Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 87 results by sanchaz
I will never forget my first mistake... trusting some dude "Tawsix" and his bitcoin mining operation SIN... I lost the first 100+ coins I mined to him.
and GLBSE, but I don't blame Nefario.
and GLBSE, but I don't blame Nefario.
I'm with you on this one.
Did the same mistake, although I only invested a few coins, which I completely lost...
Ok so I'm using the latest version from both. (I have tried cgminer 2.6.5, cgminer 2.10.5 and cgminer 2.11.0).
For some reason cgminer only reports back hardware errors, it won't even submit one share.
However with phoenix I have no problems and shares are submitted.
I understand that cgminer could report some hardware errors, but the fact that it's only reporting hardware errors, no share ever gets submitted is not normal.
Phoenix 2 on the other hand never reports errors, and shares are submitted to the pool.
The hardware can't be completely faulty since phoenix 2 is being able to get the work done.
This happens on 2 cards, both are exactly the same model. Sapphire HD5850 Xtreme.
I'm using Ubuntu 12.10 x86_64. With Catalyst 13.2 and AMD APP 2.4.
Mining --scrypt with cgminer I'm able to get some shares accepted but the hardware error rate is ~50%
Anyone have any idea to what might be wrong?
Pictures below... cards at stock clocks in all.
As you can see 29 hardware errors no shares submitted
16 for one card, 13 for the other.
Phoenix is able to submit 13 shares in the same time frame.
On the other hand scrypt will mine, with hardware errors on each individual card, but no hardware errors are reported on the final stats. Don't know what's up with that, but at least it mines scrypt.
thanks.
For some reason cgminer only reports back hardware errors, it won't even submit one share.
However with phoenix I have no problems and shares are submitted.
I understand that cgminer could report some hardware errors, but the fact that it's only reporting hardware errors, no share ever gets submitted is not normal.
Phoenix 2 on the other hand never reports errors, and shares are submitted to the pool.
The hardware can't be completely faulty since phoenix 2 is being able to get the work done.
This happens on 2 cards, both are exactly the same model. Sapphire HD5850 Xtreme.
I'm using Ubuntu 12.10 x86_64. With Catalyst 13.2 and AMD APP 2.4.
Mining --scrypt with cgminer I'm able to get some shares accepted but the hardware error rate is ~50%
Anyone have any idea to what might be wrong?
Pictures below... cards at stock clocks in all.
As you can see 29 hardware errors no shares submitted
16 for one card, 13 for the other.
Phoenix is able to submit 13 shares in the same time frame.
On the other hand scrypt will mine, with hardware errors on each individual card, but no hardware errors are reported on the final stats. Don't know what's up with that, but at least it mines scrypt.
thanks.
Each device is given a unique device ID. For OpenCL the format works like this:
[class:platform:device]
So [cl:0:0] refers to OpenCL device 0 of platform 0.
[cpu:0] Is a generic identifier for the CPU.
What exactly is the platform?
And how can it change to 1 0 or any other value?
thx
So i've been away from mining for a while and I'm looking to get back in.
Which is the best AMD drivers version to use for the 5850?
Which is the best miner and it's parameters? (back then i used phoenix with phatk2 with something like this -k phatk2 DEVICE=0 VECTORS AGGRESSION=10 -v FASTLOOP BFI_INT WORKSIZE=128)
thx.
Which is the best AMD drivers version to use for the 5850?
Which is the best miner and it's parameters? (back then i used phoenix with phatk2 with something like this -k phatk2 DEVICE=0 VECTORS AGGRESSION=10 -v FASTLOOP BFI_INT WORKSIZE=128)
thx.
+1 Shades Minoco to absorb SIN
AND CAN WE PLEASE GET AN ASSETS LIST!?
Is it so hard?
You Tawsix keep avoiding this issue at all cost I wonder why...
SIN is over your argument of keeping the assets a secret is no longer valid!
AND CAN WE PLEASE GET AN ASSETS LIST!?
Is it so hard?
You Tawsix keep avoiding this issue at all cost I wonder why...
SIN is over your argument of keeping the assets a secret is no longer valid!
Re: [BtcOnTilt.com] = [Current Promotion: Free chips for replying!]
[NEW] Post your [BTC On Tilt] username here and I'll credit your account 50 chips!
[BTC On Tilt] username: sanchaz
I really wonder however, how you manage to have THIS many hardware failures?!
Sounds like someone is buying old used parts off eBay and charging the investors for new parts. Is there any auditing of invoices, or is everyone just expected to have faith?No, it does not sound like someone is buying old used parts. It sounds like someone is buying new parts that have a pretty standard DOA rate of 2-4%. I buy a decent amount of computer hardware myself, and I'd guess DOA rates to be around 5% for the stuff I've bought. So he's ahead of the game compared to my personal data.
agreed just stop with the conspiracies. Seriously it seems perfectly normal.
how about an irc channel with a password sent to all investors using a motion or something like that?
that would be a good way to communicate on a daily basis, informal but would be enough for some opinions and get some feedback.
that would be a good way to communicate on a daily basis, informal but would be enough for some opinions and get some feedback.
The problem with that is there is no real way to confirm who is an investor or not.
Password for the channel would be supplied through a motion.
But i dont see why the channel couldnt be open to all, like that future investors would be able to clear up any doubts with Twasix ou any other current investor quickly and live.
how about an irc channel with a password sent to all investors using a motion or something like that?
that would be a good way to communicate on a daily basis, informal but would be enough for some opinions and get some feedback.
that would be a good way to communicate on a daily basis, informal but would be enough for some opinions and get some feedback.
The amount of shares DISHWARA receives should be based on the equipment we actually need (and we will take/use) and the hashing power of that equipment.
If we need some equipment for something other than generating hashes, I think Tawsix should purchase it with some generated funds and not IPO shares (perhaps funds from selling said shares though).
If we give DISHWARA X shares, we shouldn't be able to get more hashing capability from (X*.75) BTC worth purchased equipment. And as I said before, the amount of shares should be based on
If we don't need an i5, should we take it? I don't see a problem as long as it either helps us generate hashes OR it isn't tacked on top of the shares we pay for hashing capabilities.
If we need some equipment for something other than generating hashes, I think Tawsix should purchase it with some generated funds and not IPO shares (perhaps funds from selling said shares though).
If we give DISHWARA X shares, we shouldn't be able to get more hashing capability from (X*.75) BTC worth purchased equipment. And as I said before, the amount of shares should be based on
- Hashing Power of Assets
- NOT the Value of Assets
- Equipment Acquired That Helps Generate More Hashes
If we don't need an i5, should we take it? I don't see a problem as long as it either helps us generate hashes OR it isn't tacked on top of the shares we pay for hashing capabilities.
i agree it should be based mainly on hashing power of the assets, 10k seems like too much.
yes i too agree btcguild and bitcoins.lc, the second is my personal choice for my own miners.
I would not like to see the miners at deepbit or slush or any other kind of obligatory fee pool
I would not like to see the miners at deepbit or slush or any other kind of obligatory fee pool