Bitcoin Forum
November 30, 2021, 12:02:58 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 22.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Warning: One or more bitcointalk.org users have reported that they strongly believe that the creator of this topic is a scammer. (Login to see the detailed trust ratings.) While the bitcointalk.org administration does not verify such claims, you should proceed with extreme caution.
Pages: « 1 ... 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 [228] 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 ... 529 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN] Signatum - New Algorithm - Fair Launch - No Premine  (Read 823008 times)
Gongolo
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 374
Merit: 101


View Profile
August 12, 2017, 09:18:11 PM
 #4541

for Nvidia miners: please let me know if you want me to do this skunk vs spmod miner comparison:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2070862.msg20825849#msg20825849


you should also add the CWI Miner to your test, that one might be a surprise for you Wink (and you don't have to pay 0.05 BTC for it)

In my cfg, CwiGm is fast as krnlx, both are faster than palgin mod.
CwiGm is hardcoded to CWI pools, while you can use ccminer krnlx with any pool.
I hope CWI will unlock its miner soon.


BTC: 1ABBEJJtTaz8wSvFSsFvUoNkmQXNh7rq2U
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1638273778
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1638273778

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1638273778
Reply with quote  #2

1638273778
Report to moderator
1638273778
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1638273778

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1638273778
Reply with quote  #2

1638273778
Report to moderator
1638273778
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1638273778

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1638273778
Reply with quote  #2

1638273778
Report to moderator
blissz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336
Merit: 258


View Profile
August 12, 2017, 09:23:53 PM
 #4542

Ok thank you for the suggestions. I will do a few more tests after I finished the skunk vs spmod 5 Smiley
As I only have 2 identical rigs I have to do a sort of knockout test between each miner Smiley

update on skunk vs spmod 5 is here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2070862.msg20825849#msg20825849
lynxy
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 20
Merit: 0


View Profile
August 12, 2017, 09:29:33 PM
 #4543

for Nvidia miners: please let me know if you want me to do this skunk vs spmod miner comparison:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2070862.msg20825849#msg20825849


Most of developers want to get 10-20% developers fees and have full control over their coins. This coin has "No premine. No ICO. No Dev Fee."
May be this is the answer why some exchanges so slow to accept SIGT, but they promptly accept some questionable ICOs(pyramids).

brubic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 397
Merit: 250



View Profile
August 12, 2017, 09:30:04 PM
 #4544

I like the activity of the dev and the community, the coin has a future, those who say that the coin is dying are newbee, even the legendary members are often mistaken, but here some noobs write nonsense
lynxy
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 20
Merit: 0


View Profile
August 12, 2017, 09:48:45 PM
 #4545

for Nvidia miners: please let me know if you want me to do this skunk vs spmod miner comparison:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2070862.msg20825849#msg20825849


you should also add the CWI Miner to your test, that one might be a surprise for you Wink (and you don't have to pay 0.05 BTC for it)

Agree , just switched all my rigs to CWI miner it is faster than cc and all my cards 85% power (I can save couple pennies with my 1080 Ti-s).
blissz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336
Merit: 258


View Profile
August 12, 2017, 09:59:00 PM
 #4546

so what I did:

  • 2 identical rigs (6x undervolted gtx 1070 both at same clocks / hashrate when using an identical miner)
  • both running on the same pool with static diff set to 1.0
  • started miners exactly at the same time
  • stopped the miners after one hour

apparently the skunk miner seems to work a bit better on my rig, but this comparison is more for checking the reported hashrate vs accepted shares. Since people feel the reported hashrate is not fair on the skunk miner.
Actually this test is running for a too short time to draw conclusions, but it gives an idea already. Next update will be after 12 hours of mining

I will do more testing. I will test some more miners on request. Please PM me when you want me to test a private miner (ie. spmod 6 or something else) or give me a link to a public miner if you want it to be tested.




my mistake: skunk = krnlx miner Smiley I will update the graphics on the next update
31biggestholderofsigt
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 45
Merit: 0


View Profile
August 12, 2017, 10:44:02 PM
 #4547

How long does nova exchange take
MightSellIt
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 135
Merit: 100


View Profile
August 12, 2017, 11:02:26 PM
 #4548

What are the best vid cards for mining? maybe my HD 6850 card doesn't work with this.

