julz (OP)
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1092
Merit: 1001
|
 |
April 03, 2012, 06:34:25 AM |
|
|
@electricwings BM-GtyD5exuDJ2kvEbr41XchkC8x9hPxdFd
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"This isn't the kind of software where we can leave so many unresolved bugs that we need a tracker for them." -- Satoshi
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
Sukrim
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2618
Merit: 1006
|
|
April 03, 2012, 10:44:32 AM |
|
About that Bitcoin vs. F@H thingie in the comments:
Unlike F@H Bitcoin has a 100% stable algorithm that has to be executed on every worker. F@H or any other BOINC project might update their algorithms over time and invalidating the older benchmarks. Bitcoin mining only might make use of updated OpenCL kernels if someone discovers that there is a more efficient wasy of combining some AND and OR instructions or the like. The algorithm itself ("SHA256(SHA256(header))<=Difficulty") won't change though.
|
|
|
|
molecular
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2772
Merit: 1019
|
|
April 03, 2012, 01:46:51 PM |
|
oh that's who mysteryminer2 is!
|
PGP key molecular F9B70769 fingerprint 9CDD C0D3 20F8 279F 6BE0 3F39 FC49 2362 F9B7 0769
|
|
|
|
chiropteran
|
|
April 03, 2012, 01:48:13 PM |
|
Are they going to start using correct miners? They were showing the 7970's max mining potential as 300mhash or so for a long time, while you could easily get double that with diablo...
|
|
|
|
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
|
|
April 03, 2012, 01:55:30 PM |
|
Yeah it might be too much to ask but it would be nice if they ask for HERE for some assistance of proper mining configurations.
I mean yeah there is some variance depedning on the particular miners and params but 300 MH/s for a 7970 is just a useless datapoint.
|
|
|
|
|
MrTeal
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1274
Merit: 1004
|
|
April 03, 2012, 02:03:20 PM |
|
Also, if anyone wants to do a straight swap of my 6970 at an impressive 390MH/s for your 6990 at a pathetic 389MH/s, we could work something out.
|
|
|
|
|
Graet
VIP
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 980
Merit: 1001
|
|
April 03, 2012, 02:03:52 PM |
|
signed up and commented - did anyone else?  |
|
|
|
Seal
Donator
Hero Member
Offline
Activity: 848
Merit: 1078
|
|
April 04, 2012, 12:51:03 PM |
|
signed up and commented - did anyone else? Looks like bitcoin is gonna gain a lot more momentum soon with all these mentions. +1 for the cause! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
chiropteran
|
|
April 04, 2012, 02:38:08 PM |
|
My 7970 gets over 550mhash at 950 core and under-clocked memory. I don't know how they come up with that result.
|
|
|
|
MrTeal
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1274
Merit: 1004
|
|
April 04, 2012, 02:43:27 PM |
|
My 7970 gets over 550mhash at 950 core and under-clocked memory. I don't know how they come up with that result.
They have no idea what they're doing. I have to imagine that the 6990 is mining on only one GPU and they figured that XFire would take care of the rest. How else do you explain it getting almost the same but slightly lower performance than a 6970? Should send them an email letting them know that I would retest all their cards using a couple miners to get the optimal settings for each, if they'd be willing to send me all the cards for a couple months.  |
|
|
|
|
Graet
VIP
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 980
Merit: 1001
|
|
April 05, 2012, 05:00:49 AM |
|
yep,i asked in my comment about overclocking and using a better miner and stuff  I think a few emails offering help could be good |
|
|
|
ewhenn
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 59
Merit: 0
|
|
April 07, 2012, 02:37:47 AM |
|
Doesn't go into operating costs or anything. Also a 6990 is faster than a 6970, lol. I'd take their results with a grain of salt.
|
|
|
|
|
Seal
Donator
Hero Member
Offline
Activity: 848
Merit: 1078
|
|
April 07, 2012, 11:58:10 AM |
|
Anybody on here also members of Overclockers.com or [H]? Do they have Bitcoin subforums yet? Those guys are big fans of crunching projects so it'd be good to have them on board.
|
|
|
|
Starlightbreaker
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1006
|
|
April 09, 2012, 03:44:31 PM |
|
Anybody on here also members of Overclockers.com or [H]? Do they have Bitcoin subforums yet? Those guys are big fans of crunching projects so it'd be good to have them on board.
overclockers.com hates bitcoin. |
|
|
|
Buckwheet
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 169
Merit: 100
Green Mining 85% Cheaper
|
|
April 09, 2012, 05:54:23 PM |
|
Anybody on here also members of Overclockers.com or [H]? Do they have Bitcoin subforums yet? Those guys are big fans of crunching projects so it'd be good to have them on board.
[H] has a distributed computing sub forum with a thread for Bitcoin. Most of it is F@H however. We are generally more interested in builing 4P systems for F@H on the forum. |
|
|
|
|
Gomeler
|
|
April 09, 2012, 08:57:23 PM |
|
Anybody on here also members of Overclockers.com or [H]? Do they have Bitcoin subforums yet? Those guys are big fans of crunching projects so it'd be good to have them on board.
[H] has a distributed computing sub forum with a thread for Bitcoin. Most of it is F@H however. We are generally more interested in builing 4P systems for F@H on the forum. XtremeSystems has a bitcoin sub-forum but it receives very little attention due to WCG being the primary project over there. |
|
|
|
|
Seal
Donator
Hero Member
Offline
Activity: 848
Merit: 1078
|
|
April 10, 2012, 12:38:38 AM |
|
Anybody on here also members of Overclockers.com or [H]? Do they have Bitcoin subforums yet? Those guys are big fans of crunching projects so it'd be good to have them on board.
overclockers.com hates bitcoin. Why? Its been a while since I was active on there. |
|
|
|
|
bulanula
|
|
April 10, 2012, 08:16:16 AM |
|
Since their BTC benchmarks are so untrue and it seems they have little will to do anything to inform themselves to correct this, it makes me wonder if indeed all their other benchmarks could be of the same rubbish quality  |
|
|
|
|
|
Dusty
|
|
April 10, 2012, 08:32:11 AM |
|
Since their BTC benchmarks are so untrue and it seems they have little will to do anything to inform themselves to correct this, it makes me wonder if indeed all their other benchmarks could be of the same rubbish quality +1 |
|
|
|
|
