Was a driver issue on my side.
Back to close to what it should be :-)
-Dave
Topic: Vanitygen: Vanity bitcoin address generator/miner [v0.22] - page 18. (Read 1153511 times)
Seems to me without tweaking, i get 18 on my 7970 but im not home to verify.
My default clock is 925 though and i can push it to 1150 to get close to 25.
My default clock is 925 though and i can push it to 1150 to get close to 25.
Any idea what a 7970 should be getting?
According to this link https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Vanitygen it should be around 28MKey
Mine is only getting 17.x
running on Win 7 64 bit.
Before I start messing around with drivers and different versions I figure it's easier to ask.
Thanks,
Dave
According to this link https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Vanitygen it should be around 28MKey
Mine is only getting 17.x
running on Win 7 64 bit.Before I start messing around with drivers and different versions I figure it's easier to ask.
Thanks,
Dave
Somewhere someplace there used to be an updated list of video cards and key speeds. Is there one around that is still somewhat accurate?
Thanks,
Dave
Thanks,
Dave
You mean like this one? https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Vanitygen
-Dave
I've got a Radeon Vega 56 I could probably benchmark if you so desired (drop me a PM if so).
I was just looking to put together a few older gaming PCs with cards that are not worth mining with anymore and wanted to keep the best one(s) for vanitygen.
But it's a do I keep the RX470 or the RX460 or the GT 1050 etc...
I *know* there was a better list because I printed it and made notes last summer. I just cannot remember where.
Thanks,
Dave
Somewhere someplace there used to be an updated list of video cards and key speeds. Is there one around that is still somewhat accurate?
Thanks,
Dave
Thanks,
Dave
You mean like this one? https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Vanitygen
-Dave
I've got a Radeon Vega 56 I could probably benchmark if you so desired (drop me a PM if so).
You can use a vanitygen as a benchmarking tools to test the speed of CPU.
Somewhere someplace there used to be an updated list of video cards and key speeds. Is there one around that is still somewhat accurate?
Thanks,
Dave
Thanks,
Dave
You mean like this one? https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Vanitygen
-Dave
Somewhere someplace there used to be an updated list of video cards and key speeds. Is there one around that is still somewhat accurate?
Thanks,
Dave
Thanks,
Dave
You mean like this one? https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Vanitygen
Somewhere someplace there used to be an updated list of video cards and key speeds. Is there one around that is still somewhat accurate?
Thanks,
Dave
Thanks,
Dave
Just for Info: with ~2 million addresses to search at once, the Vega 64 does ~102mkeys (search with txt file "-f" command
the rx480 does 44million wit 2 million unique addresses
the rx480 does 44million wit 2 million unique addresses
Fair enough, 2M addresses require a lot of memory search.
Coreclock 1850 mem1100
Seems reasonabe, Rx480@1286MHz gives ~68 out of 2304 CUs. ((68M/(2304*1286))*(4096*1850))Quote
i have no idea how many energy it sucks out of the wall
HWiNFO may give you an idea how much chip core sucks from PSU (well, more or less).Just for Info: with ~2 million addresses to search at once, the Vega 64 does ~102mkeys (search with txt file "-f" command
the rx480 does 44million wit 2 million unique addresses
Coreclock 1850 mem1100
Seems reasonabe, Rx480@1286MHz gives ~68 out of 2304 CUs. ((68M/(2304*1286))*(4096*1850))Quote
i have no idea how many energy it sucks out of the wall
HWiNFO may give you an idea how much chip core sucks from PSU (well, more or less). Vanitygen use to create more personalized address to unigue flair. A random cryptic addresses generated by regular bitcoin clients.
thats clear, what do u want to say? ... what i wanted to say is the normal usecase of vanitygen..... 174mkeys per second in normal personalized address generation.... what do u think i do with vanitygen?
Coreclock 1850 mem1100, i have no idea how many energy it sucks out of the wall
Just for Information:
My Vega 64 water cooled edition does 174million keys per second:) its rly fast!
My Vega 64 water cooled edition does 174million keys per second:) its rly fast!
Core clock and power consumtion?
The checksum matches?
Just for Information:
My Vega 64 water cooled edition does 174million keys per second:) its rly fast!
My Vega 64 water cooled edition does 174million keys per second:) its rly fast!
Can the latest version (v0.22) make compressed keys?
segvan only produces compressed keys. It does have an option I added at the last minute for old-style “1” addresses. However, its primary function is to produce Segwit addresses (both Bech32 and “3”-nested), which require compressed keys. You should be using Segwit, anyway; it will save you significantly on fees.
A day or two ago, I whipped up a quickie Segwit address generator with a simple regex search. It can produce both P2WPKH-nested-in-P2SH and Bech32 addresses. It’s quite trivial; it lacks vanitygen’s features, and probably also falls short in performance.
Please see and followup-to: segvan: Segwit vanity address & bulk address generator
Github: https://github.com/nym-zone/segvan
Some sample outputs from short patterns:
3NULL3ZCUXr7RDLxXeLPDMZDZYxuaYkCnG (^3NULL[0-9])
bc1qcash96s5jqppzsp8hy8swkggf7f6agex98an7h (hahah; ^bc1qcash[0-9])
3NULL3ZCUXr7RDLxXeLPDMZDZYxuaYkCnG (^3NULL[0-9])
bc1qcash96s5jqppzsp8hy8swkggf7f6agex98an7h (hahah; ^bc1qcash[0-9])
More recent gems, my new tip addresses:
bc1qnullnymefa273hgss63kvtvr0q7377kjza0607
35segwitgLKnDi2kn7unNdETrZzHD2c5xh
Can the latest version (v0.22) make compressed keys? The ones that start with Letters and not 5 for the private key part. Sure I can convert it, but I'd want to generate a few hundred compressed keys (offline) for cold storage.
Here is the address: 1EJvrRrgEAtAHx2dfVUh1NBresW1CJ9RHP
I have the page number saved and I haven't moved the funds because I am keeping it like a trophy.
I have the page number saved and I haven't moved the funds because I am keeping it like a trophy.
How many digits long is the page number? There are 1.80925e+75 pages. I'm guessing that you picked a page incredibly near to the start, relative to the number of pages that exist.
Jump to: