joblo
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1470
Merit: 1114
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
December 20, 2015, 07:13:43 PM |
|
Good cards. But they draw 200-250w. The x11 kernal is not optimal. You should mine something else.
4 750ti's draw 260 watts. 4 R9 Nano's draw 400 watt while doing 11Mhz per card!.. ![Wink](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/wink.gif) Is that at the wall? My fury draws more than 300 watt, the single card! And it's the same chipset. yup ... apparently the nano has mixed specs of the fury x and fury - but with a much lower power draw - and a much smaller size mate ... very impressive cards ... but very expensive cards ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) ... #crysx 980 performance in a half length card with only one 8 pin power connector, it's only a matter of time for someone to build a 2x-nano.
|
|
|
|
Eliovp
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1050
Merit: 1293
Huh?
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
December 20, 2015, 07:39:23 PM |
|
Good cards. But they draw 200-250w. The x11 kernal is not optimal. You should mine something else.
4 750ti's draw 260 watts. 4 R9 Nano's draw 400 watt while doing 11Mhz per card!.. ![Wink](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/wink.gif) Is that at the wall? My fury draws more than 300 watt, the single card! And it's the same chipset. yup ... apparently the nano has mixed specs of the fury x and fury - but with a much lower power draw - and a much smaller size mate ... very impressive cards ... but very expensive cards ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) ... #crysx 980 performance in a half length card with only one 8 pin power connector, it's only a matter of time for someone to build a 2x-nano. True, and push the price down :p Or someone who builds a farm with 100 of those ![Grin](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/grin.gif) Or maybe there is one in the making... ![Roll Eyes](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif)
|
|
|
|
AzzAz
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1030
Merit: 1006
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
December 20, 2015, 07:39:47 PM Last edit: December 20, 2015, 09:07:34 PM by AzzAz |
|
Noboby tested yet? What speeds are you getting in release 77 (lyra2v2) ? Can you compare with release 74 and 76 please. This program is supported by donations. If you want more speead, please donate to my donation adress. A handful of people did it for release 76. Thanks for your support. Looks like .77 is 1-2% slower than .76 on quark, 960s. Testing further edit: No, it's same +-1%
|
|
|
|
pallas
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2716
Merit: 1094
Black Belt Developer
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
December 20, 2015, 07:49:08 PM |
|
The nano has just a differently tuned Fiji chip, the same that's on the fury series. And, apart from the ram interface, it's very very similar to hawaii (290 and 390). Stop dreaming.
|
|
|
|
Eliovp
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1050
Merit: 1293
Huh?
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
December 20, 2015, 08:07:55 PM |
|
The nano has just a differently tuned Fiji chip, the same that's on the fury series. And, apart from the ram interface, it's very very similar to hawaii (290 and 390).
Well, they seem to have tuned it very well. over 100 watt less on a nano vs a fury x while almost doing the exact same hash rate... And i have both of them, so i'm 200% sure of that ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) Stop dreaming.
Dreams are today's answers to tomorrow's questions ![Wink](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
|
|
|
|
scryptr
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1797
Merit: 1028
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
December 20, 2015, 08:53:47 PM |
|
The nano has just a differently tuned Fiji chip, the same that's on the fury series. And, apart from the ram interface, it's very very similar to hawaii (290 and 390).
Well, they seem to have tuned it very well. over 100 watt less on a nano vs a fury x while almost doing the exact same hash rate... And i have both of them, so i'm 200% sure of that ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) Stop dreaming.
Dreams are today's answers to tomorrow's questions ![Wink](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/wink.gif) I MUST BE DREAMING-- Tomorrow's question: Does Selena Gomez still love me? --scryptr
|
|
|
|
djm34
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1050
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
December 20, 2015, 10:48:39 PM |
|
The nano has just a differently tuned Fiji chip, the same that's on the fury series. And, apart from the ram interface, it's very very similar to hawaii (290 and 390).
Well, they seem to have tuned it very well. over 100 watt less on a nano vs a fury x while almost doing the exact same hash rate... And i have both of them, so i'm 200% sure of that ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) Stop dreaming.
Dreams are today's answers to tomorrow's questions ![Wink](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/wink.gif) I MUST BE DREAMING-- Tomorrow's question: Does Selena Gomez still love me? --scryptr okay... ![Grin](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/grin.gif) this thread is getting a bit hijacked amd card,dream, then fantasy about some unknown actress (at least to me...)... ![Grin](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/grin.gif) lets call that Christmas spirit (not sure how it fits with amd though...) anyway, my turn: I love you Anne ! ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif)
|
djm34 facebook pageBTC: 1NENYmxwZGHsKFmyjTc5WferTn5VTFb7Ze Pledge for neoscrypt ccminer to that address: 16UoC4DmTz2pvhFvcfTQrzkPTrXkWijzXw
|
|
|
chrysophylax
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2870
Merit: 1091
--- ChainWorks Industries ---
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
December 21, 2015, 01:29:21 AM |
|
The nano has just a differently tuned Fiji chip, the same that's on the fury series. And, apart from the ram interface, it's very very similar to hawaii (290 and 390).
Well, they seem to have tuned it very well. over 100 watt less on a nano vs a fury x while almost doing the exact same hash rate... And i have both of them, so i'm 200% sure of that ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) Stop dreaming.
Dreams are today's answers to tomorrow's questions ![Wink](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/wink.gif) I MUST BE DREAMING-- Tomorrow's question: Does Selena Gomez still love me? --scryptr okay... ![Grin](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/grin.gif) this thread is getting a bit hijacked amd card,dream, then fantasy about some unknown actress (at least to me...)... ![Grin](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/grin.gif) lets call that Christmas spirit (not sure how it fits with amd though...) anyway, my turn: I love you Anne ! ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) hahaha ... yup - i agree with djm34 ... its the christmas spirits ... and all you guys and gals drink way too much of those spirits ... ![Tongue](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/tongue.gif) ... #crysx
|
|
|
|
djm34
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1050
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
December 21, 2015, 01:54:39 AM |
|
The nano has just a differently tuned Fiji chip, the same that's on the fury series. And, apart from the ram interface, it's very very similar to hawaii (290 and 390).
Well, they seem to have tuned it very well. over 100 watt less on a nano vs a fury x while almost doing the exact same hash rate... And i have both of them, so i'm 200% sure of that ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) Stop dreaming.
Dreams are today's answers to tomorrow's questions ![Wink](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/wink.gif) I MUST BE DREAMING-- Tomorrow's question: Does Selena Gomez still love me? --scryptr okay... ![Grin](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/grin.gif) this thread is getting a bit hijacked amd card,dream, then fantasy about some unknown actress (at least to me...)... ![Grin](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/grin.gif) lets call that Christmas spirit (not sure how it fits with amd though...) anyway, my turn: I love you Anne ! ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) hahaha ... yup - i agree with djm34 ... its the christmas spirits ... and all you guys and gals drink way too much of those spirits ... ![Tongue](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/tongue.gif) ... #crysx still sober as far as I am concerned ![Grin](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/grin.gif)
|
djm34 facebook pageBTC: 1NENYmxwZGHsKFmyjTc5WferTn5VTFb7Ze Pledge for neoscrypt ccminer to that address: 16UoC4DmTz2pvhFvcfTQrzkPTrXkWijzXw
|
|
|
chrysophylax
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2870
Merit: 1091
--- ChainWorks Industries ---
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
December 21, 2015, 03:38:27 AM |
|
sp ...
750ti oc lp card ...
tested with ccminer-spmod77 ... build f23x64c75 ...
-------
[2015-12-21 13:55:33] accepted: 107/107 (100.00%), 5919 kH/s yes! [2015-12-21 13:55:33] mining-ace.granitecoin.com:6010/ quark block 2682200 [2015-12-21 13:55:33] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 750 Ti, 5930 (T= 71C F= 59% C=1163/2700) [2015-12-21 13:55:48] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 750 Ti, 5911 (T= 72C F= 59% C=1163/2700) [2015-12-21 13:56:03] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 750 Ti, 5920 (T= 72C F= 59% C=1163/2700) [2015-12-21 13:56:18] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 750 Ti, 5915 (T= 72C F= 59% C=1176/2700) [2015-12-21 13:56:33] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 750 Ti, 5922 (T= 72C F= 59% C=1163/2700)
-------
seems to be about the same - so as you mentioned earlier - it seems that the compute 5.0 cards dont have much of an increase ...
#crysx
|
|
|
|
Velgelm
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
December 21, 2015, 05:19:19 AM |
|
Noboby tested yet? What speeds are you getting in release 77 (lyra2v2) ? Can you compare with release 74 and 76 please. This program is supported by donations. If you want more speead, please donate to my donation adress. A handful of people did it for release 76. Thanks for your support. GTX 960 OC +210 core Lyre2REV2 74-6051 77-6363 Qubit 74-8458 77-8150 X11 74-5592 77-5400
|
|
|
|
sp_ (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1087
Team Black developer
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
December 21, 2015, 06:34:16 AM |
|
Thanks for testing. lyra2v2 is up 5% on the gtx 960. Is it worth 0.01BTC in donations guys? Your moneymaker is 5% faster. Time to support the optimizers ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif)
|
|
|
|
serg_25
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 51
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
December 21, 2015, 07:50:29 AM |
|
Hi Guys. did you see that speed? https://www.nicehash.com/index.jsp?p=news&id=53damn... amd again can be more profitable than nvidia. Look at X11 speed. 11.72mh with r9 280x. P.S. wolf, is it your work on nicehash?
|
|
|
|
Velgelm
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
December 21, 2015, 08:24:38 AM |
|
shit..damn...fuck...
|
|
|
|
sp_ (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1087
Team Black developer
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
December 21, 2015, 08:37:15 AM |
|
x11 has never been profitable on NVIDIA. Mine Lyra2v2 or quark. The optimized AMD kernals are slow and use alot of power.
When using Xintensity of 1024 the client will report higher numbers than on the pool. (bug in the kuchur bins)
|
|
|
|
Velgelm
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
December 21, 2015, 08:45:34 AM |
|
x11 has never been profitable on NVIDIA. Mine Lyra2v2 or quark. The optimized AMD kernals are slow and use alot of power.
When using Xintensity of 1024 the client will report higher numbers than on the pool. (bug in the kuchur bins)
i understood this, but with this bins difficulty on X11 , quark and lyra2rev2 will be start to the moon
|
|
|
|
serg_25
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 51
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
December 21, 2015, 09:05:21 AM |
|
x11 has never been profitable on NVIDIA. Mine Lyra2v2 or quark. The optimized AMD kernals are slow and use alot of power.
When using Xintensity of 1024 the client will report higher numbers than on the pool. (bug in the kuchur bins)
You probably right. To avoid "panic" i decided to make some calculation on "kh/s per watt" comparsion: (750Ti vs 280x) NVIDIA: $speedx11 = 3.35; $speedlyra = 5.135; $speedquark = 6.9; $watt = 40;
$speed* / $watt * 1000
result: nvidia X11 kh\s per watt 83.75 Lyra kh\s per watt 128.375 Quark kh\s per watt 172.5
AMD $speedx11 = 11.72; $speedlyra = 13.06; $speedquark = 16.19; $watt = 180;
result: X11 kh\s per watt 65.111111111111 Lyra kh\s per watt 72.555555555556 Quark kh\s per watt 89.944444444444
Well, based on number 750 Ti is faster. Numbers can't lie. P.S. please keep in mind that ofcourse we need to understand that it will be different money for full rig setup, but this difficult to calculate because all of us have different prices for cards (new or used one) P.P.S. but amd also has benefit. you can mine eth with 280x.
|
|
|
|
pallas
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2716
Merit: 1094
Black Belt Developer
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
December 21, 2015, 09:23:44 AM |
|
...and power consumption is not the same on all algos.
|
|
|
|
serg_25
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 51
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
December 21, 2015, 09:30:55 AM |
|
...and power consumption is not the same on all algos.
yep, on 750Ti. for me it starts from 38 - 43 watt based on algo.
|
|
|
|
pallas
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2716
Merit: 1094
Black Belt Developer
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
December 21, 2015, 09:40:11 AM |
|
...and power consumption is not the same on all algos.
yep, on 750Ti. for me it starts from 38 - 43 watt based on algo. on 280x as well: depends on ram usage and how well the kernel is optimised (and probably other factors). it can easily swing from 150W to 200/220W.
|
|
|
|
|