[ANN] [ASIC-RESISTANT] UltraCoin (UTC) - Ultrafast 6 second transactions!!

[Protagonus]

1) Absolutely incorrect.  I have done extensive work with YACoin, which is currently at N=14.  If you know what to look for in a card and how to work with it, the GPU is extremely more efficient.  My findings are out there if you do your research.  If you can't find it, the summary is : 2.9 KH/sec with a GPU consuming 25watts - compare that to any cpu and it favors pretty well.


2) That's a poor comparison from the page.  What is unfortunately missing from that page is the amount of memory the card has - this is the most important aspect of how the card will perform at N=14.  I've put that info into many of the entries I've posted, but I'm not the only contributor.  The Xeon you quoted is actually mine, and it is horribly inefficient!  To get that, the server is running at over 400 watts, and I get a whole 1.53KH/sec (at idle it's over 260Watts), but I only get 1 miner out of it!  With a GPU mining machine, I can run 4 cards giving 10+ KH/sec for 200 Watts.  Actually, if you following cudaminer, the nvidia 750ti has come along and is now getting over 3 KH/sec for < 60Watts too. 

3)Finally, something I agree with

To point 1 and 2 above;  yes I had not noticed the higher efficiency on the comparison page.  I do not ever intend to provide improper information.  Another found and posted right below me (Puycheval), the R7 250 was doing 2.47 kh/s @ 35w.  It would seem then an N = 15 would possibly be the last GPU point.  However, even at 14 it seems there are only 1 or 2 GPU's that are efficient?

To point 3.  Whew!  At least there was something 


Thanks for the reply with more information also.  Glad to see you post!

[1715326454]

1715326454

[1715326454]

1715326454

[1715326454]

1715326454

[Halofire]

Thirtybird, thank you for explaining, what cards do you use and would you share your settings for your cards per nfactor level?

All this detail should have been posted by devs on 1st page so we all knew what to expect, unless they were lacking knowledge at which point they should have said they didn't know what to expect. It was me who told bumface on CT that we needed to change our gpu settings when first 'public n-factor' came about, who then told ziggy. So if devs had no clue... leads me to believe they aren't even mining UTC anymore, since they would have been in same boat and had to of needed to tweak their own rig's settings and would have known about it instead of letting me tell them? So if dev's aren't mining their own coin.....UTC Pump and Dump coin added to the list.

[masonbtc]

I find it scary that the devs don't even know how their own coin works.  The first n-factor change was a complete surprise to everyone!  Someone had to look at the source code and calculate the n-factor changes instead of the devs simply sharing this info with everyone. 

I still haven't heard a reasonable explanation as to why the N-factor is changing at such a rapid pace.  If the point is to discourage asics, then you could up the n-factor maybe once or twice a year at most.  Look at the vertcoin adaptive n-factor for something that makes sense.  As it stands the future of this coin is rapidly becoming a cpu-miner only, which is alienating the great community of miners that has come together to support this coin. 

Here is the vertcoin adaptive n-factor for comparison:

| N        | Memory | Timestamp   | Date/Time                     |   |
|----------|--------|-------------|-------------------------------|---|
| 2048     | 256 kB | 1389306217  | Thu, 09 Jan 2014 22:23:37 GMT |   |
| 4096     | 512 kB | 1456415081  | Thu, 25 Feb 2016 15:44:41 GMT |   |
| 8192     | 1 MB   | 1506746729  | Sat, 30 Sep 2017 04:45:29 GMT |   |
| 16384    | 2 MB   | 1557078377  | Sun, 05 May 2019 17:46:17 GMT |   |
| 32768    | 4 MB   | 1657741673  | Wed, 13 Jul 2022 19:47:53 GMT |   |
| 65536    | 8 MB   | 1859068265  | Tue, 28 Nov 2028 23:51:05 GMT |   |
| 131072   | 16 MB  | 2060394857  | Tue, 17 Apr 2035 03:54:17 GMT |   |
| 262144   | 32 MB  | 2463048041  | Sun, 19 Jan 2048 12:00:41 GMT |   |
| 524288   | 64 MB  | 2999918953  | Fri, 23 Jan 2065 06:49:13 GMT |   |
| 1048576  | 128 MB | 3536789865  | Wed, 28 Jan 2082 01:37:45 GMT |   |
| 2097152  | 256 MB | 5684273513  | Mon, 16 Feb 2150 04:51:53 GMT |   |
| 4194304  | 512 MB | 7831757161  | Sat, 07 Mar 2218 08:06:01 GMT |   |
| 8388608  | 1 GB   | 9979240809  | Thu, 25 Mar 2286 11:20:09 GMT |   |
| 16777216 | 2 GB   | 16421691753 | Fri, 19 May 2490 21:02:33 GMT |   |
| 33554432 | 4 GB   | 22864142697 | Sun, 15 Jul 2694 06:44:57 GMT |   |

I am still mining, and have been since day one, but I just don't understand some of the decisions that have been made.

[cointradero]

Protagonus  --  Good explanation above.  More in detail than I was willing (and able in some cases) to go.  Everything you posted is correct.  Though, there was no discussion of how system RAM in multiple GPU machines will be affected by N-factor changes at 12 and above.  I haven't found much information about it either, but the trend isn't looking good.  I don't know if this is truly a system limitation or just an issue with how cgminer and it's derivatives allocate system RAM.  Either way, the hashrates are likely going to go down even more on multi-GPU systems.

You need quite a bit of system RAM as the miner builds the OpenCL in system memory before passing it off to the GPU.  If you have a 4GB GPU, you will want 8 GB of system memory, or run the cards with 2 threads (-g 2) and half the memory.  This actually applies as you go up in number of cards as well.  My baseline is that the machine has to have at least half of the ram of the SUM of all the GPU's in the machine.  My miner with 4GB does okay with 2 4G cards, but even adding an additional 2GB card gets funny (I've found some workarounds, but it's a kludge).  One other miner has 4x 2GB cards and works great with just 4 GB system memory.

edit:  If someone could hardcode the N-factor to 12, or 13 and recompile it, could we not test out how it would hash on a testnet?

I've found you can fake this by either setting the --minf and --maxnf to the value you want to test, or, you know, mine a coin that is on that NFactor...  I maintain a list here if you want to test on a different coin:
[url]https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Aj3vcsuY-JFNdC1ITWJrSG9VeWp6QXppbVgxcm0tbGc&usp=drive_web#gid=0[/ulr]

Honestly, i was just too lazy to see if UTC chose a different group oh hashing functions than other scrypt jane coins.  I'm being lazy again, but if I remember correctly, scrypt jane has 3+ potential hashing functions.  Two are usually used for the PoW function.  If a coin dev chose too, he could use any of the 3+ available.  There might have be more than one mixing function, I really don't remember there.  Anyway, there should be different ways to implement scrypt-jane and I wasn't sure if they copied Yacoin, Ybcoin, etc and just changed the interest rate and start time, or if they did some more customization.  I figured it would be easier to just replace the 10 lines of code that return the N-factor to just return a bigger number and recompile it than to read and compare the code of the other coins.  

From what I can tell though, I really doubt they changed anything major with this coin.  

[Ruckster2010]

--snip--
There are a few CPU miners.  One is listed on the Ultracoin forum too.  However, there is one specific miner that is best and most up to date.
 
-Manual N parameters for multiple coins
-X86 and 64bit formats
-Stratum pool capable
-Scrypt optimizations for Scrypt-Jane

https://github.com/thirtybird/cpuminer/releases/

This is the absolute best CPU miner out there currently.  I believe it has all the needs being asked for.



Even though I'm not actively posting here;  I still hate to not help if I can.

Thanks
Prot

UftrEhcPx5hTY4YJvSziPi13dfZT9nXSqw

good find, looks like they just recently added the min/max and starttime parameters.
+1 internets to you sir

This cpu miner works awesome.  I am thoroughly impressed.  I am a small miner anyway but have effectively doubled my hashing power putting this miner on 3 good cpu machines.  Ready for the n factor change anytime.  Thanks guys.

[MasterCATZ]

PRICE:
====

Despite the price slumping slightly the hashrate on UTC seems to remain globally constant (albeit slightly decreasing). Good.
This might be explained by people leaving DOGE and going back to LTC (look at its hashrate) and other alts.

Therefore this goes in the direction that either the market might gets the perception that UTC holds value or this is the novelty effect.

Anyway this pool of new miners that stick to the coin is both good and bad: good because it obviously helps consolidate the coin; and bad because there are always casual miners who dump every now and then among them.
NB: there need to be fresh coins on the market anyway, so these dumpers are welcome.

A potential side effect regarding dumping miners would be to keep the price where it is right now, slightly decreasing on a daily basis.
Anyway do not panic: as soon as profitability turns to another coin we should get rid of these dumpers and rise at least a bit until we get profitable again, and so on until we get more market attention.

Price evolution as of now is all about the fight between market and dumpers.

It's all about marketing and publicity, and this what lots of people are doing now. Do not stop your efforts, for they will be rewarded on the mid & long terms if we get lucky.


MARKETING: UTC = SPEED!
========

Transaction SPEED is the biggest single value proposition we can make for this coin. This coin is unique because of its transaction speed. We absolutely need to capitalize on this and pass the message to the public. The rest is secondary. And we need to communicate and become known for this because competition will hit the market soon.

We must get UTC = SPEED, or better: SPEED = UTC in the mind of the public. AND we must communicate we are the first to be so fast.

Having tried transactions between wallets, exchanges, etc. with BTC, LTC and UTC, I shall say that UTC transaction speed is simply awesome. This sole transaction execution time aspect makes the coin extremely convenient and cutting edge on the market.

Bumface you're absolutely right to underline this in your video, but you need to redo it by comparing this difference in speed between these 3 coins.

It is important because BTC is the reserve currency of all cryptos. This is going to be the global savings account equivalent. Not worth for everyday transactions because it is slow. Count 30 minutes for a transaction approx.

LTC was supposed to be fast. Actually it's much faster than BTC, but not nearly as fast as needed should you shop for groceries or fill your gas tank. You still have to wait for a few minutes. Not bad but not practical.

UTC fills a gap because with its 30s tx time it really starts to be practical and build up credible competition in the payment card field. This is the target you need to subtly point out in your demo without being too bold or aggressive, because this is where we get mainstream adoption.

+1

My thoughts are to dethrone LTC we need to pitch BTC / LTC / UTC  and paypal REFUND transaction times

say you are buying a house / car

they ask for an Deposit ( great I'll use my Ultra Fast UTC )
and pay the rest with BTC

Deposit is made paper work done ... when BTC clears its all yours


I was thinking of this as an  scenario

car dealership

4x customers

1x paying by cheque ( they get their car 1 week later )
1 x paying by cash ( they get the car ones the moneys all been counted / verified in a few hrs time )
1x BTC ( they get the car later on in that arvo when BTC cleared )
1x UTC .. they get the car once that paper works been finished cause .. BOOM its their


another situation would be placing deposit for something thats not going to last long on the market

1x person runs off to get some cash ( gets back and its SOLD )
1x person asks to pay with cheque  but declined because of Transaction time
1x person wips out their mobile starts setting up Q code to pay in BTC , see's the person with a roll of cash running up switches payment to UTC **BOOM** done

*yes we need to get that Android app done .. or started !! *
I personally don't want to put my name to code that involves money , but I guess I could add it to my list of unfinished projects

[Ruckster2010]

--snip--
There are a few CPU miners.  One is listed on the Ultracoin forum too.  However, there is one specific miner that is best and most up to date.
 
-Manual N parameters for multiple coins
-X86 and 64bit formats
-Stratum pool capable
-Scrypt optimizations for Scrypt-Jane

https://github.com/thirtybird/cpuminer/releases/

This is the absolute best CPU miner out there currently.  I believe it has all the needs being asked for.



Even though I'm not actively posting here;  I still hate to not help if I can.

Thanks
Prot

UftrEhcPx5hTY4YJvSziPi13dfZT9nXSqw

good find, looks like they just recently added the min/max and starttime parameters.
+1 internets to you sir

This cpu miner works awesome.  I am thoroughly impressed.  I am a small miner anyway but have effectively doubled my hashing power putting this miner on 3 good cpu machines.  Ready for the n factor change anytime.  Thanks guys.

Can you post your config, and tell us what CPU you use, and your hash speed per core?

Running a Core-I7-4770 3.4 GHz 12.GB Ram
averaging about 9.9 Khash total across all cores

Found the I7 miner version works, but so does the Core2 version, so that is what I used.  I see no difference between the 2.

The settings are: minerd-x64-core2 -o stratum+tcp://pickaxe.pool.pm:3306 -u xxxxxxxxx -p xxxxxx -a scrypt-chacha --nfmin 4 --nfmax 30 --starttime 1388361600

The key is each setting name is different than the ultracoin miner, eg. no --sj- and --time is --starttime

Cheers.

[GOLDbarISmine]

--snip--
There are a few CPU miners.  One is listed on the Ultracoin forum too.  However, there is one specific miner that is best and most up to date.
 
-Manual N parameters for multiple coins
-X86 and 64bit formats
-Stratum pool capable
-Scrypt optimizations for Scrypt-Jane

https://github.com/thirtybird/cpuminer/releases/

This is the absolute best CPU miner out there currently.  I believe it has all the needs being asked for.



Even though I'm not actively posting here;  I still hate to not help if I can.

Thanks
Prot

UftrEhcPx5hTY4YJvSziPi13dfZT9nXSqw

good find, looks like they just recently added the min/max and starttime parameters.
+1 internets to you sir

This cpu miner works awesome.  I am thoroughly impressed.  I am a small miner anyway but have effectively doubled my hashing power putting this miner on 3 good cpu machines.  Ready for the n factor change anytime.  Thanks guys.

Can you post your config, and tell us what CPU you use, and your hash speed per core?

Running a Core-I7-4770 3.4 GHz 12.GB Ram
averaging about 9.9 Khash total across all cores

Found the I7 miner version works, but so does the Core2 version, so that is what I used.  I see no difference between the 2.

The settings are: minerd-x64-core2 -o stratum+tcp://pickaxe.pool.pm:3306 -u xxxxxxxxx -p xxxxxx -a scrypt-chacha --nfmin 4 --nfmax 30 --starttime 1388361600

The key is each setting name is different than the ultracoin miner, eg. no --sj- and --time is --starttime

Cheers.

u should use avx2

[Ruckster2010]

--snip--
There are a few CPU miners.  One is listed on the Ultracoin forum too.  However, there is one specific miner that is best and most up to date.
 
-Manual N parameters for multiple coins
-X86 and 64bit formats
-Stratum pool capable
-Scrypt optimizations for Scrypt-Jane

https://github.com/thirtybird/cpuminer/releases/

This is the absolute best CPU miner out there currently.  I believe it has all the needs being asked for.



Even though I'm not actively posting here;  I still hate to not help if I can.

Thanks
Prot

UftrEhcPx5hTY4YJvSziPi13dfZT9nXSqw

good find, looks like they just recently added the min/max and starttime parameters.
+1 internets to you sir

This cpu miner works awesome.  I am thoroughly impressed.  I am a small miner anyway but have effectively doubled my hashing power putting this miner on 3 good cpu machines.  Ready for the n factor change anytime.  Thanks guys.

Can you post your config, and tell us what CPU you use, and your hash speed per core?

Running a Core-I7-4770 3.4 GHz 12.GB Ram
averaging about 9.9 Khash total across all cores

Found the I7 miner version works, but so does the Core2 version, so that is what I used.  I see no difference between the 2.

The settings are: minerd-x64-core2 -o stratum+tcp://pickaxe.pool.pm:3306 -u xxxxxxxxx -p xxxxxx -a scrypt-chacha --nfmin 4 --nfmax 30 --starttime 1388361600

The key is each setting name is different than the ultracoin miner, eg. no --sj- and --time is --starttime

Cheers.

u should use avx2

I didn't see any discernible difference, however, I have 2 identical machines, I'll run one with AVX2 and 1 with core2 and I'll compare in the morning.

[Ruckster2010]

--snip--
There are a few CPU miners.  One is listed on the Ultracoin forum too.  However, there is one specific miner that is best and most up to date.
 
-Manual N parameters for multiple coins
-X86 and 64bit formats
-Stratum pool capable
-Scrypt optimizations for Scrypt-Jane

https://github.com/thirtybird/cpuminer/releases/

This is the absolute best CPU miner out there currently.  I believe it has all the needs being asked for.



Even though I'm not actively posting here;  I still hate to not help if I can.

Thanks
Prot

UftrEhcPx5hTY4YJvSziPi13dfZT9nXSqw

good find, looks like they just recently added the min/max and starttime parameters.
+1 internets to you sir

This cpu miner works awesome.  I am thoroughly impressed.  I am a small miner anyway but have effectively doubled my hashing power putting this miner on 3 good cpu machines.  Ready for the n factor change anytime.  Thanks guys.

Can you post your config, and tell us what CPU you use, and your hash speed per core?

Running a Core-I7-4770 3.4 GHz 12.GB Ram
averaging about 9.9 Khash total across all cores

Found the I7 miner version works, but so does the Core2 version, so that is what I used.  I see no difference between the 2.

The settings are: minerd-x64-core2 -o stratum+tcp://pickaxe.pool.pm:3306 -u xxxxxxxxx -p xxxxxx -a scrypt-chacha --nfmin 4 --nfmax 30 --starttime 1388361600

The key is each setting name is different than the ultracoin miner, eg. no --sj- and --time is --starttime

Cheers.

I'm using an AMD 965 Black Edition and I am only getting 1.4 kh/s total....... 8gb system ram. Why does mine seem so underwhelming?

Are you using the AMD version?

[Ruckster2010]

--snip--
There are a few CPU miners.  One is listed on the Ultracoin forum too.  However, there is one specific miner that is best and most up to date.
 
-Manual N parameters for multiple coins
-X86 and 64bit formats
-Stratum pool capable
-Scrypt optimizations for Scrypt-Jane

https://github.com/thirtybird/cpuminer/releases/

This is the absolute best CPU miner out there currently.  I believe it has all the needs being asked for.



Even though I'm not actively posting here;  I still hate to not help if I can.

Thanks
Prot

UftrEhcPx5hTY4YJvSziPi13dfZT9nXSqw

good find, looks like they just recently added the min/max and starttime parameters.
+1 internets to you sir

This cpu miner works awesome.  I am thoroughly impressed.  I am a small miner anyway but have effectively doubled my hashing power putting this miner on 3 good cpu machines.  Ready for the n factor change anytime.  Thanks guys.

Can you post your config, and tell us what CPU you use, and your hash speed per core?

Running a Core-I7-4770 3.4 GHz 12.GB Ram
averaging about 9.9 Khash total across all cores

Found the I7 miner version works, but so does the Core2 version, so that is what I used.  I see no difference between the 2.

The settings are: minerd-x64-core2 -o stratum+tcp://pickaxe.pool.pm:3306 -u xxxxxxxxx -p xxxxxx -a scrypt-chacha --nfmin 4 --nfmax 30 --starttime 1388361600

The key is each setting name is different than the ultracoin miner, eg. no --sj- and --time is --starttime

Cheers.

I'm using an AMD 965 Black Edition and I am only getting 1.4 kh/s total....... 8gb system ram. Why does mine seem so underwhelming?

Are you using the AMD version?

Yes, the Athlonfx one. I have however, tried every single one and this one works best. It DOES submit shares, VERY slowly. One thing I did notice is on the workers page, the difficulty for video card is at 19.37, however my CPUs difficulty is 64?

That may adjust over time.  Higher difficulty shares are rated more than lower difficulty shares.  You may have to let it run for a while to see some averaged out figures. Are you running the video card and the CPU miner on the same machine?  If so, you may need to tell the CPU miner to use one less core (-t option) or you could see a significant drop on what your video card produces.

[MasterCATZ]

https://github.com/thirtybird/cpuminer/releases/


AWSOME !!

3 days old and works sweet with UTC


Intel and AMD rigs running fine with it .. now to get my 64 bit BAMT's running need to access more of that RAM


Personally CPU mining is no problem , people will eventually pull their GPU's off to mine something else and leave CPU mining UTC .. no drama their .. same amount of daily coins with difficulty adjusting

Using Generic CPU compile I'll recompile tomorrow and compare with correct CPU builds

Entry level OVH SeedBOX normally mining LTC at 6 kh/s
Intel(R) Pentium(R) Dual  CPU  E2180  @ 2.00GHz

 thread 0: 481 hash/s
 thread 1: 551 hash/s
accepted: 1/1 (100.00%), 1.03K hash/s (yay!!!)


Intel® Core™2 Quad Processor Q6600 (8M Cache, 2.40 GHz)
thread 0: 9694 hashes, 271 hash/s
thread 1: 12289 hashes, 344 hash/s
thread 3: 12108 hashes, 339 hash/s
thread 2: 12262 hashes, 343 hash/s


Intel® Core™2 Duo Processor E6300 (2M Cache, 1.86 GHz)

thread 0: 14354 hashes, 266 hash/s
thread 1: 14824 hashes, 274 hash/s


for some reason still nothing accepted from the C2Duo's


Intel Core i5 4440 Quad Core 3.1GHz
 accepted: 1/1 (100.00%), 2.32K hash/s (yay!!!)
 thread 2:  585 hash/s
 thread 3:  581 hash/s
 thread 0:  590 hash/s
thread 1: 541 hash/s
thread 2: 568 hash/s
( PC using 30 watts more )
considering 2x GPU 320 kh/s for under 600 watts, and  that CPU doing 2 kh/s at around 30 watts is pretty expensive
GPU 1.7 watt / kh/s
CPU 15 watt / kh/s

of cause thats current N Factor will see what happens around N 14



AMD A10-5800K
GPU mining 25 kh/s
CPU mining  
thread 0: 685 hash/s
thread 1: 641 hash/s
thread 2: 696 hash/s
thread 3: 713 hash/s
accepted: 1/1 (100.00%), 2.72K hash/s (yay!!!)

Pool  showing 5kh/s    diff 16.00 !!!

Tho I now think I am pushing it seeing SQUARE BLACK DOTS ON SCREEN

[Ruckster2010]

https://github.com/thirtybird/cpuminer/releases/


AWSOME !!

3 days old and works sweet with UTC


Intel and AMD rigs running fine with it .. now to get my 64 bit BAMT's running need to access more of that RAM


Personally CPU mining is no problem , people will eventually pull their GPU's off to mine something else and leave CPU mining UTC .. no drama their .. same amount of daily coins with difficulty adjusting

Silly question.  What is a BAMT?

[Ruckster2010]

--snip--
There are a few CPU miners.  One is listed on the Ultracoin forum too.  However, there is one specific miner that is best and most up to date.
 
-Manual N parameters for multiple coins
-X86 and 64bit formats
-Stratum pool capable
-Scrypt optimizations for Scrypt-Jane

https://github.com/thirtybird/cpuminer/releases/

This is the absolute best CPU miner out there currently.  I believe it has all the needs being asked for.



Even though I'm not actively posting here;  I still hate to not help if I can.

Thanks
Prot

UftrEhcPx5hTY4YJvSziPi13dfZT9nXSqw

good find, looks like they just recently added the min/max and starttime parameters.
+1 internets to you sir

This cpu miner works awesome.  I am thoroughly impressed.  I am a small miner anyway but have effectively doubled my hashing power putting this miner on 3 good cpu machines.  Ready for the n factor change anytime.  Thanks guys.

Can you post your config, and tell us what CPU you use, and your hash speed per core?

Running a Core-I7-4770 3.4 GHz 12.GB Ram
averaging about 9.9 Khash total across all cores

Found the I7 miner version works, but so does the Core2 version, so that is what I used.  I see no difference between the 2.

The settings are: minerd-x64-core2 -o stratum+tcp://pickaxe.pool.pm:3306 -u xxxxxxxxx -p xxxxxx -a scrypt-chacha --nfmin 4 --nfmax 30 --starttime 1388361600

The key is each setting name is different than the ultracoin miner, eg. no --sj- and --time is --starttime

Cheers.

I'm using an AMD 965 Black Edition and I am only getting 1.4 kh/s total....... 8gb system ram. Why does mine seem so underwhelming?

Are you using the AMD version?

Yes, the Athlonfx one. I have however, tried every single one and this one works best. It DOES submit shares, VERY slowly. One thing I did notice is on the workers page, the difficulty for video card is at 19.37, however my CPUs difficulty is 64?

That may adjust over time.  Higher difficulty shares are rated more than lower difficulty shares.  You may have to let it run for a while to see some averaged out figures.  Happy mining.

Cool deal, sounds good. Thank you! What sucks though is when I have the CPU miner AND the GPU miner running at the same time on my rig, my GPU starts mining much less efficiently.

I edited my original post above.  Have a look up a couple messages before you replied.

[Halofire]

https://github.com/thirtybird/cpuminer/releases/


AWSOME !!

3 days old and works sweet with UTC


Intel and AMD rigs running fine with it .. now to get my 64 bit BAMT's running need to access more of that RAM


Personally CPU mining is no problem , people will eventually pull their GPU's off to mine something else and leave CPU mining UTC .. no drama their .. same amount of daily coins with difficulty adjusting

Silly question.  What is a BAMT?

linux OS you can use.

[NewSapUser]

Thank you
I changed conf my rig 2*280x on SMOS like advised, now the resul is:

   Temp    Fan% (rpm)    Load  Rate     Accept/Invalid   Status
0: 70c-    61% (2397+)   99%   150 Khs  1253/17 (1.34%)  stratum+tcp://ultra.nit
1: 71c+    48% (1739-)   99%   140 Khs  1219/21 (1.69%)  stratum+tcp://ultra.nit
ro.org:3337
Total: 290 Khash/s  2472 accepted, 38 invalid (1.51%)
....................................................................

change intensity to 12, thread-concurrency to 16384, gpu-threads to 2, worksitzew to 256. delete "sharethreads"

Thanks. After these changes result:
Mon Mar 10 20:28:21 2014  -  smos-1  -  eth0:192.168.1.3

   Temp    Fan% (rpm)    Load  Rate     Accept/Invalid   Status
0: 58c+    5% (1041+)    99%    80 Khs  7/0 (0.00%)      stratum+tcp://ultra.nitro.org:3337
1: 57c+    6% (972+)     99%    80 Khs  5/0 (0.00%)      stratum+tcp://ultra.nitro.org:3337

Total: 160 Khash/s  12 accepted, 0 invalid (0.00%)

what to do?
last conf
{
"pools" : [
        {
                "url" : "stratum+tcp://ultra.nitro.org:3337",
                "user" : "xxxx.x",
                "pass" : "xxxx"
        }
],
"api-listen" : true,
"intensity" : "12",
"worksize" : "256",
"auto-fan" : true,
"temp-cutoff" : "85",
"temp-overheat" : "75",
"temp-target" : "73",
"expiry" : "1",
"gpu-dyninterval" : "7",
"log" : "5",
"queue" : "0",
"retry-pause" : "5",
"scan-time" : "30",
"scrypt-jane" : true,
"sj-time" : "1388361600",
"sj-nfmin" : "4",
"sj-nfmax" : "30",
"temp-hysteresis" : "3",
"shares" : "0",
"thread-concurrency" : "16384",
"gpu-thread" : "2",
"gpu-engine" : "1050",
"lookup-gap" : "2",
"gpu-powertune" : "20",
"gpu-memclock" : "1500"
}

Hi all!
please look at my new config, what wrong?

[lightsout]

So Nitro or leetpools? Whats the better choice you guys?

[lightsout]

So Nitro or leetpools? Whats the better choice you guys?

I've always used Nitro, but occasionally the pool goes offline. Not sure why. It's great but maybe not as stable as some others.

leet has been good to me but the reported hash seems low was wondering if I could do better somewhere else.

[Halofire]

So Nitro or leetpools? Whats the better choice you guys?

i have half rig at leet, other at nitro. no significant difference.

[lightsout]

So Nitro or leetpools? Whats the better choice you guys?

i have half rig at leet, other at nitro. no significant difference.

thanks I'll just leave it alone then