[ANN] [QRK] Quark | Core 0.10 upgrade

[CoMM0n]

BlueCoinStock has new improvements!

Public market QRK/BTC: http://bluecoinstock.com/public/market/3
Full mode Cryptsy: http://bluecoinstock.com/viewer/3/2/1
Full mode Vircurex: http://bluecoinstock.com/viewer/3/2/2
Full mode BTER: http://bluecoinstock.com/viewer/3/2/3
Full mode COINS-E: http://bluecoinstock.com/viewer/3/2/5

Public market QRK/LTC: http://bluecoinstock.com/public/market/11
Full mode Cryptsy: http://bluecoinstock.com/viewer/11/2/1

[reRaise]

New fresh quark buy & sell subreddit. www.reddit.com/r/quarkmarket. Looks great

[dE_logics]

I just added support for Quark mining in my sph-sgminer GPU miner. Only source code is provided. Check out this thread for details: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=475795.0. Speed is ~1.6 MH/s on R9 290.

It works.  Getting 1.45MH/s with my 7970

I would call it a failure.

I mean if you're not using Windows (with all those Microsoft and malware 'services', anti-virus scans and viruses running the background), that's hardly any advantage.

And I think the CPU miner can be optimized more.

[dE_logics]

And then compared to the power the GPU takes, you may not like to mine with a GPU as a whole.

[Its About Sharing]

I just added support for Quark mining in my sph-sgminer GPU miner. Only source code is provided. Check out this thread for details: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=475795.0. Speed is ~1.6 MH/s on R9 290.

It works.  Getting 1.45MH/s with my 7970

I would call it a failure.

I mean if you're not using Windows (with all those Microsoft and malware 'services', anti-virus scans and viruses running the background), that's hardly any advantage.

And I think the CPU miner can be optimized more.

Well, from a profit point of view, that is the first thing I thought - failure.
But from an ASIC resistant (key word, resistant) point of view, that is interesting. If a top GPU gets 1.45Mh/s (@300 watts) and my AMD FX8350 gets 850Kh/s (w/extra air cooling @ 120 watts or so) that is interesting. But the CPU uses less than have the watts (barely) and costs half as much (app.)
Wait, that actually seems in line, no? What "should" a card like that get, theoretically? Seems close to what it "should" get.
My R9 290 gets 870kH/s on Scrypt coins.

On second thought, not bad. If it was just profitable to mine QRK (that will come I hope.)

IAS

[dE_logics]

People should realize somethings are best done by a CPU (if not ASIC).

I bet someone has a more optimized CPU miner.

With CPU you can always buy server boards with 4 CPU sockets. That's a lot cheaper than 4xR9 290. Both running cost and initial buyout.

Then we got cloud mining...

[FiniteByDesign]

Quark Crypto-Card support added!

[digitalindustry]

BlueCoinStock has new improvements!

Public market QRK/BTC: http://bluecoinstock.com/public/market/3
Full mode Cryptsy: http://bluecoinstock.com/viewer/3/2/1
Full mode Vircurex: http://bluecoinstock.com/viewer/3/2/2
Full mode BTER: http://bluecoinstock.com/viewer/3/2/3
Full mode COINS-E: http://bluecoinstock.com/viewer/3/2/5

Public market QRK/LTC: http://bluecoinstock.com/public/market/11
Full mode Cryptsy: http://bluecoinstock.com/viewer/11/2/1

cool site actually - the official name is Quark , lots of people like to call it quarkcoin but if will look more professional if you call it Quark - .

[digitalindustry]

Quark Crypto-Card support added!

tell us more ?

[JuanHungLo]

I just added support for Quark mining in my sph-sgminer GPU miner. Only source code is provided. Check out this thread for details: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=475795.0. Speed is ~1.6 MH/s on R9 290.

It works.  Getting 1.45MH/s with my 7970

I would call it a failure.

I mean if you're not using Windows (with all those Microsoft and malware 'services', anti-virus scans and viruses running the background), that's hardly any advantage.

