Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
You really can compile from your mac . Don't need Wine for this problem.Not on Mavericks, it is still not sorted out even in bitcoin: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/3228
Mine uses getwork. I will add staratum support in next versionsYou sure, stratum? It is not like it is applicable or useful for PTS/MMC..
BOOST_LIB_SUFFIX=-mt
QT client does not link properly on Mavericks, this issue is inherited from Bitcoin: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/3228Is there a binary available for OSX Mavericks? I´m unable to compile even though I´ve followed the instructions in this thread...
this is also my problem. But what i did was virtualbox and setup debian...but yes better if we can run on mac
Mike
Python is significantly slower than C. Buyer beware. Personally i would wait for a C implementation than buy a python one.Sorry, but so what? You do not need ultra performance to send 10-20 packets of data/sec over networkMost pools are running python, for that matter.
Anyway, sold.
EDIT: sold exclusively.
Conveinently "sold exclusively" immediately when people started asking to buy it from you. I smell a rat.
Unless you can produce, I'm inclined to NOT believe you.
Code: [Select]EXCEPTION: 9key_error
CKey::CKey() : EC_KEY_new_by_curve_name failed
protoshares in Runaway exception
protoshares-qt: /usr/include/boost/thread/pthread/condition_variable_fwd.hpp:81: boost::condition_variable::~condition_variable(): Assertion `!ret' failed.
Aborted (core dumped)
Built ok, error on start. Libboost differs on .rpm instead of .deb distros?
OS - Fedora 19 64 bit
This is mostly viable for all those gpu rigs owner although ltc is more profitable than pts right now, even with the gpu miner bonus ^^Somehow, PTS value increase seems more sustainable than one of LTC
And supply is running out blazingly fast, a foresighted miner cannot ignore this.
But you cannot economically switch your CPU back to LTC mining when you are done with PTS, so it is not just the power draw.My 7950 at 1025/1250 ran at 515 cpm, dual gpu 510 cpm each - power draw about 200-225W per GPU, 50W for the System -> 450-500W for 1000 cpm -> around 2 cpm per W
My i5-3570k at home draws 90W under load (whole system) for 120 cpm, thats 1.33 cpm/w
e5 Xeons are better cpm/w (i think they even beat gpus) but are not realistic to compare since one e5 costs around 1000-2000€ and a 7950 200€ max.
Your i5 is better cpm/w than a GPU which means that those who own i5's can still mine profitably and cover electric costs. Those who are investing in capital equipment just for mining care about CPM/w and CPM/capital in which case they will probably opt for the GPU approach. But for the average casual miner capital costs are '0' which means all that matters is CPM/w. I believe that an i7 is probably around 1 cpm/w.
As an individual miner, it is cheaper to mine with your CPU than your GPU if you care about return on electricity. That is a win in my book!
1.2 CPM per Watt is worse than 2 CPM per Watt...but yeah, close enough to make cpu mining still a viable option.
Well, it is about 99% for this kernel, and no register spilling, AMD has tons of registers, for that matter. Just take a look at what compiler generates when you shift or rotate ulong..Sure thing you can get great results with 128-bit registers and vector rotates and shifts in one cycle. But GPU has just so much more ALUs it kind of compensates. Still, registers are 32-bit and there is no SHLD/SHRD to implement 64-bit ops nicely, so they are pretty much a showstopper.I would say it differently - cpu compensates (very well) for less parallelism with vector instructions. Do you agree?
32 bit registers doesn't make it automatically slower because they're 32 bit, there's just not enough free registers left for all possible waves. Do you have 100% kernel occupancy on all your kernels? I don't think so. SHLD/SHRD isn't going to change it.
@reorder
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/intelligent-systems/intel-technology/fast-sha512-implementations-ia-processors-paper.html
8.59cycles/bytes for sha512 on large data buffer. It's ridiculous.
Theres a guy on irc freenode #protoshares testing a gpu miner for pts mining
He says 1 GFX card with 2 gig DDR is like the largest amazon ec2 instance,two xeons
If that is all the faster a GPU is then I would have to say that we are VERY close to having a CPU only algorithm. What is the relative power consumption and cost of the systems?
It's because of sha512, not birthdays.
New intel cpus are extra fast in generating sha512s due to many specialized vector instructions. 32 ht cores 2.1Ghz xeon (2x16) can generate one nonce range in 37ms, radeon 5870 in ~70ms. That's it. Additionally intel cpu can be oced even 2x.
All that birthday searching does nothing, in fact, it probably helps gpu.
Its 40nm gpu vs 22nm cpu though, a three generation gap! Maybe Rx200 Radeons are again much faster than cpu. When the two gpu version comes out I'm going to buy it and write optimized version for it out of curiosity.
Still, few have such high-end cpus.
Also, there's absolutely no resistance to fpga/asics. It can be drastically faster on such things, I mean several orders of magnitude. Not that it's something important anywany - mining is too short lived.
