Bitcoin Forum
February 18, 2018, 09:13:52 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: What type of pool payouts do you prefer?
Bitcoins - 3217 (80.4%)
Bank transfer / USD - 413 (10.3%)
Gold/silver coins and bars - 371 (9.3%)
Total Voters: 3999

Pages: « 1 ... 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 [979] 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 ... 1135 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [2+ EH] Slush Pool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool  (Read 4323802 times)
MrTeal
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1274
Merit: 1000


View Profile
October 24, 2014, 02:01:05 PM
 #19561

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 Rate

multiplied by 28 [63 core processors] = 450,000,000,000 (450GB) Total Hash Rate

The 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.
1518945232
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1518945232

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1518945232
Reply with quote  #2

1518945232
Report to moderator
1518945232
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1518945232

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1518945232
Reply with quote  #2

1518945232
Report to moderator
1518945232
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1518945232

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1518945232
Reply with quote  #2

1518945232
Report to moderator
Automated Bitcoin Fork Extraction Tool WE DO TOUGH WALLETS: BCH | BTG | BCD | SBTC | UBTC | B2X | BCX | BTF Electrum 2FA, Trezor, Ledger, SegWit, Bech32
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1518945232
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1518945232

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1518945232
Reply with quote  #2

1518945232
Report to moderator
1518945232
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1518945232

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1518945232
Reply with quote  #2

1518945232
Report to moderator
pekatete
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500



View Profile WWW
October 24, 2014, 02:04:30 PM
 #19562

^^^^ Guys, wasted breath there, someone forgot to take their tablets on time (this thread is littered with that kind of twaddle from them)!

bspurloc
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 569
Merit: 500


View Profile
October 24, 2014, 02:58:25 PM
 #19563

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
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 139
Merit: 100


View Profile
October 24, 2014, 03:00:55 PM
 #19564

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 Smiley  )

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
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 569
Merit: 500


View Profile
October 24, 2014, 03:04:32 PM
 #19565

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???

bspurloc
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 569
Merit: 500


View Profile
October 24, 2014, 03:06:49 PM
 #19566

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 Smiley  )

Third. Does anyone have a Prisma miner up and running on Slush's yet? Wondering about performance, particularly when connected to Slush's pool.

how did you order 2 when they had the min at 60? and now 20?
They dont really explain how to power them too...
pekatete
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500



View Profile WWW
October 24, 2014, 03:09:56 PM
 #19567


slush doesn't allow for manual changing of the diff, is that in the S4's gui???

Check your facts, infact slush NOW allows manual setting of diff.

Sir Alan
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 221
Merit: 100


View Profile
October 24, 2014, 04:28:01 PM
 #19568

slush doesn't allow for manual changing of the diff, is that in the S4's gui???
Check your facts, infact slush NOW allows manual setting of diff.
Or, to be strictly accurate, manual setting of minimum diff - the pool may then set it higher automatically.  BTCguild has done the same.

I have set my S3+s to minimum 256 on both pools (balanced 50/50) and that achieves a higher perceived hash rate on both than does 128.

1Eeyore17YeHrbJW5Q3pSdV8sXujkdrrFc
Sir Alan
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 221
Merit: 100


View Profile
October 24, 2014, 04:34:36 PM
 #19569

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.
It is possible that your internet connection is throttling the throughput; for instance, if you are using wifi rather than an ethernet cable to connect to your router you may well see a lower figure; an ADSL connection down a phone line is likely to be slower than cable broadband;  peak network usage may also slow things down at certain times of day.  I have seen all of these play havoc with my own stats.

1Eeyore17YeHrbJW5Q3pSdV8sXujkdrrFc
Billbags
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 280
Merit: 250

Brainwashed this way


View Profile
October 24, 2014, 04:54:26 PM
 #19570

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 Smiley  )

Third. Does anyone have a Prisma miner up and running on Slush's yet? Wondering about performance, particularly when connected to Slush's pool.

how did you order 2 when they had the min at 60? and now 20?
They dont really explain how to power them too...

http://minersource.net/collections/frontpage/products/bitmain-antminer-u3-usb-home-miner-ships-november-12th

Listen: meat beat manifesto ~ Edge of no control (pt.1)
Read:"He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past." ~ George Orwell
Think: http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2014/12/the-dawn-of-trustworthy-computing.html
kkurtmann
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 475
Merit: 250



View Profile WWW
October 24, 2014, 05:27:50 PM
 #19571

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 Rate

multiplied by 28 [63 core processors] = 450,000,000,000 (450GB) Total Hash Rate

The 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.


You could not be more wrong!

https://www.buytrezor.com?a=55c37b866c11   well sir, I like it!
whispy
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 44
Merit: 0


View Profile
October 24, 2014, 06:14:45 PM
 #19572

What a lovely 3 minute block.
Did I hear the word invalid mentioned?
MrTeal
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1274
Merit: 1000


View Profile
October 24, 2014, 06:16:07 PM
 #19573

What a lovely 3 minute block.
Did I hear the word invalid mentioned?
There's already another block built on them, so it's extremely unlikely we'll get an orphan here.
pikachuy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 479
Merit: 250


View Profile
October 24, 2014, 06:30:52 PM
 #19574

Any advise/information people? I ran slush's pool for 1 hour to test, but I don't see any kind of compensation? I did the same for BTCguild and Ghash and they both compensated my time for the 1 hour test on the their pools, as I can see it on my account. Any clue of why my account with Slush doesn't show any kind compensation? I see on my slush account it was hashing at 2th/s for 60 mins. Any help/information would be appreciated. Thanks.

█ BTC: 12FLMGv2pMo7gFrwxVifsJcNYZEVwdHfkk █ ETH: 0x8087a135e9c8EDFf63A917AA0DF44e5F083a31a7 █ LTC: LhKGh5FAMy7ZagBBwj7ArUaktB2tgPp1dL
MrTeal
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1274
Merit: 1000


View Profile
October 24, 2014, 06:35:22 PM
 #19575

Any advise/information people? I ran slush's pool for 1 hour to test, but I don't see any kind of compensation? I did the same for BTCguild and Ghash and they both compensated my time for the 1 hour test on the their pools, as I can see it on my account. Any clue of why my account with Slush doesn't show any kind compensation? I see on my slush account it was hashing at 2th/s for 60 mins. Any help/information would be appreciated. Thanks.
When were you testing? Slush uses a score based algorithm to deter poolhopping that weighs each share based on when it was submitted. Shares near the start of a block are worth less than shares near the end.
Sir Alan
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 221
Merit: 100


View Profile
October 24, 2014, 06:41:30 PM
 #19576

Any advise/information people? I ran slush's pool for 1 hour to test, but I don't see any kind of compensation? I did the same for BTCguild and Ghash and they both compensated my time for the 1 hour test on the their pools, as I can see it on my account. Any clue of why my account with Slush doesn't show any kind compensation? I see on my slush account it was hashing at 2th/s for 60 mins. Any help/information would be appreciated. Thanks.
You don't say when you started and stopped.  Shares on Slush lose value rapidly, so that old shares become worthless after a while.  If you ran your test in the middle of the recent long round, then your reward would have petered out to zero pretty quickly.  It's to discourage pool hoppers.  If you tell us the timing of your test, and the number of shares credited to you, somebody will be able to give you a more definitive answer.  BTCguild operates a different scoring system, and I have never used the Evil Empire so I don't know how they work.

One hour is hardly a fair test of any pool.  You need to give it at least 24 hours - preferably considerably longer.  Try running all three pools evenly balanced for perhaps 3-4 days and compare your earnings.  Over the last 72 hours or so, my earnings from Slush and BTCguild have been more or less the same for roughly the same hashing power.

1Eeyore17YeHrbJW5Q3pSdV8sXujkdrrFc
Billbags
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 280
Merit: 250

Brainwashed this way


View Profile
October 24, 2014, 06:56:59 PM
 #19577

Any advise/information people? I ran slush's pool for 1 hour to test, but I don't see any kind of compensation? I did the same for BTCguild and Ghash and they both compensated my time for the 1 hour test on the their pools, as I can see it on my account. Any clue of why my account with Slush doesn't show any kind compensation? I see on my slush account it was hashing at 2th/s for 60 mins. Any help/information would be appreciated. Thanks.

