Quote from: Jean_Luc on December 27, 2019, 06:33:02 PM

Quote from: zielar on December 27, 2019, 05:39:19 PM

This is not exactly the answer to my question - "Is there a number that creates a range that makes up 100% of the pool in which the prefix is located?"

However, thanks for the calculation and explanation.
What the case looks like in case of difficulties 10054102514374868992
What percentage does this number specify? (I can't find an effective calculation method myself)

I'm not sure to fully understand the question.
If I understand well, there is no way to define a group with a specific size where you are 100% sure that a given prefix is located because addresses are randomly distributed. As said in above posts, the difficulty give the probability to hit a particular prefix after 1 try, nothing more...
63% means that if you make 173346595075428800 tries, you will have 63% of chance to find the desired prefix.

So explaining in the simplest understandable way:
115792089237316195423570985008687907852837564279074904382605163141518161494336 - the size of the entire BTC range
173346595075428800 means as if every "173346595075428800" of spaces appears the prefix searched, but they are not evenly distributed across the full range (i.e. that I can search 10x the whole "173346595075428800" without finding the solution, and searching the 11th range I will find solutions eleven)?
I have scanned the continuous range of over 505000000000000000 (decimal) in order to find a solution for a vanity address with the aforementioned difficulty value with no results and this probably allowed me to understand the above ...

Quote from: Jean_Luc on January 06, 2020, 08:02:10 PM

I just updated CUDA8 project files for VS2015.
Let me know if it is better...

Now works correctly. Thank you!

Quote from: MrFreeDragon on January 12, 2020, 01:24:40 PM

Quote from: Project BULK on January 12, 2020, 12:07:25 PM

I think that the function (Base Key) greatly reduces performance. Because the search range is too narrow. Now, if it as it to disconnect! We can say that this is a useless function, since one character in 160 changes Sha 256 cardinally.

I have the opinion about this, may be not correct. I guess that the base key function is very important for securiyty reasons. Vanitysearch is a tool designed to generate desired vanity addresses. So these addresses also should be secured - for these purposes random base key is used. Without base key fuction 2 different persons could generate the same addresses if use the same prefix - let's say I generate the address starting with "1Dragon", so another person could generate the same address using vanitysearch without base key.

But anyway, if vanitysearch performance without base key is faster, it will be good be able to disable this function (only for advanced users, as it decreases the security).

PS. Without base key, by default users could use number 1 as teh starting private key. So, all different users will generate the same address if use similar prefix, because the tool increment priv key number by 1 searchig for the address.

I have a different opinion on this topic:
1. The option of manually setting BaseKey will not affect your security in any way, because manual setting has exactly the same number of combinations - how many random combinations can the machine generate.
2. The implementation of the option of manual determination (with security) should work so that by default the application generates a random key (as it does by default), while for advanced users - it gives the ability to disable the generation of BaseKey (with forced own input)
3. The above points are justified, because no one who turns off the random BaseKey mode (differently each time) consciously - will not do it to find an empty address for the purpose of storing funds for which BaseKey was used 0x00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001

Now wanting to dispel doubts:
1. Do they have any impact on the functioning of VanitySearch:
- pagefile size and virtual memory settings:

- "lock pages in memory" settings from gpedit.msc:

- setting the manual value -m in VanitySearch
2. What values should I use by default to get the best working environment for VanitySearch in Windows for the ONE vanity address I am looking for?