is the memory bandwidth - you are going to see the same for 480
So hitting this limit you can ether go dual miner way and utilize the board to its max or drop GPU voltage and/or clocks to see if you have same hashrate
Basically you can hash at the same speed with less power used

So it was all about that 512 against 256 mem band? I guess there will be no cheap 290's anymore...

Not exactly - of course raw bus make an impact but its also dependent on algo - I think dual miner will be better for nv vs amd - we'll see if it happens in near future

Hmm.. for me it looks like dcr pow mining days are gone...

decred is useless to mine even at a side mining at this point, so i would not care much about dual miner, would only increase consumption

Hmm Idk bout that nano does 25mhs eth and 1200 dcr for around 140 watts mueasurd at the wall eth alone is 100 watts so that's only 40 more watts for 1200 dcr
390 and 290x does like 870 dcr for 50 more wat
Quite worth it Imo for the newer cards older cards not so much

1200 decred it's like 0.05 more per month, for a single gpu, with 1kwh more per day or 30 more per month

only worth it for a big farm with cheap electricity, and this only for the nano, 870 with 50, is worse

[vaulter]

Some more 1070 info -
I did lowered power limit to 100W (which should result in less then 110W real world consumption)
Quark 24mhs
LyrareV2 14mhs
Neoscrypt 900khs
x11 evo is 10mhs (13.5mhs for 1080)

[Amph]

Some more 1070 info -
I did lowered power limit to 100W (which should result in less then 110W real world consumption)
Quark 24mhs
LyrareV2 14mhs
Neoscrypt 900khs
x11 evo is 10mhs (13.5mhs for 1080)

ccminer need tweaking i think, if sp is still around or someone else, those number may be higher, like they were for 970

can you try to lower even, more until you start to lose hashrate? i think you can go to 80w-90w

[sp_]

The current numbers are lower than the 980ti does on 1290mhz. With my private kernals. But the consumption is 50%

[restless]

Have you seen anybody achieve the 40 MH/s on the 290 or 390?

Why the 390x is the same speed as the 390?

 My 5 x R9 290 cards right now are managing 24-25 MH/s each at best.
 1350 mem clock is optimal for them (Sapphire ref boards) - anything more DROPS the hashrate fast, anything less drops it but slowly.
 They stock clock at 947 - but when they thermal limit, they go down to about 900 before the hashrate gets impacted, so DEFINITELY memory system limited.

 Ballpark 300 watts - have not gotten around to undervolting any of them yet, Real Life keeps getting in the way.


 When Ethereum is no longer profitable, they're gonna ROCK RC5-72 - already did a bit of testing. 200kblocks/day out of ONE machine not too shabby for years-old tech.

290 are NOT mem bound, check with GPU-Z how big is memory controller load
800/950 and 900/1100 are optimal core/mem
With good cooling & undervolting one can run 290 at 1000-1050 core, mem at 1200-1300 and get 30MH
I have only 1 such card, undervolted to 0.97V it runs 900/1125 - 25MH, underclocked because is in a case

Well, the Bios is Stilt-modded for reference 290 with additional undervolting

[QuintLeo]

Have you seen anybody achieve the 40 MH/s on the 290 or 390?

 My 5 x R9 290 cards right now are managing 24-25 MH/s each at best.
 1350 mem clock is optimal for them (Sapphire ref boards) - anything more DROPS the hashrate fast, anything less drops it but slowly.
 They stock clock at 947 - but when they thermal limit, they go down to about 900 before the hashrate gets impacted, so DEFINITELY memory system limited.

 Ballpark 300 watts - have not gotten around to undervolting any of them yet, Real Life keeps getting in the way.

 When Ethereum is no longer profitable, they're gonna ROCK RC5-72 - already did a bit of testing. 200kblocks/day out of ONE machine not too shabby for years-old tech.

290 are NOT mem bound, check with GPU-Z how big is memory controller load
800/950 and 900/1100 are optimal core/mem
With good cooling & undervolting one can run 290 at 1000-1050 core, mem at 1200-1300 and get 30MH
I have only 1 such card, undervolted to 0.97V it runs 900/1125 - 25MH, underclocked because is in a case

Well, the Bios is Stilt-modded for reference 290 with additional undervolting

 Don't ASSUME Windows. I don't inflict Windows on any system I use unless I plan to game on it - though I DO wish there was a LINUX version of GPU-Z, I LIKE that utility.

 I CAN'T get mine to clock to 800, much less 900 on core, or underclock memory at all - limitation of the bios on the things and ATICONFIG even when I SET the peak clocks lower they IGNORE the settings. Hopefully that's something a bios mod could fix. I've seen the same issue on other R-series cards but NOT on the older 7xxx series cards, where I set the memory clock and core clock down but the card don't STAY there, seems that the more recent cards with "smarter" BIOS are STUPIDER about ignoring the settings I give them because they think they know better than I do what's good for specific applications and don't care that their "smarter" settings make them OVERHEAT.

 Only reference I ever found to the Stilt bios mods had BROKEN LINKS, couldn't download any of them to even try undervolting. 8-(
 Do you have a reference to them that has working download links?

[Next BillG]

Have you seen anybody achieve the 40 MH/s on the 290 or 390?

Why the 390x is the same speed as the 390?

 My 5 x R9 290 cards right now are managing 24-25 MH/s each at best.
 1350 mem clock is optimal for them (Sapphire ref boards) - anything more DROPS the hashrate fast, anything less drops it but slowly.
 They stock clock at 947 - but when they thermal limit, they go down to about 900 before the hashrate gets impacted, so DEFINITELY memory system limited.

 Ballpark 300 watts - have not gotten around to undervolting any of them yet, Real Life keeps getting in the way.


 When Ethereum is no longer profitable, they're gonna ROCK RC5-72 - already did a bit of testing. 200kblocks/day out of ONE machine not too shabby for years-old tech.

290 are NOT mem bound, check with GPU-Z how big is memory controller load
800/950 and 900/1100 are optimal core/mem
With good cooling & undervolting one can run 290 at 1000-1050 core, mem at 1200-1300 and get 30MH
I have only 1 such card, undervolted to 0.97V it runs 900/1125 - 25MH, underclocked because is in a case

Well, the Bios is Stilt-modded for reference 290 with additional undervolting

You are right. The 390 is also Core bound. I can run it at 1050/1200 and get around 30MHz. The memory controller is less than 100%.

[sp_]

The 290 should be able to do 40MHASH but can only do 30. (75% of the the bandwidth limit)
The 390 should be able to do 40MHASH but can only do 30. (75% of the the bandwidth limit)
The 970 should be able to do 30MHASH but it can only do 22. (73.33% of the bandwidth limit)
The 1070 should be able to do 30MHASH but it can only do 24(unverified). (80% of the bandwidth limit)
The 1080 should be able to do 30MHASH but it can only do 24(unverified). (80% of the bandwidth limit)

etc etc. GDDR5 ram is not good for random access. GDDRx is even slower. 1070,1080 is unusable for etherum mining. Top expensive. Too slow. 

[Amph]

The 290 should be able to do 40MHASH but can only do 30. (75% of the the bandwidth limit)
The 390 should be able to do 40MHASH but can only do 30. (75% of the the bandwidth limit)
The 970 should be able to do 30MHASH but it can only do 22. (73.33% of the bandwidth limit)
The 1070 should be able to do 30MHASH but it can only do 24(unverified). (80% of the bandwidth limit)
The 1080 should be able to do 30MHASH but it can only do 24(unverified). (80% of the bandwidth limit)

etc etc. GDDR5 ram is not good for random access. GDDRx is even slower. 1070,1080 is unusable for etherum mining. Top expensive. Too slow. 

1070 is doing 26.7MH at 100w, according to an insider, this is good to me, better than any other gpu at the moment

[Zitdadast]

The 290 should be able to do 40MHASH but can only do 30. (75% of the the bandwidth limit)
The 390 should be able to do 40MHASH but can only do 30. (75% of the the bandwidth limit)
The 970 should be able to do 30MHASH but it can only do 22. (73.33% of the bandwidth limit)
The 1070 should be able to do 30MHASH but it can only do 24(unverified). (80% of the bandwidth limit)
The 1080 should be able to do 30MHASH but it can only do 24(unverified). (80% of the bandwidth limit)

etc etc. GDDR5 ram is not good for random access. GDDRx is even slower. 1070,1080 is unusable for etherum mining. Top expensive. Too slow. 

1070 is doing 26.7MH at 100w, according to an insider, this is good to me, better than any other gpu at the moment

1070 does 3.7 J/MH, the undervolt R9 nano does about 4J/MH. So the 1070 is better. But they are different generation cards.

[sp_]

But the price is to high.. A used 290 can do 33MHASH with another algo in dual mining for free with private kernals. Undervolted 260watt.
you pick them up secondhand for $150

Wolf0 has optimized etherum to run 7% faster than the opensource already. (85% of the bandwidth limit)

The 1080 is currently priced at $750 and hash @ 24MHASH if you are lucky. ($3.17 a day in income) (with free power you ROI in 237 days)

You can pickup 5 290 (x) cards for the same price and hash 165MHASH. ($21.78 a day in income) + (3-5$ a day in decred income) = $27 a day (with free power you ROI in 1 month)

Dual mining for NVIDIA is not yet possible..

The etherum net hashrate is currently 3190.3497 GH/s

If we assume that everyone was using the gtx 1080, then we would have 132 932 active gpu's mining 1 alticoin.

To build a gridcomputer with the same hashpower based on the 1080 will cost around $99 698 428 just for the graphic cards. Then you need psu's, cables,psus, etc etc add 30%.
(An investment of 130 million dollars++ to get 50% of the hashrate of 1 altcoin.)

[Amph]

1080 is trash at the moment, 1070 is vastly better, like i said it can do 100w with 27MH

you are comparing 33MH at 260w, to 27MH at 100w, 160w difference is fucking huge, i don't care about initial investment when it is for new gpu that will retain their value for 1 year at least

and there is not such thing as free power, that is called stealing, not possible here, efficiency matter more for me than initial investment