I use the benchmark test in this link for reference.  I have miners here and BTCguild. My neice has 1050ghs over at the dark side(she has a miner that doesn't preform well at most other pools). I can tell you those pools in that link do better than ghash almost every month. I guess due to ghash having a lot of down time and orphans? You have to look over time to really compare.

I will also recommend that you devide your hashrate between at least 2 different pools. It's called Variance. I keep 80% here and 20% at BTCguild. That way if one pool is having bad luck the other May be doing good. A hash is a hash. Don't keep all your eggs in one basket.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=416933.0

Listen: meat beat manifesto ~ Edge of no control (pt.1)
Read:"He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past." ~ George Orwell
Think: http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2014/12/the-dawn-of-trustworthy-computing.html
sjc1490
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 546
Merit: 500



View Profile
October 24, 2014, 07:42:45 PM
 #19578



Third. Does anyone have a Prisma miner up and running on Slush's yet? Wondering about performance, particularly when connected to Slush's pool.

I have 3 Tubes (from the same family) pointed here using the Tube controller. All are performing fine in the 850 to 900 range at a 290 clock.

BTC ADDRESS: 12Qwd8VKLQ4xF44ytHXBpCAKuF9VknG4X2
kkurtmann
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 475
Merit: 250



View Profile WWW
October 24, 2014, 07:42:56 PM
 #19579

Any advise/information people? I ran slush's pool for 1 hour to test, but I don't see any kind of compensation? I did the same for BTCguild and Ghash and they both compensated my time for the 1 hour test on the their pools, as I can see it on my account. Any clue of why my account with Slush doesn't show any kind compensation? I see on my slush account it was hashing at 2th/s for 60 mins. Any help/information would be appreciated. Thanks.

I use the benchmark test in this link for reference.  I have miners here and BTCguild. My neice has 1050ghs over at the dark side(she has a miner that doesn't preform well at most other pools). I can tell you those pools in that link do better than ghash almost every month. I guess due to ghash having a lot of down time and orphans? You have to look over time to really compare.

I will also recommend that you devide your hashrate between at least 2 different pools. It's called Variance. I keep 80% here and 20% at BTCguild. That way if one pool is having bad luck the other May be doing good. A hash is a hash. Don't keep all your eggs in one basket.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=416933.0

It's not called variance, it's called load balancing. Variance is something completely different to what you describe.

https://www.buytrezor.com?a=55c37b866c11   well sir, I like it!
pikachuy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 479
Merit: 250


View Profile
October 24, 2014, 07:51:43 PM
 #19580

Any advise/information people? I ran slush's pool for 1 hour to test, but I don't see any kind of compensation? I did the same for BTCguild and Ghash and they both compensated my time for the 1 hour test on the their pools, as I can see it on my account. Any clue of why my account with Slush doesn't show any kind compensation? I see on my slush account it was hashing at 2th/s for 60 mins. Any help/information would be appreciated. Thanks.

I use the benchmark test in this link for reference.  I have miners here and BTCguild. My neice has 1050ghs over at the dark side(she has a miner that doesn't preform well at most other pools). I can tell you those pools in that link do better than ghash almost every month. I guess due to ghash having a lot of down time and orphans? You have to look over time to really compare.

I will also recommend that you devide your hashrate between at least 2 different pools. It's called Variance. I keep 80% here and 20% at BTCguild. That way if one pool is having bad luck the other May be doing good. A hash is a hash. Don't keep all your eggs in one basket.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=416933.0

I looked through your benchmark link but it doesn't contain any data for slush's pool =( I'm guessing the best thing to do is to load balance all 3 pools simultaneously (slush, btcguild, ghash) and share my hashes evenly, since it's all based on luck.

Edit: getting a piece of a pie is better then getting no pie i assume. This way I am guarantee 3 pie pieces, instead of hoping for 1 big pie or no pie at all.

█ BTC: 12FLMGv2pMo7gFrwxVifsJcNYZEVwdHfkk █ ETH: 0x8087a135e9c8EDFf63A917AA0DF44e5F083a31a7 █ LTC: LhKGh5FAMy7ZagBBwj7ArUaktB2tgPp1dL
Pages: « 1 ... 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 [979] 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 ... 1135 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!