Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 26 results by TheMathGuy
Re: [ANN] cudaMiner & ccMiner CUDA based mining applications [Windows/Linux/MacOSX]
The 690 is a very .. very old card already .. and I didn't buy it for crypto mining but rendering.
My point is that it sux that my old card has after so much time till more cuda cores than any new you can buy.
And the Titan Z.. well ..who in the right mind will buy that one!? I wonder if they every sell one such card for the price they dream. So forget about that one.
The 690 was in the price range of a normal card back then.
My point is that it sux that my old card has after so much time till more cuda cores than any new you can buy.
And the Titan Z.. well ..who in the right mind will buy that one!? I wonder if they every sell one such card for the price they dream. So forget about that one.
The 690 was in the price range of a normal card back then.
uhhh... you can not compare maxwell cuda cores vs kepler cuda cores.
"Nvidia claims a 128 CUDA core SMM has 90% of the performance of a 192 CUDA core SMX" see http://web.archive.org/web/20140221105651/http://anandtech.com/show/7764/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-750-ti-and-gtx-750-review-maxwell/3
So 128 maxwell cores are equal to roughly 0.9*192 = 172.8 kepler cores.
now while you still can not not compare the two architectures on just cores, we can at least try:
gtx 690
cuda cores: 3072 (kepler)
gtx 980
cuda cores: 2560 (maxwell) which is roughly 2560 * (172.8/128) = 3456 (kepler)
Re: [ANN] sgminer v5 - new unified multi-algorithm on-the-fly kernel switching miner
I think most people have problems with windows and not ubuntu/linux
Which is true for just about anything, not just crypto-currency mining
Maybe the time has arrived for everyone to finally drop windoze and switch to Linux for day-to-day work? Amen
Re: [ANN] NiceHash.com - innovative professional cryptocurrency cloud mining service
I can not connect my second rig to the 4336/4337 port, while the first one works fine! I have setup the password as follows: f0=0;f2=0;f3=4;f4=3.1;f5=0 So it should switch between x11/x13. Again, it works fine on the first rig while the second rig (same btc adress, same password) can not connect to either 4336/4337 servers. Btw the second rig works fine when set to 3336/3337, but I would like for it to benefit from the switch function of the 4xxx ports too.
Re: [ANN] sgminer - new unified multi-algorithm on-the-fly kernel switching miner
ONCE AGAIN this another .conf file with ALL THE THREAD CONCURRENCIES AT THE LOWEST POSSIBLE VALUE OF 8192,
-- and there's no mixture of TC's, mixing worksizes, or mixing intensities... Why mine scrypt if it's on the absolute shittiest possible settings for hashrate?
-- and there's no mixture of TC's, mixing worksizes, or mixing intensities... Why mine scrypt if it's on the absolute shittiest possible settings for hashrate?
Uhhmmm.... 8192 is the BEST TC value for the 280x, read his post better please.
Re: [ANN][X11/X13] X11 (Darkcoin)/X13 (Marucoin) miner (based on sph-sgminer)
Has the "x13modold" been integrated in the unified SGminer yet?
Yes it has, see: https://github.com/sgminer-dev/sgminer/tree/v5_0/kernel
It's called 'marucoin-modold.cl'
Re: [ANN] sgminer - new unified multi-algorithm on-the-fly kernel switching miner
Fuck, maybe this is what's going on.
Elun, mrbdo, the best scrypt kernel file for R9 290X cards is this one found in the cgminer 3.7.3 is this file "scrypt130511_alexey.cl"
Can we get this kernel file built in? I'm going to try and dry drop it in right now.
However, it can find alexkarnew... but here is what happens...
Code:
[00:34:35] Algorithm alexkarold not found, using ckolivas.
[00:34:35] Started sgminer 4.2.1
[00:34:35] Loaded configuration file C:\sgminer_v5_0\sgminer-nicehash.conf
[00:34:35] Started sgminer 4.2.1
[00:34:35] Loaded configuration file C:\sgminer_v5_0\sgminer-nicehash.conf
Elun, mrbdo, the best scrypt kernel file for R9 290X cards is this one found in the cgminer 3.7.3 is this file "scrypt130511_alexey.cl"
Can we get this kernel file built in? I'm going to try and dry drop it in right now.
However, it can find alexkarnew... but here is what happens...
