Topic: Is someone with a low hash rate better off with PPS? (Read 1167 times)

Thanks this was really helpful. Summed up everything I needed to know perfectly.

Yes.  But even rolling the dice doesn't matter because you are "playing the same" game even when you get your new card.  In the long run you make the same amount.

Don't forget about fees though.

The only things that affect revenue is
a) fees
b) does pool keep or pay transaction fees
c) merged mining
d) stales & downtime
e) can the pool be hopped
f) financial stability of pool (trust of operator)

That much I understood, however- consider it a "temporary" situation until a better card is bought, is it a simple matter of rolling the dice for half or double the payment vs. a steady amount?

No.

That being said the major benefit of PPS which is no variance still applies.  There is no "extra" benefit for having low hash rate.

If your mining is VARIABLE then PPS (and SMPPS) has an added psychological benefit in that you get paid for every hash.  PPLNS and Score based algorithms could result in non-payment due to luck.  However your average reward will still be the same in  the LONG RUN.  Sometimes you will get no payment sometimes you will get double or even triple payment. 

Still if someone has highly variable mining I would recommend PPS.  "mentally" it is easier.    The being said the magnitude of the hashing is completely irrelevant.

If you supply 0.001% of the network hashing power then you will get 0.001% (minus fees) of the global annual reward (currently ~52,000 BTC).

No.

For the miner it doesn't matter what reward system the pool is using.
The difference is, with PPS you get steady payouts while proportional, score-based, dgm, ppnls, and others introduce much more variance.
Over time, payouts from all those reward systems should converge at the same value.

The miner should select their pool to minimize pool fees and stale shares.
How many stale shares you will get is influenced by your network connection to the pool, the algorithm the pool uses to prioritize LP messages, or whether the pool has grown to its limit.

There are some very subtle interactions between different software miners and pool implementations, for example:
    I'm using cgminer on my mining rigs.
    I have excellent connectivity to Eligius and always get <1% stale shares when using Eligius as a primary pool.
    However, when Eligius is chosen as one of the backup pools and receives very little traffic, my stale shares skyrocket up to 30%!

Another advice is never to choose a pool based on its recent good luck: these lucky blocks have already been mined and they don't influence the rate of future block mining at all.
OTOH, there have been pools constantly stricken with bad luck - this may indicate issues with the pool's code.

Obviously, staying up to speed with the Pools subforum (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=41.0) pays off.
No one should mine using pool receiving very little attention from their owners, as Arsbitcoin - once an excellent pool - currently is.

I was going to answer a friends question when we were debating pools and I honestly didn't know the answer.
Is someone with a low hash rate, let's say... 80Mh/s better off with PPS pools, or what?

This threads discussion will enlighten me as well as answer some new comers questions too!