Topic: [ANN][YAC] yacoin: yet another altcoin. START is now. - page 11. (Read 346716 times)
Just before it went on BTER there was a huge fud war on YAC on this forum. Think they got scared of it.
Good news. BTER has removed the YAC warning.
Thats great why was it there on the first place... WDC never got it.
Good news. BTER has removed the YAC warning.
Do I have to compile this myself to run on Ubuntu?
Long live YAC !
YAC is possibly the only alt from this last month that is rising after the launch rush. 
Also a bunch of P2Pool nodes in this thread - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/annyacpoolp2pool-for-yacoin-202920 - including mine, which is detailed below.
I'd encourage as many people as possible to rent a 512MB VPS and host their own node. The more the merrier
YAC p2pool - 0.01% fee
http://yac.procrypto.com:8336/
username:
password: anything
I'd encourage as many people as possible to rent a 512MB VPS and host their own node. The more the merrier
YAC p2pool - 0.01% fee
http://yac.procrypto.com:8336/
username:
password: anything
There's a p2pool also at yacointalk.com
Just setup YAC p2p pool 2% fee no sign up needed
http://31.220.1.53:8335
to mine use the following :
change Y1dncJeBobRiYiBop6LWsUXq9fm8HbQfsp with your wallet address
Pull pays out to your wallet every time a block is found.
Cheers
http://31.220.1.53:8335
to mine use the following :
Code:
minerd.exe -a scrypt-jane -o http://31.220.1.53:8335 -u Y1dncJeBobRiYiBop6LWsUXq9fm8HbQfsp
change Y1dncJeBobRiYiBop6LWsUXq9fm8HbQfsp with your wallet address
Pull pays out to your wallet every time a block is found.
Cheers
I thought the only person still mining this was Vladimir Putin?
LMAO!! ;P
Andy B
Little oddity: the few last trades on Vircurex are a lot higher than on bter. About 4k coins were bought at 50 and 60 while bter is still at 37.
YaCoin, great work, great coin!
Thanks for the reply! So am I to understand that artforz's analysis is wrong? I guess that wouldn't be the first time....
The other thread has the majority of the GPU discussion, including benchmarks from mtrlt, the developer of Reaper (the first GPU kernel released for Litecoin in response to ArtForz's claim Litecoin was GPU resistant). I disagree with ArtForz's claim that increasing N helps GPU's once both CPU's and GPU's are computing hashes large enough that they're pushed to external RAM. I would say ArtForz's analysis was cherry-picked based on the specific value of N (8192) where computation gets pushed out of the L2 cache on the AMD Phenom II he was testing with.
Indications, including from mtrlt's benchmarks, are that the performance spread between CPU's and GPU's narrows as N rises. As long as we don't cherry-pick a specific result from a certain value of N on an AMD Phenom II CPU..
Also note that YACoin doesn't use the same scrypt variant as Litecoin. The mixing algorithm is switched from salsa20/8 to chacha20/8, and the hashing algorithm is switched from SHA-256 to Keccak-512. Direct comparisons between hash rates of the two aren't quite going to be an apples-vs-oranges comparison for a given value of N.
Thanks for the reply! So am I to understand that artforz's analysis is wrong? I guess that wouldn't be the first time....
Sorry if this has been answered before, but I just found out about YACoin and I don't want to read all 170 pages.
Is YACoin just continually raising the N value? Does this mean it will eventually take a huge amount of time to check a block PoW for validity? How could this possibly be a good idea?
Probably the YACoin ongoing development thread will give you a better idea while reading much less than 170 pages:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/annyac-yacoin-ongoing-development-206577
My post with my benchmarks for hash rates at various values of N, and when YACoin will switch to those values of N, is in the 15th post:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2162620
I benchmarked with a 4 year old dual Xeon E5450 server (almost stone age technology, but similar combined performance to today's i7-2600k's). It appears it'll be a few decades before even today's hardware (or hardware from 4 years ago) would have a problem with the time needed to validate a block PoW.
As time goes on, doubling of N becomes further and further apart in time. Advances in computing power will rapidly outpace the rising N over the long term.
I thought the only person still mining this was Vladimir Putin?
Sorry if this has been answered before, but I just found out about YACoin and I don't want to read all 170 pages. Here is one of artforz's last posts on this forum in Feb 2012, after he found that litecoin was not GPU resistant:
Is YACoin just continually raising the N value? Does this mean it will eventually take a huge amount of time to check a block PoW for validity? How could this possibly be a good idea?
Short version: compared to (1024,1,1) increasing N and r actually helps GPUs and hurts CPUs.
Longer version:
While things are small enough to fit in L2, each CPU core can act mostly independently and has pretty large read/write BW, make it big enough to hit external memory and you've got ~15GB/s shared between all cores.
Meanwhile, GPU caches are too small to be of much use, so... with random reads at 128B/item a 256 bit GDDR5 bus ends up well < 20% peak BW, at 1024B/item that % increases very significantly.
end result, a 5870 ends up about 6 times as fast as a PhenomII for scrypt(8192,8,1). (without really trying to optimize either side, so ymmv).
The only way to make scrypt win on CPU-vs-GPU again would be to go WAAAY bigger, think > 128MB V array so you don't have enough RAM on GPUs to run enough parallel instances to mask latencies... but that also means it's REALLY slow (hash/sec? sec/hash!) and you need the same amount of memory to check results... Now who wants a *coin where a normal node needs several seconds and 100s of megs to gigs of ram just to check a block PoW for validity?
Longer version:
While things are small enough to fit in L2, each CPU core can act mostly independently and has pretty large read/write BW, make it big enough to hit external memory and you've got ~15GB/s shared between all cores.
Meanwhile, GPU caches are too small to be of much use, so... with random reads at 128B/item a 256 bit GDDR5 bus ends up well < 20% peak BW, at 1024B/item that % increases very significantly.
end result, a 5870 ends up about 6 times as fast as a PhenomII for scrypt(8192,8,1). (without really trying to optimize either side, so ymmv).
The only way to make scrypt win on CPU-vs-GPU again would be to go WAAAY bigger, think > 128MB V array so you don't have enough RAM on GPUs to run enough parallel instances to mask latencies... but that also means it's REALLY slow (hash/sec? sec/hash!) and you need the same amount of memory to check results... Now who wants a *coin where a normal node needs several seconds and 100s of megs to gigs of ram just to check a block PoW for validity?
Is YACoin just continually raising the N value? Does this mean it will eventually take a huge amount of time to check a block PoW for validity? How could this possibly be a good idea?
I've downloaded yacoin-master.zip file, unzipped, renamed to yacoin and
and then
throws this error
Wth is that?
Code:
cd yacoin/src
make -f makefile.unix
and then
Code:
cd ..
qmake
throws this error
Code:
Project MESSAGE: Building with UPNP support
sh: 1: /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/qt5/bin/lrelease: not found
RCC: Error in 'src/qt/bitcoin.qrc': Cannot find file 'locale/bitcoin_en.qm'
RCC: Error in 'src/qt/bitcoin.qrc': Cannot find file 'locale/bitcoin_ru.qm'
Wth is that?
Had same issue on ubuntu raring, older versions worked fine.
I dont remember what i did to fix it exactly, but IIRC it had something to do with installing qt-4.x also.
Jump to: