Bitcoin Forum
December 10, 2016, 12:53:21 PM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 [45] 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 ... 376 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [1050 TH] BitMinter.com [1% PPLNS,Pays TxFees +MergedMining,Stratum,GBT,vardiff]  (Read 776116 times)
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
February 01, 2012, 09:56:01 PM
 #881

It's obvious that CPU miners require a whole damned lot of getworks to mercifully complete one before it's gone stale.
I just wish to see them shot. Either you are able to achieve reasonable efficiency or the pools aren't interested in talking to you.
My guess is "reasonable" could be as low as 10% to allow for really slow GPUs.

OTOH, it's not that easy for one pool to fight against botnets - the owners retaliated to previous attempts with DDoS attacks which they can freely perform at will.
We'd need a coalition of major pools setting a deadline and removing CPU-mining support "for the sake of server loads", without even explicitly mentioning botnets.
Remember that cyber-thugs are still nothing more than thugs when push comes to shove.

Even the slowest GPU should be much faster.

Average time between LP is ~300 seconds.  Lets me conservative and say 200 seconds.  If you can complete 4 billion hashes in 200 seconds you will on average have 1 share per LP.  Now some LP may be shorter but an equal number will be longer.  You are look at lower bound of 50% efficiency (2 getworks per share) in the long run..  4 billion  / 200 = 20 MH/s.  A 6750 is what 130 MH/s.  

Are there any GPU which are economical that get less than say 100 MH/s?  40 MH/s?

On edit: looks like there are some options between 40 MH/s & 100 MH/s.  However even 40 MH/s should be able to stay above 50 efficiency.  If some worker account is <50% efficiency over a large period of time it likely a botnet.  The less efficiency an account is the more load it puts (in terms of getworks) compared to a "normal" account with similar hashrate.
It is a common myth that Bitcoin is ruled by a majority of miners. This is not true. Bitcoin miners "vote" on the ordering of transactions, but that's all they do. They can't vote to change the network rules.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481374401
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481374401

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481374401
Reply with quote  #2

1481374401
Report to moderator
1481374401
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481374401

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481374401
Reply with quote  #2

1481374401
Report to moderator
rjk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


1ngldh


View Profile
February 01, 2012, 09:56:20 PM
 #882

We'd need a coalition of major pools setting a deadline and removing CPU-mining support "for the sake of server loads"

That sounds like a great idea to me.  Does anybody here have authoritative contacts at other pools that we could ask to hop on board with phasing out CPU mining?

WP
You can't just remove the capability, although you could ban users. The CPU miners do the same work that the GPU miners do, just slower.

Mining Rig Extraordinaire - the Trenton BPX6806 18-slot PCIe backplane [PICS] Dead project is dead, all hail the coming of the mighty ASIC!
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
February 01, 2012, 09:59:27 PM
 #883

We'd need a coalition of major pools setting a deadline and removing CPU-mining support "for the sake of server loads"

That sounds like a great idea to me.  Does anybody here have authoritative contacts at other pools that we could ask to hop on board with phasing out CPU mining?

WP
You can't just remove the capability, although you could ban users. The CPU miners do the same work that the GPU miners do, just slower.

Without a proxy it isn't possible for CPU miners to avoid a low efficiency.  You can simply ban (with full payment) users who fail to meet a minimum efficiency (shares / getworks). 

Now botnets CAN use a proxy to combine multiple CPU to have higher or even perfect efficiency.  From the pool's point of view this "virtual" miner is a single very fast miner with high efficiency.  Of course if they did that they wouldn't be slamming the servers so it is win-win.
Turbor
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008


BitMinter


View Profile WWW
February 01, 2012, 10:38:52 PM
 #884

Are there any GPU which are economical that get less than say 100 MH/s?

6670... not really economical but they need no extra power.

ZodiacDragon84
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266


The king and the pawn go in the same box @ endgame


View Profile
February 01, 2012, 11:37:52 PM
 #885

What about AMD's APU processors? Cant one of those puppies pull about 30 Mhash/s due to their Radeon core?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_Fusion

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_Fusion
The Reference is near the bottom of the CPU section

Looking for a quick easy mining solution? Check out
www.bitminter.com

See my trader rep at Bitcoinfeedback.com
!
DrHaribo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1974


Bitminter.com Operator


View Profile WWW
February 02, 2012, 12:07:42 AM
 #886

Rejected work went up for a while today. Not sure why. It looked like for a while miners were not re-connecting to long polling. Anyway, I made a few tweaks to improve performance today, hope it helps a bit.

I will put some more stats in the pool back end so I can better see what's going on.

My pings from the southwest USA are now about 125ms.  Not sure what they were before, but that's still not bad at all.  Also, the website is blazing fast compared to what it used to be.  Thanks for all the hard work Doc!

Wow, that's almost the opposite side of the planet. Didn't think that would be as fast as 125 ms. Very good.

P.S. I've never mined anywhere else...I love BitMinter!  Donated 1 BTC to 15SSRJdHfhjcRU7woXR9sYKPUXNS4ScaaB

Thank you kindly, sir. Smiley

▶▶▶ Bitminter.com - Your trusted mining pool since 2011.
jake262144
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210


View Profile
February 02, 2012, 12:15:34 AM
 #887

What about AMD's APU processors?
Your point being?
Those APUs do support OpenCL but there are no good boards for them - being targeted at the econo crowd, the mobos are low-cost microATX devices.
It makes no sense whatsoever to use one in a mining rig, especially since the integrated GPU is pathetically weak.
ZodiacDragon84
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266


The king and the pawn go in the same box @ endgame


View Profile
February 02, 2012, 12:18:01 AM
 #888

I recall seeing a board that supported the processor, that also had 3 well spaced PCIe 2.1 X16 slots, and 6 RAM slots DDR3. I think is was made by MSI?

Looking for a quick easy mining solution? Check out
www.bitminter.com

See my trader rep at Bitcoinfeedback.com
!
jake262144
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210


View Profile
February 02, 2012, 12:27:09 AM
 #889

ASUS F1A75-V EVO has three PCIE slots.
Still, the board and APU are more expensive and far less flexible than the epic MSI 890fxa-gd70 and a Sempron 145.
The strongest Llano is still weaker than a hd 6570 which itself is by no means a card suitable for mining.
Why bother?
ZodiacDragon84
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266


The king and the pawn go in the same box @ endgame


View Profile
February 02, 2012, 12:32:23 AM
 #890

why bother? academics lad, academics!

Looking for a quick easy mining solution? Check out
www.bitminter.com

See my trader rep at Bitcoinfeedback.com
!
jake262144
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210


View Profile
February 02, 2012, 12:34:28 AM
 #891

Ahhh... I stand corrected Grin
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
February 02, 2012, 01:11:20 AM
 #892

I would point out the 3850 APU get 60 MH/s.  Any GPU (or CPU for that matter) with speed fast enough to complete 2x nonce range between average LP is unlikely to have a very low efficiency. Even w/ 3 LP per block that is only 40 MH/s.  For those with speeds > 1x nonce range per LP and 2x nonce range per LP efficiency is kinda hard to guestimate because a lot might depend on variance. 

Still we are more concerned with botnets consist of everything from Pentium III to modern CPU and some of those CPU get <1MH/s.  Thus their efficiency is something like 2%-5% range.  No modern rig should have a 5% efficiency, or even 10% or even 50%.
ZodiacDragon84
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266


The king and the pawn go in the same box @ endgame


View Profile
February 02, 2012, 04:37:07 AM
 #893

I would point out the 3850 APU get 60 MH/s.  Any GPU (or CPU for that matter) with speed fast enough to complete 2x nonce range between average LP is unlikely to have a very low efficiency. Even w/ 3 LP per block that is only 40 MH/s.  For those with speeds > 1x nonce range per LP and 2x nonce range per LP efficiency is kinda hard to guestimate because a lot might depend on variance. 

Still we are more concerned with botnets consist of everything from Pentium III to modern CPU and some of those CPU get <1MH/s.  Thus their efficiency is something like 2%-5% range.  No modern rig should have a 5% efficiency, or even 10% or even 50%.

Understood. However, it is also my understanding from an underground site I occasionally peruse, that some botmasters have figured out remote GPU mining. They set up the drivers and APP SDK to auto download on update, get the python or other dependencies, and run a dumbed down daemon to hash away after system has been idle for x-time. They troll sites where gamers hang out bragging about their hardware, and if they have an ATI card, they just ping the ip from the forums, and go to town. That is another reason I like Doc Haribos Java. It dont hide from you.  Smiley

Looking for a quick easy mining solution? Check out
www.bitminter.com

See my trader rep at Bitcoinfeedback.com
!
Geir
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 43


View Profile
February 02, 2012, 08:48:38 AM
 #894

I’ve actually gotten security warnings twice from Symantec on cgMiner.exe now. So apparently cgminer is being used form something malicious out there.
P4man
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 504



View Profile
February 02, 2012, 09:12:54 AM
 #895

I’ve actually gotten security warnings twice from Symantec on cgMiner.exe now. So apparently cgminer is being used form something malicious out there.

its used to run on botnets. Its old news, most AVs have been warning about most miner apps for some time now, for this reason. The better AVs give a correct warning, stating the app is potentially unwanted (which would be the case if your machine was infected by a trojan and running a miner without your knowledge). Unfortunately most just call it malware or a trojan, even though cgminer by itself demonstrably is not.

DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
February 02, 2012, 02:15:58 PM
 #896

I’ve actually gotten security warnings twice from Symantec on cgMiner.exe now. So apparently cgminer is being used form something malicious out there.

its used to run on botnets. Its old news, most AVs have been warning about most miner apps for some time now, for this reason. The better AVs give a correct warning, stating the app is potentially unwanted (which would be the case if your machine was infected by a trojan and running a miner without your knowledge). Unfortunately most just call it malware or a trojan, even though cgminer by itself demonstrably is not.

Hopefully with cgminer dropping CPU support this will go away. 
P4man
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 504



View Profile
February 02, 2012, 03:44:13 PM
 #897

Welcome to our new king of the hill

1   michaelmclees   33,117

33GH, thats some serious hashing power!

Turbor
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008


BitMinter


View Profile WWW
February 02, 2012, 06:34:05 PM
 #898

Welcome to our new king of the hill

1   michaelmclees   33,117

33GH, thats some serious hashing power!

looks like he left early Cheesy

sturle
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1418

http://bitmynt.no


View Profile WWW
February 02, 2012, 06:59:51 PM
 #899

Are there any GPU which are economical that get less than say 100 MH/s?
My fanless HD 5450 does 15 Mhash/s..  Don't make fun of it -- when it found a block in May, it paid for itself many times!  Perhaps I should go back to mining solo on that one.  Luck may strike again!

Sjå http://bitmynt.no for veksling av bitcoin mot norske kroner.  Trygt, billig, raskt og enkelt sidan 2010.
I buy with EUR and other currencies at a fair market price when you want to sell.  See http://bitmynt.no/eurprice.pl
I support the roadmap.  If a majority of miners ever try to forcefully take control of Bitcoin through a hard fork without 100% consensus, I will immediately split out and dump all my forkcoins, and buy more real Bitcoin.
P4man
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 504



View Profile
February 02, 2012, 07:10:46 PM
 #900

IN may difficulty was roughly 1/10th what it is now. You were extremely lucky then, youd have to be extraordinary lucky now.

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 [45] 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 ... 376 »
  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!