HASHNEST Discussion and Support Thread

[JessicaG]

What do you think is wrong with the statement I made? Which child subforum are you suggesting

Edit: I think I misunderstood what Jessica's was saying. S9 is 2.29 times more expensive in terms of hash cost but only 2.09 times more expensive in terms of maintence. Where does the thrice come in? You can buy more s7 hash but you will pay more in maintenance at least from the numbers that HashNest is giving. Anyone can give any other numbers?

The 'thrice' was when S9 hashes were roughly 15k satoshi vs 5k sat on S7 hashes; I gave that number out of my head, when I had last checked the prices. I see it has shifted somewhat in the meantime (S9 hashes going down in price, and S7's went up).

Number are simply not easy to give; because for instance those hashcost you were referring to prior, is a 'non-equal' percentage number between the S7 and S9 hashes: When the difficulty or the BTC price changes, the maintenance percentage on both hashes do not shift equally because they have different maintenance costs. And since your hascost is related to the ever changing factors of the hash-market prices, the price of the BTC and the bi-weekly network adjustment, exact numbers are not that easy. Unless, you would keep track of a daily record for yourself off course

[xbtman]

Thanks for the reply, I am definitely missing something. I put in equal bitcoin into S7 and S9 hashes. I was able to get 2.3 times as many S7 hashes. Even with the higher maintenence fees I am getting 2x the bitcoins from the S7.

From using the numbers on the calculator, it looks like in 2 months they should give equal bitcoins. After 3 months the S9 should be ahead, but for now S7 seems to work out.

[ps_jb]

Thanks for the reply, I am definitely missing something. I put in equal bitcoin into S7 and S9 hashes. I was able to get 2.3 times as many S7 hashes. Even with the higher maintenence fees I am getting 2x the bitcoins from the S7.

From using the numbers on the calculator, it looks like in 2 months they should give equal bitcoins. After 3 months the S9 should be ahead, but for now S7 seems to work out.

You calculations are wrong

Right now BTC dropped $200 down. If it will be down $100 and every two weeks we will experience +10% diff increase your S7 will go below trash level

[xbtman]

This is what I wrote earlier, but no one replied with numbers. I don't feel like a lot of people here have done the math.

But isn't the s7 maintenance cost more than double of the s9? Can someone show a screenshot of s7 and s9 earnings and maintenance cost?

When I run it through bitcoinwisdom mining calculator, they are both unprofitable over time but the s9 is closer to breaking even.

https://supload.com/rJL7uGurl

As far as I can tell neither will earn money more than what you spent. After spending some more time looking at how much maint the S7 is, I see some large maintenance charges added every so often. Whereas before maintenance was working out to 20% of the payout for S7. Now with these large charges its 50% of the payout, so S7 doesn't look as attractive as it did before, but its still better to buy S7 over S9 based on the price/hash difference.

I notice that prices have gone up in the last 24 horus. Is this because of the BTC continuing drop?

[JessicaG]

Thanks for the reply, I am definitely missing something.

My impression is that you have your math correct. It's just that every possible variable, except for your investment(s), isn't a static number in the whole. Hence, asking for somewhat solid numbers was kinda hard, since the whole tends to change every time one of those variables change 

I notice that prices have gone up in the last 24 hours. Is this because of the BTC continuing drop?

Prices also went up when the BTC was in it's bull run lately. So more probable, it's due to people simply buying up S7 hashes again.

[DebitMe]

Thanks for the reply, I am definitely missing something.

My impression is that you have your math correct. It's just that every possible variable, except for your investment(s), isn't a static number in the whole. Hence, asking for somewhat solid numbers was kinda hard, since the whole tends to change every time one of those variables change 

I notice that prices have gone up in the last 24 hours. Is this because of the BTC continuing drop?

Prices also went up when the BTC was in it's bull run lately. So more probable, it's due to people simply buying up S7 hashes again.

The other thing to remember is that the markets are not rational.  They don't behave like traditional markets and any attempts to make correlations between btc price or difficulty compared to price of hashes may not be relevant at all.

[ps_jb]

So more probable, it's due to people simply buying up S7 hashes again.

Two Things Are Infinite: the Universe and Human Stupidity (c)

[JessicaG]

So more probable, it's due to people simply buying up S7 hashes again.

Two Things Are Infinite: the Universe and Human Stupidity (c)

Yes, and mr. Einstein had his doubt regarding the the first 

[Doamader]

The last time i bought s7 it were just 70ghs and it gaved me negative balance, something like 500 satoshis difference between fee and my income from it, when i had 100ghs i were able to get something like 30 satoshis of profit, while with same 100ghs i had earned much more, soo i dont see how s7 keeps being more profitable then s9. I do know we can buy easy s7 at 6000 satoshis then s9 at 15k, but i dont see the difference between hash making difference on the next stage of difficult (+7.06%) (https://btc.com/). In fact i believe we will get a reverse on the next days, where s7 will be giving less then the s9, considering the same value invested between the two hash.