Code:
[00:40:29] Switching to NiceHash_Scrypt_backup
[00:40:29] Rejected untracked stratum share from NiceHash_X11_multi
[00:40:29] Stratum connection to NiceHash_X11_multi interrupted
[00:40:30] NiceHash_Scrypt_backup difficulty changed to 512
[00:40:31] NiceHash_X13_multi alive, testing stability
[00:40:33] NiceHash_Scrypt_backup extranonce change requested
[00:40:33] Network diff set to 597M
[00:40:33] Stratum from NiceHash_Scrypt_backup detected new block
[00:40:33] Network diff set to 717K
[00:40:33] Stratum from NiceHash_Scrypt_backup detected new block
[00:40:35] Network diff set to 816
[00:40:35] Stratum from mrr x13 platinum4.2 detected new block
[00:40:36] Network diff set to 799
[00:40:36] Stratum from NiceHash_X13_multi detected new block
[00:40:38] Waiting for work to be available from pools.
[00:40:38] Work available from pools, resuming.
[00:40:39] Building binary alexkarnewHawaiiglg2tc32765nf10w128l4.bin
[00:40:43] Initialising kernel alexkarnew.cl with bitalign, unpatched BFI, nfactor 10, n 1024
[00:40:43] Initialising kernel alexkarnew.cl with bitalign, unpatched BFI, nfactor 10, n 1024
[00:40:43] Initialising kernel alexkarnew.cl with bitalign, unpatched BFI, nfactor 10, n 1024
[00:40:43] Initialising kernel alexkarnew.cl with bitalign, unpatched BFI, nfactor 10, n 1024
[00:40:43] Initialising kernel alexkarnew.cl with bitalign, unpatched BFI, nfactor 10, n 1024
[00:40:43] Initialising kernel alexkarnew.cl with bitalign, unpatched BFI, nfactor 10, n 1024
[00:40:43] Error -4: Enqueueing kernel onto command queue. (clEnqueueNDRangeKernel)
[00:40:43] Error -4: Enqueueing kernel onto command queue. (clEnqueueNDRangeKernel)
[00:40:43] Error -4: Enqueueing kernel onto command queue. (clEnqueueNDRangeKernel)
[00:40:43] GPU 2 failure, disabling!
[00:40:43] GPU 1 failure, disabling!
[00:40:43] GPU 0 failure, disabling!
[00:40:45] Thread 1 being disabled
[00:40:45] NiceHash_Scrypt_backup stale share detected, submitting as user requested
[00:40:45] Accepted 69f6d357 Diff 618/512 GPU 2 at NiceHash_Scrypt_backup
[00:40:54] Network diff set to 467K
[00:40:54] Stratum from NiceHash_Scrypt_backup detected new block
[00:40:55] Stratum from NiceHash_Scrypt_backup detected new block
[00:41:07] Stratum from NiceHash_Scrypt_backup detected new block
[00:41:27] Stratum from NiceHash_Scrypt_backup detected new block
[00:41:48] NiceHash_X13_multi stable for 30 seconds
[00:41:48] Switching to NiceHash_X13_multi
[00:42:12] Network diff set to 801
[00:42:12] Stratum from NiceHash_X13_multi detected new block
[00:42:15] Network diff set to 467K
[00:42:15] Stratum from NiceHash_Scrypt_backup detected new block
[00:42:37] Network diff set to 822
[00:42:37] Stratum from NiceHash_X13_multi detected new block
[00:42:59] NiceHash_X13_multi extranonce change requested
[00:42:59] NiceHash_X13_multi difficulty changed to 0.020
[00:42:59] Stratum from NiceHash_X13_multi requested work restart
[00:43:14] Network diff set to 854
[00:43:14] Stratum from NiceHash_X13_multi detected new block
[00:43:28] Network diff set to 869
[00:43:28] Stratum from NiceHash_X13_multi detected new block
[00:43:41] Network diff set to 921
[00:43:41] Stratum from NiceHash_X13_multi detected new block
[00:43:47] Network diff set to 972
[00:43:47] Stratum from NiceHash_X13_multi detected new block
[00:44:04] Network diff set to 1.03K
[00:40:29] Rejected untracked stratum share from NiceHash_X11_multi
[00:40:29] Stratum connection to NiceHash_X11_multi interrupted
[00:40:30] NiceHash_Scrypt_backup difficulty changed to 512
[00:40:31] NiceHash_X13_multi alive, testing stability
[00:40:33] NiceHash_Scrypt_backup extranonce change requested
[00:40:33] Network diff set to 597M
[00:40:33] Stratum from NiceHash_Scrypt_backup detected new block
[00:40:33] Network diff set to 717K
[00:40:33] Stratum from NiceHash_Scrypt_backup detected new block
[00:40:35] Network diff set to 816
[00:40:35] Stratum from mrr x13 platinum4.2 detected new block
[00:40:36] Network diff set to 799
[00:40:36] Stratum from NiceHash_X13_multi detected new block
[00:40:38] Waiting for work to be available from pools.
