Topic: CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded NVIDIA Maxwell / Pascal kernels. - page 510. (Read 2347659 times)

im interested too, but only if fee or opensource

no flat fee, im mining as a hobby

Do you want to sell it? What's price?

I am happy with 136 sol/s on the 1070.

Managed to build it now. But not much time left today...

atm you can have ~98-100 sol/s from 1070, you make fee miner only if you hit 200 
280x is 150sol atm on optiminer kernel

you are .. 

Thanks for porting, I see alot of possible improvements.

Sure, when you start approaching 50% energy cost... We are no where near that. Here in the US energy is $.1 KWH on average, it's also really cheap in China. That doesn't apply to most miners though, especially if you can get commercial rates.

Lbry sp-mod #4 was just released. Did you get it?

Made a cuda port of SA5.

https://github.com/krnlx/nheqminer

Did I miss something? Is there a new miner out for Nivida?  czminer?  thx  
I know there is for amd but.

Efficiency always matter, because if you're using unefficent devices, a great percentage of what you get needs to be given to the electricity supplier.

Efficiency matters the same as the energy cost (Energy "matter" + VAT and other voices, that in EU let us pay even 0.25 EUR/KWh, or 0.28/29 USD/KWh).

@pallas, because of donations won't arrive, due a low competitivity of the kernel itself. Donations arrive, in the initial phase, if the open source kernel is highly profitable, and frankly speaking noone would release such thing without getting a proper compensation. A fee miner instead it's the best way to get a stream of funds, and I could support an honest dev (There's a reason why I don't like the sp behaviour, in opposition to the tpruvot one, which I deeply respect). As simple as that

Looks like ULTRA COIN is going to startup again in a few more blocks.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ultracoin-est-feb-2014-asic-resistant-ultrafast-6-second-transactions-727023

So riddle me this then: How is a open source miner with a dev fee different from a donation which you're so open to?

Closed source miner forces the fee. A open source one allows you to remove it, but most people wont. I think you underestimate miners ability to code and those that are willing to take that 2% away if it's 'payment for your work'. Of course people will go out of their way to remove one if it's like 10-20%.

We covered all of this multiple times over the course of years. You can always release work two versions back open source or something too, there are always compromises. The funny thing is Nvidia developers chose to rather let things die then take the time to make a miner with a fee. No one has even tried a open source miner with a dev fee. Even the miners that are already open source, NO ONE has put a dev fee in. I mean shit, you can just aim that stuff at nicehash and get paid. You don't even need to setup a pool.

Developers are lazy about the weirdest shit.


MTB is also doing this as a hobby and I'm sure he'll quit when he loses interest. Claymore will more then likely keep on trucking (incorporating MTBs open source) and eventually over take him when his interest starts to wane. That's why you pay people for their time, so they maintain interest. Donations isn't payment and should never be an expected source of income. That is what some of the Nvidia developers started believing, then got pissed when they didn't get 'donations'... which isn't the same as a fee.

yeah in fact i prefer the mtb miner over clymore, it has also the same speed and it is open source, i'm always supporting open source over private

i don't know how much mtb made in donation but it is surely less than clymore...

You seem to not realise the obvious: dev fee only works on closed source miners.
The reason is that there is no difference between free donations and donations by fee.
People will not donate in both cases. Just because they can.

BTW RIEcoin still needs a GPU miner... Someone wants something not so mainstream... There is a lot of volume there, although some days there is like nothing for some reason. Very inconsistent coin.

Efficiency wont matter till possibly this spring time when Ethereum is basically un-mineable (Equihash is pretty set to take that over though). Up until that point, AMD is earning 2x as much. It doesn't matter what the resale value is on cards unless you plan on reselling them. That was a big deal this spring when Pascal was coming out, Pascal is out. Those cards shouldn't need to be resold till the next Nvidia architecture comes out...

I guess resale value matters if you're planning on reselling your cards for AMD?

It's entirely possible to buy AMD and then resell them when they become unprofitable as well. ROI in 100 days is really fricking fast. After that point, you're just making money on top of them. I'm still using my Maxwell cards for instance... I didn't even sell those yet.


A dev fee is a way to make programmers happy. It could've been done with a open source miner with a fee as well. I've mentioned numerous times over the years I'd use a miner with a fee to support developers (2%), doesn't matter if it's open or closed source. I'm not so petty as to not pay a small amount for a product I'm using, even if there are some that are. That aside, the dev fee is there to incentivize continued development (unless you're SP and think there is no purpose to the dev fee except more money). Someone releases a better miner, you no longer get that part of the hashrate, which makes you want to make a better miner and get it back.

It's win-win.

Donations never work. You know how I know that? That amount of whining developers have done in this thread due to lack of donations. I'm not sure why some of you hate a dev fee so much. It's been proven to work over the years. The one time it didn't was back in the scrypt days when someone decided to code in a 30% dev fee, which is pretty ridiculous. Those get torn apart and ripped out. Most people aren't going to bother for 2%.

It's very weird that miners prefer a closed miner with fee over an opensource one supported by donations.

That's why efficiency matters, and WILL matter. We'll discuss about it in a couple of weeks when ZCL and ZEC profitability will collapse (high probability).

Right after this moment, we could start facing some new kernels on nvidia side, boosting efficiency.

In my experience there's only one thing: don't sell VGA's if you own them, and if you can maintain them with your electrical infrastructure. Whoever, like the infamous genesis mining, had a farm in early 2014 now have got a fortune.

i still think that 1070 are somehow better because of the resell value, good luck selling 470 with only 3gb to gamers, almost none is interested in 3gb gpu anymore, instead with a 1070 you have a very high probabily if not 100% to sell it to a gamer

and at a very high % of the retail price, i can assure you that right now i would be able to sell at retail minus vat only, so probably around 85% of their original

this mean that it's like i have payed only 15% of their original value, which is far less than any amd