[JessicaG]

i dont see how s7 keeps being more profitable then s9.

Here is a very simplified example (with totally fictional numbers, just for convenience of understanding):


First of all, one GH of SHA256 power is one GH of SHA256 power. So it doesn't matter which type of machines are producing these, be them S7's or S9's or even a truckload of USB-devices.

Now, let's say you have 1 BTC to spend, and:
- S7 hashes cost 0.01 per GH
- S9 hashes cost 0.025 per GH
- maintenance on S7 hashes cost 0.005 per GH
- maintenance on S9 hashes cost 0.01 per GH

For your 1 BTC, you could purchase a total of:
- 100 GH of S7 power, or
- 50 GH of S9 power

This translates into the maintenance for them as following:
- 100 GH of S7 power, costs 0.5 on maintenance (100 x 0.005)
- 50 GH of S9 power, costs 0.2 on maintenance (20 x 0.01)

Now, as said before, a GH is a GH. And let's say that a single GH yields 0.02. Now you get:
- 100 GH of S7 power, yields a 2.00
- 50 GH of S9 power, yields a 1.00

Then, there's the maintenance to deduct:
- 100 GH of S7 power, yielding 2.00, minus the 0.5 maintenance, is netting a 1.5
- 50 GH of S9 power, yielding 1.00, minus the 0.2 maintenance, is netting a 0.8

===> Result: The S7's yield 0.7 more than the S9's.


Again, the above numbers are totally fictional, and are only meant to explain on why currently the S7 are more profitable than S9 hashes.

but i dont see the difference between hash making difference on the next stage of difficult (+7.06%)

Another very simplified example with totally fictional numbers:


For convenience, we take the same numbers as the example earlier given. But, for easy convenience, let's say that the difficulty will increase with 100%. Now, you get:

- maintenance on S7 hashes cost 0.005 0.01 per GH (100% increase!)
- maintenance on S9 hashes cost 0.01 0.02 per GH (100% increase!)

This translates into the maintenance for them as following:
- 100 GH of S7 power, costs 0.5 1.0 on maintenance (100 x 0.005 0.01)
- 50 GH of S9 power, costs 0.2 0.4 on maintenance (20 x 0.01 0.02)

The maintenance to deduct:
- 100 GH of S7 power, yielding 2.00, minus the 0.5 1.0 maintenance, is netting a 1.5 1.0
- 50 GH of S9 power, yielding 1.00, minus the 0.2 0.4 maintenance, is netting a 0.8 0.6

===> Result: The S7's yield 0.7 0.4 more than the S9's.


Now next, for example, if you take a 300% increase, then the results on S7's would be 0, whilst the results on the S9 would still be a positive 0.2



I hope you are starting to get the picture?

[xbtman]

Recently the maintenance on s7 looks to be 75% and above.  This puts s9 above s7 from what I can tell. Is this just general variability or is it creeping up? It should stay the same until the next difficulty increase right?

[Snub]

Recently the maintenance on s7 looks to be 75% and above.  This puts s9 above s7 from what I can tell. Is this just general variability or is it creeping up? It should stay the same until the next difficulty increase right?

it depends on luck also, if antpool is unlucky for some time in a day, you will ofcourse recieve lower payouts with the same amount of fees so fees would be kinda heavy for the payouts to carry

[xbtman]

What you are saying makes sense but what I see are basically the same payouts (small variation) but hugely varying maintenance fees. Sometimes the maintenance will be 2x the payout. Recently the last day or so there has been a lot more maintenance charges that have been more than the payout (per payout) if I average all of these transactions I get 75%+ maintenance in the last day or so. Is this how they do it? The payout is fixed per GHs and they vary the maintenance to compensate when they are unlucky?

[JessicaG]

What you are saying makes sense but what I see are basically the same payouts (small variation) but hugely varying maintenance fees. Sometimes the maintenance will be 2x the payout. Recently the last day or so there has been a lot more maintenance charges that have been more than the payout (per payout) if I average all of these transactions I get 75%+ maintenance in the last day or so. Is this how they do it? The payout is fixed per GHs and they vary the maintenance to compensate when they are unlucky?

No, the payout is not fixed per GH; the payout per GH is based on how many blocks is being hashes by antpool, divided by how many hashes were present on antpool to find that block. What you see in your daily graph in your account, is the average of that current day.

