Topic: [ANN] Orbitcoin v1.6.0.0 ~ NeoScrypt ~ Green Stake ~ 4 Years Old - page 91. (Read 201256 times)

I've just found this interesting topic,
it seems we have some extra Orbitcoin supporters.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/80810-Orbitcoin-KSP-financials-and-the-rise-of-the-reusable-spacecraft/page2?s=5f7979721e1137caf7aeec2929b4643a

Its an old thread
but seems nobody from the society supported him, probably because we didn't see it.

I'm going to sign up in the morning and say a few words,
Orbitcoin is the future space reserve currency not doge lol.

I've also spent and give lots away as well,
but I guess that comes with been open source and decentralised, its the users and miners that support who must advance ORB, each helping out in their own little way.

http://sur.ly/o/orbitcoin.org/

Domain info

Domain created 2 years ago
Latest check 1 week ago
Server location France   


Mywot
 
Trust  N/A
Privacy  Good   62
Child safety  Unsatisfactory   47


Siteadvisor


Safety status: Good



Google Safe Browsing


This website is not suspicious

Trojans 0
Exploits 0
Scripting exploits 0


Alexa


Rank

5 827 422 

Daily visitors 1 036 
Daily pageviews 1 036 
 

3
likes

30
mentions

we must reactivate Facebook

I could have a lot more, but I've also seen many ORB invested to bring ORB continues, sometimes bad, sometimes good!  Everything paid for out of my own pocket!

Let me put it this way, with our Fund are minimum of 20% of all circulating ORB from the available market
but there are several addresses you can not see how much I have

+1 to that good sir,
any clue as to your vast wealth before we get a rich list?? 

every sent orb of impatient people to any exchange is a good ORB, so my orb will be staking more fast....

This is a normal market correction under low volume

ORB had grown more than 500% to 0.00025, the BTC only 85% after its lowest!

ORB has lost ~50% after high, good point to buy
ORB has still more than 200% after long-term low of 0.00003

Yesterday I looked at the ORB/USD price,
and was shocked to find it had gone down to $2.80 per 100∅

But now its at $3.95 per 100 Orbitcoin (ORB)




Go Go Orbitcoin night whales!!

try --xintensity 4 and --thread-concurrency 16384,


perhaps it is better on your system !?

And one instance on sgminer per card is, I think also better

but in order to have a constant, comparable value you need to run a minimum of one hour!

if you mine on https://orb.dnb.io

use fix diff ports, is better

Home mining is not dead ! thank ORB

Variable stratum address to use : stratum+tcp://strat.dnb.io:3031

Diff 32 stratum address : stratum+tcp://strat.dnb.io:3028
Diff 64 stratum address : stratum+tcp://strat.dnb.io:3029 i use this
Diff 128 stratum address : stratum+tcp://strat.dnb.io:3030

2xR9 280x 1100mhz gpu 1500mhz mem
win 7 x64 14.7 rc3 drv
#define SALSA_UNROLL_LEVEL 4
#define CHACHA_UNROLL_LEVEL 4
config:
--gpu-threads 2 --worksize 256 --xintensity 3 --thread-concurrency 12288 --scan-time 15 --queue 4 --expiry 30 --gpu-memdiff 325 --no-submit-stale

No, with sgminer settings, or ATI drivers ... I know MSI Afterburner, I can try it!

Can you take GPU clock and voltage down with tools like MSI Afterburner and Sapphire TriXX?

does not work, I've tried! Think a Windows error! with the driver! I do not get the memory clock down! Windows have to probably reinstall!

you have a dual core, i have only one core per card

try using a difference between core and memory of 325

Maybe you could reduce core clocks and voltage? Something like 800MHz to 900MHz while putting the voltage down to 1.0V could save a good deal of electricity and reduce noise while having only a little impact on hash rate.

My HD7990 850MHz GPU @ 1.0V / 1250MHz memory delivers 640KH/s while keeping itself at 65 to 70 degrees Celsius.

