I think that an alternative algorithm should be developed (maybe in conjunction with the Doge coin developers??) but held off until we see how hard the network is hit by the asics.
It may not be as big a problem as people are thinking.
We need to remember there are people out there running farms with hundreds of gpus. These are the same people who will invest big in the new asics, so yes the hash rate will grow, but by how much, as I'm sure these are the same people who will turn off there gpu farms and mine purely on asics.
Maybe work with the people behind Sgminer directly to develop the new algorithm, im sure between Digi, Doge and the Sgminer crew you could come up with the true next gen algorithm.
Topic: With ASICs on the horizon should DigiByte switch algorithms? - page 3. (Read 6152 times)
let the asics have digibyte and hold all your coins will only drive value up like bitcoin. saying that im only a one card wonder gpu farms have more to loose NEED MORE MERCHANTS ALL THESE COINS ITS A RACE AGAINT TIME WHO GET ESTABLISHED FIRST. the cyrpto coin grave yard is stacking up
You are absolutely correct. It is a race to see who gets established first. We are doing everything we can to be that 1st coin. We are in this for the long haul!
let the asics have digibyte and hold all your coins will only drive value up like bitcoin. saying that im only a one card wonder gpu farms have more to loose NEED MORE MERCHANTS ALL THESE COINS ITS A RACE AGAINT TIME WHO GET ESTABLISHED FIRST. the cyrpto coin grave yard is stacking up
In the long run (think few years out), the network really can't run on gpus... if Digibyte becomes a serious online medium for exchanging goods and services, ASICs will play an important in securing the blockchain and maintaining a high hash rate at a fraction of the power. Even today 10 gridseeds can put out 3.5Mh of hashing power at just under 70 watts. GPUs waste energy. Just my two cents.
With my understanding, this is inaccurate.
The actual "hash-rate" is unimportant. Ergo, "pushing down" the hashrate is not a concern.
The important thing to understand is that hash is relative. If everyone is hashing at, for arguments sake, 50% of the previous hash - then your reward for hashing remains the same.
I haven't looked into x11, but the important different between sCrypt and n-factor sCrypt is the requirement of memory during the hash function. The CPU algorithms force the limiting factor to be memory, as opposed to CPU/GPU/ASIC. Memory, it seems at least, is not poised to experience the exponential growth in price/power. This is what makes it attractive as a limiting factor.
Instead of paying any attention at all to "hashing power", the conversation needs to be about DISTRIBUTED "hashing power". A network could have the highest "hashing power" of any coin in existence and at the same time be the least secure chain. Keeping the hashing power distributed and not centralized to a few actors is the ultimate, and only important, goal that should be considered.
If you decide to switch algorithm, please switch to something that does something else than forces the hashing power down. For example the vert mining just forces the hash down but also seems to cause a lot of strain on the gpu even at low intensity, which I find stupid. The best would be to implement something new if you decide to change, even though I do not really understand the need to change. However to have something unique might interest new investors also it would show that you are not just another coin dev that copy pastes code.
You bring up some very valid points. We are looking more into each algorithm to decide if we can improve the performance and maybe implement something unique to DigiByte like we did with DigiShield.
If you decide to switch algorithm, please switch to something that does something else than forces the hashing power down. For example the vert mining just forces the hash down but also seems to cause a lot of strain on the gpu even at low intensity, which I find stupid. The best would be to implement something new if you decide to change, even though I do not really understand the need to change. However to have something unique might interest new investors also it would show that you are not just another coin dev that copy pastes code.
In the long run (think few years out), the network really can't run on gpus... if Digibyte becomes a serious online medium for exchanging goods and services, ASICs will play an important in securing the blockchain and maintaining a high hash rate at a fraction of the power. Even today 10 gridseeds can put out 3.5Mh of hashing power at just under 70 watts. GPUs waste energy. Just my two cents.
Most mining pools do not support Scrypt N at the moment. Would we be doing more harm than good?
I am not sure 100%, but they don't care what algo is, because they need just a daemon. Am I missing something?
Most mining pools do not support Scrypt N at the moment. Would we be doing more harm than good?
I am not sure 100%, but they don't care what algo is, because they need just a daemon. Am I missing something?
What sort of hash rates to you see with X11 & Scrypt-N is it about the same as Scrypt? Or is their a reduction in hash output?
Never bothered with Scrypy-N, But with x11 I get the following:
1.8 mh/s on an Asus 7970
1.24 mh/s on a R9-270
Yep. Different Algorithms so different hashrates
Scrypt Equiv x11
7970 720kh/s 1.8 mh/s
270 480kh/s 1.24 mh/s
Interesting, thanks for sharing.
Was talking to the Doge devs and they brought up some good points. The stratum on several pools will have to be changed and at the exact block of change we could see some wacky things occur with the net hash rate.
Most mining pools do not support Scrypt N at the moment. Would we be doing more harm than good?
Well, depends how you see it.
Moving away from Scrypt will annoy the people with gridseeds and the KNC titan when it comes out. But, it will push the little GPU miners out like myself. You should just leave the poll up for a bit and see what the people think.
What sort of hash rates to you see with X11 & Scrypt-N is it about the same as Scrypt? Or is their a reduction in hash output?
Never bothered with Scrypy-N, But with x11 I get the following:
1.8 mh/s on an Asus 7970
1.24 mh/s on a R9-270
Yep. Different Algorithms so different hashrates
Scrypt Equiv x11
7970 720kh/s 1.8 mh/s
270 480kh/s 1.24 mh/s
Interesting, thanks for sharing.
Was talking to the Doge devs and they brought up some good points. The stratum on several pools will have to be changed and at the exact block of change we could see some wacky things occur with the net hash rate.
Most mining pools do not support Scrypt N at the moment. Would we be doing more harm than good?
What sort of hash rates to you see with X11 & Scrypt-N is it about the same as Scrypt? Or is their a reduction in hash output?
Never bothered with Scrypy-N, But with x11 I get the following:
1.8 mh/s on an Asus 7970
1.24 mh/s on a R9-270
Yep. Different Algorithms so different hashrates
Scrypt Equiv x11
7970 720kh/s 1.8 mh/s
270 480kh/s 1.24 mh/s
What sort of hash rates to you see with X11 & Scrypt-N is it about the same as Scrypt? Or is their a reduction in hash output?
Never bothered with Scrypy-N, But with x11 I get the following:
1.8 mh/s on an Asus 7970
1.24 mh/s on a R9-270
Different algos, different hashrates... What we are talking about? It does not matter.
What sort of hash rates to you see with X11 & Scrypt-N is it about the same as Scrypt? Or is their a reduction in hash output?
Never bothered with Scrypy-N, But with x11 I get the following:
1.8 mh/s on an Asus 7970
1.24 mh/s on a R9-270
What sort of hash rates to you see with X11 & Scrypt-N is it about the same as Scrypt? Or is their a reduction in hash output?
Never bothered with Scrypy-N, But with x11 I get the following:
1.8 mh/s on an Asus 7970
1.24 mh/s on a R9-270
it doesn't matter
Voting for x-11
GPU's are cooler, very hard for asics.
GPU's are cooler, very hard for asics.
What about botnets?
CPU. Probably I fall asleep...
What sort of hash rates to you see with X11 & Scrypt-N is it about the same as Scrypt? Or is their a reduction in hash output?
Never bothered with Scrypy-N, But with x11 I get the following:
1.8 mh/s on an Asus 7970
1.24 mh/s on a R9-270
Voting for x-11
GPU's are cooler, very hard for asics.
GPU's are cooler, very hard for asics.
What about botnets?
High end CPU's get the same average return as GPU's.
Not sure about low end CPU's though, never tried it.
What sort of hash rates to you see with X11 & Scrypt-N is it about the same as Scrypt? Or is their a reduction in hash output?
Voting for x-11
GPU's are cooler, very hard for asics.
GPU's are cooler, very hard for asics.
What about botnets?
Jump to: