Bitcoin Forum
June 17, 2024, 07:25:14 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 [207] 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 ... 1240 »
  Print  
Author Topic: CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded GPU kernels.  (Read 2347501 times)
sp_ (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2912
Merit: 1087

Team Black developer


View Profile
July 18, 2015, 03:49:30 PM
 #4121

   #if __CUDA_ARCH__ > 500
   #pragma unroll
   #endif   

Team Black Miner (ETHB3 ETH ETC VTC KAWPOW FIROPOW MEOWPOW + dual mining + tripple mining.. https://github.com/sp-hash/TeamBlackMiner
rednoW
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1510
Merit: 1003


View Profile
July 18, 2015, 05:25:03 PM
 #4122

stock? ...
or you overclock also? ...
#crysx

all me results are for max possible overclock for the algo.
For quark it is 1510/1600
6114 khash new record
go6ooo1212
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512
Merit: 1000


quarkchain.io


View Profile
July 18, 2015, 05:34:06 PM
 #4123

Just did a small donation to SP_ , TxID:
58b1cd0e556f708bd6da1a7d5cad19b3a7dbca88b75d39ce63ccc4b921f7fb9f
sp_ (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2912
Merit: 1087

Team Black developer


View Profile
July 18, 2015, 07:22:09 PM
Last edit: July 18, 2015, 07:44:21 PM by sp_
 #4124

Thanks for the support guys.

I found another improvement:

   x8 = ROTL32(0x4D42C787, 7);

compiles to:

   // inline asm
   mov.u32    %r4599, 1296222087;
   // inline asm
   shf.l.wrap.b32 %r4597, %r4599, %r4599, %r4756;

stupid compiler.

x11 improvement coming soon. (luffacubehash512)

Team Black Miner (ETHB3 ETH ETC VTC KAWPOW FIROPOW MEOWPOW + dual mining + tripple mining.. https://github.com/sp-hash/TeamBlackMiner
chrysophylax
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2828
Merit: 1091


--- ChainWorks Industries ---


View Profile WWW
July 19, 2015, 01:13:28 AM
 #4125

Thanks for the support guys.

I found another improvement:

   x8 = ROTL32(0x4D42C787, 7);

compiles to:

   // inline asm
   mov.u32    %r4599, 1296222087;
   // inline asm
   shf.l.wrap.b32 %r4597, %r4599, %r4599, %r4756;

stupid compiler.

x11 improvement coming soon. (luffacubehash512)

and just as i finished writing in the sgminer thread about wanting more x11 optimizations and how ive been asking for them for many many months - you come out with this ...

the farm will be grateful - and will mine donations when the donation links get up and running again next week mate ...

x11 opts makes us smile here ...

#crysx

hashbrown9000
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 427
Merit: 250


View Profile
July 19, 2015, 01:25:29 AM
 #4126

looks like the Quark honeymoon is over. Now 0.187 on hashpower

Pinkcoin:
ETH:
VTC:
BTC:
CapnBDL
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064
Merit: 500


MOBU


View Profile WWW
July 19, 2015, 01:43:20 AM
Last edit: July 19, 2015, 02:05:49 AM by CapnBDL
 #4127

looks like the Quark honeymoon is over. Now 0.187 on hashpower

Explain plz?

           ▄██▄
████▄    ▄██████▄    ▄████
██████▄ ▀████████▀ ▄██████
▐███████▄ ▀████▀ ▄███████▌
▐█████████▄ ▀▀ ▄█████████▌
 ████ ▀█████▄▄█████▀ ████
 ████ ▄ ▀████████▀ ▄ ████
 ▐███ ██▄ ▀████▀ ▄██ ███▌
 ▐███ ████▄ ▀▀ ▄████ ███▌
  ███ ██████▄▄██████ ███
  ███ ██████████████ ███
  ▐██ ██████████████ ██▌
  ▐██ ██████████████ ██▌
   ██ ██████████████ ██
       ▀██████████▀
         ▀██████▀
           ▀██▀
.M O B U.███████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
   The Investment Bank of the Future  
The Security Token Protocol and Licensed Security Token Exchange
█▀




█▄
Facebook Medium
Whitepaper ANN
LinkedIn    Reddit
▀█




▄█

         ▄▄▄█████▄▄▄
      ▄███████████████▄
    ▄███████████████████▄
   ███████████████████████
  ████ ▀███████▀    ▀██████
 █████▌  ▀▀███        ▄█████
▐██████▄             ▐██████▌
▐█████▄               ██████▌
▐███████▄            ███████▌
 ███████▄          ▄████████
  ████████       ▄█████████
   █████▀   ▄▄▄███████████
    ▀███████████████████▀
      ▀███████████████▀
         ▀▀▀█████▀▀▀

         ▄▄▄█████▄▄▄
      ▄███████████████▄
    ▄███████████████████▄
   ███████████████████████
  █████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀█████
 █████     ▄▄          █████
▐█████     ████▄▄      █████▌
▐█████     ████████    █████▌
▐█████     ████▀▀      █████▌
 █████     ▀▀          █████
  █████▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█████
   ███████████████████████
    ▀███████████████████▀
      ▀███████████████▀
         ▀▀▀█████▀▀▀

         ▄▄▄█████▄▄▄
      ▄███████████████▄
    ▄███████████████████▄
   ███████████████████████
  ████████████████▀▀▀ ▐████
 ███████████▀▀▀  ▄█▀  ██████
▐█████▀▀▀      ▄█▀    ██████▌
▐███▄▄▄    ▄▄██▀     ███████▌
▐████████ ███▀       ███████▌
 ████████▌█          ███████
  ████████ ▄▄██▄    ███████
   ███████████████▄ ██████
    ▀███████████████████▀
      ▀███████████████▀
         ▀▀▀█████▀▀▀
bensam1231
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750
Merit: 1024


View Profile
July 19, 2015, 02:23:41 AM
 #4128

Yeah all the algos are a flaming wreck right now. Hopefully the chinese find some other shit coin they're interested in.

I buy private Nvidia miners. Send information and/or inquiries to my PM box.
hashbrown9000
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 427
Merit: 250


View Profile
July 19, 2015, 03:04:08 AM
 #4129

Quote
Quote from: hashbrown9000 on Today at 01:25:29 AM
looks like the Quark honeymoon is over. Now 0.187 on hashpower

Explain plz?

Well, for people that pay for electricity anyways.  For me, at $0.11/kwH , it's just about breaking even = no point to keep the rigs running.

Pinkcoin:
ETH:
VTC:
BTC:
lawrencelyl
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 94
Merit: 10


View Profile
July 19, 2015, 03:14:05 AM
 #4130

Quote
Quote from: hashbrown9000 on Today at 01:25:29 AM
looks like the Quark honeymoon is over. Now 0.187 on hashpower

Explain plz?

Well, for people that pay for electricity anyways.  For me, at $0.11/kwH , it's just about breaking even = no point to keep the rigs running.
In my country, I pay $0.137/kwh excluding tax.  Cry
sp_ (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2912
Merit: 1087

Team Black developer


View Profile
July 19, 2015, 06:25:30 AM
 #4131

Submitted a small boost in the qubit algo.

Team Black Miner (ETHB3 ETH ETC VTC KAWPOW FIROPOW MEOWPOW + dual mining + tripple mining.. https://github.com/sp-hash/TeamBlackMiner
djm34
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400
Merit: 1050


View Profile WWW
July 19, 2015, 12:10:24 PM
 #4132

Thanks for the support guys.

I found another improvement:

   x8 = ROTL32(0x4D42C787, 7);

compiles to:

   // inline asm
   mov.u32    %r4599, 1296222087;
   // inline asm
   shf.l.wrap.b32 %r4597, %r4599, %r4599, %r4756;

stupid compiler.

x11 improvement coming soon. (luffacubehash512)
why don't you just declare it as constant ? no point in doing a rotation at all, if the result is known

djm34 facebook page
BTC: 1NENYmxwZGHsKFmyjTc5WferTn5VTFb7Ze
Pledge for neoscrypt ccminer to that address: 16UoC4DmTz2pvhFvcfTQrzkPTrXkWijzXw
sp_ (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2912
Merit: 1087

Team Black developer


View Profile
July 19, 2015, 12:28:56 PM
 #4133

stupid compiler.
x11 improvement coming soon. (luffacubehash512)
why don't you just declare it as constant ? no point in doing a rotation at all, if the result is known

I did. not much gain in x11 though, but qubit got a little bit faster.

Team Black Miner (ETHB3 ETH ETC VTC KAWPOW FIROPOW MEOWPOW + dual mining + tripple mining.. https://github.com/sp-hash/TeamBlackMiner
bensam1231
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750
Merit: 1024


View Profile
July 19, 2015, 06:26:44 PM
 #4134

Thanks for the support guys.

I found another improvement:

   x8 = ROTL32(0x4D42C787, 7);

compiles to:

   // inline asm
   mov.u32    %r4599, 1296222087;
   // inline asm
   shf.l.wrap.b32 %r4597, %r4599, %r4599, %r4756;

stupid compiler.

x11 improvement coming soon. (luffacubehash512)

and just as i finished writing in the sgminer thread about wanting more x11 optimizations and how ive been asking for them for many many months - you come out with this ...

the farm will be grateful - and will mine donations when the donation links get up and running again next week mate ...

x11 opts makes us smile here ...

#crysx

I'd also vote for x11. It looks like the safest option right now or Neoscrypt or Cryptonote. But apparently Cryptonote is overrun with bots so it doesn't really even matter if it's improved. Neoscrypt is still relatively nice though.

I buy private Nvidia miners. Send information and/or inquiries to my PM box.
scryptr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1796
Merit: 1028



View Profile WWW
July 19, 2015, 06:54:08 PM
 #4135

BUILD 861-

I compiled commit 861 and it is now running on my Linux rigs.  My 750ti cards are now mining Quark in the 6500kh/s range, with an occasional 6600kh/s reading.  This is an improvement of 100kh/s over previous builds. 

We will see about stability over the next few days.

--scryptr

TIPS:  BTC - 1Fs4uZ6a9ABYBTaHGUfqcwCQmeBRxkKRQT    DASH - XrK81tW31SLsVvZ2WX9VhTjpT6GXJPLdbQ
          SCRYPTR'S NOTEBOOK: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5035515.msg46035530#msg46035530
          GITHUB: "github.com/scryptr"  MERIT is appreciated, also.  Thanks!
dga
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 737
Merit: 511


View Profile WWW
July 20, 2015, 05:30:52 PM
 #4136

Thanks for keeping my toys profitable this week.  This isn't a particularly effective patch - sub-0.1% improvement on 750ti - but it's a little cleaner.  (I'm not sure if this part is the speedup or some other changes I made that I'll submit separately, but I figure the cleanup is worthwhile anyway).  The only real substance in here is ensuring that the temporary variable for the swaps is scoped more tightly; the rest just shifts them to using typesafe inline functions instead of the existing macros.

Code:
diff --git a/bitslice_transformations_quad.cu b/bitslice_transformations_quad.cu
index fa81e83..67786c0 100644
--- a/bitslice_transformations_quad.cu
+++ b/bitslice_transformations_quad.cu
@@ -10,46 +10,53 @@
 #define merge8(z, x, y, b)\
                z=__byte_perm(x, y, b); \
 
-#define SWAP8(x,y)\
-               x=__byte_perm(x, y, 0x5410); \
-               y=__byte_perm(x, y, 0x7632);
-
-#define SWAP4(x,y)\
-               t = (y<<4); \
-               t = (x ^ t); \
-               t = 0xf0f0f0f0UL & t; \
-               x = (x ^ t); \
-               t=  t>>4;\
-               y=  y ^ t;
-
-#define SWAP4_final(x,y)\
-               t = (y<<4); \
-               t = (x ^ t); \
-               t = 0xf0f0f0f0UL & t; \
-               x = (x ^ t); \
-
-
-#define SWAP2(x,y)\
-               t = (y<<2); \
-               t = (x ^ t); \
-               t = 0xccccccccUL & t; \
-               x = (x ^ t); \
-               t=  t>>2;\
-               y=  y ^ t;
-
-#define SWAP1(x,y)\
-               t = (y+y); \
-               t = (x ^ t); \
-               t = 0xaaaaaaaaUL & t; \
-               x = (x ^ t); \
-               t=  t>>1;\
-               y=  y ^ t;
+__device__ __forceinline__
+void SWAP8(uint32_t &x, uint32_t &y) {
+       x = __byte_perm(x, y, 0x5410);
+       y = __byte_perm(x, y, 0x7632);
+}
+
+__device__ __forceinline__
+void SWAP4(uint32_t &x, uint32_t &y) {
+       uint32_t t = (y<<4) ^ x;
+       t = 0xf0f0f0f0UL & t;
+       x = (x ^ t);
+       t = t>>4;
+       y = y ^ t;
+}
+
+__device__ __forceinline__
+void SWAP4_final(uint32_t &x, const uint32_t y) {
+       uint32_t t = (y<<4);
+       t = (x ^ t);
+       t = 0xf0f0f0f0UL & t;
+       x = (x ^ t);
+}
+
+__device__ __forceinline__
+void SWAP2(uint32_t &x, uint32_t &y) {
+       uint32_t t = (y<<2);
+       t = (x ^ t);
+       t = 0xccccccccUL & t;
+       x = (x ^ t);
+       t = t>>2;
+       y = y ^ t;
+}
+
+__device__ __forceinline__
+void SWAP1(uint32_t &x, uint32_t &y) {
+       uint32_t t = (y+y);
+       t = (x ^ t);
+       t = 0xaaaaaaaaUL & t;
+       x = (x ^ t);
+       t = t>>1;
+       y = y ^ t;
+}
 
 __device__ __forceinline__
 void to_bitslice_quad(uint32_t *const __restrict__ input, uint32_t *const __restrict__ output)
 {
     uint32_t other[8];
-       uint32_t t;
 
        uint32_t perm = (threadIdx.x & 1) ? 0x7362 : 0x5140;
        const unsigned int n = threadIdx.x & 3;
@@ -90,7 +97,6 @@ void to_bitslice_quad(uint32_t *const __restrict__ input, uint32_t *const __rest
 __device__ __forceinline__
 void from_bitslice_quad(const uint32_t *const __restrict__ input, uint32_t *const __restrict__ output)
 {
-       uint32_t t;
        const uint32_t perm = 0x7531;//(threadIdx.x & 1) ? 0x3175 : 0x7531;
 
                output[0] = __byte_perm(input[0], input[4], perm);
@@ -158,7 +164,6 @@ void from_bitslice_quad(const uint32_t *const __restrict__ input, uint32_t *cons
 __device__ __forceinline__
 void from_bitslice_quad_final(const uint32_t *const __restrict__ input, uint32_t *const __restrict__ output)
 {
-       uint32_t t;
        const uint32_t perm = 0x7531;//(threadIdx.x & 1) ? 0x3175 : 0x7531;
 
        if (threadIdx.x & 3)

And to groestl functions:

Code:
diff --git a/groestl_functions_quad.cu b/groestl_functions_quad.cu
index c39e81d..5b1cdb1 100644
--- a/groestl_functions_quad.cu
+++ b/groestl_functions_quad.cu
@@ -54,11 +56,9 @@ __device__ __forceinline__ void G256_AddRoundConstantP_quad(uint32_t &x7, uint32
 __device__ __forceinline__ void G16mul_quad(uint32_t &x3, uint32_t &x2, uint32_t &x1, uint32_t &x0,
        const uint32_t &y3, const uint32_t &y2, const uint32_t &y1, const uint32_t &y0)
 {
-    uint32_t t0,t1,t2;
-    
-    t0 = ((x2 ^ x0) ^ (x3 ^ x1)) & ((y2 ^ y0) ^ (y3 ^ y1));
-    t1 = ((x2 ^ x0) & (y2 ^ y0)) ^ t0;
-    t2 = ((x3 ^ x1) & (y3 ^ y1)) ^ t0 ^ t1;
+    uint32_t t0 = ((x2 ^ x0) ^ (x3 ^ x1)) & ((y2 ^ y0) ^ (y3 ^ y1));
+    uint32_t t1 = ((x2 ^ x0) & (y2 ^ y0)) ^ t0;
+    uint32_t t2 = ((x3 ^ x1) & (y3 ^ y1)) ^ t0 ^ t1;
 
     t0 = (x2^x3) & (y2^y3);
     x3 = (x3 & y3) ^ t0 ^ t1;
@@ -71,26 +71,24 @@ __device__ __forceinline__ void G16mul_quad(uint32_t &x3, uint32_t &x2, uint32_t
 
 __device__ __forceinline__ void G256_inv_quad(uint32_t &x7, uint32_t &x6, uint32_t &x5, uint32_t &x4, uint32_
 {
-    uint32_t t0,t1,t2,t3,t4,t5,t6,a,b;
-
-    t3 = x7;
-    t2 = x6;
-    t1 = x5;
-    t0 = x4;
+    uint32_t t3 = x7;
+    uint32_t t2 = x6;
+    uint32_t t1 = x5;
+    uint32_t t0 = x4;
 
     G16mul_quad(t3, t2, t1, t0, x3, x2, x1, x0);
 
-    a = (x4 ^ x0);
+    uint32_t a = (x4 ^ x0);
     t0 ^= a;
     t2 ^= (x7 ^ x3) ^ (x5 ^ x1);
     t1 ^= (x5 ^ x1) ^ a;
     t3 ^= (x6 ^ x2) ^ a;
 
-    b = t0 ^ t1;
-    t4 = (t2 ^ t3) & b;
+    uint32_t b = t0 ^ t1;
+    uint32_t t4 = (t2 ^ t3) & b;
     a = t4 ^ t3 ^ t1;
-    t5 = (t3 & t1) ^ a;
-    t6 = (t2 & t0) ^ a ^ (t2 ^ t0);
+    uint32_t t5 = (t3 & t1) ^ a;
+    uint32_t t6 = (t2 & t0) ^ a ^ (t2 ^ t0);
 
     t4 = (t5 ^ t6) & b;
     t1 = (t6 & t1) ^ t4;
@@ -107,9 +105,8 @@ __device__ __forceinline__ void G256_inv_quad(uint32_t &x7, uint32_t &x6, uint32
 
 __device__ __forceinline__ void transAtoX_quad(uint32_t &x0, uint32_t &x1, uint32_t &x2, uint32_t &x3, uint32
 {
-    uint32_t t0, t1;
-    t0 = x0 ^ x1 ^ x2;
-    t1 = x5 ^ x6;
+    uint32_t t0 = x0 ^ x1 ^ x2;
+    uint32_t t1 = x5 ^ x6;
     x2 = t0 ^ t1 ^ x7;
     x6 = t0 ^ x3 ^ x6;
     x3 = x0 ^ x1 ^ x3 ^ x4 ^ x7;    
@@ -122,19 +119,17 @@ __device__ __forceinline__ void transAtoX_quad(uint32_t &x0, uint32_t &x1, uint3
 
 __device__ __forceinline__ void transXtoA_quad(uint32_t &x0, uint32_t &x1, uint32_t &x2, uint32_t &x3, uint32
 {
-    uint32_t t0,t2,t3,t5;
-
     x1 ^= x4;
-    t0 = x1 ^ x6;
+    uint32_t t0 = x1 ^ x6;
     x1 ^= x5;
 
-    t2 = x0 ^ x2;
+    uint32_t t2 = x0 ^ x2;
     x2 = x3 ^ x5;
     t2 ^= x2 ^ x6;
     x2 ^= x7;
-    t3 = x4 ^ x2 ^ x6;
+    uint32_t t3 = x4 ^ x2 ^ x6;
 
-    t5 = x0 ^ x6;
+    uint32_t t5 = x0 ^ x6;
     x4 = x3 ^ x7;
     x0 = x3 ^ x5;
 
@@ -160,14 +155,12 @@ __device__ __forceinline__ void sbox_quad(uint32_t *const r)
 
 __device__ __forceinline__ void G256_ShiftBytesP_quad(uint32_t &x7, uint32_t &x6, uint32_t &x5, uint32_t &x4,
 {
-    uint32_t t0,t1;
-
        const uint32_t tpos = threadIdx.x & 0x03;
        const uint32_t shift1 = tpos << 1;
        const uint32_t shift2 = shift1 + 1 + ((tpos == 3) << 2);
 
-    t0 = __byte_perm(x0, 0, 0x1010)>>shift1;
-    t1 = __byte_perm(x0, 0, 0x3232)>>shift2;
+    uint32_t t0 = __byte_perm(x0, 0, 0x1010)>>shift1;
+    uint32_t t1 = __byte_perm(x0, 0, 0x3232)>>shift2;
     x0 = __byte_perm(t0, t1, 0x5410);
 
     t0 = __byte_perm(x1, 0, 0x1010)>>shift1;
@@ -201,14 +194,12 @@ __device__ __forceinline__ void G256_ShiftBytesP_quad(uint32_t &x7, uint32_t &x6
 
 __device__ __forceinline__ void G256_ShiftBytesQ_quad(uint32_t &x7, uint32_t &x6, uint32_t &x5, uint32_t &x4,
 {
-    uint32_t t0,t1;
-
        const uint32_t tpos = threadIdx.x & 0x03;
        const uint32_t shift1 = (1 - (tpos >> 1)) + ((tpos & 0x01) << 2);
        const uint32_t shift2 = shift1 + 2 + ((tpos == 1) << 2);
 
-    t0 = __byte_perm(x0, 0, 0x1010)>>shift1;
-    t1 = __byte_perm(x0, 0, 0x3232)>>shift2;
+    uint32_t t0 = __byte_perm(x0, 0, 0x1010)>>shift1;
+    uint32_t t1 = __byte_perm(x0, 0, 0x3232)>>shift2;
     x0 = __byte_perm(t0, t1, 0x5410);
 
     t0 = __byte_perm(x1, 0, 0x1010)>>shift1;

Cheers.

