== Bitcoin challenge transaction: ~1000 BTC total bounty to solvers! ==UPDATED==

[bane77]

A few days ago I checked this pool, but I didn't really understand the principle of operation and even the scoreboard itself. Back then I didn't have time to write more about it, and now that I have - the server of this field is not working, so apart from the unclear interface - the stability is poor. Nevertheless, I encourage you to join us at ttdsales.com/64bit

Not sure what was confusing about the interface. If you need help understanding, I am here to assist.

It is easy to understand.

If you have the #64 space, ttd breaks it down into 2^32 ranges (I believe), so ranges are randomly selected and assigned to users; so it will take 2^32 searches to touch the entire 64 bit range. The other pool breaks the entire range down where users search 2^19 ranges (considered 1 round, spread out over the entire #64 range) and search 2^32 keys within each range. After the 2^19 ranges have been searched, the next start range is shifted by beginning range 8000000000000000 + 2^32. Next start range would be 8000000000000000 + 2^32 + 2^32, next start range, etc.. In this way, every space of #64 is touched, every round. It is merely a different concept versus ttd. I understand you have a lot invested with ttd's pool, so of course you will want people to join it where you have a large majority of ranges searched.

But it was setup this way so that users with 1 GPU could continually run their GPU and compete with people like you who bring online massive amount of work-related/server type GPUs, for periods of time. It was designed so even the slowest single GPU could complete a range in under a minute.

Another difference was the software. ttd's pool uses old bitcrack, single GPU only, unless you run multiple instances (pain in the neck) OR you can use the modified VS Bitcrack that your buddy wrote for you long ago and then you can use multiple GPUs. The other pool was using a far superior program, a different version of VS.

The other pool, had a bonus for the finder as well, built into the numbers.

When the pool was running and had users, the stability was not poor, it was up and running 24/7. Once users declined and I had 99% of searched ranges (took months to get to that point), I took it off-line but continue to work it, from time to time. Mining is too good right now ($$$) for most with GPU power to want to participate in any #64 pool, myself included.

My only suggestion was that the Pool is not available all the time (for whatever reasons) which makes participating [or creating a competitive] unattractive. That's right - I put a lot of strength into ttd and that's why I'm going to work for this pool, but not only because I put a lot of effort into looking for it, but also because regardless of the situation - the pool has a 100% uptime, so who wants to be clear conditions to join and continue your work or even start, where the same regardless of when it started - if you find the right key (and the chance is greater because the range where the key is missing is already eliminated) - me and the author have a $ 500 bonus . After all, it would be obvious that no one would start working seeing how many scans I have already scanned without a bonus :-)

If you have the #64 space, ttd breaks it down into 2^32 ranges (I believe), so ranges are randomly selected and assigned to users; so it will take 2^32 searches to touch the entire 64 bit range. The other pool breaks the entire range down where users search 2^19 ranges (considered 1 round, spread out over the entire #64 range) and search 2^32 keys within each range. After the 2^19 ranges have been searched, the next start range is shifted by beginning range 8000000000000000 + 2^32. Next start range would be 8000000000000000 + 2^32 + 2^32, next start range, etc.. In this way, every space of #64 is touched, every round. It is merely a different concept versus ttd. I understand you have a lot invested with ttd's pool, so of course you will want people to join it where you have a large majority of ranges searched.

Do you know what the data below "Distribution for each 16th of the entire 64 - 63 bit range" means?

Is that how many keys where tried in each key range?

This is a general picture of the situation showing how many percent of what part of the entire range has already been scanned. The entire range of 64 is divided into 16 sub-ranges. The percentage indicator shows, for example, that the 16th part of the main range (i.e. F80000: FFFFFF) was scanned in almost 40%.

I am having to do a string search versus full address search because a few of those cards are the RTX 3070 cards. But at least I can still use them with VBC.  But as you can see, I set the range from 8000000000000000 to FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF and the program spreads out over entire range. I was hoping to hit close to address and find it before 2^50 but no such luck.  I'll let it ride for at least another 6-8 hours and see what happens.

I do search by string too

I just try do experiment about look a pattern

problem all puzzle is not create by pattern all is absolute random

problem on rank 2*63-2*64 prefix is distribution all keyspace by variable difference

conclusion no pattern

Code:

16454495722324959939	16jY7qK5oW1wnfKRN6uj1ASVdds6aouxDX	3ee4133d41444731cd7beb48b26d3a501fc744ce	359043673673754458109913579780954779489629848782	KwDiBf89QgGbjEhKnhXJuH7LrciVrZi3qZ4hn8W4n7yeaG9rram8	000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000E45A1CAE075D22C3
15356914462326594163	16jY7qK6wNNFqnR4k1UGUmfv7TFvTrfUbd	3ee4133d42ac12d331b91511632880f5413f9a53	359043673675622622798033731761492103220271487571	KwDiBf89QgGbjEhKnhXJuH7LrciVrZi3qZ3SCCx52gr4araCbtaR	000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000D51EB856CD091A73
14084089149906511880	16jY7qK9UeLf4rFYrQsoqQnYbuNpSU9si6	3ee4133d45d08b8400891186f72ccbc24cfdd40b	359043673679799677369610125758950696635980436491	KwDiBf89QgGbjEhKnhXJuH7LrciVrZi3qZ1xrrHCkz9TeKqnueyf	000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000C374BC760D1C6808
10957366083765617198	16jY7qKJTia8qA2HRyCH8ttkDK48ynC1qW	3ee4133d50eed586e09a754d9cea64bd8a8e99cf	359043673694578455355112905559483281244005767631	KwDiBf89QgGbjEhKnhXJuH7LrciVrZi3qYxMEeazeLdb25mbUBw9	0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000009810626608C3422E
15338467798463623790	16jY7qKXvAbWydkoECFnvC4B6tjBrEKWhN	3ee4133d6195ed5c8e3a8d5403e938cf0f43ca84	359043673716713700287800823551761138585853741700	KwDiBf89QgGbjEhKnhXJuH7LrciVrZi3qZ3QxUe4KUp4Qyb5bTtR	000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000D4DD2F322E31326E
12018053845398380115	16jY7qKYE8yqVeeo2BQ2GEuxzccLtrXruQ	3ee4133d61f818fbacb8d98050673320fb5d9f8b	359043673717223430130265268114148103754155401099	KwDiBf89QgGbjEhKnhXJuH7LrciVrZi3qYyaM7UjWXwrcJJnbQe2	000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000A6C8B44C4A7CDE53
15919540175014676452	16jY7qKq9YFpbNv7hE9rAegbnzQxThjb9y	3ee4133d76e8ddd9249feed6118b39026ca024b6	359043673745058134190826254367550950173015286966	KwDiBf89QgGbjEhKnhXJuH7LrciVrZi3qZ45uxygmUpuWfLF3Yys	000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000DCED91719F4F47E4
14960309530126404974	16jY7qL3Lk1F6doZRESLuyL1K5jQ4eqx6A	3ee4133d85ffdce51ba9dc109c8ab8b18507a68a	359043673765115957620901275540833771579488315018	KwDiBf89QgGbjEhKnhXJuH7LrciVrZi3qZ2yc1u6yhHBLx5U9MV5	000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000CF9DB24129134D6E
15163223678565228562	16jY7qL53WH9mqfiGnDVNu4E5cmpaTt2uJ	3ee4133d881b5811bdba44b047547989c0ed3f6e	359043673767917103900228355891329549583627665262	KwDiBf89QgGbjEhKnhXJuH7LrciVrZi3qZ3DD3WJbyCwwmeMLipV	000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000D26E9798F2AC2012
17690427578206221414	16jY7qL5MmbBuUPN3pjLgLyCKNCAnMyuPL	3ee4133d887f1bc6b3762a22de2bdca6e91ae941	359043673768435110696216248540087649519577786689	KwDiBf89QgGbjEhKnhXJuH7LrciVrZi3qZ68e2XDu8T3FmYF4H64	000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000F58106278BC17466
14130206010662142352	16jY7qLBfZwny9vSBX1G45XkLFB1jAzqZ7	3ee4133d904d3c7a19809acc9ee368e5ac76fef7	359043673778809983070097333345067472077834354423	KwDiBf89QgGbjEhKnhXJuH7LrciVrZi3qZ21xB6s78CZR1uPt36f	000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000C41893806C9B4190
13355442818363142526	16jY7qLED7wcq3mw3gWq3PqwtnmoZcQYBk	3ee4133d93733783fef9051366cb7392af95097a	359043673782994873710099489007655791452168194426	KwDiBf89QgGbjEhKnhXJuH7LrciVrZi3qZ181XK3xsR9gWHUgvez	000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000B958107BAE93B17E
16943334460982138399	16jY7qLGAvZw8JXVeDe6dKz2mdQfgDLyME	3ee4133d95e0dadc9e7043138d4236e8d8aaf03f	359043673786222603113445584966135603418991620159	KwDiBf89QgGbjEhKnhXJuH7LrciVrZi3qZ5GYyDTyLjCLEii1f7k	000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000EB22D0EC3179961F
17625864068125699820	16jY7qLK8rBoKkAEfdQMMZDX2yogfjZinv	3ee4133d998bf7eff1f284ea13c3f0277b2753a3	359043673791098759584668108861628840569146397603	KwDiBf89QgGbjEhKnhXJuH7LrciVrZi3qZ64JyPjsWtcpdWfBdvm	000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000F49BA5FBEFF42EEC
15753519546411984270	16jY7qLKagtc9cypcLj3Ui3QhcQgndY29t	3ee4133d9a191d487e39da0068db61a2a21a7765	359043673791831630906369292845610890857495033701	KwDiBf89QgGbjEhKnhXJuH7LrciVrZi3qZ3tnQ32KETDrkAXS8b4	000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000DA9FBE8FCE0F258E
10985036183770518811	16jY7qLU3rWzA5WzpV4BuDW6yh7Xv8wbn4	3ee4133da4940a6c8157683f58ce3924288c90dc	359043673805762180865213802119997989261188829404	KwDiBf89QgGbjEhKnhXJuH7LrciVrZi3qYxP6F5Nmpm3UswAqn9p	0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000009872B0353A74551B
11114163388052541195	16jY7qLXbTXPSciC46crGHs4DqH3EaSdHe	3ee4133da8f71f2df32e42748ecdb7d3e49aa303	359043673811593551211807398525934563932772147971	KwDiBf89QgGbjEhKnhXJuH7LrciVrZi3qYxXkMNkX743SmHrYB2P	0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000009A3D70B750860F0B
12811263834395200302	16jY7qLYUz7iQLiAWpCvSFDmgYB5638mMR	3ee4133daa10955629e2f547c710dff740908428	359043673813054983139446058212669508452736861224	KwDiBf89QgGbjEhKnhXJuH7LrciVrZi3qYzVXVcJ9Fv937ruhXMy	000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000B1CAC09494EF4B2E

Questin; what number of same characters of address would be needed to get 9/10 missing characters of priv. key so  you can brute force it than?

The ratio of the characters of the address (or the initial prefix) to the value of the characters of the private key or the general distribution throughout the entire range of the pool is completely random, so whatever you write about - it probably doesn't lead to anything :-)

Sry  if my questions r stupid, but i just started to learn about BTC/Crypto,... Anyway  i was referring to wif priv. key, so how did you get first 7 characters which r the same of BTC puzzle address and my question was how many more characters of the address would be needed to get like 10 missing characters of wif priv. key. Cos in your poast first 7 characters of the address correspond to first 33 characters of priv. key-missing 19 characters? Or this is not the case? Thanks!

[1714613133]

1714613133

[1714613133]

1714613133

[1714613133]

1714613133

[Ovixx]

This is a general picture of the situation showing how many percent of what part of the entire range has already been scanned. The entire range of 64 is divided into 16 sub-ranges. The percentage indicator shows, for example, that the 16th part of the main range (i.e. F80000: FFFFFF) was scanned in almost 40%.

Hey, thanks for your answer. It looks like you're the one coordinating the pool. Great effort there!

Are those parts being scanned sequentially or is it random? Which I had a GPU to join you guys.

No he is not coordinating anything. He just tries to benifit from others searching.

You are absolutely right! ....By the way, I see his site is down. The f****ng pool. Each *.txt file generated by the ttdclient contains 16 ghost addresses besides the base address 16jY7qLJnxb7CHZyqBP8qca9d51gAjyXQN.
That's ridiculous.

[zielar]

This is a general picture of the situation showing how many percent of what part of the entire range has already been scanned. The entire range of 64 is divided into 16 sub-ranges. The percentage indicator shows, for example, that the 16th part of the main range (i.e. F80000: FFFFFF) was scanned in almost 40%.

Hey, thanks for your answer. It looks like you're the one coordinating the pool. Great effort there!

Are those parts being scanned sequentially or is it random? Which I had a GPU to join you guys.

No he is not coordinating anything. He just tries to benifit from others searching.

You are absolutely right! ....By the way, I see his site is down. The f****ng pool. Each *.txt file generated by the ttdclient contains 16 ghost addresses besides the base address 16jY7qLJnxb7CHZyqBP8qca9d51gAjyXQN.
That's ridiculous.

That's right ... I'm just an active participant.
I noticed that a few hours ago the server on which the pool was placed stopped working. I have already informed the owner by e-mail and via Telegram. I don't think this is a conscious step. I am of good cheer.

[zielar]

Pool restored after failure due to weather anomalies in owner's areas.  The owner is on vacation so he only took care of the restoration after I gave him the information.  So go ahead: http://ttdsales.com/64bit

[BwtException]

Pool restored after failure due to weather anomalies in owner's areas.  The owner is on vacation so he only took care of the restoration after I gave him the information.  So go ahead: http://ttdsales.com/64bit

Can you tell me which GPU you're using? Gotta check the price to see if it's worth getting one.

[zielar]

Pool restored after failure due to weather anomalies in owner's areas.  The owner is on vacation so he only took care of the restoration after I gave him the information.  So go ahead: http://ttdsales.com/64bit

Can you tell me which GPU you're using? Gotta check the price to see if it's worth getting one.

These are NVIDIA Tesla series GPU cards.
I can use the resources available in the company as long as they are free (not in use).
The prices of these cards are so high that it is definitely not profitable to buy at least one for this type of workload.
Personally, if I had to invest in a GPU for such loads - I would choose the RTX3090 because:
a) it achieves a MUCH higher hashrate
b) you will buy MUCH more RTX3090 than this ONE Tesla.

[WanderingPhilospher]

This is a general picture of the situation showing how many percent of what part of the entire range has already been scanned. The entire range of 64 is divided into 16 sub-ranges. The percentage indicator shows, for example, that the 16th part of the main range (i.e. F80000: FFFFFF) was scanned in almost 40%.

Hey, thanks for your answer. It looks like you're the one coordinating the pool. Great effort there!

Are those parts being scanned sequentially or is it random? Which I had a GPU to join you guys.

No he is not coordinating anything. He just tries to benifit from others searching.

You are absolutely right! ....By the way, I see his site is down. The f****ng pool. Each *.txt file generated by the ttdclient contains 16 ghost addresses besides the base address 16jY7qLJnxb7CHZyqBP8qca9d51gAjyXQN.
That's ridiculous.

Those "ghost" addresses are the PoW addresses. This is how the pool knows you searched the range you said you searched. If you search only 1 range at a time, there will be 1 PoW address and the target address in the .txt file.

[simplebtcfuture]

what would be the cheapest gpu's (but still acceptable speed) that I could purchase for participating in this puzzle?
 please any recommendations

[BorisTheHorist]

what would be the cheapest gpu's (but still acceptable speed) that I could purchase for participating in this puzzle?
 please any recommendations

You need to understand that is not the right question.
here is my previous post on this subject: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1306983.msg59904434#msg59904434
or in summary: "you need 2724 2080ti approximately to do puzzle 64 in one month with bitcrack. 1362 if you correctly guess which half of the range it is in.
or in other words 1,830,035 optimal 2080ti hours for $24,000. mine is a founder edition and can hit 1,400,000,000 Mk/s with -b 4532 -t 32 -p 584."

running One 2080ti 24/7 is not really advisable.
running 2724 is not worth $24,000.

a 3070 might be similar to my 2080ti and according to some data I have ~954 3090s would do it in a month.

so to wrap it up
1. you have to first guess a lucky number and hope it's close.
2. get as efficient (modern NVIDIA for cuda) a card as you can
3. stick with it for months
...just for the slim chance of getting it.

some 'attempts' have been made at pooling resources but stick with it for months still applies

[zielar]

What are these cosmic parameters for bitrack?
I once stated exactly that -b is a parameter that should be equal to the number of "compute units" read with cuBitCrack -l, a -t parameter of 512 (or 256 if the newer card architecture doesn't let that big), and a floating parameter -p that it is necessary by trial and error to determine the most issued. Apart from the fact that you tire your GPU with the parameters you specify (not to mention the MKeys / s speed) - let me also remind you that VanitySearch has better performance when it comes to MKeys / s.
As for the right question of my predecessor - any not too old card will be good. At the current stage of development of all the above-mentioned applications - it is definitely worth paying attention to NVIDIA cards, because they are reliable on these cards, which cannot be mentioned about the OpenCL support that only BitCrack provides, and in addition with a different effect.
A colleague in front of me is somewhat misleading, because there was no question about how many cards he must have to find the key, but what card he must have in order to start participation, and these are two different issues. The same in terms of profitability. As you can see on the ttdsales.com/64bit/ pool, which is actively working to find the key to # 64 - apart from me, there is also a group of people who with little power, but still support the search, because each already proven range falls out of the pool of possibilities, and what a hence -> the number of possible ranges is constantly decreasing, but if in the end the correct key is found by these smaller participants (because the chance for this is greater with every moment when subsequent empty ranges fall off) - apart from the prize resulting from the score table - the participant will receive such a Pool owner bonus of $ 500 + from me another $ 500, so even entering the participation with little power -> you can get rich with a bit of luck by a minimum of $ 1000, and I will just mention that 16% of the range has already been checked.

As part of the development of this topic - I will gladly update the main post with the GPU performance charts in terms of speed achieved along with the best settings for both programs listed beside.
I remember that some time ago someone created something like that, taking into account the price of the GPU and the price-performance ratio, but I don't remember if it was in any of the previous topics on this challenge, such as VanitySearch, BitCrack or elsewhere, but if anyone remembers - I would be grateful for pointing to the link in order to be able to start developing the base version of this list. Creating it from scratch somehow I don't really want to go out :-)

[WanderingPhilospher]

As part of the development of this topic - I will gladly update the main post with the GPU performance charts in terms of speed achieved along with the best settings for both programs listed beside.
I remember that some time ago someone created something like that, taking into account the price of the GPU and the price-performance ratio, but I don't remember if it was in any of the previous topics on this challenge, such as VanitySearch, BitCrack or elsewhere, but if anyone remembers - I would be grateful for pointing to the link in order to be able to start developing the base version of this list. Creating it from scratch somehow I don't really want to go out :-)

VanitySearch benchmarks

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5112311.msg50823897#msg50823897

However, the speed using ttd version will be slower since it is searching for keys in one specific range versus original vanity search that searches using inversions and such.

[simplebtcfuture]

As you can see on the ttdsales.com/64bit/ pool, which is actively working to find the key to # 64 - apart from me, there is also a group of people who with little power, but still support the search, because each already proven range falls out of the pool of possibilities, and what a hence -> the number of possible ranges is constantly decreasing

yes I have been lurking around that pool for a while and up to date for the most part, I just never owned a gpu and would like to throw one or two at the pool for fun. 3 questions:

1) Would it be a bad idea to purchase a used gpu? risky efficiency/speed wise?

2) Do participants get to choose which specific range they would like to allocate their gpu's to on ttdsales?

3) Are the already scanned ranges publicly published somewhere?

thank you for your answer

[zielar]

As you can see on the ttdsales.com/64bit/ pool, which is actively working to find the key to # 64 - apart from me, there is also a group of people who with little power, but still support the search, because each already proven range falls out of the pool of possibilities, and what a hence -> the number of possible ranges is constantly decreasing

yes I have been lurking around that pool for a while and up to date for the most part, I just never owned a gpu and would like to throw one or two at the pool for fun. 3 questions:

1) Would it be a bad idea to purchase a used gpu? risky efficiency/speed wise?

2) Do participants get to choose which specific range they would like to allocate their gpu's to on ttdsales?

3) Are the already scanned ranges publicly published somewhere?

thank you for your answer

1) Not a bad idea. This has no effect on performance. When buying a used one, it is worth knowing what the card was used for during its use (i.e. whether it was used as a graphics card in the computer or used for crypto mining). the same new.
2) The participants can decide on their own to what extent the parties they want to be allocated. For example - the VanitySearch configuration file consists of five lines, as in the example on my one machine:

Code:

zielar
-gpu -gpuId 0,1,2 -t 0
0xC000000
0xFFFFFFF
16

which in turn means for the program: 1. my login 2. commands for vanitysearch for selected processors 0,1,2 and excluding CPU usage, 3. Lowest selected range, 4. Maximum selected range, 5. Number of simultaneously downloaded ranges (i.e. I download 16 ranges at once to eliminate connecting to the pool every single range)
3) The specific scanned ranges are not published for obvious reasons which, apart from their huge number, include issues that eliminate the support of people not participating in the pool. Working for a pool is about bringing their members closer to the correct key, not letting outsiders know which ranges are already checked and empty. Thanks to this also - the pool has an advantage over people who will try their luck [in the form of already such a large resource of proven ranges], and as a colleague wrote earlier - the full range is huge. This 16% consists of more than 21 million sub-ranges that the Pool has already scanned, while the full sub-range pool is 134,217,728.

However, you can see the estimated distribution of the scanned sub-ranges in the table after logging in, divided into 16 parts - from which you can see, for example, that the final (F80000-FFFFFF) range is already scanned in 45%, while the initial (80000-87FFFF) only in 4%. This information, however, is so useless for outsiders, because the correct key is only one and it can still lie in the still unchecked part of the last range, while the very percentage discrepancy from the beginning to the end results from the fact that I insisted on the second half of the range and as I wished, the system assigned me sub-ranges from the second half to be scanned.

P.S. As a curiosity, I will only mention that today I switched to the initial ranges, because my whim regarding the sub-ranges has changed

As part of the development of this topic - I will gladly update the main post with the GPU performance charts in terms of speed achieved along with the best settings for both programs listed beside.
I remember that some time ago someone created something like that, taking into account the price of the GPU and the price-performance ratio, but I don't remember if it was in any of the previous topics on this challenge, such as VanitySearch, BitCrack or elsewhere, but if anyone remembers - I would be grateful for pointing to the link in order to be able to start developing the base version of this list. Creating it from scratch somehow I don't really want to go out :-)

VanitySearch benchmarks

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5112311.msg50823897#msg50823897

However, the speed using ttd version will be slower since it is searching for keys in one specific range versus original vanity search that searches using inversions and such.

Thanks a lot. This is what I was looking for. This will be very helpful, as these results were created while the VanitySearch performance was the same as the current VanitySearch performance with the scoping option. Nevertheless - the values will be more or less very similar, and I have a base for possible development. Soon there will be a table in the main topic - which I will gladly supplement with the missing types of cards, if someone has one ... Then I ask for info in the post or in PW (i.e. what GPU, how many Mkeys / s achieves and any additional starting variables such such as -g which increase performance)

[EDIT]
I've already added the performance sections to the main topic.

[WanderingPhilospher]

Thanks a lot. This is what I was looking for. This will be very helpful, as these results were created while the VanitySearch performance was the same as the current VanitySearch performance with the scoping option. Nevertheless - the values will be more or less very similar, and I have a base for possible development. Soon there will be a table in the main topic - which I will gladly supplement with the missing types of cards, if someone has one ... Then I ask for info in the post or in PW (i.e. what GPU, how many Mkeys / s achieves and any additional starting variables such such as -g which increase performance)

Welcomed!

Used GPUs...if you can find one that is still under manufacturer's warranty, that is best. Usually a card has a 3 year warranty. I have purchased many used over the years with no issues.

For the puzzle, I am spending time each day on #120 via Kangaroo. I still mine most of the day but switch over to #120 for a bit each day until I find around 2^20.5 DPs. Another forum user has quite a few DPs saved and I am starting to send him my tame and wild points and he checks to see if we have a collision.

Zielar, if you want to join in the hunt, I can set up your own port on my server and you can point and run your GPUs . We should be at around 2^28 DPs needed out of 2^30.55 DPs by the end of this month (running DP 30). The thrill of the hunt continues...slow and steady!

[zielar]

Thanks a lot. This is what I was looking for. This will be very helpful, as these results were created while the VanitySearch performance was the same as the current VanitySearch performance with the scoping option. Nevertheless - the values will be more or less very similar, and I have a base for possible development. Soon there will be a table in the main topic - which I will gladly supplement with the missing types of cards, if someone has one ... Then I ask for info in the post or in PW (i.e. what GPU, how many Mkeys / s achieves and any additional starting variables such such as -g which increase performance)

Welcomed!

Used GPUs...if you can find one that is still under manufacturer's warranty, that is best. Usually a card has a 3 year warranty. I have purchased many used over the years with no issues.

For the puzzle, I am spending time each day on #120 via Kangaroo. I still mine most of the day but switch over to #120 for a bit each day until I find around 2^20.5 DPs. Another forum user has quite a few DPs saved and I am starting to send him my tame and wild points and he checks to see if we have a collision.

Zielar, if you want to join in the hunt, I can set up your own port on my server and you can point and run your GPUs . We should be at around 2^28 DPs needed out of 2^30.55 DPs by the end of this month (running DP 30). The thrill of the hunt continues...slow and steady!

I wish I had saved my 115 files. I didn't think they would ever be useful then, and their size didn't encourage me to keep them anyway. Well ... it's hard. If I still have time - I will definitely join the cooperation, but I promised myself that I would finish topic # 64 for good first, and then focus on Kangaroo. In any case, if I get it again - we will surely get along somehow, because I will be happy to join the cooperation again, rather than wanting something again myself.

[zielar]

I am happy to inform you that I spent quite a lot of time to refresh this topic and catch up with today's technology in terms of eliminating the problems that I was able to read or meet anywhere, and therefore - I added an extensive update to the main topic. I hope that for many people - the time I have devoted will be helpful and will solve most problems / questions / doubts. All the best!

If you want - you can send me a donation to my BTC wallet address 31hgbukdkehcuxcedchkdbsrygegyefbvd

[BwtException]

what would be the cheapest gpu's (but still acceptable speed) that I could purchase for participating in this puzzle?
 please any recommendations

mine is a founder edition and can hit 1,400,000,000 Mk/s with -b 4532 -t 32 -p 584."

Can you clarify this number?
You wrote 1,4 billion but used Mk/s (million keys per second).

Is this 1,4 billion keys per second or what?

[zielar]

My guess is that he meant 1400Mkeys/s

[BwtException]

Ok, that's 1,4 billion k/s.
Makes sense.

[BorisTheHorist]

Ok, that's 1,4 billion k/s.
Makes sense.

Yes, Around 1.4 Billion peak. it fluctuates but not wildly.