I have 1060's and 1070's.  Getting about 18-19Mh/s out of the 1060's and around 28-29 from the 1070's.  

The key was finding the right mod for the miner and settling on the right intensity level.  Here is what I have learned...

1. There is very little you can do in the way of overclocking to get a better hashrate.  With Claymore and ETH mining, stock/overclock ratio can easily be 4/5.  Ie., 25 stock and 32 OC.  I cannot make ccminer budge with memory or base clock changes.  Power increase makes a small difference.

2. What ccminer reports as hashrate is NOT what you are going to get from the pool.  260 reported ends up about 200-210 from the pool.

3. The 32 bit ccminer runs better for me on Win10.  I have the version labeled ccminer_krnlx_170810.  There were three .exe files in my download.  The Cuda 7.5 32 bit version was the best of the three for me.

4. Compared to Claymore dual mining, ccminer is coming in at about 80% of the power when I think I have it fairly well optimized.  

5. Believe it or not, increasing the intensity MAY slow you down.  One of my rigs (5x1060's and 1x1070) runs great at i=22.5 and slows DOWN at i=23.

I was only able to mine for about 30 hours at the 5000 reward level.  I am going to mine this 100% for at least until it reaches 60K.

As for the current valuations, chances are very few people here have spent any time with financial markets and charts.  NEW things almost always dip multiple times before the market truly discovers and has confidence in a bottom.  That is why market tops and bottoms are almost never hairpin turns.  They have to work it out.  Lows are tested and retested sometimes many times before confidence is found and a march upwards begins.
Nice review, true crypto OG right there Wink

Recently this has been the only coin for miners in out there, and this one definitely has market maker. But we gotta wait till new blood gets shaken out.
omhr69
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 10
Merit: 0


View Profile
August 12, 2017, 11:17:15 PM
 #4549

What are the best vid cards for mining? maybe my HD 6850 card doesn't work with this.

I have 1060's and 1070's.  Getting about 18-19Mh/s out of the 1060's and around 28-29 from the 1070's.  

The key was finding the right mod for the miner and settling on the right intensity level.  Here is what I have learned...

1. There is very little you can do in the way of overclocking to get a better hashrate.  With Claymore and ETH mining, stock/overclock ratio can easily be 4/5.  Ie., 25 stock and 32 OC.  I cannot make ccminer budge with memory or base clock changes.  Power increase makes a small difference.

2. What ccminer reports as hashrate is NOT what you are going to get from the pool.  260 reported ends up about 200-210 from the pool.

3. The 32 bit ccminer runs better for me on Win10.  I have the version labeled ccminer_krnlx_170810.  There were three .exe files in my download.  The Cuda 7.5 32 bit version was the best of the three for me.

4. Compared to Claymore dual mining, ccminer is coming in at about 80% of the power when I think I have it fairly well optimized.  

5. Believe it or not, increasing the intensity MAY slow you down.  One of my rigs (5x1060's and 1x1070) runs great at i=22.5 and slows DOWN at i=23.

I was only able to mine for about 30 hours at the 5000 reward level.  I am going to mine this 100% for at least until it reaches 60K.

As for the current valuations, chances are very few people here have spent any time with financial markets and charts.  NEW things almost always dip multiple times before the market truly discovers and has confidence in a bottom.  That is why market tops and bottoms are almost never hairpin turns.  They have to work it out.  Lows are tested and retested sometimes many times before confidence is found and a march upwards begins.
Nice review, true crypto OG right there Wink

Recently this has been the only coin for miners in out there, and this one definitely has market maker. But we gotta wait till new blood gets shaken out.

Strongly agree, thank you for helping the community.
jimboscott
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 243
Merit: 105


View Profile
August 12, 2017, 11:27:45 PM
 #4550

so what I did:

  • 2 identical rigs (6x undervolted gtx 1070 both at same clocks / hashrate when using an identical miner)
  • both running on the same pool with static diff set to 1.0
  • started miners exactly at the same time
  • stopped the miners after one hour

apparently the skunk miner seems to work a bit better on my rig, but this comparison is more for checking the reported hashrate vs accepted shares. Since people feel the reported hashrate is not fair on the skunk miner.
Actually this test is running for a too short time to draw conclusions, but it gives an idea already. Next update will be after 12 hours of mining

I will do more testing. I will test some more miners on request. Please PM me when you want me to test a private miner (ie. spmod 6 or something else) or give me a link to a public miner if you want it to be tested.




my mistake: skunk = krnlx miner Smiley I will update the graphics on the next update


Where are you getting your 'reported' hashrate?  From your pool or from your rig?  The reason I ask is that my pool (suprnova) never shows anything close to a static figure (or maybe I do not know where to find it...).  Also, my rig that has 5 1060's and just 1 1070 is getting 123.5 reported from the miner.  Various mods have gone from 108 to 123.5 which is a 'settled in' hashrate.  I would think 6 1070's should be topping 145.

My guess is that you might run a bit faster with the ccminer_krnlx_170810 versions that you should be able to find.  There were three versions in the zip file and the Cuda 7.5 32bit version did best for me.
relayd
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 81
Merit: 12


View Profile
August 12, 2017, 11:32:01 PM
 #4551

so what I did:

  • 2 identical rigs (6x undervolted gtx 1070 both at same clocks / hashrate when using an identical miner)
  • both running on the same pool with static diff set to 1.0
  • started miners exactly at the same time
  • stopped the miners after one hour

apparently the skunk miner seems to work a bit better on my rig, but this comparison is more for checking the reported hashrate vs accepted shares. Since people feel the reported hashrate is not fair on the skunk miner.
Actually this test is running for a too short time to draw conclusions, but it gives an idea already. Next update will be after 12 hours of mining

I will do more testing. I will test some more miners on request. Please PM me when you want me to test a private miner (ie. spmod 6 or something else) or give me a link to a public miner if you want it to be tested.




my mistake: skunk = krnlx miner Smiley I will update the graphics on the next update


Interesting nice work.

As I mentioned before spmod cannot be trusted as the source is not available. It could be redirecting hash rate somewhere else (which you can in theory prove with network analysis) or more likely it's reporting false hashrate.

Ofcourse a single point of data is not enough.

I don't recommend using spmod, since it's technically a leaked private build (which should not be distributed at all) and because we cannot trust it due to not having any source available (potentially a GPL3 violation as well).

Instead use:

palginmod - https://github.com/palginpav/ccminer/releases/

or

krnlx - https://github.com/krnlx/ccminer-skunk-krnlx/

For me palginmod is the most stable on a GTX 1060 6GB.
jimboscott
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 243
Merit: 105


View Profile
August 13, 2017, 12:07:38 AM
 #4552

so what I did:

  • 2 identical rigs (6x undervolted gtx 1070 both at same clocks / hashrate when using an identical miner)
  • both running on the same pool with static diff set to 1.0
  • started miners exactly at the same time
  • stopped the miners after one hour

apparently the skunk miner seems to work a bit better on my rig, but this comparison is more for checking the reported hashrate vs accepted shares. Since people feel the reported hashrate is not fair on the skunk miner.
Actually this test is running for a too short time to draw conclusions, but it gives an idea already. Next update will be after 12 hours of mining

I will do more testing. I will test some more miners on request. Please PM me when you want me to test a private miner (ie. spmod 6 or something else) or give me a link to a public miner if you want it to be tested.



my mistake: skunk = krnlx miner Smiley I will update the graphics on the next update


Interesting nice work.

As I mentioned before spmod cannot be trusted as the source is not available. It could be redirecting hash rate somewhere else (which you can in theory prove with network analysis) or more likely it's reporting false hashrate.

Ofcourse a single point of data is not enough.

I don't recommend using spmod, since it's technically a leaked private build (which should not be distributed at all) and because we cannot trust it due to not having any source available (potentially a GPL3 violation as well).

Instead use:

palginmod - https://github.com/palginpav/ccminer/releases/

or

krnlx - https://github.com/krnlx/ccminer-skunk-krnlx/

For me palginmod is the most stable on a GTX 1060 6GB.


Here's what I am going to do...

With my setup it is taking me a consistent 5:45 to mine 50 coins.  That is using the ccminer_krnlx_170810 build I mentioned earlier.  I am 3 coins away from another 50 and when that is awarded I am going to change everything over to palginmod.  If the established ratio of miner reported hashrate and awards suddenly diverges when we will have some evidence that something nefarious might me up...
relayd
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 81
Merit: 12


View Profile
August 13, 2017, 12:43:43 AM
 #4553

Here's what I am going to do...

With my setup it is taking me a consistent 5:45 to mine 50 coins.  That is using the ccminer_krnlx_170810 build I mentioned earlier.  I am 3 coins away from another 50 and when that is awarded I am going to change everything over to palginmod.  If the established ratio of miner reported hashrate and awards suddenly diverges when we will have some evidence that something nefarious might me up...


Difficulty is not stable, so you won't get a meaningful result.

Only way to test it alone is to perhaps to make a fork of the entire coin and premine a set amount, then reset and test again. Might be way too much effort.

Otherwise have identical setups in the same pool, mine for X amount of time using different miners at the exact same time, repeat results 3-10 times and then average results to compare.
jimboscott
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 243
Merit: 105


View Profile
August 13, 2017, 02:02:49 AM
 #4554

Here's what I am going to do...

With my setup it is taking me a consistent 5:45 to mine 50 coins.  That is using the ccminer_krnlx_170810 build I mentioned earlier.  I am 3 coins away from another 50 and when that is awarded I am going to change everything over to palginmod.  If the established ratio of miner reported hashrate and awards suddenly diverges when we will have some evidence that something nefarious might me up...


Difficulty is not stable, so you won't get a meaningful result.

Only way to test it alone is to perhaps to make a fork of the entire coin and premine a set amount, then reset and test again. Might be way too much effort.

Otherwise have identical setups in the same pool, mine for X amount of time using different miners at the exact same time, repeat results 3-10 times and then average results to compare.

For the last 30 hours I have been within 5 minutes every 50 coin payout.  I know the difficulty shifts around.  I know this is not scientific.  But I am still curious.  For some reason the 'what to mine' sites seem to be giving inflated numbers.  Maybe the inflation IS coming from elsewhere.

So far, my hashrate is down from 255 Mh/s to 233 Mh/s but my average payout for the last 2 hours is 10% HIGHER than the average of the previous 30.

One would not expect that.
jimboscott
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 243
Merit: 105


View Profile
August 13, 2017, 02:40:35 AM
 #4555

Interesting findings with ccminer versions.  Very interesting.

I had been using various versions of the 'krnlx' ccminer for the last 5 days or so and when I plugged in my MINER-reported hashrate into the profitability calculators, my actual results were immediately proven to be significantly LESS than what the calculators were saying.  Using 'whattomine', and the krnlx_170810 version (32 bit Cuda 7.5) I was getting a MINER reported overall hashrate of 255 Mh/s.  But, my rewards were coming at a 190 Mh/s rate.  Ie., if I adjusted hashrate in the calculator to match my rewards, I had to go from my reported rate of 255 all the way down to 190.

So, I have these 12 GPU's getting 9.09 coins per hour while the calculator says I should be getting 13.5. 

Reading a post that I initially through was born of paranoia, insinuating that it was possible that some of these 'faster' modded ccminer versions might be skimming hashrate and delivering it elsewhere, I decided to go with the version that poster recommended, the palingmod versions.

So, I fired that up using the exact same settings for cards and the exact same .bat files.  And, this is what happened...

My MINER reported rate went from 255 to 233. 


At 233, whattomine tells me to look for 12 coins per hour.  That is one coin every 5 minutes.  I have been running on palingmod for 138 minutes.  I am told by whattomine, adjusted for difficulty mind you, that I should have 27 coins.  I have 25.  At my previous 'rate' of 255 I was losing 33% of what I was 'supposed to get' when using the krnlx version.  I am now off by about 8%.

So, I am running SLOWER and getting MORE. 

I know this is not a static environment, but I can tell you that since day one of mining this, I have been consistently OFF by 30-35% on the 'expected' numbers. 

If someone has the expertise to sniff out all the network traffic that the krnlx versions are making, it might be interesting to see if anything suspicious is taking place.
Erotic Toothpaste
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 50
Merit: 0


View Profile
August 13, 2017, 02:54:20 AM
 #4556

Please do not get angry. I love this coin first times, but SIGT is dying unfortunately. I know you still want to believe but unfortunately this is the case.

Apart from genuine mining questions all your other posts are FUD on coins to decrease the price, and Lies on development to increase it, plus loads of other total bullshit about how you can no longer get hard over your goats and you feel they are looking elsewhere for sex. Get off the thread, head down to the doctors and get some medication to sort that impotence problem. your goats need you man, we dont.

LOL. So much salty.

If you want to talk salty, why not get on the thread and talk about the salty surprise you swallow when choking on goat lipstick, anything else is purely un-entertaining to the community. have something constructive to say, fine explain away, however, wasting minutes of your life spreading FUD on a new coin, that neither you or your goats will get back is a sad affair.

https://i.hizliresim.com/okRrm7.jpg

Did not quite understand what you was saying then, some burbling about me being mad, it was hard to understand with all the slurping, groans and goat bleets pal, not to mention your dad in the background shouting some shit about swallowing, gets a bit distracting if you know what i mean.

Get off the thread, your contributions are that of a spazmoid, i am not pro sigt, im pro crypto with fingers in many coins, because i understand what benefits it has for the future (cryptocurrency as a whole), if we all backed coins we could all be rich, but there is always one tit who thinks he can be richer than the rest. It is unhealthy for crypto to let BTC monopolize, it needs competition to prosper. but there is always some uneducated goons that come along and chat shit while their dad slaps his cock in their face.

What is it with you and goats?
akai
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 370
Merit: 250


View Profile
August 13, 2017, 03:00:40 AM
 #4557

Interesting findings with ccminer versions.  Very interesting.

I had been using various versions of the 'krnlx' ccminer for the last 5 days or so and when I plugged in my MINER-reported hashrate into the profitability calculators, my actual results were immediately proven to be significantly LESS than what the calculators were saying.  Using 'whattomine', and the krnlx_170810 version (32 bit Cuda 7.5) I was getting a MINER reported overall hashrate of 255 Mh/s.  But, my rewards were coming at a 190 Mh/s rate.  Ie., if I adjusted hashrate in the calculator to match my rewards, I had to go from my reported rate of 255 all the way down to 190.

So, I have these 12 GPU's getting 9.09 coins per hour while the calculator says I should be getting 13.5. 

Reading a post that I initially through was born of paranoia, insinuating that it was possible that some of these 'faster' modded ccminer versions might be skimming hashrate and delivering it elsewhere, I decided to go with the version that poster recommended, the palingmod versions.

So, I fired that up using the exact same settings for cards and the exact same .bat files.  And, this is what happened...

My MINER reported rate went from 255 to 233. 


At 233, whattomine tells me to look for 12 coins per hour.  That is one coin every 5 minutes.  I have been running on palingmod for 138 minutes.  I am told by whattomine, adjusted for difficulty mind you, that I should have 27 coins.  I have 25.  At my previous 'rate' of 255 I was losing 33% of what I was 'supposed to get' when using the krnlx version.  I am now off by about 8%.

So, I am running SLOWER and getting MORE. 

I know this is not a static environment, but I can tell you that since day one of mining this, I have been consistently OFF by 30-35% on the 'expected' numbers. 

If someone has the expertise to sniff out all the network traffic that the krnlx versions are making, it might be interesting to see if anything suspicious is taking place.
On the first day I use KRNLX tools found this problem, according to pool the hash and miners are about 15%  gap between, profitability and later I changed back to the ccminer, hash back to normal, income also is normal, I have been looking at, so there will be no mistake, so I think there may be some problems
jimboscott
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 243
Merit: 105


View Profile
August 13, 2017, 03:04:13 AM
 #4558

If SIGT is indeed dying...

1. Why all the discussion of it?  Ideas that die are not talked about.  Products that die are not attacked OR defended.

2. If it is 'dying' then how is it that it is within ~5% of the profitability of one of the MOST LIVING coins... ETH?  Right now, with similar Nvidia setups, ETH is giving me about 22.00/day while the DYING SIGT is in its 'death throes' while STILL delivering 20.86 per day while in a really bad SIGT/USD slump?

I thought dead things not only stopped breathing, they stopped moving, they stopped EVERYTHING.

Dead?  I don't think so.
Erotic Toothpaste
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 50
Merit: 0


View Profile
August 13, 2017, 03:05:57 AM
 #4559

Interesting findings with ccminer versions.  Very interesting.

I had been using various versions of the 'krnlx' ccminer for the last 5 days or so and when I plugged in my MINER-reported hashrate into the profitability calculators, my actual results were immediately proven to be significantly LESS than what the calculators were saying.  Using 'whattomine', and the krnlx_170810 version (32 bit Cuda 7.5) I was getting a MINER reported overall hashrate of 255 Mh/s.  But, my rewards were coming at a 190 Mh/s rate.  Ie., if I adjusted hashrate in the calculator to match my rewards, I had to go from my reported rate of 255 all the way down to 190.

So, I have these 12 GPU's getting 9.09 coins per hour while the calculator says I should be getting 13.5. 

Reading a post that I initially through was born of paranoia, insinuating that it was possible that some of these 'faster' modded ccminer versions might be skimming hashrate and delivering it elsewhere, I decided to go with the version that poster recommended, the palingmod versions.

So, I fired that up using the exact same settings for cards and the exact same .bat files.  And, this is what happened...

My MINER reported rate went from 255 to 233. 


At 233, whattomine tells me to look for 12 coins per hour.  That is one coin every 5 minutes.  I have been running on palingmod for 138 minutes.  I am told by whattomine, adjusted for difficulty mind you, that I should have 27 coins.  I have 25.  At my previous 'rate' of 255 I was losing 33% of what I was 'supposed to get' when using the krnlx version.  I am now off by about 8%.

So, I am running SLOWER and getting MORE. 

I know this is not a static environment, but I can tell you that since day one of mining this, I have been consistently OFF by 30-35% on the 'expected' numbers. 

If someone has the expertise to sniff out all the network traffic that the krnlx versions are making, it might be interesting to see if anything suspicious is taking place.

138 Minutes isn't even remotely close to a good sample size. You also said it yourself, the testing environment is not stable. 5 minutes ago the difficulty was 15k, now it is 26k. Whattomine is only accurate for that one split second you hit refresh. Not saying you shouldn't be skeptical, I am skeptical myself.
Hurtman
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 178
Merit: 100


View Profile
August 13, 2017, 03:13:23 AM
 #4560

If SIGT is indeed dying...

1. Why all the discussion of it?  Ideas that die are not talked about.  Products that die are not attacked OR defended.

2. If it is 'dying' then how is it that it is within ~5% of the profitability of one of the MOST LIVING coins... ETH?  Right now, with similar Nvidia setups, ETH is giving me about 22.00/day while the DYING SIGT is in its 'death throes' while STILL delivering 20.86 per day while in a really bad SIGT/USD slump?

I thought dead things not only stopped breathing, they stopped moving, they stopped EVERYTHING.

Dead?  I don't think so.
for 1070 and 1080 maybe it is good,but on the radeon ETH+DCR the profit is twice more
Pages: « 1 ... 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 [228] 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 ... 529 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!