Best Sub-$500 ASIC Miner? : BitcoinMining

AMD RX 5600 XT Mining Performance

AMD RX 5600 XT Mining Performance
**Disclaimer**
[Still testing, and Tuning but the new AMD RDNA Architecture is new and not only is AMD still optimizing drivers, the mining Developers who DO NOT get GPU's sent to them, are still working on optimizations. Please be patient with me as I continue to test and allow sufficient time for new miners to be developed.]

Same as before, I am sharing my performance numbers with the Crypto Mining community, so we can collaborate together. The RX 5000 series GPUs, unfortunately, don't have the ability to mine every Algorithm available. Mining Devs are still working on it still, but you find what I tested so far below. I did test the SoftPowerPlayTables, MorePowerTool and force flashing a different Vbios on the GPU but to no avail. The card either won't boot or if it does it looks the core clock to 300 Mhz. These GPU's were meant to compete against the GTX 1660 TI and 1660 Super, but due to price war with Nvidia, AMD released a VBIOS to allow the RX 5600 XT compete with the RTX 2060 (KO).
I will test any updates, and when I get time, I will update my findings below. I did a live stream recently, which you can find below, but it was lengthy. I speak on the recent AMD launch of this GPU, what I tried, the mining performance, power draw, and whether you should consider this GPU for cryptocurrency mining. So if you got time, please feel free to check it out, otherwise, when I get time from my busy life, I will try to get a summary video together for you guys. Carter from BitsBeTrippin should be doing his own independent testing in the future, and I always recommend checking more than one review for your research. Take care!

