Are CPU only coins possible?

[criptix]

Or will someone eventually come up with a GPU script/ASIC to mine it?
I don't think I have to explain the benefits of having one for the crypto market

[minerja]

Hi,

I don't think they are, but...
it depends on why you want a cpu only coin

I'm guessing that possibly, like me, you are after a coin that has wide appeal for all, low entry level requirements, and is difficult for the big boys to manipulate.
If so, then YES i do think that coin can be made, but i think it needs to be more complex than simply being "CPU" only.

J

[QuintLeo]

There is no way to limit a coin to CPU only - if it gets popular enough SOMEONE will write a GPU miner for it.

 The best you can do it make it a "hard on memory usage" coin, like Monero, or make it something like BURST where the hashes are PREcomputed then stored on a HD, and are complicated enough it's difficult to impossible to compute them "on the fly" fast enough to matter.

[Princess802]

It's an interesting problem.

The posters above Me are more or less right, but they are basing their answers on how crypto / mining works *so far*.

If you're basing your idea of crypto on ... well ... Cryptography, than No.  No, someone will absolutely use GPU to run your algorithm.

But.

What if you based it not on a repetitive algorithm (Recursion, I know.) but on something else.  For example, solarcoin is based on production of electricity, not processor cycles.

I don't have an actual answer for you, but I have asked this same question Myself.

If you're interested, I do have a few ideas...

[criptix]

The best you can do it make it a "hard on memory usage" coin, like Monero, o

That is the closest to what I mean,  but it still fails at the task, GPUS still have a huge advantage

For example, solarcoin is based on production of electricity, not processor cycles.

Thats not decentralised at all

If you're interested, I do have a few ideas...

Yes Ill gladly listen to ideas

[btct22]

I used to mine bitcoin a lot.  Now I've got a garage of dusty mining gear, and have gone all in on Masternode coins.  Beats mining hands down!  No gear to buy, no extra power to pay for.

Here is some background info: https://www.investitin.com/masternode-list/  - and a new site that has launched that compares these coins is: https://masternodes.pro/

I use XenServer and host several nodes on a single PC. The cost of running 1 node is about the same as running 50 (yes, maybe one day  ) , and the profit potential is pretty ridiculous if you diversify into a few of these coins.

[Ayers]

There is no way to limit a coin to CPU only - if it gets popular enough SOMEONE will write a GPU miner for it.

 The best you can do it make it a "hard on memory usage" coin, like Monero, or make it something like BURST where the hashes are PREcomputed then stored on a HD, and are complicated enough it's difficult to impossible to compute them "on the fly" fast enough to matter.

not 100% true, you can make so that even if gpu is possible they will not be better than cpu but on par like with some algo that soem coin use you have hodlcoin, which is one and vericoin another one i think

[QuintLeo]

The best you can do it make it a "hard on memory usage" coin, like Monero, o

That is the closest to what I mean,  but it still fails at the task, GPUS still have a huge advantage

 Actually, on Monero the highest-hashrate stuff is still high-end CPUs like the AMD Epyc, Threadripper, and some of the top-end Intel many-core server CPUs.

 The only GPU that can get into the 1000 hash/sec range is the Vega, per ONE report from ONE person - everything else that manages over 1000 hash/sec is a CPU - and the highest single-CPU report I've seen to date was an Epyc pulling over 3000 hash/sec vs the Vega at 1800.


 The main issue is that nothing in cryptography that is in widespread usage uses anything but integer operations - which GPUs are perfectly capable of doing JUST as efficiently per clock cycle as any CPU can, but have a lot more "cores" to do the work with than any CPU does.
 Even though GPUs clock a lot lower than CPUs (as a general rule on same-timeframe hardware), they have so many more "cores" that they can do a lot more work in total on anything that can be processed in a widely parallel way of work.

 This also applies to ASIC hardware - the only reason you don't see a lot more algorithms with ASIC available is that most of the applicable coins would not generate enough income to make an ASIC unit able to pay off in a reasonable timeframe, coupled with the VERY HIGH COST to design, debug, and put an ASIC chip for mining into production that would be able to beat GPUs by a wide enough margin to matter.

 This is the main reason there is no ASIC hardware for ETH mining - the uncertainty about "when is it going to go POS" has kept ASIC making companies uncertain that their miners would SELL - even though ETH would certainly make enough income to support ASIC if one COULD count on it being mineable for long enough.
 The other reason is that ETH is hard on memory access - and ASIC *CAN'T* do much if any better on that than GPUs can do.
 Wider RAM doesn't always help on that - otherwise the Fury and the Vega lines would be by far dominate ETH mining, instead of being high-end but NOT crazy-outstanding.

[KaydenC]

 Actually, on Monero the highest-hashrate stuff is still high-end CPUs like the AMD Epyc, Threadripper, and some of the top-end Intel many-core server CPUs.

 The only GPU that can get into the 1000 hash/sec range is the Vega, per ONE report from ONE person - everything else that manages over 1000 hash/sec is a CPU - and the highest single-CPU report I've seen to date was an Epyc pulling over 3000 hash/sec vs the Vega at 1800.

Actually Vega is widely known to do 1800h/s minimum with registry mods. I didn't mod them and my vega64s do 1500h/s at 160W. CPUs with a ton of L3 cache does very well with monero, but GPUs are better price to perf wise.


CPU only coins are also vulnerable to botnet mining.

[Sev18]

Algorithms for cpu only coins need to be compatible with cpu only feathres, (such as L3 chache)?
As ethash algorithm made itself ASIC-resistant by using huge Vram usage.

[Princess802]

If you're interested, I do have a few ideas...