The (small) variation you see in the payouts on each block, is due to the above. A simplified example:
- 100 people hash, each with 1 PH of power, totaling 100 PH/s
- The current block reward is 12.5, so everyone gets 12.5/100 = 0.125 reward on that block

- Now 20 join in, also with 1 PH of power each, totaling 120 PH/s
- The block reward of 12.5 is now divided among 120 people, so everyone gets ~0.104167 reward on that block



What you see in the hugely varying maintenance fees, has to do with the time (the pool luck) it took to find a block. Remember, that the maintenance fee is being presented is the costs vs time (xxx $/day  )  So when antpool find a block rather quickly ("lucky"), you see that represented as a 'reduced' maintenance costs on that block. And when antpool took some time to find a block ("unlucky"), you see that represented as a 'increased' maintenance costs on that block.

Also, to a less volatile degree, the maintenance fee is subject to the price of the Bitcoin itself; though the price itself is a given fixed amount of $ per day, you pay your fees in Bitcoins. So if the price of the Bitcoin rises, your maintenance fee (paid in Bitcoins) goes down. And when the price of the Bitcoin drops, your maintenance fee paid in Bitcoin, goes up.

[xbtman]

Ahh that makes sense, thanks for clarifiying with examples

In terms of Pacmic v5 and autorebuy what is your opinion? It seems like you have 6THS for 1BTC but at current prices you can get 6.6THS if you buy the S9 hash on the market. In Pacmic you don't pay maintenance but you don't get to keep your hashrate at the end of the contract. I would assume even with maintenance it would be better to just buy s9 hash on the market?

Also in terms of Pacmic how does the autorebuy work in terms of paying back the capital. With one contract on autobuy lets say I get up reinvesting .05BTC of my profit into hashrate. The contract will then terminate when I am paid back 1.05BTC?

Edit: Also one more question, is it possible to switch to Kano.is pool using Hashnest?

[JessicaG]

Ahh that makes sense, thanks for clarifiying with examples

In terms of Pacmic v5 and autorebuy what is your opinion? It seems like you have 6THS for 1BTC but at current prices you can get 6.6THS if you buy the S9 hash on the market. In Pacmic you don't pay maintenance but you don't get to keep your hashrate at the end of the contract. I would assume even with maintenance it would be better to just buy s9 hash on the market?

Also in terms of Pacmic how does the autorebuy work in terms of paying back the capital. With one contract on autobuy lets say I get up reinvesting .05BTC of my profit into hashrate. The contract will then terminate when I am paid back 1.05BTC?

You're welcome 


I'm not into Pacmic's. Though what I understood from other users is that you can get the most profits from them when you set it to autorebuy for like roughly the first 50% of the contract, and then switch the autorebuy off and let it expire in it's 'normal' way.
But again, I'm not into Pacmic's, so hopefully others could shed their light/experience on it...

Edit: Also one more question, is it possible to switch to Kano.is pool using Hashnest?

No. Hashnest is using antpool by default, and there is no way to switch to other pools.

[Rogerdale]

I'm looking into a possibility of buying a hashnest contract. However, I have some concerns. In particular, they offer AntMiner S9 contract for $1699 whereas they (Bitmain shop to be precise, but they are the same organization) physically sell (sold out) AntMiner S9-B22 for $1232 and they currently sell AntMiner T9 for $1104. Well, I understand that hosting in the cloud requires some additional costs, but not 25% ($450) really?

How do you explain such cost difference?

[DebitMe]

I'm looking into a possibility of buying a hashnest contract. However, I have some concerns. In particular, they offer AntMiner S9 contract for $1699 whereas they (Bitmain shop to be precise, but they are the same organization) physically sell (sold out) AntMiner S9-B22 for $1232 and they currently sell AntMiner T9 for $1104. Well, I understand that hosting in the cloud requires some additional costs, but not 25% ($450) really?

How do you explain such cost difference?

If you buy from the store, you also pay for shipping costs and you need a PSU to power your unit.  These 2 things pretty much make up that difference.

[Rogerdale]

If you buy from the store, you also pay for shipping costs and you need a PSU to power your unit.  These 2 things pretty much make up that difference.

But they offer Ant S7 miners for $370 having the same power supply requirements and the same size (so I assume that shipping costs and PSU are the same for S9 and S7). And total cost for S7 is even less than the price difference between "physical" and "cloud" S9. I believe that price of GHs on Ant S9 may fall by that difference (i.e. 25%) and it is not worth buying more. I would better buy less and add more when it becomes cheaper.

[DebitMe]

If you buy from the store, you also pay for shipping costs and you need a PSU to power your unit.  These 2 things pretty much make up that difference.

But they offer Ant S7 miners for $370 having the same power supply requirements and the same size (so I assume that shipping costs and PSU are the same for S9 and S7). And total cost for S7 is even less than the price difference between "physical" and "cloud" S9. I believe that price of GHs on Ant S9 may fall by that difference (i.e. 25%) and it is not worth buying more. I would better buy less and add more when it becomes cheaper.

These markets are not rational, and will not act rational.  Also remember that there is no oversight to stop people from manipulating the markets.  Historically there has always been a sharp decline at some point when a new hash is offered, but who knows when or how much.