Sapphire Pulse RX 5600 XT | AMD Adrenalin 2020 Edition 20.1.3

Miner Hashrate Clocks and Power Voltage Power Draw Software / Wall
Ethereum(ETH) - Ethash
Claymore v15 (Stock) 37.7 Mhs Core 1780 Mhz / Mem 1750 Mhz 0.960 Vcore 122 Watts - 125 @ Wall
Claymore v15 (Tuning) 40.1 Mhs Core 1780 Mhz / Mem 1860 Mhz 0.960 Vcore 123 Watts - 126 @ Wall
Claymore v15 (Tuning) 40.4 Mhs Core 1500 Mhz / Mem 1860 Mhz 0.800 Vcore 92 Watts / 94 @ Wall
Phoenix Miner 4.9c 40.5 Mhs Core 1780 Mhz / Mem 1860 Mhz 0.960 Vcore 122 Watts - 126 @ Wall
Phoenix Miner 4.9c Best Config 40.6 Mhs Core 1500 Mhz / Mem 1860 Mhz 0.800 Vcore 85 Watts - 88 @ Wall
Phoenix Miner 4.9c 55.7 Mhs [invalid shares mostly] ( -openclLocalWork 128 -openclGlobalMultiplier 4096 ) Core 1780 Mhz / Mem 1860 Mhz 0.960 Vcore 122 Watts - 130 @ Wall
Grin-CR29(GRIN) - Cuckaroom29
LoLminer v 0.9.6.1 4.06 g/s Core 1600 Mhz / Mem 1840 Mhz 0.800 Vcore 89 Watts / 92 @ Wall
LoLminer v 0.9.6.1 4.03 g/s Core 1780 Mhz / Mem 1750 Mhz 0.960 Vcore 115 Watts / 118 @ Wall
LoLminer v 0.9.6.1 4.33 G/s Core 1820 Mhz / Mem 1850 Mhz 0.960 Vcore 125 Watts / 127 @ Wall
LoLminer v 0.9.6.1 4.37 g/s Core 1820 Mhz / Mem 1860 Mhz 0.960 Vcore 125 Watts / 128 @ Wall
Beam(BEAM)BeamHashII
LoLminer v 0.9.6.1 31.03 sol/s Core 1780 Mhz / Mem 1750 Mhz 0.960 Vcore 128 Watts / 130 @ Wall
LoLminer v 0.9.6.1 32.8 sol/s Core 1820 Mhz / Mem 1860 Mhz 0.960 Vcore 134 Watts / 138 @ Wall
LoLminer v 0.9.6.1 28.98 sol/s Core 1650 Mhz / Mem 1840 Mhz 0.800 Vcore 88 Watts / 91 @ Wall
Ryo(RYO) - CryptoNightGPU
XMR-Stak 2.10.8 Unroll - 8 1567.5 h/s Core 1780 Mhz / Mem 1750 Mhz 0.960 Vcore 138 Watts / 141 @ Wall
XMR-Stak 2.10.8 Unroll - 8 1645.3 h/s Core 1820 Mhz / Mem 1860 Mhz 0.960 Vcore 138 Watts / 141 @ Wall
XMR-Stak 2.10.8 Unroll - 8 1620 h/s Core 1820 Mhz / Mem 1860 Mhz 0.900 Vcore 130 Watts / 134 @ Wall
XMR-Stak 2.10.8 Unroll - 1 1654.3 h/s Core 1820 Mhz / Mem 1860 Mhz 0.960 Vcore 138 Watts / 142 @ Wall
Conceal(CCX) - CryptoNightConceal
XMR-Stak 2.10.8 1822.2 h/s Core 1780 Mhz / Mem 1750 Mhz 0.960 Vcore 97 Watts / 100 @ Wall
XMR-Stak 2.10.8 1930 h/s Core 1820 Mhz / Mem 1860 Mhz 0.960 Vcore 97 Watts / 100 @ Wall
XMR-Stak 2.10.8 1930 h/s Core 1820 Mhz / Mem 1860 Mhz 0.900 Vcore 94 Watts / 98 @ Wall
HavenProtocol(XHV)CryptoNightHaven
XMR-Stak 2.10.8 948 h/s Core 1780 Mhz / Mem 1750 Mhz 0.960 Vcore 88 Watts / 92 @ Wall
XMR-Stak 2.10.8 1063 h/s Core 1820 Mhz / Mem 1860 Mhz 0.875 Vcore 85 Watts / 88 @ Wall
XMR-Stak 2.10.8 1172 h/s Core 1650 Mhz / Mem 1860 Mhz 0.800 Vcore 81 Watts / 85 @ Wall
BitTube(TUBE)CryptoNightSaber
XMR-Stak 2.10.8 1063 h/s Core 1780 Mhz / Mem 1750 Mhz 0.960 Vcore 100 Watts / 102 @ Wall
XMR-Stak 2.10.8 1078 h/s Core 1820 Mhz / Mem 1860 Mhz 0.875 Vcore 82 Watts / 85 @ Wall
XMR-Stak 2.10.8 1086 h/s Core 1650 Mhz / Mem 1860 Mhz 0.800 Vcore 78 Watts / 82 @ Wall
Bitcoin Interest(BCI) ProgPow
Phoenix Miner 4.9c 0.972 Mhs Core 1780 Mhz / Mem 1750 Mhz 0.960 Vcore 115 Watts / 118 @ Wall
Phoenix Miner 4.9c 0.870 Mhs Core 1300 Mhz / Mem 1840 Mhz 0.800 Vcore 81 Watts / 85 @ Wall
Phoenix Miner 4.9c 0.972 Mhs Core 1820 Mhz / Mem 1850 Mhz 0.875 Vcore 108 Watts / 112 @ Wall
Zcoin(XZC)MTP
Wildrig Miner 0.20.1 2410 Khs Core 1780 Mhz / Mem 1750 Mhz 0.960 Vcore 155 Watts / 160 @ Wall
Wildrig Miner 0.20.1 2462 Khs Core 1820 Mhz / Mem 1850 Mhz 0.960 Vcore 155 Watts / 160 @ Wall
Wildrig Miner 0.20.1 2342 Khs Core 1650 Mhz / Mem 1840 Mhz 0.800 Vcore 118 Watts / 121 @ Wall
Wildrig Miner 0.20.1 Other Algos Stock Settings
Lyra2REv3 62.7 Mhs Core 1780 Mhz / Mem 1750 Mhz 0.960 Vcore 155 Watts / 160 @ Wall
Blake2b - Wildrig 1.84 Ghs Core 1780 Mhz / Mem 1750 Mhz 0.960 Vcore 134 Watts / 138 @ Wall
BMW512 0.988 Ghs Core 1780 Mhz / Mem 1750 Mhz 0.960 Vcore 134 Watts / 138 @ Wall
Blake2s 3.98 Ghs Core 1780 Mhz / Mem 1750 Mhz 0.960 Vcore 131 Watts / 136 @ Wall

Live Stream, Testing Mining Performance of the Sapphire Pulse RX 5600 XT
https://youtu.be/ffe1rdwuX1w
Summary of Live Stream, in shorter Video:
https://youtu.be/dixRu8wY_lo
https://preview.redd.it/vz2bvrbca1d41.jpg?width=480&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=68241a3eedd6f19f932b23e74401fa4eb3f257f7
submitted by cmvjax to gpumining [link] [comments]

With the pretty awesome rise of almost all crypto currencies, it's time to restart our machines and mine the most profitable coin today 30.01.2020!!!

So let's talk about the GPUs to start with, the ranking has radically changed and even those that were running at a loss have become profitable again The top 10 chart:
1.NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti 4.60 Mh/s 220W $1.35 $0.55 Zcoin(XZC) MTP Algo
2.NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 4.00 Mh/s 190W $1.17 $0.48 Zcoin(XZC) MTP
3.AMD Radeon VII 78.00 Mh/s 230W $1.22 $0.39 EthereumClassic(ETC) Ethash Algo
4.NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti 3.60 Mh/s 190W $1.05 $0.37 Zcoin(XZC) MTP
5.AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 51.50 Mh/s 140W $0.81 $0.30 EthereumClassic(ETC) Ethash
6.NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 2.60 Mh/s 130W $0.76 $0.29 Zcoin(XZC)MTP
7.NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 2.80 Mh/s 150W $0.82 $0.28 Zcoin(XZC) MTP
8.NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 2.80 Mh/s 150W $0.82 $0.28 Zcoin(XZC) MTP
9.NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti 2.50 Mh/s 130W $0.73 $0.26 Zcoin(XZC) MTP
10.NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 2.00 Mh/s 100W $0.59 $0.22 Zcoin(XZC)
Now let's go to the asic Top 10:
  1. Innosilicon A10 ETHMaster 500.00 Mh/s 750W Ethash $5.13 EthereumClassic(ETC) Ethash
  2. Bitmain Antminer Z11 135.00 kh/s 1418W Equihash $3.45 Pirate(ARRR)
  3. BlackMiner F1+ 22.00 Gh/s 860W Eaglesong $3.23 Nervos(CKB) FPGAminer
4.Bitmain Antminer B7 96.00 kh/s 528W Tensority $1.87
5.Bitmain Antminer S17+ 73.00 Th/s 2920W SHA-256 $1.67 BitcoinSV(BSV)
6.StrongU STU-U6 420.00 Gh/s 2100W X11 $1.52 Dash(DASH)
  1. Bitmain Antminer S17 Pro 56 Th/s 2212W SHA-256 $1.46 BitcoinSV(BSV)
  2. Bitmain Antminer S17 59.00 Th/s 2385W SHA-256 $1.34 BitcoinSV(BSV)
  3. Innosilicon A9 ZMaster 50.00 kh/s 620W Equihash $1.08 Pirate(ARRR)
  4. FusionSilicon X7 262.00 Gh/s 1300W X11 $1.03 Dash(DASH)
Dont forget you can find around new Firmware for example for Z9/Z11 Efudd Firmware,and Hive OS firmwares which can Overclock S9/S15/S17 or Underclock (if your electriciy fee are too expensive), for example my S17 Pro I switched to new firmware (Hive OS) to 36Th/s with 900 Watts power gives me a 2.90 usd/day profit without electricity of course, for Z11 Overclocking without changing PSU from 135 to 150-160Ko/sol.
I calculated everything on the basis of 0.15 cens Kw / h.
Brand New Miner coming out:
ASICminer Zeon Turbo 400,000 Sol/s Equihash
Most Profitable Miner in the World. ASICminer Daily Revenue: $27 $16 (less 0.15 Kw/h fee) ASICminer Power Consumption: 2500W
asicminer dot co/shop (Factory)
submitted by pushingworld77 to BitcoinMining [link] [comments]