[00:40:38] Work available from pools, resuming.
[00:40:39] Building binary alexkarnewHawaiiglg2tc32765nf10w128l4.bin
[00:40:43] Initialising kernel alexkarnew.cl with bitalign, unpatched BFI, nfactor 10, n 1024
[00:40:43] Initialising kernel alexkarnew.cl with bitalign, unpatched BFI, nfactor 10, n 1024
[00:40:43] Initialising kernel alexkarnew.cl with bitalign, unpatched BFI, nfactor 10, n 1024
[00:40:43] Initialising kernel alexkarnew.cl with bitalign, unpatched BFI, nfactor 10, n 1024
[00:40:43] Initialising kernel alexkarnew.cl with bitalign, unpatched BFI, nfactor 10, n 1024
[00:40:43] Initialising kernel alexkarnew.cl with bitalign, unpatched BFI, nfactor 10, n 1024
[00:40:43] Error -4: Enqueueing kernel onto command queue. (clEnqueueNDRangeKernel)
[00:40:43] Error -4: Enqueueing kernel onto command queue. (clEnqueueNDRangeKernel)
[00:40:43] Error -4: Enqueueing kernel onto command queue. (clEnqueueNDRangeKernel)
[00:40:43] GPU 2 failure, disabling!
[00:40:43] GPU 1 failure, disabling!
[00:40:43] GPU 0 failure, disabling!
[00:40:45] Thread 1 being disabled
[00:40:45] NiceHash_Scrypt_backup stale share detected, submitting as user requested
[00:40:45] Accepted 69f6d357 Diff 618/512 GPU 2 at NiceHash_Scrypt_backup
[00:40:54] Network diff set to 467K
[00:40:54] Stratum from NiceHash_Scrypt_backup detected new block
[00:40:55] Stratum from NiceHash_Scrypt_backup detected new block
[00:41:07] Stratum from NiceHash_Scrypt_backup detected new block
[00:41:27] Stratum from NiceHash_Scrypt_backup detected new block
[00:41:48] NiceHash_X13_multi stable for 30 seconds
[00:41:48] Switching to NiceHash_X13_multi
[00:42:12] Network diff set to 801
[00:42:12] Stratum from NiceHash_X13_multi detected new block
[00:42:15] Network diff set to 467K
[00:42:15] Stratum from NiceHash_Scrypt_backup detected new block
[00:42:37] Network diff set to 822
[00:42:37] Stratum from NiceHash_X13_multi detected new block
[00:42:59] NiceHash_X13_multi extranonce change requested
[00:42:59] NiceHash_X13_multi difficulty changed to 0.020
[00:42:59] Stratum from NiceHash_X13_multi requested work restart
[00:43:14] Network diff set to 854
[00:43:14] Stratum from NiceHash_X13_multi detected new block
[00:43:28] Network diff set to 869
[00:43:28] Stratum from NiceHash_X13_multi detected new block
[00:43:41] Network diff set to 921
[00:43:41] Stratum from NiceHash_X13_multi detected new block
[00:43:47] Network diff set to 972
[00:43:47] Stratum from NiceHash_X13_multi detected new block
[00:44:04] Network diff set to 1.03K
"Error -4: Enqueueing kernel onto command queue" indicates that your system is running out of memory. Either lower your TC or add more RAM.
Re: [ANN] sgminer - new unified multi-algorithm on-the-fly kernel switching miner
I finally managed to get it fully working on xubuntu 13.10 (multi with ALL algorithms). It took me about 7 hours of painful troubleshooting, but hey, it works.
Re: [ANN][X11] X11/Darkcoin Gpu Miner 40% faster - FIXED: temps now show on windows
HI everyone!