And I think the CPU miner can be optimized more.

Well, from a profit point of view, that is the first thing I thought - failure.
But from an ASIC resistant (key word, resistant) point of view, that is interesting. If a top GPU gets 1.45Mh/s (@300 watts) and my AMD FX8350 gets 850Kh/s (w/extra air cooling @ 120 watts or so) that is interesting. But the CPU uses less than have the watts (barely) and costs half as much (app.)
Wait, that actually seems in line, no? What "should" a card like that get, theoretically? Seems close to what it "should" get.
My R9 290 gets 870kH/s on Scrypt coins.

On second thought, not bad. If it was just profitable to mine QRK (that will come I hope.)

IAS

who said anything about using 300 watts per GPU?

my 4 7970s normally pull about 1150 watts according to my Kill A Watt.  It is only pulling 580 watts for 1.45 MH/s/GPU.
And as for mining QRK, well, obviously.  But there are other coins released based on the quark algo, you know.  And their value is yet to be determined.

[Its About Sharing]

I just added support for Quark mining in my sph-sgminer GPU miner. Only source code is provided. Check out this thread for details: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=475795.0. Speed is ~1.6 MH/s on R9 290.

It works.  Getting 1.45MH/s with my 7970

I would call it a failure.

I mean if you're not using Windows (with all those Microsoft and malware 'services', anti-virus scans and viruses running the background), that's hardly any advantage.

And I think the CPU miner can be optimized more.

Well, from a profit point of view, that is the first thing I thought - failure.
But from an ASIC resistant (key word, resistant) point of view, that is interesting. If a top GPU gets 1.45Mh/s (@300 watts) and my AMD FX8350 gets 850Kh/s (w/extra air cooling @ 120 watts or so) that is interesting. But the CPU uses less than have the watts (barely) and costs half as much (app.)
Wait, that actually seems in line, no? What "should" a card like that get, theoretically? Seems close to what it "should" get.
My R9 290 gets 870kH/s on Scrypt coins.

On second thought, not bad. If it was just profitable to mine QRK (that will come I hope.)

IAS

who said anything about using 300 watts per GPU?

my 4 7970s normally pull about 1150 watts according to my Kill A Watt.  It is only pulling 580 watts for 1.45 MH/s/GPU.
And as for mining QRK, well, obviously.  But there are other coins released based on the quark algo, you know.  And their value is yet to be determined.

I said 300 watts as my card is the R9 290, as I said later on. 1150 or 1200, not a big difference. Not sure of your point there?

I'm more here to support Quark coin, not so much to make money. I do mine other coins for that, so it is good to know, perhaps a hedge.

I really like the idea of a coin that is ASIC resistant, key word being "resistant". Still early in the experiment though.

[ocminer]

https://qrk.suprnova.cc



No fees and low withdrawal fees.

DDoS Prot/Stratum/Vardiff/and all the Standard Goodies.

https://qrk.suprnova.cc

[JuanHungLo]

I just added support for Quark mining in my sph-sgminer GPU miner. Only source code is provided. Check out this thread for details: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=475795.0. Speed is ~1.6 MH/s on R9 290.

It works.  Getting 1.45MH/s with my 7970

I would call it a failure.

I mean if you're not using Windows (with all those Microsoft and malware 'services', anti-virus scans and viruses running the background), that's hardly any advantage.

And I think the CPU miner can be optimized more.

Well, from a profit point of view, that is the first thing I thought - failure.
But from an ASIC resistant (key word, resistant) point of view, that is interesting. If a top GPU gets 1.45Mh/s (@300 watts) and my AMD FX8350 gets 850Kh/s (w/extra air cooling @ 120 watts or so) that is interesting. But the CPU uses less than have the watts (barely) and costs half as much (app.)
Wait, that actually seems in line, no? What "should" a card like that get, theoretically? Seems close to what it "should" get.
My R9 290 gets 870kH/s on Scrypt coins.

On second thought, not bad. If it was just profitable to mine QRK (that will come I hope.)

IAS

who said anything about using 300 watts per GPU?

my 4 7970s normally pull about 1150 watts according to my Kill A Watt.  It is only pulling 580 watts for 1.45 MH/s/GPU.
And as for mining QRK, well, obviously.  But there are other coins released based on the quark algo, you know.  And their value is yet to be determined.

I said 300 watts as my card is the R9 290, as I said later on. 1150 or 1200, not a big difference. Not sure of your point there?

I'm more here to support Quark coin, not so much to make money. I do mine other coins for that, so it is good to know, perhaps a hedge.

I really like the idea of a coin that is ASIC resistant, key word being "resistant". Still early in the experiment though.

Well, you are at the support level for QRK.  My point is that when considering profitability you must not assume that the GPU is using 300 watts.  The GPU is using more like 112 watts and getting 1.45 MH/s, and you no longer need a box fan either.  Temps are in the 50s.  I hold 6 figures deep of QRK and plan on holding it.  But it is not economical to mine it, for me at least. 

[Its About Sharing]

I just added support for Quark mining in my sph-sgminer GPU miner. Only source code is provided. Check out this thread for details: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=475795.0. Speed is ~1.6 MH/s on R9 290.

It works.  Getting 1.45MH/s with my 7970

I would call it a failure.

I mean if you're not using Windows (with all those Microsoft and malware 'services', anti-virus scans and viruses running the background), that's hardly any advantage.

And I think the CPU miner can be optimized more.

Well, from a profit point of view, that is the first thing I thought - failure.
But from an ASIC resistant (key word, resistant) point of view, that is interesting. If a top GPU gets 1.45Mh/s (@300 watts) and my AMD FX8350 gets 850Kh/s (w/extra air cooling @ 120 watts or so) that is interesting. But the CPU uses less than have the watts (barely) and costs half as much (app.)
Wait, that actually seems in line, no? What "should" a card like that get, theoretically? Seems close to what it "should" get.
My R9 290 gets 870kH/s on Scrypt coins.

On second thought, not bad. If it was just profitable to mine QRK (that will come I hope.)

IAS

who said anything about using 300 watts per GPU?

my 4 7970s normally pull about 1150 watts according to my Kill A Watt.  It is only pulling 580 watts for 1.45 MH/s/GPU.
And as for mining QRK, well, obviously.  But there are other coins released based on the quark algo, you know.  And their value is yet to be determined.

I said 300 watts as my card is the R9 290, as I said later on. 1150 or 1200, not a big difference. Not sure of your point there?

I'm more here to support Quark coin, not so much to make money. I do mine other coins for that, so it is good to know, perhaps a hedge.

I really like the idea of a coin that is ASIC resistant, key word being "resistant". Still early in the experiment though.

Well, you are at the support level for QRK.  My point is that when considering profitability you must not assume that the GPU is using 300 watts.  The GPU is using more like 112 watts and getting 1.45 MH/s, and you no longer need a box fan either.  Temps are in the 50s.  I hold 6 figures deep of QRK and plan on holding it.  But it is not economical to mine it, for me at least. 

Thanks for clarifying things but I sort of had that idea. I notice my Video card (of course) changes A LOT regarding wattage with any change in settings.
So, I'm using half of my CPU to "mine" Quark but really to just support the network.

There is a deep feeling about the potential need of a coin with an algorithm such as Quarks. I like the idea of having a coin that anyone and EVERYONE can mine/support.

[K1773R]

I just added support for Quark mining in my sph-sgminer GPU miner. Only source code is provided. Check out this thread for details: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=475795.0. Speed is ~1.6 MH/s on R9 290.

It works.  Getting 1.45MH/s with my 7970

I would call it a failure.

I mean if you're not using Windows (with all those Microsoft and malware 'services', anti-virus scans and viruses running the background), that's hardly any advantage.

And I think the CPU miner can be optimized more.

Well, from a profit point of view, that is the first thing I thought - failure.
But from an ASIC resistant (key word, resistant) point of view, that is interesting. If a top GPU gets 1.45Mh/s (@300 watts) and my AMD FX8350 gets 850Kh/s (w/extra air cooling @ 120 watts or so) that is interesting. But the CPU uses less than have the watts (barely) and costs half as much (app.)
Wait, that actually seems in line, no? What "should" a card like that get, theoretically? Seems close to what it "should" get.
My R9 290 gets 870kH/s on Scrypt coins.

On second thought, not bad. If it was just profitable to mine QRK (that will come I hope.)

IAS

who said anything about using 300 watts per GPU?

my 4 7970s normally pull about 1150 watts according to my Kill A Watt.  It is only pulling 580 watts for 1.45 MH/s/GPU.
And as for mining QRK, well, obviously.  But there are other coins released based on the quark algo, you know.  And their value is yet to be determined.

I said 300 watts as my card is the R9 290, as I said later on. 1150 or 1200, not a big difference. Not sure of your point there?

I'm more here to support Quark coin, not so much to make money. I do mine other coins for that, so it is good to know, perhaps a hedge.

I really like the idea of a coin that is ASIC resistant, key word being "resistant". Still early in the experiment though.

Well, you are at the support level for QRK.  My point is that when considering profitability you must not assume that the GPU is using 300 watts.  The GPU is using more like 112 watts and getting 1.45 MH/s, and you no longer need a box fan either.  Temps are in the 50s.  I hold 6 figures deep of QRK and plan on holding it.  But it is not economical to mine it, for me at least. 

Thanks for clarifying things but I sort of had that idea. I notice my Video card (of course) changes A LOT regarding wattage with any change in settings.
So, I'm using half of my CPU to "mine" Quark but really to just support the network.

There is a deep feeling about the potential need of a coin with an algorithm such as Quarks. I like the idea of having a coin that anyone and EVERYONE can mine/support.

is there still only the proprietary miner?

[Its About Sharing]

is there still only the proprietary miner?

I am using minerd on Linux. (I think that is the name, that is the program I run.)

You can use the wallet but don't think that is really practical, neither is profitable.

The new wallet will supposedly have an ability to support the network with a 20% CPU button (or the like).

IAS

[JuanHungLo]

I just added support for Quark mining in my sph-sgminer GPU miner. Only source code is provided. Check out this thread for details: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=475795.0. Speed is ~1.6 MH/s on R9 290.

It works.  Getting 1.45MH/s with my 7970

I would call it a failure.

I mean if you're not using Windows (with all those Microsoft and malware 'services', anti-virus scans and viruses running the background), that's hardly any advantage.

And I think the CPU miner can be optimized more.

Well, from a profit point of view, that is the first thing I thought - failure.
But from an ASIC resistant (key word, resistant) point of view, that is interesting. If a top GPU gets 1.45Mh/s (@300 watts) and my AMD FX8350 gets 850Kh/s (w/extra air cooling @ 120 watts or so) that is interesting. But the CPU uses less than have the watts (barely) and costs half as much (app.)
Wait, that actually seems in line, no? What "should" a card like that get, theoretically? Seems close to what it "should" get.
My R9 290 gets 870kH/s on Scrypt coins.

On second thought, not bad. If it was just profitable to mine QRK (that will come I hope.)

IAS

who said anything about using 300 watts per GPU?

my 4 7970s normally pull about 1150 watts according to my Kill A Watt.  It is only pulling 580 watts for 1.45 MH/s/GPU.
And as for mining QRK, well, obviously.  But there are other coins released based on the quark algo, you know.  And their value is yet to be determined.

I said 300 watts as my card is the R9 290, as I said later on. 1150 or 1200, not a big difference. Not sure of your point there?

I'm more here to support Quark coin, not so much to make money. I do mine other coins for that, so it is good to know, perhaps a hedge.

I really like the idea of a coin that is ASIC resistant, key word being "resistant". Still early in the experiment though.

