These new EFFICIENT x11 algos everyone is talking about ?? BULLSHIT or real?

[AlexGR]

The 6870 I can get to 1.05 MH/s.

There's margin for improvement. My 6850 overclocked @950 pulls 1065kh while in scrypt it does ~280. I find that experimental intensity works better than traditional intensity, usually with a value of 400 or 800.

[Timespace]

The 6870 I can get to 1.05 MH/s.

There's margin for improvement. My 6850 overclocked @950 pulls 1065kh while in scrypt it does ~280. I find that experimental intensity works better than traditional intensity, usually with a value of 400 or 800.

Yep xintensity 400 brings almost 150 kh/s more per card... Thank you! Now if I can start to optimize the 270x some...

[softron]

It quite good algo less energy consumption. Less noise try mining hirocoin

[reRaise]

Now you're bringing your own discussion into lala land, really.
"They" don't have X11 ASICs.

The point is, that for the moment, ANY possible method to avoid the planned concentration of power is welcome.
And so YES, X11 is one of them, and it's for REAL.
It's a convincing concept, as is Quark, Scrypt-N, Jane, whatever.

I'd favor it, because of the low power requirement and the way the existing hardware is utilized.

The low power requirement could be an indication of it's biggest issue here.

Also is you favour it based on the "seemingly" low power requirement.... does it use less power than coins with QRK algos?

This low power requirement argument is the most worrying of them all it does not hold water. I wonder if that person running 1.8GH and the other one running 1.2GH are not seeing this low power requirement advantage i wonder if their gpus are sucking up the max electricity it can?  or perhaps they are sitting there all nice and cool with x11 asics? who can say... i wonder if x99 would solve this issue.

The low power requirement argument seems like it could be kind of null and void. I hope you will start to see what we are saying here.

So far let's be honest here... nobody has given even 1 good reason for x11 to exist above the algos we had already. Can you imagine us having to fork every single coin over to x11 just to find we jumped into the hands of those that can mine this with a hugely unfair advantage.... sounds worrying to me.

Whats the matter with you dude?
The low power is a fact, I have a meter on it.
It's one of the good concepts for now, it may change tomorrow, thats how the world is, buddy.
And look at the coins man, people like them and money is going there.

Thats what you don't seem to like.

sorry but please answer my questions.... we know that running this perhaps inefficient miner draws less power compared to scrypt . What about compared to QRK? If it does not draw less power then i guess there was not advantage in that respect over previous algos was there?

The money is probably mining at 1.8GH the rest going there are not the money.

DRK has its clear advantage over many coins that being the dark send feature we are not challenging drk we are challenging x11.

If you want to mine drk.... great it has a good active dev...so go for it. However this thread is about x11 since every coin is now thinking of swapping to it

You shouldn't start threads like this, if you can't accept facts you don't overview.

The algorithm is only a part of the system that makes up a coin.
There are other methods involved, to secure the proof of work concept (what you call "mining").

Changing any of them, at any time should be of no concern.
The deployment of the necessary software for future coins has to be improved.

X11 is very safe for the moment, because it is very unlikely that there are ASICs out there for each of the 11 algos.
Quark uses only 6 algos, so the probability for an ASIC is how much higher?
 

An the rumor there is a private version of a mining software out there running at better pace is spread by whom?
This is a propaganda thread, pure disinformation.

Not true, qrk adds 3 more rounds of hashing randomly so the computer doesn't know whether it will be lets say Keccak or Grøstl or Blake, but with x11 the computer remains certain about which hashing function will be used.

[cryptohunter]

You shouldn't start threads like this, if you can't accept facts you don't overview.

The algorithm is only a part of the system that makes up a coin.
There are other methods involved, to secure the proof of work concept (what you call "mining").

Changing any of them, at any time should be of no concern.
The deployment of the necessary software for future coins has to be improved.

X11 is very safe for the moment, because it is very unlikely that there are ASICs out there for each of the 11 algos.
Quark uses only 6 algos, so the probability for an ASIC is how much higher?
 

An the rumor there is a private version of a mining software out there running at better pace is spread by whom?
This is a propaganda thread, pure disinformation.

Yup and the best way to achieve it is by portraying yourself as a messiah for truth, get all agitated all over the place, use bold sensationalism and a myriad of other negativity. This fudge packer is actually giving a bad name to Qrk. If I was semi-interested in it, I am no longer because it probably has more phags and pricks like the OP in it. Not going to enjoy a community like that.

All of these algos are open source. Go ahead use what you like and improve it for others. There is no x11 vs other algos. Choose what fits your goals and go with it.

I miss the red big font Beecoin signature of his too.

Just because i currently have 9 inches of my considerable manhood in your mothers asshole does not mean you can call me a fudge packer. Hopefully your sister has a taste for fudge though....we'll find out in another few seconds.

Again answer my questions you retarded fool ... let me post them again for you since you obviously missed them the first time noob troll.

Who cares what you are interested in with your 0.5mh rig and 1000 cents you got given in some giveaway. Pathetic creature. What a silly little slapper you are ...take after the rest of your red neck skanky family.

You miss my big red font, your mom misses my big purple cock , you and your sister miss the taste of my ass.... how can i please you guys all of the time. Give me a break mofo.  I'm sorry to drop the tone down to personal insults or in your case glowing praise but still if you must operate at the gutter level you are accustomed to then i have not choice but to communicate with you in the manner you feel comfortable with.

Meanwhile let's get back to something more interesting............

Here are some questions you forgot to answer...

1. is it more efficient than qrk?
2. is it more secure than qrk?
3. is it more efficient than scrypt? or is the miner just crippled and can't use the full potential of the card?
4. are there more efficient miners already out for x11 that are more optimised?
5. is it more asic resistant that qrk?
6. is it more asic resistant that scyptN , scrypt jane
7. is it x12, x13, x99 going to be better? will we need to fork all of the coins over and over again?


just tell me some definite benefits of x11 that are real benefits not maybe beneficial but then again if the miner can be improved shown to not be beneficial at all.


come on how hard is it to sell the best solution out there right now???

[cryptohunter]

It quite good algo less energy consumption. Less noise try mining hirocoin

Nah sorry that was a instamined scam coin i won't be trying that one. Examine the block explorer and cunning launch time with no announcement.

[cryptohunter]

I've seen two guys with 1.2 and 1.8 Gh/s yesterday on drk.suchpool.pw

As X11 is max triple the hashrate than scrypt, it means they have 400 to 600 MH in GPU power - except they use a more efficient software or already have X11 ASICs.

I can imagine GPU farms with 100 or 200 MH...but not with 600MH+! So currently it feels for me as we still don't have gotten the right answer here.

I happen to know one gpu farm that pulls ~1 ghs in scrypt. So, that'd be ~3gh in x11.

Really you know a 1GH farm in pure GPU power.... anyone else know this and can give some details.... how many 7950 are required for this ...or perhaps even 290x ....sounds interesting. Where is it based, who owns it....surely you can give us some details.

[cryptohunter]

It quite good algo less energy consumption. Less noise try mining hirocoin

the algo = less energy?? you are still posting this after reading the entire thread?

[AlexGR]

I've seen two guys with 1.2 and 1.8 Gh/s yesterday on drk.suchpool.pw

As X11 is max triple the hashrate than scrypt, it means they have 400 to 600 MH in GPU power - except they use a more efficient software or already have X11 ASICs.

I can imagine GPU farms with 100 or 200 MH...but not with 600MH+! So currently it feels for me as we still don't have gotten the right answer here.

I happen to know one gpu farm that pulls ~1 ghs in scrypt. So, that'd be ~3gh in x11.

Really you know a 1GH farm in pure GPU power.... anyone else know this and can give some details.... how many 7950 are required for this ...or perhaps even 290x ....sounds interesting. Where is it based, who owns it....surely you can give us some details.

That particular one has a mix of cards and is actually a nightmare in terms of homogeneity due to the various models, pcs, etc. Generally mines doge & lite. He's usually top spot or second spot in any pool he mines at any given moment.

[Amph]

heavycoin algo is better imho, also more optimized

[cryptohunter]

I've seen two guys with 1.2 and 1.8 Gh/s yesterday on drk.suchpool.pw

As X11 is max triple the hashrate than scrypt, it means they have 400 to 600 MH in GPU power - except they use a more efficient software or already have X11 ASICs.

I can imagine GPU farms with 100 or 200 MH...but not with 600MH+! So currently it feels for me as we still don't have gotten the right answer here.

I happen to know one gpu farm that pulls ~1 ghs in scrypt. So, that'd be ~3gh in x11.

Really you know a 1GH farm in pure GPU power.... anyone else know this and can give some details.... how many 7950 are required for this ...or perhaps even 290x ....sounds interesting. Where is it based, who owns it....surely you can give us some details.

That particular one has a mix of cards and is actually a nightmare in terms of homogeneity due to the various models, pcs, etc. Generally mines doge & lite. He's usually top spot or second spot in any pool he mines at any given moment.

How do you know it has a mix of cards?  also what user does he go under on the pools. This has to be the largest gpu farm i have heard off. Someone must know where this is, just the amount of cards and electricity must be mind blowing?


Come on what is the pool username ? you must know a lot about it else how do you know what cards it uses and also it is actually them on the pools.

What is the highest GH reading on a scrypt pool that you have seen them use? which pool was it? 

I would have thought 1 GH scrypt without botnet or asic would be crazy.... but i mean if you have seen it and seen the different cards they are using then we have no choice but to believe it.

[AlexGR]

I've seen two guys with 1.2 and 1.8 Gh/s yesterday on drk.suchpool.pw

As X11 is max triple the hashrate than scrypt, it means they have 400 to 600 MH in GPU power - except they use a more efficient software or already have X11 ASICs.

I can imagine GPU farms with 100 or 200 MH...but not with 600MH+! So currently it feels for me as we still don't have gotten the right answer here.

I happen to know one gpu farm that pulls ~1 ghs in scrypt. So, that'd be ~3gh in x11.

Really you know a 1GH farm in pure GPU power.... anyone else know this and can give some details.... how many 7950 are required for this ...or perhaps even 290x ....sounds interesting. Where is it based, who owns it....surely you can give us some details.

That particular one has a mix of cards and is actually a nightmare in terms of homogeneity due to the various models, pcs, etc. Generally mines doge & lite. He's usually top spot or second spot in any pool he mines at any given moment.

How do you know it has a mix of cards?

Because the farm expanded in stages and the cards were bought in batches, thus hurting homogeneity (different models).

also what user does he go under on the pools. This has to be the largest gpu farm i have heard off. Someone must know where this is, just the amount of cards and electricity must be mind blowing?

Yep the electricity in particular.

Come on what is the pool username ? you must know a lot about it else how do you know what cards it uses and also it is actually them on the pools.

He goes "anonymous".

What is the highest GH reading on a scrypt pool that you have seen them use? which pool was it? 

I haven't asked permission to disclose, and I think I wouldn't be given permission even if I asked.

[iopq]

It quite good algo less energy consumption. Less noise try mining hirocoin

the algo = less energy?? you are still posting this after reading the entire thread?

yes

compare SHA-256 mining with GPU to scrypt
SHA-256 was optimized to the bone with Bitcoin, it was over 99% efficient compared to a "perfect" miner that didn't waste any ops anywhere because it only had a few ops here and there that were necessary but not part of the algorithm

yet it still takes less energy than mining scrypt, when scrypt possibly isn't even as optimized (there aren't several competing scrypt kernels afaik, but for Bitcoin there was fatk, poclbm, diablo, etc.)

[cryptohunter]

It quite good algo less energy consumption. Less noise try mining hirocoin

the algo = less energy?? you are still posting this after reading the entire thread?

yes

compare SHA-256 mining with GPU to scrypt
SHA-256 was optimized to the bone with Bitcoin, it was over 99% efficient compared to a "perfect" miner that didn't waste any ops anywhere because it only had a few ops here and there that were necessary but not part of the algorithm

yet it still takes less energy than mining scrypt, when scrypt possibly isn't even as optimized (there aren't several competing scrypt kernels afaik, but for Bitcoin there was fatk, poclbm, diablo, etc.)

Ok so that sounds more like the replies we are after.  Let me just understand this.

sha256 miners although almost 100% efficient running on gpu - draw less electricity and creates less heat than scrypt... can i ask by exactly how much less electricity? i've never mined sha256...are we talking 50%

sha256 mining you are sure was optimised to almost 100%?  what level of optimisation do you consider x11 miners to have at this point?

Can this therefore be a direct indication and something we can even apply to x11 ?

Also is there any reason at all why x11 could or should me more efficient than QRK?  in terms of heat and electricity used even when the cards calculations resources are maxed and fully optimised?

So far the answer i am getting on that is NO. However if you really think it is possible that is something we need to investigate and consider now.

[iopq]

It quite good algo less energy consumption. Less noise try mining hirocoin

the algo = less energy?? you are still posting this after reading the entire thread?

yes

compare SHA-256 mining with GPU to scrypt
SHA-256 was optimized to the bone with Bitcoin, it was over 99% efficient compared to a "perfect" miner that didn't waste any ops anywhere because it only had a few ops here and there that were necessary but not part of the algorithm

yet it still takes less energy than mining scrypt, when scrypt possibly isn't even as optimized (there aren't several competing scrypt kernels afaik, but for Bitcoin there was fatk, poclbm, diablo, etc.)

Ok so that sounds more like the replies we are after.  Let me just understand this.

sha256 miners although almost 100% efficient running on gpu - draw less electricity and creates less heat than scrypt... can i ask by exactly how much less electricity? i've never mined sha256...are we talking 50%

sha256 mining you are sure was optimised to almost 100%?  what level of optimisation do you consider x11 miners to have at this point?

Can this therefore be a direct indication and something we can even apply to x11 ?

Also is there any reason at all why x11 could or should me more efficient than QRK?  in terms of heat and electricity used even when the cards calculations resources are maxed and fully optimised?

So far the answer i am getting on that is NO. However if you really think it is possible that is something we need to investigate and consider now.

the very first SHA-256 miner was only maybe 5% less efficient than the best one (poclbm was giving me good hash rates before a lot of these newer kernels optimized it by a few more percent)
people just found 1% improvements here and there a few times and after a while there were no optimizations left
some optimizations reduced the total instruction count by one out of 1300 (less than 0.1% improvement)

SHA-256 takes like 20% less energy to mine off the top of my head because it doesn't use the GPU ram as much
so I'm sure there are algorithms that take even less GPU power because they rape one part of the chip (bottleneck) and don't touch the rest of it much

[cryptohunter]

It quite good algo less energy consumption. Less noise try mining hirocoin

the algo = less energy?? you are still posting this after reading the entire thread?

yes

compare SHA-256 mining with GPU to scrypt
SHA-256 was optimized to the bone with Bitcoin, it was over 99% efficient compared to a "perfect" miner that didn't waste any ops anywhere because it only had a few ops here and there that were necessary but not part of the algorithm

yet it still takes less energy than mining scrypt, when scrypt possibly isn't even as optimized (there aren't several competing scrypt kernels afaik, but for Bitcoin there was fatk, poclbm, diablo, etc.)

Ok so that sounds more like the replies we are after.  Let me just understand this.

sha256 miners although almost 100% efficient running on gpu - draw less electricity and creates less heat than scrypt... can i ask by exactly how much less electricity? i've never mined sha256...are we talking 50%

sha256 mining you are sure was optimised to almost 100%?  what level of optimisation do you consider x11 miners to have at this point?

Can this therefore be a direct indication and something we can even apply to x11 ?

Also is there any reason at all why x11 could or should me more efficient than QRK?  in terms of heat and electricity used even when the cards calculations resources are maxed and fully optimised?

So far the answer i am getting on that is NO. However if you really think it is possible that is something we need to investigate and consider now.

the very first SHA-256 miner was only maybe 5% less efficient than the best one (poclbm was giving me good hash rates before a lot of these newer kernels optimized it by a few more percent)
people just found 1% improvements here and there a few times and after a while there were no optimizations left
some optimizations reduced the total instruction count by one out of 1300 (less than 0.1% improvement)

SHA-256 takes like 20% less energy to mine off the top of my head because it doesn't use the GPU ram as much
so I'm sure there are algorithms that take even less GPU power because they rape one part of the chip (bottleneck) and don't touch the rest of it much

OK so it seems that some algos will bottleneck certain parts of the gpu before others so since other parts are left redundant it draws less energy. I did actually ask that exact thing earlier in the thread but nobody took up on it. Okay so let's be fair... so algos on x11 could be running as fast as they ever will on our gpus and will burn less energy than scrypt? is that a fair assumption?  

However is 50% sounding correct? that does sound like some miner tweaks and mods could be very useful..the bottlenecks seem rather large here?

Also since none of these algos in this mix or qrks mix are memory hard, it seems those 2 should be equally as efficient since the algos will be creating these same bottlenecks and stoping the memory getting over taxed? or very very close too close to seperate really. So x11 is not ground breaking with regard the efficiency aspect since we can see sha256 and all the other algos in QRK and x11 are possibly just as easy on our electricity usage.


So the super new efficiency story seems to be a good marketing  at best or perhaps just wishful thinking.... but perhaps not as open to super tweaking of the miner as we thought could be taking place.

So we rule out going x11 based on efficiency alone...


Let's do it like this.... a kind of battle of the algos....


so for efficiency running on gpu with current miners - - any algo that is not memory hard?  qrk, x11, single algos ...sha 256 ... all the others...


so for asic resistance - - scryptN, vs scrypt jane - high n, vs QRK, vs X11.   Let's do that one now.... who wins the anti asic battle and why? technical difficulty to create and cost to create...lets take in all the factors here....??

[flipme]

It quite good algo less energy consumption. Less noise try mining hirocoin

the algo = less energy?? you are still posting this after reading the entire thread?

yes

compare SHA-256 mining with GPU to scrypt
SHA-256 was optimized to the bone with Bitcoin, it was over 99% efficient compared to a "perfect" miner that didn't waste any ops anywhere because it only had a few ops here and there that were necessary but not part of the algorithm

yet it still takes less energy than mining scrypt, when scrypt possibly isn't even as optimized (there aren't several competing scrypt kernels afaik, but for Bitcoin there was fatk, poclbm, diablo, etc.)

Ok so that sounds more like the replies we are after.  Let me just understand this.

sha256 miners although almost 100% efficient running on gpu - draw less electricity and creates less heat than scrypt... can i ask by exactly how much less electricity? i've never mined sha256...are we talking 50%

sha256 mining you are sure was optimised to almost 100%?  what level of optimisation do you consider x11 miners to have at this point?

Can this therefore be a direct indication and something we can even apply to x11 ?

Also is there any reason at all why x11 could or should me more efficient than QRK?  in terms of heat and electricity used even when the cards calculations resources are maxed and fully optimised?

So far the answer i am getting on that is NO. However if you really think it is possible that is something we need to investigate and consider now.

the very first SHA-256 miner was only maybe 5% less efficient than the best one (poclbm was giving me good hash rates before a lot of these newer kernels optimized it by a few more percent)
people just found 1% improvements here and there a few times and after a while there were no optimizations left
some optimizations reduced the total instruction count by one out of 1300 (less than 0.1% improvement)

SHA-256 takes like 20% less energy to mine off the top of my head because it doesn't use the GPU ram as much
so I'm sure there are algorithms that take even less GPU power because they rape one part of the chip (bottleneck) and don't touch the rest of it much

Thanks for pointing this out. The ASIC MOB is pulling all registers now! Watch out.
Stupid, uneducated posters, street smart crooks, name calling, tabloid phrases.

You got anything substantial to add to your own thread OP?

[cryptohunter]

It quite good algo less energy consumption. Less noise try mining hirocoin

the algo = less energy?? you are still posting this after reading the entire thread?

yes

compare SHA-256 mining with GPU to scrypt
SHA-256 was optimized to the bone with Bitcoin, it was over 99% efficient compared to a "perfect" miner that didn't waste any ops anywhere because it only had a few ops here and there that were necessary but not part of the algorithm

yet it still takes less energy than mining scrypt, when scrypt possibly isn't even as optimized (there aren't several competing scrypt kernels afaik, but for Bitcoin there was fatk, poclbm, diablo, etc.)

Ok so that sounds more like the replies we are after.  Let me just understand this.

sha256 miners although almost 100% efficient running on gpu - draw less electricity and creates less heat than scrypt... can i ask by exactly how much less electricity? i've never mined sha256...are we talking 50%

sha256 mining you are sure was optimised to almost 100%?  what level of optimisation do you consider x11 miners to have at this point?

Can this therefore be a direct indication and something we can even apply to x11 ?

Also is there any reason at all why x11 could or should me more efficient than QRK?  in terms of heat and electricity used even when the cards calculations resources are maxed and fully optimised?

So far the answer i am getting on that is NO. However if you really think it is possible that is something we need to investigate and consider now.

the very first SHA-256 miner was only maybe 5% less efficient than the best one (poclbm was giving me good hash rates before a lot of these newer kernels optimized it by a few more percent)
people just found 1% improvements here and there a few times and after a while there were no optimizations left
some optimizations reduced the total instruction count by one out of 1300 (less than 0.1% improvement)

SHA-256 takes like 20% less energy to mine off the top of my head because it doesn't use the GPU ram as much
so I'm sure there are algorithms that take even less GPU power because they rape one part of the chip (bottleneck) and don't touch the rest of it much

Thanks for pointing this out. The ASIC MOB is pulling all registers now! Watch out.
Stupid, uneducated posters, street smart crooks, name calling, tabloid phrases.

You got anything substantial to add to your own thread OP?

Please troll, give your noob mouth a rest. We are talking here, don't want your continued screaming and shouting about asic supporters?  i see none in here.

This has nothing to do with asic support. Go back and read the entire thread. Then get your parents to read over it and assist you with your comprehension skills.  

flipme and slapper..... are you two morons a couple?

[flipme]

It quite good algo less energy consumption. Less noise try mining hirocoin

the algo = less energy?? you are still posting this after reading the entire thread?

yes

compare SHA-256 mining with GPU to scrypt
SHA-256 was optimized to the bone with Bitcoin, it was over 99% efficient compared to a "perfect" miner that didn't waste any ops anywhere because it only had a few ops here and there that were necessary but not part of the algorithm

yet it still takes less energy than mining scrypt, when scrypt possibly isn't even as optimized (there aren't several competing scrypt kernels afaik, but for Bitcoin there was fatk, poclbm, diablo, etc.)

Ok so that sounds more like the replies we are after.  Let me just understand this.

sha256 miners although almost 100% efficient running on gpu - draw less electricity and creates less heat than scrypt... can i ask by exactly how much less electricity? i've never mined sha256...are we talking 50%

sha256 mining you are sure was optimised to almost 100%?  what level of optimisation do you consider x11 miners to have at this point?

Can this therefore be a direct indication and something we can even apply to x11 ?

Also is there any reason at all why x11 could or should me more efficient than QRK?  in terms of heat and electricity used even when the cards calculations resources are maxed and fully optimised?

So far the answer i am getting on that is NO. However if you really think it is possible that is something we need to investigate and consider now.

the very first SHA-256 miner was only maybe 5% less efficient than the best one (poclbm was giving me good hash rates before a lot of these newer kernels optimized it by a few more percent)
people just found 1% improvements here and there a few times and after a while there were no optimizations left
some optimizations reduced the total instruction count by one out of 1300 (less than 0.1% improvement)

SHA-256 takes like 20% less energy to mine off the top of my head because it doesn't use the GPU ram as much
so I'm sure there are algorithms that take even less GPU power because they rape one part of the chip (bottleneck) and don't touch the rest of it much

OK so it seems that some algos will bottleneck certain parts of the gpu before others so since other parts are left redundant it draws less energy. I did actually ask that exact thing earlier in the thread but nobody took up on it. Okay so let's be fair... so algos on x11 could be running as fast as they ever will on our gpus and will burn less energy than scrypt? is that a fair assumption?  

However is 50% sounding correct? that does sound like some miner tweaks and mods could be very useful..the bottlenecks seem rather large here?

Also since none of these algos in this mix or qrks mix are memory hard, it seems those 2 should be equally as efficient since the algos will be creating these same bottlenecks and stoping the memory getting over taxed? or very very close too close to seperate really. So x11 is not ground breaking with regard the efficiency aspect since we can see sha256 and all the other algos in QRK and x11 are possibly just as easy on our electricity usage.


So the super new efficiency story seems to be a good marketing  at best or perhaps just wishful thinking.... but perhaps not as open to super tweaking of the miner as we thought could be taking place.

So we rule out going x11 based on efficiency alone...


Let's do it like this.... a kind of battle of the algos....


so for efficiency running on gpu with current miners - - any algo that is not memory hard?  qrk, x11, single algos ...sha 256 ... all the others...


so for asic resistance - - scryptN, vs scrypt jane - high n, vs QRK, vs X11.   Let's do that one now.... who wins the anti asic battle and why? technical difficulty to create and cost to create...lets take in all the factors here....??

You could make it run much faster on a farm with a smart paralleling solution.
That would be a thread dispatcher for the algos among entities delivering a timely result according to the total cycle time.
Get a quote from the guys who do the weather forecast software.
Or from Disney, or lets call a name, PIXAR.

Or Google.
Whats up with the Google Coin. If it's for real I'd expect a real overcast for anything Altcoin.
They probably come up with their own algo.

Or maybe they'll just use X11, bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha.

[cryptohunter]

It quite good algo less energy consumption. Less noise try mining hirocoin

the algo = less energy?? you are still posting this after reading the entire thread?

yes

compare SHA-256 mining with GPU to scrypt
SHA-256 was optimized to the bone with Bitcoin, it was over 99% efficient compared to a "perfect" miner that didn't waste any ops anywhere because it only had a few ops here and there that were necessary but not part of the algorithm

yet it still takes less energy than mining scrypt, when scrypt possibly isn't even as optimized (there aren't several competing scrypt kernels afaik, but for Bitcoin there was fatk, poclbm, diablo, etc.)

Ok so that sounds more like the replies we are after.  Let me just understand this.

sha256 miners although almost 100% efficient running on gpu - draw less electricity and creates less heat than scrypt... can i ask by exactly how much less electricity? i've never mined sha256...are we talking 50%

sha256 mining you are sure was optimised to almost 100%?  what level of optimisation do you consider x11 miners to have at this point?

Can this therefore be a direct indication and something we can even apply to x11 ?

Also is there any reason at all why x11 could or should me more efficient than QRK?  in terms of heat and electricity used even when the cards calculations resources are maxed and fully optimised?

So far the answer i am getting on that is NO. However if you really think it is possible that is something we need to investigate and consider now.

the very first SHA-256 miner was only maybe 5% less efficient than the best one (poclbm was giving me good hash rates before a lot of these newer kernels optimized it by a few more percent)
people just found 1% improvements here and there a few times and after a while there were no optimizations left
some optimizations reduced the total instruction count by one out of 1300 (less than 0.1% improvement)

SHA-256 takes like 20% less energy to mine off the top of my head because it doesn't use the GPU ram as much
so I'm sure there are algorithms that take even less GPU power because they rape one part of the chip (bottleneck) and don't touch the rest of it much

OK so it seems that some algos will bottleneck certain parts of the gpu before others so since other parts are left redundant it draws less energy. I did actually ask that exact thing earlier in the thread but nobody took up on it. Okay so let's be fair... so algos on x11 could be running as fast as they ever will on our gpus and will burn less energy than scrypt? is that a fair assumption?  

However is 50% sounding correct? that does sound like some miner tweaks and mods could be very useful..the bottlenecks seem rather large here?

Also since none of these algos in this mix or qrks mix are memory hard, it seems those 2 should be equally as efficient since the algos will be creating these same bottlenecks and stoping the memory getting over taxed? or very very close too close to seperate really. So x11 is not ground breaking with regard the efficiency aspect since we can see sha256 and all the other algos in QRK and x11 are possibly just as easy on our electricity usage.


So the super new efficiency story seems to be a good marketing  at best or perhaps just wishful thinking.... but perhaps not as open to super tweaking of the miner as we thought could be taking place.

So we rule out going x11 based on efficiency alone...


Let's do it like this.... a kind of battle of the algos....


so for efficiency running on gpu with current miners - - any algo that is not memory hard?  qrk, x11, single algos ...sha 256 ... all the others...


so for asic resistance - - scryptN, vs scrypt jane - high n, vs QRK, vs X11.   Let's do that one now.... who wins the anti asic battle and why? technical difficulty to create and cost to create...lets take in all the factors here....??

You could make it run much faster on a farm with a smart paralleling solution.
That would be a thread dispatcher for the algos among entities delivering a timely result according to the total cycle time.
Get a quote from the guys who do the weather forecast software.
Or from Disney, or lets call a name, PIXAR.

Or Google.
Whats up with the Google Coin. If it's for real I'd expect a real overcast for anything Altcoin.
They probably come up with their own algo.

Or maybe they'll just use X11, bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha.

They may well use x11 but before they decide to they just need answers to a few of these questions.

1. is it more efficient than qrk?
2. is it more secure than qrk?
3. is it more efficient than scrypt? or is the miner just crippled and can't use the full potential of the card?
4. are there more efficient miners already out for x11 that are more optimised?
5. is it more asic resistant that qrk?
6. is it more asic resistant that scyptN , scrypt jane
7. is it x12, x13, x99 going to be better? will we need to fork all of the coins over and over again?


just yes or no with some kind of reasoning they can follow.... it can't be that hard can it to answer a few questions to the best of your knowledge?

If we had a direct answer to some of those backed up with some real data that could be a great starting point ...