RX 5700 (NON XT) Mining Performance (7/28/2019)

**Disclaimer**
[Still testing, and Tuning but the new AMD RDNA Architecture is new and not only is AMD still optimizing drivers, the mining Developers who DO NOT get GPU's sent to them, are still working on optimizations. Please be patient with me as I continue to test and allow sufficient time for new miners to be developed.]
Same stuff different day just as with the RX 590 Fatboy and RTX 2080, I will be testing the RX 5700 over time as new miners come out, to compare price to performance for mining. Below are some of my results when testing the new AMD RX 5700 (Non XT) graphics card mining performance, now I was only able to get a few working. I did some videos on its Gaming performance and the "SoftPowerPlayTables" mod from Igor's Lab at Tom's Hardware, which allowed the RX 5700 to really stretch its legs. Allowing this Non-XT model to surpass the RTX 2060 Super and even get on par with the first Gen RTX 2070. Moving forward, as new miners are release I will update my numbers and test when I can.
***UPDATE: 7/31/19 - New Phoenix Miner 4.5c still only getting 2 - 4 Mhs, XMR Stak 2.10.7, only Algo that will run is RYO
***UPDATE: 9/15/19 - Updated Power Draw numbers, as my Watt Meter died, new one in and retested Algos below
***UPDATE: 12/14/19 - Updated and added Algos as miner support was implemented. Retesting with Radeon Adrenalin 2020 driver
***UPDATE: 1/22/19 - Updated additional miners as support was implemented. Retesting with Radeon Adrenalin 2020 driver (20.1.3)
RX 5700 GPU
Driver Currently in Use:
Mining Performance AMD DRIVER - Adrenalin Edition 19.9.1
OverdriveNTool 0.2.8
Average temps during mining
Stock Setup: 65c - 72c
Aggressive Fan Curve: 40% - 75%
Algo (Mining Program) / OC settings (volt mV) / Power draw

Claymore Miner (Updates will Follow) [ UPDATED 9/15/2019 got new Kill-A-Watt Meter ]
ETH (Claymore Miner V 15) STOCK*** 49.5 MHs 1750 Core (1037 mV) / Mem 1750 (850mV) 155 Watts
ETH (Claymore Miner V 15) SPPT Mod*** 51 MHs 1900 Core (1037mV) / Mem 1800 (850mV) 155 Watts
ETH (Claymore Miner V 15) SPPT Mod*** 53.2 MHs 1750 Core (990mV) / Mem 1850(850mV) 160 Watts
ETH (Claymore Miner V 15) SPPT Mod*** 53.5 MHs 1750 Core (990mV) / Mem 1860 (850mV) 160 Watts
ETH (Claymore Miner V 15) SPPT Mod*** [Best Config] 52.6 MHs 1325Core (900mV) / Mem 1860 (850mV) 115 Watts

Claymore Miner (Updates will Follow) [ UPDATED 9/15/2019 got new Kill-A-Watt Meter ]

ETH (Phoenix Miner) STOCK*** 48.8 MHs 1750 Core (1037 mV) / Mem 1750 (850mV) 155 Watts
ETH (Phoenix Miner) [Best Config] 53.4 Mhs 1250 Core (750 mV) / Mem 1850 (850 mV) 115 Watts

ProgPow | BCI - Bitcoin Interest (ethminer not working on Navi ATM)
Phoenix Miner 4.9c Stock 1.44 Mhs 1750 Core (1018mV) / Mem 1750 (850mV) 140 Watts
Phoenix Miner 4.9c 1.291 1500 Core (805mV) / Mem 1850 (850mV) 96 Watts
WildRig Multi Miner
Blake2b (WildRig Multi (0.20.1) 1.86 Ghs 1750 Core (1018mV) / Mem 1750 (850mV) 132 Watts
Blake2s (WildRig Multi (0.20.1) 4.7 Ghs 1750 Core (1018mV) / Mem 1750 (850mV) 128 Watts
BMW512 (WildRig Multi (0.20.1) 1.05 Ghs 1750 Core (1018mV) / Mem 1750 (850mV) 130 Watts
Lrya2Rev3 (WildRig Multi (0.20.1) 61.4 Mhs 1750 Core (1018mV) / Mem 1750 (850mV) 160 Watts
Lrya2Rev2 (WildRig Multi (0.19 Beta) 1.04 Khs 1750 Core (1018mV) / Mem 1750 (850mV) 160 Watts
Lrya2vCoban (WildRig Multi (0.19 Beta) 54.5 Mhs 1750 Core (1018mV) / Mem 1750 (850mV) 160 Watts
MTP (WildRig Multi (0.20.1) 2.5 Mhs 1750 Core (1018mV) / Mem 1750 (850mV) 152 Watts

XMR-Stak (Updates will Follow)
Cryptonight-GPU - RYO (XMRStak 2.10.8) 1.42 Khs (1 Thread) 1750 Core (1018 mV) / Mem 1750 (850mV) 132 Watts
Cryptonight-GPU - RYO (XMRStak 2.10.8) 1.62 Khs (2 Threads) 1750 Core (1018 mV) / Mem 1750 (850mV) 155 Watts
Cryptonight-GPU - RYO (XMRStak 2.10.8) 1.89 Khs (2 Threads) 1900 Core (1018 mV) / Mem 1750 (850mV) 160 Watts
Cryptonight-GPU - RYO (XMRStak 2.10.8) 1.89 Khs (2 Threads) Undervolt 1900 Core (1000 mV) / Mem 1750 (850mV) 155 Watts
Cryptonight-Conceal - CCX (XMRStak 2.10.8) 2.23 Khs (1 Thread) 1750 Core (1018 mV) / Mem 1750 (850mV) 116 Watts

XMR-Stak - Cryptonight-R
Cryptonight-R (XMRStak 2.10.7) 1.1 Khs (2 Threads) Undervolt 1325Core (800mV) / Mem 940 (850mV) 90 Watts
Cryptonight-R (XMRStak 2.10.7) 1.145 Khs (2 Threads) 1750 Core (1018 mV) / Mem 875 (850mV) 128 Watts

LOL miner - Grin 29
Grin29 (LoLMiner 0.8.8) 5.2 G/s 1750 Core (1037 mV) / Mem 1750 (850mV) 128 Watts
Grin31 (LoLMiner 0.9.3) 0.95 G/s 1750 Core (1037 mV) / Mem 1750 (850mV) 130 Watts

RX 5700 Mining Performance (WildRig - XMRStak)
submitted by cmvjax to gpumining [link] [comments]

A 14-year-old's experience with Bitcoin

First-time poster here, don’t bully me, apologies for the potentially atrocious formatting :) TL;DR at the end
So in the wake of Bitcoin’s explosive rise in value and media attention, I’ve been encouraged by others to share my experience over the past few years as a miner. Here's my story (it's kinda long, you've been warned)

Humble Beginnings

It all started almost three years ago in the beginning of 2015 when Bitcoin flew under my radar. Looking into it, I admittedly wasn’t drawn in because of the decentralisation or the anonymous payments, I was hooked on the idea that anyone could get their hands on some just by running a program and leaving it to do its own thing. I know, how shallow of me. But the idea of making even a bit of money without ