Topic: [HAVELOCK] PETAMINE - 1,150 TH/S HASH RATE (1GH/S per Unit) - page 3. (Read 565897 times)

Different pools use different difficulty settings etc that may influence performance, even if only marginally (except in cases like p2pool). Id be surprised if the 3% (?) fee slush charges made up for that, and Id be even more surprised if variability would drop when switching to a pool that only has 3% of the network, but hey, at least its a trusted pool.

Maybe someone can explain cryptx that he can divide his hashrate over multiple pools to reduce variability (and ensure no pool becomes dominant).

its not a fixed 1GH like AMhash is setup, on unlucky days you get lower payments on lucky days you should get more then 1GH would normally mine

although it still doesnt add on on cryptxs side

Slightly improved performance?  Each share represents 1 GH/s, and they should be at 1150 GH/s no matter the pool, any improved performance of units are going straight into their pockets, or is the contract changing and they are paying more out to people than 1 GH/s?

Apparently they have left ghash.io in favor of Slush ()
CryptX announcement from today on havelockinvestments:

December 11th, 2014 - Dear unit holders,

We switched pools from ghash.io to Slush pool as we have slightly improved performance there and the pool also has a better historical variance compared to ghash.io (although this is no guarantee for future variance). The switch hasn't caused any mining downtime and we have already received the first payouts. Payouts occur after 100 confirmations of finding a block. We are still working on the stats page as we need to alter our code to match the API of Slush pool.

Team CryptX

I think 13 days data set is not enough to test mining luck of a pool. While mining at CloudMining.website, which is engaged into pool switching, I'm also experiencing high fluctuation from the throughput derived at www.cloudmining.website/calculator.php. For a better analysis please take a data set of at least 3 months.

1. I was too fast on computation of average mined blocks, they mined 675 blocks in 29 days, it's 23 on average. So about 10% lower than expected, not 20%.

As for the ghash.io payment address  they have more payment addresses but only one where they mine, if you login to ghash.io you can check live mined blocks and compare it to blockchain.info and you won't see different initial mining address than posted. But I checked randomly only few of blocks. Also payment addresses to Peta lead back to this one.

As for variance, as it is a Poisson process the variance could be theroetically high on any side, however the higher number of events should appear on average, the lower probability of extreme data. Or in other words, the probability you find only 1 block per day with 10 PH (on average you should find 5) is much higher (about 5%) than that you will find 10 or less blocks with 50 PH (it's only 0.31%). So yes variance plays great role but finding only 12 blocks is out of variance probability (about 0.14% - or once in  two years). They had probably some problems with pool that day.

A few points:
-Im fairly sure ghash uses more than one mining address. Any incoming payment to 1Peta prior to yesterday would have come from ghash, try tracing them back.
-be careful basing your math on an assumption of a constant combined hashrate for ghash. It might fluctuate significantly. Either way, with 15% of the network, variance is going to be non trivial even with a stable hashrate.
- KnC take the bad luck risk on to them, its a PPS pool. It doesnt mean they dont have variance, its just not visible to its users..
- AMhash doesnt run its own pool, I believe they mine on both ghash and discus fish. Similarly I recall antminer dividing its hashrate between its own pool and external pools to reduce variance.

I am starting to think something stinks at ghash.io

Ghash.io mining address is this one:

https://blockchain.info/address/1CjPR7Z5ZSyWk6WtXvSFgkptmpoi4UM9BC?offset=0&filter=2

(Filtered only incoming transactions)

Data can be easily exported to see number of blocks mined per day so last few days are as follows:
12/8/2014   19
12/7/2014   19
12/6/2014   25
12/5/2014   29
12/4/2014   27
12/3/2014   12
12/2/2014   16
12/1/2014   19
11/30/2014   18
11/29/2014   21
11/28/2014   20
11/27/2014   23
11/26/2014   24


At 50 PH/s they should mine appr. 25-26 blocks per day, but they have days when they mine a half of them??? If this was standard variance this should be visible on whole network hashrate which isn't. Also if this was a variance they would have to have much better days also to opposite side (like 40+ days)

This is hard to understand considering the fact KNcminer claims here https://www.kncminer.com/categories/cloud-mining that they have 'Statistically stable output with KnC:s 10+PH/s Clear Sky Pool (PPS).'
Also amhash and hashnest have very low fluctuations with much smaller hashrate (like few percents)

So ghash.io has either some other unsigned address where they mine or or they have something wrong in pool setup which causes them mine on average 20% less. (That wouldn't be a problem if there wasn't such huge variance).


If we do get back to initial question if ghash.io sends what he has to to Peta address, between 11/9-12/8 they mined 675 blocks=16875BTC of which about 1.1/51 should have go to Peta - it's about 380BTC but the real hashrate for each mined block at ghash.io is impossible to get, if ghash.io has 54PH, the sum should go down to 360BTC but still 30BTC more than what I see at Peta address at that period.


The unstable performance of ghash.io raises much important questions though...

Use peta's address:
https://blockchain.info/address/1PETAmNrgdzx3FwzJPNuhx18JVKdGtwWt6

Any incoming transaction there is from mining, they all trace back to a pool, usually ghash.io.

OK but you'll have to navigate me a bit. Here https://blockchain.info/blocks/GHash.IO I can see only last 4 days and I didn't find any other way to get older data containing info about origin. How are blocks identified to be able to tell they are from some pool?

When I used to mine there would often be days when my expected payout was to be .1 btc but only got .08(but rarely ever would get it going in the other direction to .12 to even it out)

BTCguild had a problem for a few weeks a while back where it seemed like they wern't paying out the right amount

Sure you can. Blockchain shows all the transactions, so you can just do the math for anything up until yesterday. Or you can even include yesterday as there is a delay between mining > blocks maturing > ghash paying out > dividends. Not sure how much but at least one day, probably more.

Im still pretty amazed cryptx live stats went to zero, there is no announcement, and no one seems to care...

Ooops, so my idea of analyzing ghash.io blocks will be useless if he left the pool...

How much per Ghs on an average ?

when I quickly add up all incoming transactions to peta's mining address, I get ~331 BTC for the past month or 11 BTC per day. That is  0.0096/TH/day. Quite far from your estimate.

So either ghash is having terrible luck, not paying out correctly or cryptx is not pointing all its hashrate at the pool.
So I checked its stats, and WTF ?

http://www.petamine.co/stats/

I guess they are moving to another pool and didnt feel the need to tell anyone?
Either way, until yesterday the chart does still show the full ~1150TH at ghash, so for now Im gonna blame either ghash or bad luck at ghash and assume thats why cryptx is moving to another pool. But it would be wise to follow this up and ask him to comment.

I just used theoretical calculation which works perfectly for other mining companies too:
Everything counted per THs to get rid of gazillion decimal places.

BTC mined per day/Ths: 0.01257
Daily maintenance fee/THs: USD 3.5
Daily maintenance fee/BTC at USD 340/BTC: BTC0.010294

Theoretical daily dividend per Th/s: 0.01257-0.010294=BTC0.002276

Quick payout address analysis shows BTC323.97 received between 8/12-9/11 (29 days), or BTC11.17/day. This is not enough even to cover hosting costs at rate 340 (3.5*1150/340=BTC11.83, I would have to go manually day by day and recalculate it by historical exchange rate. So ghash.io seems to pay too little, however the reason is unclear...

Your idea with ghash.io blocks counting is very interesting, will give it a try, I'll have to grab at least 10 days of data first, because there's not enough history to work with...will get back when I have the data.


edit: for very precise guys, I used latest difficulty number and didn't recalculate older difficulty (non)changes

Care to share the math?
And have you been using theoretical yield, or what ghash.io actually paid out (https://blockchain.info/address/1PETAmNrgdzx3FwzJPNuhx18JVKdGtwWt6) or based on the number of blocks the pool found? I kinda doubt cex.io luck would be that bad over the course of an entire month to explain your numbers, but assuming your math is solid, it would be good to see who, if anyone, is skimming.

Average daily dividend payout for last 30 days was BTC0.00000135 while it should have been about BTC0.0000022758.
This results in difference about 1 BTC/day per farm (1150 THs).And this was calculated at todays 340 BTC/USD, lower than was rate for whole month.
Seems that Cryptx can't help himself and takes 1 BTC daily as management fee...

Other cloud mining farms like amhash, hashnest or even GAWminers pay exact amount as calculations suggest.

Of course Petascam will now get better at scamming people.  He literally has millions of dollars worth of future-longcon liquidity for running his next long con.  Obviously he wont be taking any kind of public responsibility for future ventures, but there are plenty of proxy's he can run future scams through out there.

They don't need to do anything else, but listen to the shareholders. They voted to switch to P2P. End of story.