dmwardjr
|
 |
October 24, 2014, 05:18:41 AM |
|
Tin foil hats for sale 0.01 BTC.
I'm wearing it like a Proud Clown!!!
|
BTC ADDRESS:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
|
dmwardjr
|
 |
October 24, 2014, 05:19:58 AM |
|
It seems no one cares to TRY to explain HOW the guild would use 99% of my CPU when I would navigate to the website?
It doesn't do it anymore, and probably never will again.
Oh well.
|
BTC ADDRESS:
|
|
|
kkurtmann
|
 |
October 24, 2014, 05:21:11 AM |
|
Tin foil hats for sale 0.01 BTC.
I'm wearing it like a Proud Clown!!! Discounted for you since you are so obviously new here. 0.009 BTC
|
|
|
|
-ck
Moderator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2506
Merit: 1047
Ruu \o/
|
 |
October 24, 2014, 05:21:56 AM |
|
It seems no one cares to TRY to explain HOW the guild would use 99% of my CPU when I would navigate to the website?
It doesn't do it anymore, and probably never will again.
Oh well.
One runaway javascript on the web page would be enough to do it. Why does this need to be explained, and especially on the slush pool thread?
|
|
|
|
dmwardjr
|
 |
October 24, 2014, 05:22:44 AM |
|
I did tell him in a PM I had just upgraded from OS X Mavericks to OS X Yosemite that same night. It was the first day Yosemite came available for download. I don't know if that had anything to do with it or not? It never did it before until after the upgrade to Yosemite. I told him that might be part of the reason. I just didn't know.
|
BTC ADDRESS:
|
|
|
dmwardjr
|
 |
October 24, 2014, 05:24:06 AM |
|
It seems no one cares to TRY to explain HOW the guild would use 99% of my CPU when I would navigate to the website?
It doesn't do it anymore, and probably never will again.
Oh well.
One runaway javascript on the web page would be enough to do it. Why does this need to be explained, and especially on the slush pool thread? Well, THAT could explain it because my computer later prompted me for a Java update after updating to Yosemite. About 4 hours later.
|
BTC ADDRESS:
|
|
|
kkurtmann
|
 |
October 24, 2014, 05:25:31 AM |
|
I love this thread. The newbs make it so amusing.
|
|
|
|
dmwardjr
|
 |
October 24, 2014, 05:26:02 AM |
|
It seems no one cares to TRY to explain HOW the guild would use 99% of my CPU when I would navigate to the website?
It doesn't do it anymore, and probably never will again.
Oh well.
One runaway javascript on the web page would be enough to do it. Why does this need to be explained, and especially on the slush pool thread? What prompted it is if you look back earlier to see me wondering what was up with the "1 Day Luck" acting up? I suppose I will stop being paranoid and TRY to ask questions if something seems weird.
|
BTC ADDRESS:
|
|
|
dmwardjr
|
 |
October 24, 2014, 05:26:57 AM |
|
I love this thread. The newbs make it so amusing.
LOL Happy to make your night amusing... Like I said, I've officially been hazed!!!
|
BTC ADDRESS:
|
|
|
kkurtmann
|
 |
October 24, 2014, 05:27:54 AM |
|
Seems you been hazing yourself.
|
|
|
|
dmwardjr
|
 |
October 24, 2014, 05:36:08 AM |
|
Seems you been hazing yourself.
EXACTLY!!! At least you're getting some entertainment...
|
BTC ADDRESS:
|
|
|
dmwardjr
|
 |
October 24, 2014, 07:35:49 AM |
|
If you have EVERYONE's CPU on the guild that COULD be a lot of hashing power if combined.
No it wouldn't. Please check your numbers. 10,000 of the most powerful CPUs today amount to about one S3 which is 440GH. For a pool with 13,000,000 GH, do you honestly think the pool operator would risk his reputation for that much more? What I'm mentioning is NOT to continue accusations. What I'm mentioning is merely to prove a point. MacBook Pro 17" Early 2011 2.2 GHz Intel Quad Core i7; meaning 2.2 GHz x 4 cores = 8.8 GHz 450 divided by 8.8 = 51.14 MacBook Pro 17" with i7 2.2 GHz Quad Core chips Most PC's and Mac's today I would say average around 2.2 GHz x 4 for 8.8 GHz but we will use my 2011 model Mac to be conservative. If you had 10,000 computers with 8.8 GHz average, that would be equivalent to 195.5 S3's; NOT ONE as you say. Also, if it took 10,000 CPU's to equal 1 S3, you would be saying EACH AND EVERY CPU in each and every computer [10,000 computers] is less than a quarter (.25 cents)! That is FAR from the truth. BM1382 has achieved 15.75 Gh/s in hash performance in each chip: BitMain BM1382 chip specifications: - Process Node: 28nm – Package Type: FCQFN-56 – Packaged Chip Size: 8mm x 8mm – Number of Cores: 63– Core Voltage: 0.75 V – Core Frequency: 250 MHz– Hash Rate: 15.75 GH/s 250,000,000 Hz (250 MHz) - Core Frequency x 63 Cores (processors) 15,750,000,000 Hash Ratemultiplied by 28 [63 core processors] = 450,000,000,000 (450GB) Total Hash RateThe new Bitmain Antminer U3 uses four (4) 1382 chips [4 x 15.75GH] for a total of 63 GH/s http://www.coindesk.com/hackers-hijack-retailers-showroom-pcs-cryptocurrency-mining/Also, if it took 10,000 computers, as you say, why would hackers even bother hacking these retail stores for dismal profits from mining? The reason is because it does not take 10,000 computers to make one S3. It only takes approximately 50 computers to make one S3 but that is being conservative. It may only take about 48 computers. I challenge anyone with a PC that has a QUAD CORE PROCESSOR to mine with their CPU for an hour then multiply their hourly average hash rate x 51 and see if it is somewhat close to one S3. Well, you might have to multiply it by 58 cause Slush always shows a little slower than what my rigs say. You might see you have to multiply times close to 200 to get close to 450GH/s. If that's the case, then it takes approximately 200 to equal 1 S3.
|
BTC ADDRESS:
|
|
|
cowchaser
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 11
Merit: 0
|
 |
October 24, 2014, 07:51:26 AM |
|
My S4 is not performing as expected. I only see 1800 - 1900 Gh/sec hourly ratings on Slush so far. Have been checking the average for the last couple of days but can't see any improvement.
I tried minimum difficulty at 2048 and 2250. No real difference.
Anyone seeing similar behavior ?
The funny thing is that on the S4 internal stats page I currently see like an average mining speed of 2002.39 Gh/s over the last 3 days.
Slush: xxxxxxxxx x 0 355500 3139621.50955 0 minutes 1806.571 2250
versus
S4 internal stats:
Elapsed GH/S(5s) GH/S(avg) FoundBlocks Utility LocalWork WU BestShare 3d3h14m53s 2845.66 2001.94 0 11.84 158480049 27975.18 153414510
|
|
|
|
|
Tazza
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 41
Merit: 0
|
 |
October 24, 2014, 01:55:44 PM |
|
I challenge anyone with a PC that has a QUAD CORE PROCESSOR to mine with their CPU for an hour then multiply their hourly average hash rate x 51 and see if it is somewhat close to one S3. Well, you might have to multiply it by 58 cause Slush always shows a little slower than what my rigs say.
You might see you have to multiply times close to 200 to get close to 450GH/s. If that's the case, then it takes approximately 200 to equal 1 S3.
You really ought to test out that hypothesis yourself before spouting off such utter tripe on here. You do know of course a Ghz is in no way comparable to GH/s. Actually, since I'm feeling kind I'll give you the answer and save you some time and give you the (rough) hashing results using all cores. 4x Opteron 6174's will crank out around 115Mhash/s (while chewing over 300 watts), an Athlon 64 X2 6400+ Black Edition will do a whopping 2.9Mhash/s!! But you're also aware that's the exact reason people switched to GPU's right? where the 5830 would do 270-330 Mhash/s 5850 was around the 400 range.
|
|
|
|
MrTeal
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1274
Merit: 1000
|
 |
October 24, 2014, 02:01:05 PM |
|
If you have EVERYONE's CPU on the guild that COULD be a lot of hashing power if combined.
No it wouldn't. Please check your numbers. 10,000 of the most powerful CPUs today amount to about one S3 which is 440GH. For a pool with 13,000,000 GH, do you honestly think the pool operator would risk his reputation for that much more? What I'm mentioning is NOT to continue accusations. What I'm mentioning is merely to prove a point. MacBook Pro 17" Early 2011 2.2 GHz Intel Quad Core i7; meaning 2.2 GHz x 4 cores = 8.8 GHz 450 divided by 8.8 = 51.14 MacBook Pro 17" with i7 2.2 GHz Quad Core chips Most PC's and Mac's today I would say average around 2.2 GHz x 4 for 8.8 GHz but we will use my 2011 model Mac to be conservative. If you had 10,000 computers with 8.8 GHz average, that would be equivalent to 195.5 S3's; NOT ONE as you say. Also, if it took 10,000 CPU's to equal 1 S3, you would be saying EACH AND EVERY CPU in each and every computer [10,000 computers] is less than a quarter (.25 cents)! That is FAR from the truth. BM1382 has achieved 15.75 Gh/s in hash performance in each chip: BitMain BM1382 chip specifications: - Process Node: 28nm – Package Type: FCQFN-56 – Packaged Chip Size: 8mm x 8mm – Number of Cores: 63– Core Voltage: 0.75 V – Core Frequency: 250 MHz– Hash Rate: 15.75 GH/s 250,000,000 Hz (250 MHz) - Core Frequency x 63 Cores (processors) 15,750,000,000 Hash Ratemultiplied by 28 [63 core processors] = 450,000,000,000 (450GB) Total Hash RateThe new Bitmain Antminer U3 uses four (4) 1382 chips [4 x 15.75GH] for a total of 63 GH/s http://www.coindesk.com/hackers-hijack-retailers-showroom-pcs-cryptocurrency-mining/Also, if it took 10,000 computers, as you say, why would hackers even bother hacking these retail stores for dismal profits from mining? The reason is because it does not take 10,000 computers to make one S3. It only takes approximately 50 computers to make one S3 but that is being conservative. It may only take about 48 computers. I challenge anyone with a PC that has a QUAD CORE PROCESSOR to mine with their CPU for an hour then multiply their hourly average hash rate x 51 and see if it is somewhat close to one S3. Well, you might have to multiply it by 58 cause Slush always shows a little slower than what my rigs say. You might see you have to multiply times close to 200 to get close to 450GH/s. If that's the case, then it takes approximately 200 to equal 1 S3. A general purpose CPU cannot output one doubleSHA256 hash per clock cycle. GHz != GH/s. That's the whole reason that we use specialized ASICs. An i5-2500k will get ~20MH/s or so (at 4GHz I believe, though I haven't tried in years). You could have 100,000 people looking at your page and hashing for you, and it would equal about the power of a single Bitmain S4. Probably less, since the average processor is likely less powerful across a sample of 100,000 users.
|
|
|
|
pekatete
|
 |
October 24, 2014, 02:04:30 PM |
|
^^^^ Guys, wasted breath there, someone forgot to take their tablets on time (this thread is littered with that kind of twaddle from them)!
|
|
|
|
bspurloc
|
 |
October 24, 2014, 02:58:25 PM |
|
It seems no one cares to TRY to explain HOW the guild would use 99% of my CPU when I would navigate to the website?
It doesn't do it anymore, and probably never will again.
Oh well.
One runaway javascript on the web page would be enough to do it. Why does this need to be explained, and especially on the slush pool thread? cuz the slush pool thread isnt about helping people on the slush pool. it's now a chat area and wah wah long blocks wah wah long blocks...
|
|
|
|
kcal63
|
 |
October 24, 2014, 03:00:55 PM |
|
Well first, yes I should have posted more info/specs about my error issue. It was across all of my miners, BTCGardens, Rockminers, and Bitmain.I found the problem a bad cable. Second< I will post more info on the Bitmain U3's as soon as mine arrive, I orderd 2 of them a while ago and they have an expected delivery date of Nov 17 as of now. (I know they are money losing miners but so cute I had to have a couple  ) Third. Does anyone have a Prisma miner up and running on Slush's yet? Wondering about performance, particularly when connected to Slush's pool.
|
|
|
|
bspurloc
|
 |
October 24, 2014, 03:04:32 PM |
|
My S4 is not performing as expected. I only see 1800 - 1900 Gh/sec hourly ratings on Slush so far. Have been checking the average for the last couple of days but can't see any improvement.
I tried minimum difficulty at 2048 and 2250. No real difference.
Anyone seeing similar behavior ?
The funny thing is that on the S4 internal stats page I currently see like an average mining speed of 2002.39 Gh/s over the last 3 days.
Slush: xxxxxxxxx x 0 355500 3139621.50955 0 minutes 1806.571 2250
versus
S4 internal stats:
Elapsed GH/S(5s) GH/S(avg) FoundBlocks Utility LocalWork WU BestShare 3d3h14m53s 2845.66 2001.94 0 11.84 158480049 27975.18 153414510
slush doesn't allow for manual changing of the diff, is that in the S4's gui???
|
|
|
|
|