AliMan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 2044
Merit: 502


Vave.com - Crypto Casino


View Profile
July 20, 2015, 08:55:58 PM
 #4137

80 GH/s on Quark on nicehash even at 0.23 BTC/GH, how's that even profitable?

██████
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████
██████            ██████
 █████            █████
  █████          █████
   █████        █████
 ████████      ████████
  ████████    ████████
      █████  █████ 
    ████████████████
    ████████████████
        ████████   
         ██████     
          ████     
           ██         
AVE.COM | BRANDNEW CRYPTO
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀.. CASINO & BETTING PLATFORM
██████
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████
██████
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████
🏆🎁
██████
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████
██████
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████
████████████████████████████████   ████████████████   ██████
.
..PLAY NOW..
.
██████   ███████████████████   █████████████████████████████
██████
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████
joblo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470
Merit: 1114


View Profile
July 20, 2015, 10:25:37 PM
 #4138

80 GH/s on Quark on nicehash even at 0.23 BTC/GH, how's that even profitable?

On the mining side I don't know why some orf the quark volume hasn't moved to other algos.
At current quark rates some algos are becoming more competitive.

For rentals the margin hasn't changed much. The rental price on Nicehash is in line with what
SAK is paying on ffpool as it was when SAK was double the current price. If it was profitable
then it must still be profitable now. With margins that tight I don't see how it was ever profitable
to pay to mine SAK.

AKA JayDDee, cpuminer-opt developer. https://github.com/JayDDee/cpuminer-opt
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5226770.msg53865575#msg53865575
BTC: 12tdvfF7KmAsihBXQXynT6E6th2c2pByTT,
sp_ (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2912
Merit: 1087

Team Black developer


View Profile
July 21, 2015, 06:00:28 AM
 #4139

Quote
Quote from: hashbrown9000 on Today at 01:25:29 AM
looks like the Quark honeymoon is over. Now 0.187 on hashpower
Explain plz?
Well, for people that pay for electricity anyways.  For me, at $0.11/kwH , it's just about breaking even = no point to keep the rigs running.

Quark is paying 0.23BTC/day. (nicehash 24hours average)
If you mine with the 750ti, quark will still be profitable with  0,07BTC/day (GHASH)
 
BUILD 861-
I compiled commit 861 and it is now running on my Linux rigs.  My 750ti cards are now mining Quark in the 6500kh/s range, with an occasional 6600kh/s reading.  This is an improvement of 100kh/s over previous builds.  
We will see about stability over the next few days.
--scryptr

6.6MHASH@50watt

7575W for 1 ghash/s of quark

Electricity cost:
7575 * $0.11 *24/1000= $20

Mining income per day:
0.23 * 287 = $66

Net gain: $46 a day.

You need 151 750ti cards, or around 40 980ti cards.

Team Black Miner (ETHB3 ETH ETC VTC KAWPOW FIROPOW MEOWPOW + dual mining + tripple mining.. https://github.com/sp-hash/TeamBlackMiner
bensam1231
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750
Merit: 1024


View Profile
July 21, 2015, 06:21:59 AM
 #4140

Quote
Quote from: hashbrown9000 on Today at 01:25:29 AM
looks like the Quark honeymoon is over. Now 0.187 on hashpower
Explain plz?
Well, for people that pay for electricity anyways.  For me, at $0.11/kwH , it's just about breaking even = no point to keep the rigs running.

Quark is paying 0.23BTC/day. (nicehash 24hours average)
If you mine with the 750ti, quark will still be profitable with  0,07BTC/day (GHASH)
 


Weird, when I figured things out, a 750ti was closer to a 970 in terms of efficiency. How many watts per 750ti and how much hash?

I'm at .1144 kwh and it's getting closer to .14BTC/day to be profitable

Quark
190w per 970, 16.5Mhs

Is there a special TDP I'm supposed to be running 970s at? I know the efficiency goes up when you drop the TDP, but not by that much and you lose a lot of hash.

I buy private Nvidia miners. Send information and/or inquiries to my PM box.
Pages: « 1 ... 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 [207] 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 ... 1240 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!