--device 0 = HD 7970 --device 1 = R290x

kernel change
#define SALSA_UNROLL_LEVEL 4
#define CHACHA_UNROLL_LEVEL 4


303.3 Kh/s, ~ WU 4.300,
--device 0 --gpu-threads 2 --worksize 256 --xintensity 3,3 --shaders 2048,2816 --thread-concurrency 6144,11264 --scan-time
15 --queue 4 --expiry 30 --auto-gpu --gpu-engine 1050 --gpu-memdiff 325 --temp-target 85,100 --temp-overheat 90,105 --temp-
cutoff 95,110 --no-submit-stale

360.1 Kh/s, ~ WU 5.080, pool show 375 Kh/s
401.4Kh/s, ~ WU 5.800,
--device 0,1 --gpu-threads 2 --worksize 256 --xintensity 3,3 --shaders 2048,2816 --thread-concurrency 12288,16896 --scan-time
15 --queue 4 --expiry 30 --auto-gpu --gpu-engine 1050 --gpu-memdiff 325 --temp-target 85,100 --temp-overheat 90,105 --temp-
cutoff 95,110 --no-submit-stale

update 08/07/15, my driver was crashing so sgminer showed wrong value
326.2 Kh/s, ~ WU 5.000, pool show 326 Kh/s
402.5 Kh/s, ~ WU 5.850, pool show 373 Kh/s
--device 0 --gpu-threads 2 --worksize 256 --xintensity 4,4 --shaders 2048,2816 --thread-concurrency 8192,11264 --scan-time
15 --queue 4 --expiry 30 --auto-gpu --gpu-engine 1050 --gpu-memdiff 325 --temp-target 85,100 --temp-overheat 90,105 --temp-
cutoff 95,110 --no-submit-stale

326.9 Kh/s, ~ WU 4.500,
402.7 Kh/s, ~ WU 5.805, pool show 450 Kh/s
--device 0,1 --gpu-threads 2 --worksize 256 --xintensity 4,4 --shaders 2048,2816 --thread-concurrency 16384,22528 --scan-time
15 --queue 4 --expiry 30 --auto-gpu --gpu-engine 1050 --gpu-memdiff 325 --temp-target 85,100 --temp-overheat 90,105 --temp-
cutoff 95,110 --no-submit-stale


 Kh/s, ~ WU , not tested
--device 1 --gpu-threads 2 --worksize 256 --xintensity 3,3 --shaders 2048,2816 --thread-concurrency 6144,8448 --scan-time
16 --queue 4 --expiry 30 --auto-gpu --gpu-engine 1050 --gpu-memdiff 325 --temp-target 85,100 --temp-overheat 90,105 --temp-
cutoff 95,110 --no-submit-stale


I'll still try
--device 0,1 --gpu-threads 1 --worksize 256 --xintensity 3,4 --shaders 2048,2816 --thread-concurrency 6144,11264 --scan-time
15 --queue 4 --expiry 30 --auto-gpu --gpu-engine 1050 --gpu-memdiff 325 --temp-target 85,100 --temp-overheat 90,105 --temp-
cutoff 95,110 --no-submit-stale


on Win7x64 for me, with
kernel change
#define SALSA_UNROLL_LEVEL 4
#define CHACHA_UNROLL_LEVEL 4


Result, this is the best combination with

365.7 Kh/s, ~ WU 5.150, pool show 395 Kh/s HD 7970
401.1 Kh/s, ~ WU 5.800, pool show 507 Kh/s R 290x
--device 0,1 --gpu-threads 2 --worksize 256 --xintensity 3,4 --shaders 2048,2816 --thread-concurrency 12288,22528 --scan-time
15 --queue 4 --expiry 30 --auto-gpu --gpu-engine 1050 --gpu-memdiff 325 --temp-target 85,100 --temp-overheat 90,105 --temp-
cutoff 95,110 --no-submit-stale

If you ever try Ghost! You said you have 2x HD 7990 (so this is a dual-core but try per card --gpu-threads 4 --xintensity 3 --shaders 2048 --thread-concurrency 24576
I would be interested what then comes out after one hour

all tests terminated after an hour, the pool could therefore get more if you leaves run longer, the pool statistics lagging behind temporally





now ich check this again
#define SALSA_UNROLL_LEVEL 3
#define CHACHA_UNROLL_LEVEL 3

update 08/07/15, my driver was crashing so sgminer showed wrong value
295.3 Kh/s, ~ WU 4.000, pool show 312 Kh/s, canceld after 30 min
338.3 Kh/s, ~ WU 4.500, pool show 353 Kh/s, canceld after 40 min
--device 0 --gpu-threads 1 --worksize 256 --xintensity 3,3 --shaders 2048,2816 --thread-concurrency 6144,8448 --scan-time 15
--queue 4 --expiry 30 --auto-gpu --gpu-engine 1050 --gpu-memdiff 325 --temp-target 85,100 --temp-overheat 90,105 --temp-
cutoff 95,110 --no-submit-stale

update 08/07/15, my driver was crashing so sgminer showed wrong value
383.9 Kh/s, ~ WU 5.500, pool show 393 Kh/s, that should be the best result for HD 7970 or R 280
--device 0 --gpu-threads 2 --worksize 256 --xintensity 3 --shaders 2048 --thread-concurrency 12288 --scan-time 15 --queue 4 --expiry 30 --auto-gpu --gpu-engine 1050 --gpu-memdiff 325 --temp-target 85,100 --temp-overheat 90,105 --temp-cutoff 95,110 --no-submit-stale

415.7 Kh/s, ~ WU 6.030, pool show 424 Kh/s
--device 0 --gpu-threads 2 --worksize 256 --xintensity 3,3 --shaders 2048,2816 --thread-concurrency 12288,16896 --scan-time
15 --queue 4 --expiry 30 --auto-gpu --gpu-engine 1050 --gpu-memdiff 325 --temp-target 85,100 --temp-overheat 90,105 --temp-
cutoff 95,110 --no-submit-stale

update 08/07/15, my driver was crashing so sgminer showed wrong value
342.9 Kh/s, ~ WU 5.100, pool show 367 Kh/s
403.5 Kh/s, ~ WU 5.300, pool show 385 Kh/s
--device 1 --gpu-threads 2 --worksize 256 --xintensity 4,4 --shaders 2048,2816 --thread-concurrency 16384,22528 --scan-time
16 --queue 4 --expiry 30 --auto-gpu --gpu-engine 1050 --gpu-memdiff 325 --temp-target 85,100 --temp-overheat 90,105 --temp-
cutoff 95,110 --no-submit-stale

Just wanted to drop a note here and remind users of the pool who have a balance to withdraw in a timely manor.

My pool is run as a hobby and I don't want to hold your property for any length of time.

https://hobbyistpool.ddns.net/orb



 

daily update Smiley

the test's showing on win7 x64
with sgminer 5.1.1 and using *.dll from driver 14.7 RC1 at fix diff 64 and -i = 16 for both cards

hd 7970
345 kh/s wu 5065 -g 2, -xi 5, better then -xi 4, so i will try -xi 6, the best was -xi 3 with wu 5.521
353 kh/s wu 5021 -g 2, -xi 6, the best was -xi 3 with wu 5.521
376.3 kh/s wu  5.502, looks good
setting: --gpu-threads 1 --worksize 256 --intensity 16 --shaders 2048 --thread-concurrency 65536 --scan-time 15 --queue 4 --expiry 30 --lookup-gap 2 --auto-gpu --gpu-powertune 20 --gpu-engine 1050 --gpu-memclock 1375 --temp-target 85 --temp-overheat 90 --temp-cutoff 95 --no-submit-stale




r290x
409 kh/s wu 5937 -g 2, a little bit worse than -xi 4, try -xi 6, the best was -xi 4 with wu 6.033
421 kh/s wu 6014 -g 2, -xi 6, the best was -xi 4 with wu 6.033
392.3 kh/s wu  5.605, looks not good but Ghost told me there is a possibility of change in the kernel for R290x, to compare, but I leave this the same!
setting: --gpu-threads 1 --worksize 256 --intensity 16 --shaders 2816 --thread-concurrency 90112 (much better is 65536, seems illogical because --thread-concurrency is a multiplier of shaders and a R290x has 2816 ... but it's such as it is! ) --scan-time 15 --queue 4 --expiry 30 --auto-gpu --gpu-powertune 20 --gpu-engine 1050 --gpu-memclock 1375 --temp-target 100 --temp-overheat 105 --temp-cutoff 110 --no-submit-stale

daily update

the test's showing on win7 x64
with sgminer 5.1.1 and using *.dll from driver 14.7 RC1 at fix diff 64 and xi = 6 for both cards

hd 7970
345 kh/s wu 5065 -g 2, -xi 5, better then -xi 4, so i will try -xi 6, the best was -xi 3 with wu 5.521
353 kh/s wu 5021 -g 2, -xi 6, the best was -xi 3 with wu 5.521



r290x
409 kh/s wu 5937 -g 2, a little bit worse than -xi 4, try -xi 6, the best was -xi 4 with wu 6.033
421 kh/s wu 6014 -g 2, -xi 6, the best was -xi 4 with wu 6.033

ok I think I only got reject shares, I'll try it again when I'm at home