Well, you are at the support level for QRK.  My point is that when considering profitability you must not assume that the GPU is using 300 watts.  The GPU is using more like 112 watts and getting 1.45 MH/s, and you no longer need a box fan either.  Temps are in the 50s.  I hold 6 figures deep of QRK and plan on holding it.  But it is not economical to mine it, for me at least. 

Thanks for clarifying things but I sort of had that idea. I notice my Video card (of course) changes A LOT regarding wattage with any change in settings.
So, I'm using half of my CPU to "mine" Quark but really to just support the network.

There is a deep feeling about the potential need of a coin with an algorithm such as Quarks. I like the idea of having a coin that anyone and EVERYONE can mine/support.

is there still only the proprietary miner?

No, see the link this post https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=260031.msg5320713#msg5320713

[dE_logics]

I just added support for Quark mining in my sph-sgminer GPU miner. Only source code is provided. Check out this thread for details: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=475795.0. Speed is ~1.6 MH/s on R9 290.

It works.  Getting 1.45MH/s with my 7970

I would call it a failure.

I mean if you're not using Windows (with all those Microsoft and malware 'services', anti-virus scans and viruses running the background), that's hardly any advantage.

And I think the CPU miner can be optimized more.

Well, from a profit point of view, that is the first thing I thought - failure.
But from an ASIC resistant (key word, resistant) point of view, that is interesting. If a top GPU gets 1.45Mh/s (@300 watts) and my AMD FX8350 gets 850Kh/s (w/extra air cooling @ 120 watts or so) that is interesting. But the CPU uses less than have the watts (barely) and costs half as much (app.)
Wait, that actually seems in line, no? What "should" a card like that get, theoretically? Seems close to what it "should" get.
My R9 290 gets 870kH/s on Scrypt coins.

On second thought, not bad. If it was just profitable to mine QRK (that will come I hope.)

IAS

who said anything about using 300 watts per GPU?

my 4 7970s normally pull about 1150 watts according to my Kill A Watt.  It is only pulling 580 watts for 1.45 MH/s/GPU.
And as for mining QRK, well, obviously.  But there are other coins released based on the quark algo, you know.  And their value is yet to be determined.

I said 300 watts as my card is the R9 290, as I said later on. 1150 or 1200, not a big difference. Not sure of your point there?

I'm more here to support Quark coin, not so much to make money. I do mine other coins for that, so it is good to know, perhaps a hedge.

I really like the idea of a coin that is ASIC resistant, key word being "resistant". Still early in the experiment though.

Well, you are at the support level for QRK.  My point is that when considering profitability you must not assume that the GPU is using 300 watts.  The GPU is using more like 112 watts and getting 1.45 MH/s, and you no longer need a box fan either.  Temps are in the 50s.  I hold 6 figures deep of QRK and plan on holding it.  But it is not economical to mine it, for me at least. 

What the heck are you talking about? 7970 takes 100W idle. And a bit less than 350W peak.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-7970-ghz-edition-review-benchmark,3232-18.html

Either you're lying, or you're in a serious misconception.

[Hilux74]

What the heck are you talking about? 7970 takes 100W idle. And a bit less than 350W peak.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-7970-ghz-edition-review-benchmark,3232-18.html

Either you're lying, or you're in a serious misconception.

You should try it before speaking so harsh.

With Smelter my HD5XXX cards and HD6970 pull just over 100w each (7Mhash/s total).  My entire 'CPU miner' system...a ThinkstationD10 motherboard with 2x Xeon (700Khash) plus the 3 video cards pulls 525-550watts total when everything is mining.

I haven't tried this new GPU miner but I expect power usage should be similar so it is unlikely he is lying.

[JuanHungLo]

What the heck are you talking about? 7970 takes 100W idle. And a bit less than 350W peak.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-7970-ghz-edition-review-benchmark,3232-18.html

Either you're lying, or you're in a serious misconception.

Serious misconception?  Lying??  What do you need a photo?  Quarkcoin algo is NOT a scrypt, therefore it does NOT require the same power to solve with a GPU.  Are you so new to this that you do not know that?  You should really think before putting your foot in your mouth and your ass out here for all to see just how stupid you look.