Could you check my version of sgminer?
https://github.com/lasybear/sph-sgminer_x11mod
## Mod x11 (separate kernels)
0. Use "kernel" : "x11mod" in config file or -k x11mod via command line.
1. Do not use intensity higher than 15.
2. In case of instability please set a little bit lower engine frequency than a original sgminer.
3. Tested only on Ubuntu x64 and BAMT..
4. Tested only on R9 280x and R9 270x.
My experience:
MSI R9 280x 3.4 MH/s
"intensity" : "15",
"vector" : "1",
"worksize" : "256",
"kernel" : "x11mod",
"thread-concurrency" : "8192",
"lookup-gap" : "2",
"gpu-engine" : "1200",
"gpu-memclock" : "1500",
"gpu-powertune" : "20",
"gpu-vddc" : "1.200",
"gpu-threads" : "2"
Rig
5 x Sapphire R9 270x Vapor-X 10.43 MH/s (~2.08 MH/s per card)
"intensity" : "15",
"vectors" : "1",
"worksize" : "128",
"kernel" : "x11mod",
"thread-concurrency" : "8192",
"lookup-gap" : "2",
"gpu-engine" : "1150",
"gpu-memclock" : "1500",
"gpu-powertune" : "20",
"gpu-vddc" : "1.150,1.150,1.150,1.150,1.150",
"gpu-threads" : "2"
Open sourced == NO HIDDEN MININGS )
If you satisfied, please donate
BTC: 1LykvDuT7PCJ2xgT513RsyWQSZ9pbrDFa6
MRO: 47mfp5AVx6R1Gdc6qPZeV2Ceq1Aw3HFXLRHgjW2pHszVRLzg5pe4tNPMz1NSmAYADGFmUDthoLzyBDB GEz7AoFya9QZKWcu
LTC: LYpe5amuVYdSKmi3D5HCoKMeBd6yty8xVi
Thanks.
Could you check my version of sgminer?
https://github.com/lasybear/sph-sgminer_x11mod
## Mod x11 (separate kernels)
0. Use "kernel" : "x11mod" in config file or -k x11mod via command line.
1. Do not use intensity higher than 15.
2. In case of instability please set a little bit lower engine frequency than a original sgminer.
3. Tested only on Ubuntu x64 and BAMT..
4. Tested only on R9 280x and R9 270x.
My experience:
MSI R9 280x 3.4 MH/s
"intensity" : "15",
"vector" : "1",
"worksize" : "256",
"kernel" : "x11mod",
"thread-concurrency" : "8192",
"lookup-gap" : "2",
"gpu-engine" : "1200",
"gpu-memclock" : "1500",
"gpu-powertune" : "20",
"gpu-vddc" : "1.200",
"gpu-threads" : "2"
Rig
5 x Sapphire R9 270x Vapor-X 10.43 MH/s (~2.08 MH/s per card)
"intensity" : "15",
"vectors" : "1",
"worksize" : "128",
"kernel" : "x11mod",
"thread-concurrency" : "8192",
"lookup-gap" : "2",
"gpu-engine" : "1150",
"gpu-memclock" : "1500",
"gpu-powertune" : "20",
"gpu-vddc" : "1.150,1.150,1.150,1.150,1.150",
"gpu-threads" : "2"
Open sourced == NO HIDDEN MININGS )
If you satisfied, please donate
BTC: 1LykvDuT7PCJ2xgT513RsyWQSZ9pbrDFa6
MRO: 47mfp5AVx6R1Gdc6qPZeV2Ceq1Aw3HFXLRHgjW2pHszVRLzg5pe4tNPMz1NSmAYADGFmUDthoLzyBDB GEz7AoFya9QZKWcu
LTC: LYpe5amuVYdSKmi3D5HCoKMeBd6yty8xVi
Thanks.
Dude, awesome! Just compiled, went from 1.60 per card to 2.35 (~+47%), no fee, no errors, just smooth sailing.
You should definitely make your own thread in case you want to continue developing this miner.
Re: [ANN][X11] X11/Darkcoin Gpu Miner 40% faster than sph-sgminer
One of my 280x is sick 
Lower the core clock and reboot the system.
Re: [ANN] cudaMiner & ccMiner CUDA based mining applications [Windows/Linux/MacOSX]
Can anyone here tell me if the 750 TI will be favorable vs AMD on x11?
I know the miner is not there yet, but by searching around the forums I get the impression that the 750 TI is better vs AMD on non-scrypt-(N/jane/whatever) coins.