Yes Ill gladly listen to ideas

The CPU/GPU problem is basically this :

"Any math that involves a recursive algorithm dealing in hashing / integers can be done more efficiently with a GPU.  While heavy memory usage can lessen the advantage, it will never be enough to exclude GPU."

For the moment, we're going to ignore PoC (burstcoin) and ASIC.  However, it should be noted that even PoC coins use GPU to "optimise" their lookup tables / generate plots.

Additionally, I am completely ignoring the many, many economic flaws in the following proposed coin.

If you want to create a CPU only coin, you need to start with a PoS base.

Assuming you tie the staking rate to block creation, and instead of a minimum age for staking reward you implement a *maximum* age while abandoning the "weight" criteria, and offering *no* reward for successful hashing of a block, while setting a constant time for new blocks, regardless of actual completion time, you create a currency that:

Will mitigate any and all advantage that comes from successful hashing, thereby making CPU v GPU v ASIC a moot point.

Coins can "stake" almost immediately, and be set to only offer a reward in proportion to their lifetime, but as they have a maximum age, once it reaches x reward, it will no longer stake.  New coins will, of course, have their own lifetime, and all transfers will effectively "reset" the coin age.

Hashrate is irrelevant, as a 1TH ASIC and a 1MH CPU both provide the same value, having 0 reward for their work, outside of maintenance to the network.  If the difficulty is low enough.  The only advantage speed offers is to the overall network.  This could be in the form of random distribution for rewards (a lottery system, not tied to speed) or all mining power going to transaction overhead.  Additionally, just do away with PoW all together.

Faucets could be used effectively, as they would be giving not only coins, but potential speed as well.  If the network had 0 transaction fees, there would be no need for minimum withdrawal limits.

So, as you can see, simply by offering an inital irresponsibly high staking rate diminishing over time, disregarding network weight in staking, having an upper bound on staking age (vs lower/infinite bound) and elimination of all block rewards and transaction fee, you could create what is (effectively) a CPU only coin.

There are *lots* of economic / practical reasons attempting this will fail.  I'll list the three biggest :

1) How does anybody ever get coins who doesn't have at least one coin to begin with?

2) Nobody will bother mining / hashing for 0 reward.

3) Anybody could just move "old" (non-staking) coins to another wallet.  Hyper-Inflation would result, and be unstoppable.  The only way to prevent this would be a centralized agency empowered to destroy coins, which would negate the entire point of the coins existance.

So, as I believe your question was on of purely theoretical value, My answer is Yes.

Yes, in theory, a CPU only coin is entirely possible.  But the greed of Man will forever doom any attempt at implementation.

[h1h2h3_c]

Hi,

I don't think they are, but...
it depends on why you want a cpu only coin

I'm guessing that possibly, like me, you are after a coin that has wide appeal for all, low entry level requirements, and is difficult for the big boys to manipulate.
If so, then YES i do think that coin can be made, but i think it needs to be more complex than simply being "CPU" only.

J

It is not always true that are cpu only coins possible because it depend on a person that what he want and how he want you can do .because it depend on you that why you want a cpu coin only.

[criptix]

"Any math that involves a recursive algorithm dealing in hashing / integers can be done more efficiently with a GPU.  While heavy memory usage can lessen the advantage, it will never be enough to exclude GPU."

From all the responses I got, everyone said basically this thing. But this is very well put, Thank You.

If you want to create a CPU only coin, you need to start with a PoS base.

Assuming you tie the staking rate to block creation, and instead of a minimum age for staking reward you implement a *maximum* age while abandoning the "weight" criteria, and offering *no* reward for successful hashing of a block, while setting a constant time for new blocks, regardless of actual completion time, you create a currency that:

Will mitigate any and all advantage that comes from successful hashing, thereby making CPU v GPU v ASIC a moot point.

Coins can "stake" almost immediately, and be set to only offer a reward in proportion to their lifetime, but as they have a maximum age, once it reaches x reward, it will no longer stake.  New coins will, of course, have their own lifetime, and all transfers will effectively "reset" the coin age.

Hashrate is irrelevant, as a 1TH ASIC and a 1MH CPU both provide the same value, having 0 reward for their work, outside of maintenance to the network.  If the difficulty is low enough.  The only advantage speed offers is to the overall network.  This could be in the form of random distribution for rewards (a lottery system, not tied to speed) or all mining power going to transaction overhead.  Additionally, just do away with PoW all together.

Faucets could be used effectively, as they would be giving not only coins, but potential speed as well.  If the network had 0 transaction fees, there would be no need for minimum withdrawal limits.

So, as you can see, simply by offering an inital irresponsibly high staking rate diminishing over time, disregarding network weight in staking, having an upper bound on staking age (vs lower/infinite bound) and elimination of all block rewards and transaction fee, you could create what is (effectively) a CPU only coin.

There are *lots* of economic / practical reasons attempting this will fail.  I'll list the three biggest :

1) How does anybody ever get coins who doesn't have at least one coin to begin with?

2) Nobody will bother mining / hashing for 0 reward.

3) Anybody could just move "old" (non-staking) coins to another wallet.  Hyper-Inflation would result, and be unstoppable.  The only way to prevent this would be a centralized agency empowered to destroy coins, which would negate the entire point of the coins existance.

So, as I believe your question was on of purely theoretical value, My answer is Yes.

Yes, in theory, a CPU only coin is entirely possible.  But the greed of Man will forever doom any attempt at implementation.

You are right PoS coins are inherently flawed, Thank You for a great elaboration why as well


I will keep thinking about some innovative ideas to make this happen tho, and will keep the thread open if anyone wants to help