Yes, you need to take your last electric bill, and write down THREE numbers:
A) How many kW/h you used
B) Your total bill -- how much you have to send in
C) Your "customer charge" or statement fee -- any "fixed" fees that are charged every month.
In my case, there is a $15 statement fee that's charged every month, whether I use 10 kW/h or 5000.
So I subtract that.
Then divide what's left by A to get your rate per kWh.
Topic: Mining will always be barely profitable (Read 4672 times)
what is your rate that costs 45c per day? I pay ~$0.085 per kwh so 125 w x 24 hours would cost me $0.24 per day. I guess you pay about $0.16 per kwh?
Honestly, I don't even know that I am doing the math right. Does 125 watts = 125 watts per hour = 3kwh per day?
Honestly, I don't even know that I am doing the math right. Does 125 watts = 125 watts per hour = 3kwh per day?
I don't know about there.. but here, its safe to assume you'll pay double the rate/kWh after taxes, trasmission/delivery fees, debt retirement fees, etc.
The funny thing about mining profitability is how electricity is priced (at least in most of the US).
Large scale miners pay more per kWh than hobbyist miners. In MOST of the US (I have yet to hear of any state/area that it is different), you end up paying more for electricity as your usage grows to certain threshholds. In CA, the base level is around 13-15 cents per kWh. When I was mining with 7 rigs (14 video cards), almost all the electricity usage was classified in top tier due to high usage for the month. Top tier pricing is 42 cents per kWh.
The overhead becomes significantly higher once you try to expand beyond a few cards in the computer you already had turned on 24/7.
Large scale miners pay more per kWh than hobbyist miners. In MOST of the US (I have yet to hear of any state/area that it is different), you end up paying more for electricity as your usage grows to certain threshholds. In CA, the base level is around 13-15 cents per kWh. When I was mining with 7 rigs (14 video cards), almost all the electricity usage was classified in top tier due to high usage for the month. Top tier pricing is 42 cents per kWh.
The overhead becomes significantly higher once you try to expand beyond a few cards in the computer you already had turned on 24/7.
Mining will always be barely profitable, but the question is, for whom?
There are economies of scale here, and sooner or later it will be only be worth it for those who can do it most cheaply per bitcoin mined - the big boys. If Bitcoin gets reasonable acceptance as a currency, Google, Amazon or the like will start devoting some of their vast and frightening computing resources to it, at least when they're not in use for anything else.
I think the heyday of the individual miner is short lived - sooner or later it will become attractive for companies with vast resources, and we'll simply be outcompeted. This isn't bad, necessarily, it's just where things must eventually end up, in my opinion.
So enjoy it while you can!
-Tristan
Seems like a very realistic scenario. But some of the major players from now will also make that transition. I hope the network stays large enough so that two entities dont become the major powers. I dont like the prospect of google or amazon having a large percentage of the network There are economies of scale here, and sooner or later it will be only be worth it for those who can do it most cheaply per bitcoin mined - the big boys. If Bitcoin gets reasonable acceptance as a currency, Google, Amazon or the like will start devoting some of their vast and frightening computing resources to it, at least when they're not in use for anything else.
I think the heyday of the individual miner is short lived - sooner or later it will become attractive for companies with vast resources, and we'll simply be outcompeted. This isn't bad, necessarily, it's just where things must eventually end up, in my opinion.
So enjoy it while you can!
-Tristan
Mining will always be barely profitable, but the question is, for whom?
There are economies of scale here, and sooner or later it will be only be worth it for those who can do it most cheaply per bitcoin mined - the big boys. If Bitcoin gets reasonable acceptance as a currency, Google, Amazon or the like will start devoting some of their vast and frightening computing resources to it, at least when they're not in use for anything else.
I think the heyday of the individual miner is short lived - sooner or later it will become attractive for companies with vast resources, and we'll simply be outcompeted. This isn't bad, necessarily, it's just where things must eventually end up, in my opinion.
So enjoy it while you can!
-Tristan
There are economies of scale here, and sooner or later it will be only be worth it for those who can do it most cheaply per bitcoin mined - the big boys. If Bitcoin gets reasonable acceptance as a currency, Google, Amazon or the like will start devoting some of their vast and frightening computing resources to it, at least when they're not in use for anything else.
I think the heyday of the individual miner is short lived - sooner or later it will become attractive for companies with vast resources, and we'll simply be outcompeted. This isn't bad, necessarily, it's just where things must eventually end up, in my opinion.
So enjoy it while you can!
-Tristan
Yes several members here have mentioned paying as low as 4c per Kwhr. Crazy I know...
Also your pricing fails to mention that in some cities their is tiered pricing. For example my friend pays about 12c per Kwhr for the first 10kwhrs per day. Then about 15c for the next 5kwhrs. Then it skyrockets to 29c after that. Without the mining rigs he touches tier 3 every day just about, so its 29c per kwhr for mining rigs
Also your pricing fails to mention that in some cities their is tiered pricing. For example my friend pays about 12c per Kwhr for the first 10kwhrs per day. Then about 15c for the next 5kwhrs. Then it skyrockets to 29c after that. Without the mining rigs he touches tier 3 every day just about, so its 29c per kwhr for mining rigs
3-4 cents an hour? That seems a bit low.
Maybe for the first 100 kW/h on a tiered system, maybe.
But rather than take anyone's word for it, I did a bit of Googling:
http://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.cfm?page=electricity_factors_affecting_prices
The average retail price of electricity in the United States in 2009 was 9.82 cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh). The average prices by type of utility customer were:
Residential: 11.5¢ per kWh
Transportation: 10.7¢ per kWh
Commercial: 10.2¢ per kWh
Industrial: 6.8¢ per kWh
Electricity Prices Vary by Locality
Prices vary over time and by locality due to the availability of power plants and fuels, local fuel costs, and pricing regulation and structures.
The three States with the highest average price of electricity in 2009 were:
Hawaii (21.21¢ per kWh)
Connecticut (18.06¢ per kWh)
New York (15.52¢ per kWh)
Those with the lowest average prices in 2009 were:
Wyoming (6.08¢ per kWh)
Idaho (6.51¢ per kWh)
Kentucky (6.52¢ per kWh)
On average, electricity prices are highest in Hawaii, mainly because most of the electricity there is generated with fuel oil. Idaho usually has the lowest prices mainly because of the availability of low-cost hydroelectric power from Federal dams.
Maybe for the first 100 kW/h on a tiered system, maybe.
But rather than take anyone's word for it, I did a bit of Googling:
http://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.cfm?page=electricity_factors_affecting_prices
The average retail price of electricity in the United States in 2009 was 9.82 cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh). The average prices by type of utility customer were:
Residential: 11.5¢ per kWh
Transportation: 10.7¢ per kWh
Commercial: 10.2¢ per kWh
Industrial: 6.8¢ per kWh
Electricity Prices Vary by Locality
Prices vary over time and by locality due to the availability of power plants and fuels, local fuel costs, and pricing regulation and structures.
The three States with the highest average price of electricity in 2009 were:
Hawaii (21.21¢ per kWh)
Connecticut (18.06¢ per kWh)
New York (15.52¢ per kWh)
Those with the lowest average prices in 2009 were:
Wyoming (6.08¢ per kWh)
Idaho (6.51¢ per kWh)
Kentucky (6.52¢ per kWh)
On average, electricity prices are highest in Hawaii, mainly because most of the electricity there is generated with fuel oil. Idaho usually has the lowest prices mainly because of the availability of low-cost hydroelectric power from Federal dams.
I believe that, from now on, mining will always be barely profitable. Not much more nor much less than that.
This happens because difficulty always corrects itself when there are too many or too few people mining. If it is really worth it, people will get in. If it is not, people will get out. It's a smooth process of self-adjustment.
With time, mining hardware will become much more efficient and people that invest in recent hardware will get more profit than the others, but that will soon be corrected by hardware depreciation.
Am I missing something?
This happens because difficulty always corrects itself when there are too many or too few people mining. If it is really worth it, people will get in. If it is not, people will get out. It's a smooth process of self-adjustment.
With time, mining hardware will become much more efficient and people that invest in recent hardware will get more profit than the others, but that will soon be corrected by hardware depreciation.
Am I missing something?
You are missing the fact that some people have free electricity, some pay just 3-4c per Kwhr, and others pay 30-50c! I went in 50/50 with a friend on a 1G hash mining rig. In the last 10 days it generated just over 3.5 BTC. A lot of that was due to downtime from some of the pools out there. The electricity cost at his place is 29c a Kwhr. When we added profits up @ the current $14 ish per BTC. In the last 10 days we basically broke even. Needless to say, we stopped mining with this rig. I will continue to mine with my 12c per Kwhr electricity, but im making only $9 a day with 1.4G hashes.
Has Triplemining even cracked their first block yet?
The only people I've seen say "mining isn't worth it" are those OUTSIDE the mining community -- such as comments on Reddit posts, non-Bitcoin message boards, etc.
Has anyone here actually said mining isn't worth it? Maybe some in General Discussion, I don't know. Maybe you can be more specific -- name names, quote quotes, etc.
Has anyone here actually said mining isn't worth it? Maybe some in General Discussion, I don't know. Maybe you can be more specific -- name names, quote quotes, etc.
It's a pretty clear implication.
You can't compare apples to oranges.
If someone bought a couple $150 video cards, you have to compare their income with those two cards *then* with the income from those two cards *now*.
You can't compare an i7 in 2010 with an i7 plus 2 video cards in 2011.
Why don't I compare a 4 GH/s farm today with a 10 GH/s farm in 2 months, and see which one makes more money per day?
You can't compare apples to oranges.
If someone bought a couple $150 video cards, you have to compare their income with those two cards *then* with the income from those two cards *now*.
You can't compare an i7 in 2010 with an i7 plus 2 video cards in 2011.
Why don't I compare a 4 GH/s farm today with a 10 GH/s farm in 2 months, and see which one makes more money per day?
I must have missed 60-Minutes. What are you trying to argue again? I'm simply saying that mining is more profitable today than it was 1.5 years ago. Back then it was a losing proposition and only those living "off the grid" and generating 100% of their electricity through solar panels could claim they were have true positive cash flow from mining.
Now we have a lot of people saying that mining is no longer worth it, and my only question to these people are "Where were you a year+ ago when mining was even LESS profitable?" Or even before that when there was no MtGox or any other exchange?
Is that true, that mining was a losing proposition back then? Difficulty was sure much lower...
I think the answer to your question is -- most of us hadn't heard of Bitcoin yet, so we didn't have an opinion one way or the other.
It's a pretty clear implication.
You can't compare apples to oranges.
If someone bought a couple $150 video cards, you have to compare their income with those two cards *then* with the income from those two cards *now*.
You can't compare an i7 in 2010 with an i7 plus 2 video cards in 2011.
Why don't I compare a 4 GH/s farm today with a 10 GH/s farm in 2 months, and see which one makes more money per day?
You can't compare apples to oranges.
If someone bought a couple $150 video cards, you have to compare their income with those two cards *then* with the income from those two cards *now*.
You can't compare an i7 in 2010 with an i7 plus 2 video cards in 2011.
Why don't I compare a 4 GH/s farm today with a 10 GH/s farm in 2 months, and see which one makes more money per day?
I must have missed 60-Minutes. What are you trying to argue again? I'm simply saying that mining is more profitable today than it was 1.5 years ago. Back then it was a losing proposition and only those living "off the grid" and generating 100% of their electricity through solar panels could claim they were have true positive cash flow from mining.
Now we have a lot of people saying that mining is no longer worth it, and my only question to these people are "Where were you a year+ ago when mining was even LESS profitable?" Or even before that when there was no MtGox or any other exchange?
It's a pretty clear implication.
You can't compare apples to oranges.
If someone bought a couple $150 video cards, you have to compare their income with those two cards *then* with the income from those two cards *now*.
You can't compare an i7 in 2010 with an i7 plus 2 video cards in 2011.
Why don't I compare a 4 GH/s farm today with a 10 GH/s farm in 2 months, and see which one makes more money per day?
You can't compare apples to oranges.
If someone bought a couple $150 video cards, you have to compare their income with those two cards *then* with the income from those two cards *now*.
You can't compare an i7 in 2010 with an i7 plus 2 video cards in 2011.
Why don't I compare a 4 GH/s farm today with a 10 GH/s farm in 2 months, and see which one makes more money per day?
Pardon my ignorance, but isn't it more profitable to mine today than it was when Bitcoins cost less than a half a penny a piece 1.5 years ago? The lack of profitability didn't stop the mining movement back then, and it's not going to stop us now.
No, the mining power of the network was tiny, and difficulty very low. Check this chart: http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=27071.0
For example, in april of 2010, 1MH/s of computing power netted you around 25 cents a day. A Core i7 can make about 10MH/s so that's 2.5 bucks a day using cpu mining which is more than enough to cover electricity.
GPU mining came around in the end of 2010, and you can see the fall in $/MH that resulted from the growth of computing power.
Wait, so if I had a Core i7 back then, I could have made around $2.50/day. But now I'm clearing around $9.xx/day and somehow that's less profitable?
You're currently making $9.xx a day with a Core i7? I doubt it.
Pardon my ignorance, but isn't it more profitable to mine today than it was when Bitcoins cost less than a half a penny a piece 1.5 years ago? The lack of profitability didn't stop the mining movement back then, and it's not going to stop us now.
No, the mining power of the network was tiny, and difficulty very low. Check this chart: http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=27071.0
For example, in april of 2010, 1MH/s of computing power netted you around 25 cents a day. A Core i7 can make about 10MH/s so that's 2.5 bucks a day using cpu mining which is more than enough to cover electricity.
GPU mining came around in the end of 2010, and you can see the fall in $/MH that resulted from the growth of computing power.
Wait, so if I had a Core i7 back then, I could have made around $2.50/day. But now I'm clearing around $9.xx/day and somehow that's less profitable?
No, the mining power of the network was tiny, and difficulty very low. Check this chart: http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=27071.0
For example, in april of 2010, 1MH/s of computing power netted you around 25 cents a day. A Core i7 can make about 10MH/s so that's 2.5 bucks a day using cpu mining which is more than enough to cover electricity.
GPU mining came around in the end of 2010, and you can see the fall in $/MH that resulted from the growth of computing power.
Can I get the source for the difficulty and value of a bitcoin in april 2010? For example, in april of 2010, 1MH/s of computing power netted you around 25 cents a day. A Core i7 can make about 10MH/s so that's 2.5 bucks a day using cpu mining which is more than enough to cover electricity.
GPU mining came around in the end of 2010, and you can see the fall in $/MH that resulted from the growth of computing power.
BitMole, I am not saying that it won't be profitable. I am just saying that it won't be like:
"OMG! I became a millionaire in a week and I have more money that I can ever spend! I have AMD cards running under my bed and even my toaster is mining for me!"
I think that it will be profitable for some, but not very profitable. There will be high competition among miners. The profitability of the "mining market" will be driven by: the cost of electricity, the cost of hardware, the introduction of new and better hardware and, most importantly, BTC cost (which is created by speculators/investors/others at the regular markets).
"OMG! I became a millionaire in a week and I have more money that I can ever spend! I have AMD cards running under my bed and even my toaster is mining for me!"
I think that it will be profitable for some, but not very profitable. There will be high competition among miners. The profitability of the "mining market" will be driven by: the cost of electricity, the cost of hardware, the introduction of new and better hardware and, most importantly, BTC cost (which is created by speculators/investors/others at the regular markets).
@ mining toaster. I totally want one now.I hear your point and I guess you're right in the sense that nothing profitible is ever profitible for everyone or it would cease to be considered profit and swallowed up by inflation.
That said, if someone single handedly sets up 50Gh/s of mining rigs, is there any situation where they can lose? Other than the price of bitcoin dropping of course.
A new technology with better energy efficiency appearing for example.
Pardon my ignorance, but isn't it more profitable to mine today than it was when Bitcoins cost less than a half a penny a piece 1.5 years ago? The lack of profitability didn't stop the mining movement back then, and it's not going to stop us now.
No, the mining power of the network was tiny, and difficulty very low. Check this chart: http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=27071.0
For example, in april of 2010, 1MH/s of computing power netted you around 25 cents a day. A Core i7 can make about 10MH/s so that's 2.5 bucks a day using cpu mining which is more than enough to cover electricity.
GPU mining came around in the end of 2010, and you can see the fall in $/MH that resulted from the growth of computing power.
Pardon my ignorance, but isn't it more profitable to mine today than it was when Bitcoins cost less than a half a penny a piece 1.5 years ago? The lack of profitability didn't stop the mining movement back then, and it's not going to stop us now.
Was it? I wasn't here back then... I know difficulty was very low so everyone was making lots of coins (even with CPUs)
Pardon my ignorance, but isn't it more profitable to mine today than it was when Bitcoins cost less than a half a penny a piece 1.5 years ago? The lack of profitability didn't stop the mining movement back then, and it's not going to stop us now.
Jump to: