nVidia listings on Mining Hardware Comparison - page 2.

nster

full member

Activity: 126

Merit: 100

Quote from: grbgout on March 27, 2011, 07:08:34 AM

I'm using a GT 240.

Using python poclbm-mod.py -d 0 -f 0 -a 10 -v -l, I regularly see between 21230 and 21255 khash/s. I've also noticed that -v (vectors) costs about 300 khash/s (21567 to 21579), but I think there was an increase of invalid/stale shares --- this may have been due to other factors, however. I also think there was a reduction in discovering multiple shares per getwork without vectors, but that may have been due to the same 'other factors'.

I don't know what the wattage draw is, but I have noticed the temperature of the card jump from 58 (idle) to 72 (mining). I'm guessing these values are in fahrenheit.

If they were in farenheit, youd have the coldest GT 240 on air lol.... mine is that - 5~6 degrees Celsius because I redid the thermal paste

deadlizard

member

Activity: 112

Merit: 11

Quote from: grbgout on March 27, 2011, 07:08:34 AM

I'm guessing these values are in fahrenheit.

You would be guessing wrong. I idle around 50 and can hit 90 under load if I push it hard enough.
Mining coins and boiling water at the same time, just 10 more to go Grin

grbgout

newbie

Activity: 12

Merit: 0

I'm using a GT 240.

Using python poclbm-mod.py -d 0 -f 0 -a 10 -v -l, I regularly see between 21230 and 21255 khash/s. I've also noticed that -v (vectors) costs about 300 khash/s (21567 to 21579), but I think there was an increase of invalid/stale shares --- this may have been due to other factors, however. I also think there was a reduction in discovering multiple shares per getwork without vectors, but that may have been due to the same 'other factors'.

I don't know what the wattage draw is, but I have noticed the temperature of the card jump from 58 (idle) to 72 (mining). I'm guessing these values are in fahrenheit.

tiberiandusk

hero member

Activity: 575

Merit: 500

The North Remembers

My computer jumps between 18.7 and 16.8Mhash/s on my 9600gt

jkminkov

hero member

Activity: 698

Merit: 500

Quote from: urizane on March 26, 2011, 01:31:12 AM

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Mining_hardware_comparison

I've added my results under GTX460 (2 cards) OC
Actually, there's probably not too many nVidia miners left. Is anybody actually going to read this?

Quote from: deadlizard on March 26, 2011, 08:15:25 AM

jkminkov, not everyone would want to sign up to add a single entry of dubious value.
If I have anything else to add to the wiki I'll sign up. but shit stats for the 2nd shittiest card on the page ... not just yet thanks

I don't want to sign-up.

560 is one of the newest Nvidia cards and it is missing, dubious entry is better than no entry at all.

GTX480>GTX560>=GTX470

deadlizard

member

Activity: 112

Merit: 11

I'm running an 8600GT at 7.3Mh/s
2Mh/s better than the ones posted on the wiki Grin

GPU shark says 43 watts so it's 0.169 Mhash/W if thats correct
using poclbm with -w 128
1602 MHz shader clock

jkminkov, not everyone would want to sign up to add a single entry of dubious value.
If I have anything else to add to the wiki I'll sign up. but shit stats for the 2nd shittiest card on the page ... not just yet thanks

LMGTFY

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 503

Quote from: jkminkov on March 26, 2011, 07:42:09 AM

add my former card
...

It's a wiki, you can add it yourself! (And that would probably be wise - I suspect you two may be among the few remaining Nvidia miners :-)

jkminkov

hero member

Activity: 698

Merit: 500

add my former card

Nvidia GTX560 Ti, factory overclocked to 900/2000

86700 hash/s

win7 x64 and RPC Miner CUDA

urizane

newbie

Activity: 56

Merit: 0

Has anybody ever noticed that the pre-populated nVidia stats all assume (regardless of generation or architecture) it would take 6640 cycles to produce a hash? I know there aren't many nVidia owners out there mining, but if any of you are reading this, add your stats to:

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Mining_hardware_comparison

I've added my results under GTX460 (2 cards) OC and noticed that a stock clocked 460 had a higher hash rate in the table than one of my overclocked 460's. Just to let you guys know, I'm getting hashes roughly every 8570 cycles versus the 6640 the table assumes. I also find it a little amusing that the hash rate assumption was applied to a 9800 as well as a 580, even though their architectures are radically different. I've said this already, but... If you've got nVidia hardware and have some stats, add your results to the hardware comparison.

Actually, there's probably not too many nVidia miners left. Is anybody actually going to read this?

Topic: nVidia listings on Mining Hardware Comparison - page 2. (Read 28307 times)