Mabsark
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 826
Merit: 1004
|
|
November 25, 2014, 10:24:44 PM |
|
My math isn't wrong. I actually pay 0.24 $/kWh (to 2 s.f.) for my electricity.
.24 cents heart breaking. AM is not in my good list right now. Should all get lumps of coal for Christmas. No no. AM is paying much less than .24$/kWh. Mabsark just likes to compare apples with oranges all the time. Does that actually make sense in your head? 0.24 $/kWh is my electricity cost, not AM's. What I compared was how much it would cost me to run an SP20, compared to the maintenance fees for AMHash. Despite your protestations to the contrary, that is an apple to apples comparison.
|
|
|
|
Tupsu
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1003
|
|
November 25, 2014, 10:34:21 PM |
|
Does that actually make sense in your head? 0.24 $/kWh is my electricity cost, not AM's. What I compared was how much it would cost me to run an SP20, compared to the maintenance fees for AMHash. Despite your protestations to the contrary, that is an apple to apples comparison.
Like I said, if I was running an SP20 from home it would cost me $0.0039 per Gh/s per day. AMHash's maintenance fee is 42% lower than that and the up front cost per Gh/s is lower too. Sure, you may be able to underclock the SP20 to consume 747 W, giving a hash rate of 1353 Gh/s but then you've increased the cost per Gh/s to 125% for 81.5% of the power consumption. Even with such an underclock I'd still be paying $0.00318 per Gh/s per day, almost twice AMHash's maintenance fee.
If someone pays only 0.1 $/kWh, it will be cheaper than AMHash's maintenance fee.
|
|
|
|
raskul
|
|
November 25, 2014, 10:39:52 PM |
|
Does that actually make sense in your head? 0.24 $/kWh is my electricity cost, not AM's. What I compared was how much it would cost me to run an SP20, compared to the maintenance fees for AMHash. Despite your protestations to the contrary, that is an apple to apples comparison.
Like I said, if I was running an SP20 from home it would cost me $0.0039 per Gh/s per day. AMHash's maintenance fee is 42% lower than that and the up front cost per Gh/s is lower too. Sure, you may be able to underclock the SP20 to consume 747 W, giving a hash rate of 1353 Gh/s but then you've increased the cost per Gh/s to 125% for 81.5% of the power consumption. Even with such an underclock I'd still be paying $0.00318 per Gh/s per day, almost twice AMHash's maintenance fee.
If someone pays only 0.1 $/kWh, it will be cheaper than AMHash's maintenance fee. That's actually more than i pay. And the electric phase in my mining hut is being upgraded this week 😵
|
tips 1APp826DqjJBdsAeqpEstx6Q8hD4urac8a
|
|
|
klondike_bar
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2128
Merit: 1005
ASIC Wannabe
|
|
November 25, 2014, 10:48:26 PM |
|
many people don't understand the many pluses of home mining, but as time goes on and the network grows we will get squeezed out due to power limits.
this is true only if difficulty growth continues to outpace Bitcoin price. If the Bitcoin priced moved to $750 (+100%) in the short-term while difficulty only grows +50% then there will be two effects: 1) mining at higher power draws or with >1w/GH equipment will immediately be profitable to run for most people, even if electricity is ~$0.28/kwh or more 2) miner prices are cheaper because what now costs 1BTC ($375) to build and ship will only be 0.5BTC or less granted - I expect that almost all but hobby mining will be centralized very soon, wherever electricity is cheap or cool air is abundant. That's just a natural outcome as Bitcoin becomes a competitive technology and companies like Bitfury intend to operate over 100MW of equipment
|
|
|
|
Mabsark
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 826
Merit: 1004
|
|
November 25, 2014, 10:56:17 PM |
|
That's actually more than i pay. And the electric phase in my mining hut is being upgraded this week 😵
Not everyone gets free electricity though. i get free electric. feel free to stick your 'maintenance cost' - somewhere in China.
|
|
|
|
notlist3d
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1456
Merit: 1000
|
|
November 26, 2014, 12:07:13 AM |
|
Does that actually make sense in your head? 0.24 $/kWh is my electricity cost, not AM's. What I compared was how much it would cost me to run an SP20, compared to the maintenance fees for AMHash. Despite your protestations to the contrary, that is an apple to apples comparison.
Like I said, if I was running an SP20 from home it would cost me $0.0039 per Gh/s per day. AMHash's maintenance fee is 42% lower than that and the up front cost per Gh/s is lower too. Sure, you may be able to underclock the SP20 to consume 747 W, giving a hash rate of 1353 Gh/s but then you've increased the cost per Gh/s to 125% for 81.5% of the power consumption. Even with such an underclock I'd still be paying $0.00318 per Gh/s per day, almost twice AMHash's maintenance fee.
If someone pays only 0.1 $/kWh, it will be cheaper than AMHash's maintenance fee. I am lucky enough to fit in this category. And with winter air cooling is easy. And did I miss something why so much AM talk is SP thread?
|
|
|
|
wh00per
|
|
November 26, 2014, 12:12:34 AM |
|
Is there anyway to cut the fan speed to less than 40? I plan on under clocking and am interested in reducing noise.
edit /etc/mg_custom_rate via ssh looks like this is a new file miner-FL1444045011# ls mg* -1mg_custom_mode mg_custom_mode_sp20 mg_custom_mode_sp30 mg_disabled_asics mg_disabled_asics_sp20 mg_disabled_asics_sp30 mg_generic_psu mg_psu_limit mg_try_12v_fix mg_work_mode miner-FL1444045011# What is the format to include the 30% fan rate? Even better you could just change the PHP file so that you don't have to keep manually editing the mg_custom_mode_sp20 file... Old code <select name="FAN" id="fan_speed_select"> <?php for($i = 40; $i < 101; $i += 10){ printf('<option value="%d" %s>%d</option>' } ?> </select>
New code <select name="FAN" id="fan_speed_select"> <?php for($i = 30; $i < 101; $i += 10){ printf('<option value="%d" %s>%d</option>' } ?> </select>
You can find this in /var/www/SP2x/settings.php around line 312 in Sp20 firmware version 2.5.27.. or you could probably just search the file for fan_speed_select. Careful though. Everything in the www folder is not persistent between reboots. Looks like one needs to modify more than the php files to make it persistent. The configuration files in /etc, however, are persistent.
|
CSA/cUL Certified Power Distribution Panels - Basic, Switched, Metered. 1-3 phases. Up to 600V. NMC:N4F9qvHz11BHcc4nh1LCJFsrZhA1EWgVwj
|
|
|
Biodom
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3878
Merit: 4305
|
|
November 26, 2014, 03:34:29 AM |
|
Here's some quotes from Guy: Home mining is not going to be around much longer though. The big mining farms are making it so you cannot compete or get ROI. Whether we like it or not mining is moving to the cloud. There will still be some home miners, but not many and most will be in the cloud. We believe that 2015 will be all about mining contracts. Mining contracts backed up by real hardware. I agree with Guy. With all due respect to Guy, this will never work for a simple reason that there is absolutely NO incentive to EVER use mining contracts vs buying bitcoin outright (in OECD countries). With the price of bitcoin approaching the cost of production for marginal players, all profit of such contract will be retained by the cloud mining company. I looked at every single cloud mining operation, and basically it is just a license to lose money (for buyers of such contracts, of course). In theory, cloud mining has to prove that buying such mining contract will result in the GUARANTEED lower price per BTC acquired than could be obtained by buying bitcoin on the open market. However, such proof does not exist at the moment and is unlikely to exist in the future as well. Case closed.
|
|
|
|
raskul
|
|
November 26, 2014, 06:34:57 AM |
|
Case reopened:
People like to prospect/gamble/mine and watch their prospective earnings accrue, regardless of whether it's a 'sure thing'.
To be able to spend fiat currency and receive btc back in any way shape or form is always going to be an attraction.
|
tips 1APp826DqjJBdsAeqpEstx6Q8hD4urac8a
|
|
|
Mabsark
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 826
Merit: 1004
|
|
November 26, 2014, 10:35:53 AM |
|
With all due respect to Guy, this will never work for a simple reason that there is absolutely NO incentive to EVER use mining contracts vs buying bitcoin outright (in OECD countries). With the price of bitcoin approaching the cost of production for marginal players, all profit of such contract will be retained by the cloud mining company. I looked at every single cloud mining operation, and basically it is just a license to lose money (for buyers of such contracts, of course).
In theory, cloud mining has to prove that buying such mining contract will result in the GUARANTEED lower price per BTC acquired than could be obtained by buying bitcoin on the open market. However, such proof does not exist at the moment and is unlikely to exist in the future as well. Case closed.
People say the exact same thing about buying miners and have been saying it since GPU mining. Cloud miners have lower up front costs involved due to not needing to ship all around the world and they generally have cheap electricity decreasing running costs. In that scenario, if cloud mining is unprofitable, then buying miners is even less profitable for the majority of people.
|
|
|
|
Soros Shorts
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1617
Merit: 1012
|
|
November 26, 2014, 11:45:49 AM |
|
With all due respect to Guy, this will never work for a simple reason that there is absolutely NO incentive to EVER use mining contracts vs buying bitcoin outright (in OECD countries). With the price of bitcoin approaching the cost of production for marginal players, all profit of such contract will be retained by the cloud mining company. I looked at every single cloud mining operation, and basically it is just a license to lose money (for buyers of such contracts, of course).
In theory, cloud mining has to prove that buying such mining contract will result in the GUARANTEED lower price per BTC acquired than could be obtained by buying bitcoin on the open market. However, such proof does not exist at the moment and is unlikely to exist in the future as well. Case closed.
People say the exact same thing about buying miners and have been saying it since GPU mining. Cloud miners have lower up front costs involved due to not needing to ship all around the world and they generally have cheap electricity decreasing running costs. In that scenario, if cloud mining is unprofitable, then buying miners is even less profitable for the majority of people. Cloud mining will attract a different breed of people than mining with physical hardware. Cloud miners will be less hardcore and more likely to jump ship at the first whiff of unprofitability. They would probably have no notion of the concept behind p2pool and would have no qualms about pointing their hashes at the most profitable pool even if it were the largest pool with over 51% of the overall hashrate.
|
|
|
|
philipma1957
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4242
Merit: 8508
'The right to privacy matters'
|
|
November 26, 2014, 12:07:51 PM |
|
With all due respect to Guy, this will never work for a simple reason that there is absolutely NO incentive to EVER use mining contracts vs buying bitcoin outright (in OECD countries). With the price of bitcoin approaching the cost of production for marginal players, all profit of such contract will be retained by the cloud mining company. I looked at every single cloud mining operation, and basically it is just a license to lose money (for buyers of such contracts, of course).
In theory, cloud mining has to prove that buying such mining contract will result in the GUARANTEED lower price per BTC acquired than could be obtained by buying bitcoin on the open market. However, such proof does not exist at the moment and is unlikely to exist in the future as well. Case closed.
People say the exact same thing about buying miners and have been saying it since GPU mining. Cloud miners have lower up front costs involved due to not needing to ship all around the world and they generally have cheap electricity decreasing running costs. In that scenario, if cloud mining is unprofitable, then buying miners is even less profitable for the majority of people. Cloud mining will attract a different breed of people than mining with physical hardware. Cloud miners will be less hardcore and more likely to jump ship at the first whiff of unprofitability. They would probably have no notion of the concept behind p2pool and would have no qualms about pointing their hashes at the most profitable pool even if it were the largest pool with over 51% of the overall hashrate. While I agree with you about cloud mining and I think it is bad for the industry it looks like it is the same as the weather . We can talk about it as much as we want but we can't change it.
|
|
|
|
raskul
|
|
November 26, 2014, 02:29:18 PM |
|
We can talk about it as much as we want but we can't change it.
IMHO, this is the best mindset and attitude to have towards the whole era we are currently in, and historically, it is how I have always viewed my headlong obsession into BTC. I said, 'one day this desktop tower won't be big enough for the hardware i'm going to need' and... I still say, 'one of these days there is going to be a 40% difficulty increase in one single jump'. But that doesn't mean to say i should stop mining when the desktop tower is too small or that i should let difficulty drown my meagre *TH/s rig. When looking at the bigger picture, I was overjoyed when this company came forward with their SP10. Heck, even the whiny high pitched 68dB of it was kind of soothing to me... it meant that I could still keep up with difficulty without relying on some ponzi scheme to earn me BTC. When Spondoolies begin their cloud mining (whether it be independently or in partnership with others) I just hope that they can offer the most usable service, with the most transparency and customisation options available. I want to be able to mine on the smallest pool i can find and i want to wait sometimes over an entire month for my pool to find a block... I don't want to be tied into mining on a fixed pool, with tiny increments of BTC dribbling into my wallet once every couple of days. I'm just not able to budget very well that way. In saying that, i don't think a proper cloud mining venture needs to be exceptionally complicated - simple pool choice and failover options is all, for one, I will really be looking for. I do think however, and knowing price of electricity where Spondoolies are based, it may be more frugal for SP-Tech to partner with another company in a less expensive region of the world to run a cloud mining farm... should it happen in the future.
|
tips 1APp826DqjJBdsAeqpEstx6Q8hD4urac8a
|
|
|
philipma1957
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4242
Merit: 8508
'The right to privacy matters'
|
|
November 26, 2014, 02:42:38 PM |
|
… I do think however, and knowing price of electricity where Spondoolies are based, it may be more frugal for SP-Tech to partner with another company in a less expensive region of the world to run a cloud mining farm... should it happen in the future.
They need to setup something in Washington state http://www.chelanpud.org/9545.htmlunder 5 cents a kwatt. I can always do some winter mining as the network grows and diff jumps to 45, 50, 60 ,70 ,80 ,100 bill But I have these limits for power. 4-5 kwatt for winter 2-3 kwatt for summer So if I was all sp20e and I downclock a lot I could do 6 at 750 watts around 1350gh for winter. that is 4500 watts and 8th for winter or 2250 watts and 4th for summer.
|
|
|
|
lowbander80
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1036
Merit: 1000
|
|
November 26, 2014, 02:43:41 PM |
|
When we see the day that earning more from cloud and less from home mining then I will commit BUT THIS IS not going to happen as the company that has the cloud wants to GET the most. This is not the cloud thread so ends here ...- .-
|
|
|
|
raskul
|
|
November 26, 2014, 02:50:48 PM |
|
… I do think however, and knowing price of electricity where Spondoolies are based, it may be more frugal for SP-Tech to partner with another company in a less expensive region of the world to run a cloud mining farm... should it happen in the future.
They need to setup something in Washington state http://www.chelanpud.org/9545.htmlunder 5 cents a kwatt contrary to our friend above who wishes to end the discussion ...- .- and since we are discussing comments made by Guy in a media interview regarding cloud mining, I feel it very relevant and not off-topic at this point in time to discuss the matter and speculate what Spondoolies might offer in a cloud mining capacity in the future.. Where I agree, the cloud needs to be profitable for the miner, as well as for Spondoolies, it should also keep the main ethic that Spondoolies have had since their beginning, and that is and has always been that the customer comes first. Forgive me if anyone feels that discussing how Spondoolies are top for customer service is off-topic. and please, let us discuss these things without butting in with comments like 'discussion ends here' whoever you may think you are. thanks for understanding. under 5c /kW is exceptionally good.
|
tips 1APp826DqjJBdsAeqpEstx6Q8hD4urac8a
|
|
|
wpgdeez
|
|
November 26, 2014, 03:26:55 PM |
|
Zvi, I am still having an issue with my SP10 running with intake temperatures at or below 0c. Technical support suggested that I update my firmware to 2.5.13, however it is unavailable in the web GUI. I found the following kb regarding the issue with low intake temps, http://www.spondoolies-tech.com/blogs/technical-blog/15824368-version-2-5-12That support article seems to indicate that it is for SP20. SP3X. Is it even possible to apply that firmware to an SP10? If not is there a manual workaround that can be done to get the unit hashing with lower than 0 degree intake? "Version 2.5.12 became the official, 2.5.6 removed and 2.5.13 is the latest experimental. 2.5.12 - different handling of BIST and Murata flow - improves stability. 2.5.13 - sets default (after factory reset) values to 1275/288 in SP3x/SP2x. Redirection bug fixed. Handling of ambient temperatures lower then 0c added."
|
|
|
|
Biodom
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3878
Merit: 4305
|
|
November 26, 2014, 03:42:36 PM |
|
With all due respect to Guy, this will never work for a simple reason that there is absolutely NO incentive to EVER use mining contracts vs buying bitcoin outright (in OECD countries). With the price of bitcoin approaching the cost of production for marginal players, all profit of such contract will be retained by the cloud mining company. I looked at every single cloud mining operation, and basically it is just a license to lose money (for buyers of such contracts, of course).
In theory, cloud mining has to prove that buying such mining contract will result in the GUARANTEED lower price per BTC acquired than could be obtained by buying bitcoin on the open market. However, such proof does not exist at the moment and is unlikely to exist in the future as well. Case closed.
People say the exact same thing about buying miners and have been saying it since GPU mining. Cloud miners have lower up front costs involved due to not needing to ship all around the world and they generally have cheap electricity decreasing running costs. In that scenario, if cloud mining is unprofitable, then buying miners is even less profitable for the majority of people. Cloud mining will attract a different breed of people than mining with physical hardware. Cloud miners will be less hardcore and more likely to jump ship at the first whiff of unprofitability. They would probably have no notion of the concept behind p2pool and would have no qualms about pointing their hashes at the most profitable pool even if it were the largest pool with over 51% of the overall hashrate. While I agree with you about cloud mining and I think it is bad for the industry it looks like it is the same as the weather . We can talk about it as much as we want but we can't change it. I don't see anyone refuting my point that cloud mining (as is) cannot provide any advantage over simply slowly buying BTC. Mining is fun at home, much less fun at a hosting site or colo and completely meaningless in a "cloud mine"-it does not reward either your soul or your pocket.
|
|
|
|
zvisha
|
|
November 26, 2014, 03:47:44 PM |
|
Zvi, I am still having an issue with my SP10 running with intake temperatures at or below 0c. Technical support suggested that I update my firmware to 2.5.13, however it is unavailable in the web GUI. I found the following kb regarding the issue with low intake temps, http://www.spondoolies-tech.com/blogs/technical-blog/15824368-version-2-5-12That support article seems to indicate that it is for SP20. SP3X. Is it even possible to apply that firmware to an SP10? If not is there a manual workaround that can be done to get the unit hashing with lower than 0 degree intake? "Version 2.5.12 became the official, 2.5.6 removed and 2.5.13 is the latest experimental. 2.5.12 - different handling of BIST and Murata flow - improves stability. 2.5.13 - sets default (after factory reset) values to 1275/288 in SP3x/SP2x. Redirection bug fixed. Handling of ambient temperatures lower then 0c added." 2.X.X are for SP2x and SP3x. Update to latest version (I think it is 1.5. - you might need to update FW twice (till it says that you have the latest image).
|
|
|
|
raskul
|
|
November 26, 2014, 03:56:08 PM |
|
With all due respect to Guy, this will never work for a simple reason that there is absolutely NO incentive to EVER use mining contracts vs buying bitcoin outright (in OECD countries). With the price of bitcoin approaching the cost of production for marginal players, all profit of such contract will be retained by the cloud mining company. I looked at every single cloud mining operation, and basically it is just a license to lose money (for buyers of such contracts, of course).
In theory, cloud mining has to prove that buying such mining contract will result in the GUARANTEED lower price per BTC acquired than could be obtained by buying bitcoin on the open market. However, such proof does not exist at the moment and is unlikely to exist in the future as well. Case closed.
People say the exact same thing about buying miners and have been saying it since GPU mining. Cloud miners have lower up front costs involved due to not needing to ship all around the world and they generally have cheap electricity decreasing running costs. In that scenario, if cloud mining is unprofitable, then buying miners is even less profitable for the majority of people. Cloud mining will attract a different breed of people than mining with physical hardware. Cloud miners will be less hardcore and more likely to jump ship at the first whiff of unprofitability. They would probably have no notion of the concept behind p2pool and would have no qualms about pointing their hashes at the most profitable pool even if it were the largest pool with over 51% of the overall hashrate. While I agree with you about cloud mining and I think it is bad for the industry it looks like it is the same as the weather . We can talk about it as much as we want but we can't change it. I don't see anyone refuting my point that cloud mining (as is) cannot provide any advantage over simply slowly buying BTC. Mining is fun at home, much less fun at a hosting site or colo and completely meaningless in a "cloud mine"-it does not reward either your soul or your pocket. at this point, i probably agree with you, however, to speculate, - what if SP-Tech came along with a cloud mining plan which was not only profitable, for the investor, but fulfilled those fun hobby-type requirements that we all have when we first plug in a new miner? What form would that take? Or is that something which you might just not see, for yourself, happening? Would it be a hosting plan on purchased hardware that you watch hashing on a webcam live-feed - if you could trade h/w (instead of trading TH/s - you could trade the actual hashboards) with other users? i'm just rolling my head around and letting out the thoughts now. lol. here's my picture of a perfect cloud mining contract: The purchasing (hire-purchase perhaps?) of full hashboards, instead of piddly little GH/s. Flexibility to change pools remotely, at the click of a button. live-feed webcams watching over a warehouse of immersion cooled SP100's (i just made that up) trading platform with other cloud users, to control pricing and p2p trading of your purchased hashboards. Fees paid pro-rata by the user, not taken from mined rewards - if fees don't get paid, hashboards power down. and most importantly - majority of the mining profit to the end user. i think too much, granted. but some of these ideas are, for me, what might make a perfect cloud mining contract - in essence, i would still want to own the hardware, rather than rent TH/s.
|
tips 1APp826DqjJBdsAeqpEstx6Q8hD4urac8a
|
|
|
|