Do you really think so? Where are you getting your data? Blocks are being mined at an equal rate (more or less) regardless of the algo being used.
http://myriad.theblockexplorer.com And the block reward is the same.
Yes I have used this page. On that page you have an information how many coins you are getting per unified MH unit.
340 MYR / MH day by Sricpt
2805 MYR / MH day by Skein
Of course this data fluctuates with every block a bit.
My SKEIN GPU rig has power usage 300 W / 1 MH = 2805/300 = 9,35 MYR / W
My SCRIPT ZEUS Blizzard miner has 38 W / 1 MH = 340/38 = 8,94 MYR / W
Okay, I’ve been going over the numbers, and your numbers are looking better and better, but . . .
Should it be the case that you are correct, the ASIC issue would be mute since effective reward adjustment would be already happening on an individual miner, per MH/s, basis.
Looking at things from the total number of coins mined and their distribution to individual miners on a 1 MH/s basis, we move in your direction, but are unable to arrive at a similar conclusion with respect to Scrypt (on the other hand, the numbers suggest that SHA-256
should be effectively neutralized).
I’m going to use the numbers taken from the following snapshot.
Let’s divide the 120,000 coins mined each hour by the 5 algos doing the mining.
That leaves us with 24,000 coins, per hour, for each algo.
If we then divide those 24,000 coins by the respective algo hashrates, we come up with the following results:
Scrypt = 14.916096 coins per hour per MH/s
SHA-256 = .0011722 coins per hour per MH/s
Groestl = 2.2573363 coins per hour per MH/s
Skein = .3992414 coins per hour per MH/s
Qubit = 8.4299262 coins per hour per MH/s
That’s simply dividing the reward by the collective hashrates. The per hour, per MH/s distribution is what it is.
Same machine DAILY results would be roughly the following:
Scrypt = 357.9863 coins @ 1 MH/s
SHA-256 = 28.1328 coins @ 1 GH/s
Groestl = 920.9932 coins @ 17 MH/s
Skein = 1197.7242 coins @ 120 MH/s
Qubit = 1143.0979 coins @ 5.65 MH/s
That’s how the global numbers are divvyed up (give or take a few KH/s).
Why would the SHA-256 settle for so little? Do they really have much choice? Anywhere else to go? . . . instead of turning their ASICs into very expensive paperweights . . .
By these numbers, Scrypt ASIC is still hauling them in (on a relative basis) and have a long way to go before falling below breakeven (when using the 7 watt gridseed as electricity cost basis, even more so).
So, is this issue a non-issue with respect to SHA-256? Or still an issue since they are so desperate as to keep mining when it’s a losing proposition and throwing good money after bad?
These numbers suggest to me that the Scrypt ASIC continues to be an issue - until their numbers grow sufficiently so as to reduce their per MH/s rewards below profitability. Just where that equilibrium lay is still an unknown, but we can be quite sure it’s at some lower price rather than a higher price . . . as long as ASIC is part of the picture (unless their numbers and crowd herding gets as crazy as the SHA-256 crowd).
BTW, what are the components of your SKEIN GPU rig?
