[ANN] PTS.1GH.COM - GPU, CPU mining ★ New version 1.4! Please upgrade ASAP! ★

[mudshark79]

Payday!

[xxrforone]

We need Gpu load up to 99%  not just 65%  7950

[mudshark79]

If the lack of luck persists hashpower will change it's mind sooner or later  , or maybe ypool also ... gpu ...

ypоol protoshares is 6%, 1GH.COM is only 3.5%
this is important for my office botnet 

Right, but at the moment 96,5% of "nothing" is less than 94% of "something"., nevermind, don't wanna spoil the party.

look at http://ptsweb.beeeeer.org/blocks
they've found 5 blocks today, 3 yesterday, and 10 the day before.  It varies a lot

Right, but the nice-looking beeer-UI doesn't give a hint about the hashpower involved also - so you can't say anything about the efficiency. 1GH does a bit or at least you could calculate, as long as the top contributor list was shorter than 100, now you can make some estimations. 

[reorder]

Btw, isn't it a "unhealthy" condition of a network, if 98% off all blocks are found by just one pool? What has this to do with "consensus" through proof-of-work? Same question is for mmc where 1gh finds nearly all the blocks... maybe a bit off topic, though. Also my understanding in this field or details is still a bit limited, normally you don't worry too much about this, don't you  ?

It is unhealthy indeed. Somehow everyone seems to ignore ypool monopoly in PTS while 1gh takes quite a fire for being #1 in MMC.

[mudshark79]

Btw, isn't it a "unhealthy" condition of a network, if 98% off all blocks are found by just one pool? What has this to do with "consensus" through proof-of-work? Same question is for mmc where 1gh finds nearly all the blocks... maybe a bit off topic, though. Also my understanding in this field or details is still a bit limited, normally you don't worry too much about this, don't you  ?

[phrozenspite]

If the lack of luck persists hashpower will change it's mind sooner or later  , or maybe ypool also ... gpu ...

ypоol protoshares is 6%, 1GH.COM is only 3.5%
this is important for my office botnet 

Right, but at the moment 96,5% of "nothing" is less than 94% of "something"., nevermind, don't wanna spoil the party.

look at http://ptsweb.beeeeer.org/blocks
they've found 5 blocks today, 3 yesterday, and 10 the day before.  It varies a lot

[mudshark79]

If the lack of luck persists hashpower will change it's mind sooner or later  , or maybe ypool also ... gpu ...

ypоol protoshares is 6%, 1GH.COM is only 3.5%
this is important for my office botnet 

Right, but at the moment 96,5% of "nothing" is less than 94% of "something"., nevermind, don't wanna spoil the party.

[earntodie]

If the lack of luck persists hashpower will change it's mind sooner or later  , or maybe ypool also ... gpu ...

ypоol protoshares is 6%, 1GH.COM is only 3.5%
this is important for my office botnet 

[phrozenspite]

hey reorder, the latest miner works fine only about 1% rejects now.
Is payout working for the site yet? i noticed that our first confirmed block put me above .1

[reorder]

Have issue:

Code: [Select]

c:\pts-1gh-win>pts-miner.exe PbFmDH5TqZViVm4TR2e4p9H4DqDYpUKdnN
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "pts-miner.py", line 5, in <module>
  File "zipextimporter.pyo", line 82, in load_module
  File "pyopencl\__init__.pyo", line 28, in <module>
  File "zipextimporter.pyo", line 98, in load_module
ImportError: MemoryLoadLibrary failed loading pyopencl\_cl.pydMy gpu:

Code: [Select]

deviceQuery.exe Starting...

 CUDA Device Query (Runtime API) version (CUDART static linking)

Detected 1 CUDA Capable device(s)

Device 0: "GeForce GTX 650 Ti"
  CUDA Driver Version / Runtime Version          6.0 / 5.5
  CUDA Capability Major/Minor version number:    3.0
  Total amount of global memory:                 1024 MBytes (1073414144 bytes)
  ( 4) Multiprocessors, (192) CUDA Cores/MP:     768 CUDA Cores
  GPU Clock rate:                                928 MHz (0.93 GHz)
  Memory Clock rate:                             2700 Mhz
  Memory Bus Width:                              128-bit
  L2 Cache Size:                                 262144 bytes
  Maximum Texture Dimension Size (x,y,z)         1D=(65536), 2D=(65536, 65536),
3D=(4096, 4096, 4096)
  Maximum Layered 1D Texture Size, (num) layers  1D=(16384), 2048 layers
  Maximum Layered 2D Texture Size, (num) layers  2D=(16384, 16384), 2048 layers
  Total amount of constant memory:               65536 bytes
  Total amount of shared memory per block:       49152 bytes
  Total number of registers available per block: 65536
  Warp size:                                     32
  Maximum number of threads per multiprocessor:  2048
  Maximum number of threads per block:           1024
  Max dimension size of a thread block (x,y,z): (1024, 1024, 64)
  Max dimension size of a grid size    (x,y,z): (2147483647, 65535, 65535)
  Maximum memory pitch:                          2147483647 bytes
  Texture alignment:                             512 bytes
  Concurrent copy and kernel execution:          Yes with 1 copy engine(s)
  Run time limit on kernels:                     Yes
  Integrated GPU sharing Host Memory:            No
  Support host page-locked memory mapping:       Yes
  Alignment requirement for Surfaces:            Yes
  Device has ECC support:                        Disabled
  CUDA Device Driver Mode (TCC or WDDM):         WDDM (Windows Display Driver Mo
del)
  Device supports Unified Addressing (UVA):      No
  Device PCI Bus ID / PCI location ID:           2 / 0
  Compute Mode:
     < Default (multiple host threads can use ::cudaSetDevice() with device simu
ltaneously) >

deviceQuery, CUDA Driver = CUDART, CUDA Driver Version = 6.0, CUDA Runtime Versi
on = 5.5, NumDevs = 1, Device0 = GeForce GTX 650 Ti
Result = PASSMaybe low memory? Monitor plugged in the card too/

No, it just does not work yet with Nvidia on 64bit Windows. Working on it right now.

[reorder]

Why are we getting so many immature blocks?

Better Question: why the block rate "degraded" while Hashpower rised constantly? Laws of Propability? Seems like best working Condition was somewhen 6 hours ago...

Just luck or lack thereof.

If the lack of luck persists hashpower will change it's mind sooner or later  , or maybe ypool also ... gpu ...

That for sure, so tell your AMD friends how cool PTS is

[mudshark79]

Why are we getting so many immature blocks?

Better Question: why the block rate "degraded" while Hashpower rised constantly? Laws of Propability? Seems like best working Condition was somewhen 6 hours ago...

Just luck or lack thereof.

If the lack of luck persists hashpower will change it's mind sooner or later  , or maybe ypool also ... gpu ...

[earntodie]

What about CPU mining for Win and Mac?

[old_pioner]

Have issue:

Code: [Select]

c:\pts-1gh-win>pts-miner.exe PbFmDH5TqZViVm4TR2e4p9H4DqDYpUKdnN
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "pts-miner.py", line 5, in <module>
  File "zipextimporter.pyo", line 82, in load_module
  File "pyopencl\__init__.pyo", line 28, in <module>
  File "zipextimporter.pyo", line 98, in load_module
ImportError: MemoryLoadLibrary failed loading pyopencl\_cl.pydMy gpu:

Code: [Select]

deviceQuery.exe Starting...

 CUDA Device Query (Runtime API) version (CUDART static linking)

Detected 1 CUDA Capable device(s)

Device 0: "GeForce GTX 650 Ti"
  CUDA Driver Version / Runtime Version          6.0 / 5.5
  CUDA Capability Major/Minor version number:    3.0
  Total amount of global memory:                 1024 MBytes (1073414144 bytes)
  ( 4) Multiprocessors, (192) CUDA Cores/MP:     768 CUDA Cores
  GPU Clock rate:                                928 MHz (0.93 GHz)
  Memory Clock rate:                             2700 Mhz
  Memory Bus Width:                              128-bit
  L2 Cache Size:                                 262144 bytes
  Maximum Texture Dimension Size (x,y,z)         1D=(65536), 2D=(65536, 65536),
3D=(4096, 4096, 4096)
  Maximum Layered 1D Texture Size, (num) layers  1D=(16384), 2048 layers
  Maximum Layered 2D Texture Size, (num) layers  2D=(16384, 16384), 2048 layers
  Total amount of constant memory:               65536 bytes
  Total amount of shared memory per block:       49152 bytes
  Total number of registers available per block: 65536
  Warp size:                                     32
  Maximum number of threads per multiprocessor:  2048
  Maximum number of threads per block:           1024
  Max dimension size of a thread block (x,y,z): (1024, 1024, 64)
  Max dimension size of a grid size    (x,y,z): (2147483647, 65535, 65535)
  Maximum memory pitch:                          2147483647 bytes
  Texture alignment:                             512 bytes
  Concurrent copy and kernel execution:          Yes with 1 copy engine(s)
  Run time limit on kernels:                     Yes
  Integrated GPU sharing Host Memory:            No
  Support host page-locked memory mapping:       Yes
  Alignment requirement for Surfaces:            Yes
  Device has ECC support:                        Disabled
  CUDA Device Driver Mode (TCC or WDDM):         WDDM (Windows Display Driver Mo
del)
  Device supports Unified Addressing (UVA):      No
  Device PCI Bus ID / PCI location ID:           2 / 0
  Compute Mode:
     < Default (multiple host threads can use ::cudaSetDevice() with device simu
ltaneously) >

deviceQuery, CUDA Driver = CUDART, CUDA Driver Version = 6.0, CUDA Runtime Versi
on = 5.5, NumDevs = 1, Device0 = GeForce GTX 650 Ti
Result = PASSMaybe low memory? Monitor plugged in the card too/

[reorder]

Why are we getting so many immature blocks?

Better Question: why the block rate "degraded" while Hashpower rised constantly? Laws of Propability? Seems like best working Condition was somewhen 6 hours ago...

Just luck or lack thereof.