I know the miner is not there yet, but by searching around the forums I get the impression that the 750 TI is better vs AMD on non-scrypt-(N/jane/whatever) coins.
current speeds in our development version are 1.8 - 2 MHash/s (killer Groestl, but slow SIMD hash implementation)
WOW! That's madness (This.. is.. Maxwell!) I feel a lot better having those 750 TI cards now.
Any idea when the public version will be available? Can't wait.
Re: [ANN] cudaMiner & ccMiner CUDA based mining applications [Windows/Linux/MacOSX]
Can anyone here tell me if the 750 TI will be favorable vs AMD on x11?
I know the miner is not there yet, but by searching around the forums I get the impression that the 750 TI is better vs AMD on non-scrypt-(N/jane/whatever) coins.
I know the miner is not there yet, but by searching around the forums I get the impression that the 750 TI is better vs AMD on non-scrypt-(N/jane/whatever) coins.
Re: [ANN][MULTI][VARDIFF] Pool|TradeMyBit - 0.5% Prop/Profit Swap/Auto-Exch
Since aprox. 6 hours ago my x11 hashrate has been displaying wrong(?) values.
It now shows ~38.7 KHash/s instead of my usual ~10 MH/s. It's like that on all my workers.
I can confirm however that all my rigs are still mining as usual and that I am also being paid like I mine with ~10 MH/s.
EDIT: now also the x11 port says 0 GH/s, while still mining.
It now shows ~38.7 KHash/s instead of my usual ~10 MH/s. It's like that on all my workers.
I can confirm however that all my rigs are still mining as usual and that I am also being paid like I mine with ~10 MH/s.
EDIT: now also the x11 port says 0 GH/s, while still mining.
Re: [ANN] NiceHash.com - innovative professional cryptocurrency cloud mining service
+2
As a GPU-only miner with power costs the most profitable coins are x11 (dark,hiro,etc.) right now.
Re: [ANN] NiceHash.com - innovative professional cryptocurrency cloud mining service
@comeonalready
Please stop cluttering the thread with your greediness over 0.25BTC. If you're not a fan of open source than this is clearly the wrong community for you, go work for M$ or something.
@phzi
Thanks a million for the fix, i will donate some ^^
EDIT: Could you pm me your BTC or LTC adress?
Please stop cluttering the thread with your greediness over 0.25BTC. If you're not a fan of open source than this is clearly the wrong community for you, go work for M$ or something.
@phzi
Thanks a million for the fix, i will donate some ^^
EDIT: Could you pm me your BTC or LTC adress?
Re: [ANN] NiceHash.com - innovative professional cryptocurrency cloud mining service
Now it is more than 30 already. 
How is this service not 10GH already
Re: [ANN] NiceHash.com - innovative professional cryptocurrency cloud mining service
Yeah there are a few things i dislike.
Firstly as a "renter" it pisses me off i have to keep adjusting as i cant get any miners. I put it at the top rate then someone goes higher. Would be better to have a 10 min minimum or something like that before switching,
Also paying to cancel when i dont want to pay ridiculous rates anymore is just stupid. Why not put a pause option or a reduce fee option?
Firstly as a "renter" it pisses me off i have to keep adjusting as i cant get any miners. I put it at the top rate then someone goes higher. Would be better to have a 10 min minimum or something like that before switching,
Also paying to cancel when i dont want to pay ridiculous rates anymore is just stupid. Why not put a pause option or a reduce fee option?
No offense but, the people that ''go higher'' obviously have a way to get more out of there hashpower than you do. For example, yesterday people mined whitecoin at ~0.014 BTC/MH/day while renting at ~0.011 BTC/MH/day.
I am starting to think we need a cap on hashrate... unlimited is causing crazy bidding wars - 1/4 of the pool's total hashrate as a maximum would be nice.
Then people would just put RoundUp(poolhashrate/max_rentable) amount of oders in at the highest price..
The current system seems fair because it represents an auction.
Also the way it works now makes NiceHash approach the maximum profit among all the scrypt coins (of course you have to deduct the 5-25% profit the renter(s) is/are making). This makes NiceHash profitable for the renter, who is out there looking for new/high profitable coins and then proceeds to rent hashrate -> other miner also find this coin and thus the bidding drives the price about 5-25% from this coins actual value (5-25% depending on how well know the coin is/gets) as well as for the miner who gets 75-95% of the current max value at all of the scrypt land without having to perform the staggering day job that is looking for profit in scrypt land.
note: don't pin me down on '5-25%' it's hard to do statistics when you don't know the coin people are mining most of the time
Re: [ANN] NiceHash.com - innovative professional cryptocurrency cloud mining service
Highest, unlimited, but only 7 miners. Majority of miners are on one of the lowest paid tiers.
Miners Speed GH/s
#492 Alive 6.10 0.13888305 0.01% 1561.21 0.10 0.00 No 7 0.0004
#490 Alive 6.00 0.01839692 5.67% 1.39 15.91 0.06 0.10 80 0.0530
#472 Alive 5.90 0.12783510 29.62% 1.69 787.77 13.61 0.35 161 0.3084
#484 Alive 5.90 0.26161980 9.09% 2.49 383.25 8.34 No 249 0.4266
#486 Alive 5.90 0.09758923 0.32% 31.69 4.58 0.05 0.10 4 0.0125
#485 Alive 5.70 0.48990200 0.00% ∞ 0.00 0.00 0.20 0 0.0000
#475 Alive 5.60 0.09712124 0.80% ∞ 12.05 0.18 0.10 0 0.0000
#481 Alive 5.60 0.19590200 0.00% ∞ 0.00 0.00 0.10 0 0.0000
#483 Alive 5.60 0.97990200 0.00% ∞ 0.00 0.00 0.40 0 0.0000
#489 Alive 5.60 0.09790200 0.00% ∞ 0.00 0.00 0.10 0 0.0000
#436 Alive 5.50 0.71617964 26.91% 4.89 4142.87 113.39 No 355 0.6388
#474 Alive 5.50 0.09790200 0.00% ∞ 0.00 0.00 0.10 0 0.0000
#406 Alive 5.40 0.16885492 17.49% 81.82 572.55 12.39 No 5 0.0092
Miners Speed GH/s
#492 Alive 6.10 0.13888305 0.01% 1561.21 0.10 0.00 No 7 0.0004
#490 Alive 6.00 0.01839692 5.67% 1.39 15.91 0.06 0.10 80 0.0530
#472 Alive 5.90 0.12783510 29.62% 1.69 787.77 13.61 0.35 161 0.3084
#484 Alive 5.90 0.26161980 9.09% 2.49 383.25 8.34 No 249 0.4266
#486 Alive 5.90 0.09758923 0.32% 31.69 4.58 0.05 0.10 4 0.0125
#485 Alive 5.70 0.48990200 0.00% ∞ 0.00 0.00 0.20 0 0.0000
#475 Alive 5.60 0.09712124 0.80% ∞ 12.05 0.18 0.10 0 0.0000
#481 Alive 5.60 0.19590200 0.00% ∞ 0.00 0.00 0.10 0 0.0000
#483 Alive 5.60 0.97990200 0.00% ∞ 0.00 0.00 0.40 0 0.0000
#489 Alive 5.60 0.09790200 0.00% ∞ 0.00 0.00 0.10 0 0.0000
#436 Alive 5.50 0.71617964 26.91% 4.89 4142.87 113.39 No 355 0.6388
#474 Alive 5.50 0.09790200 0.00% ∞ 0.00 0.00 0.10 0 0.0000
#406 Alive 5.40 0.16885492 17.49% 81.82 572.55 12.39 No 5 0.0092
Something is clearly wrong with the hash distribution, the FAQ says miners will slowly move from one order to another but this is ridiculous.
Re: [ANN] NiceHash.com - innovative professional cryptocurrency cloud mining service
I certainly hope it's an averaging scheme, where all workers are getting paid for their portion of work completed irrelevant of what task it was on... although that might complicate matters regarding minimum profitability settings.
I'm pretty sure it's not.15 minutes ago I was mining @ 5.5BTC/GH, now I've been switched to 5.9BTC/GH, even though there is two 6.5BTC/GH orders.
Last 5 minutes have been at a profitability of 5.75BTC/GH/day.
A very rough average based on GH limit rather then real GH rate would be (6.5*.1)+(5.9*.3)+(5.8*.2)+(5.6*.4)+(5.4*.01) = 5.874. Which is close enough to make me think the payout rate is definitely an average.
I am pretty sure it is not, since my graph says 5.90 at the moment, while countless others have 5.50
On a different note, is anyone else noticing the random crashes/resets? After a while almost all the hashpower seems to fallback to the unlimited orders, whether they offer more or not.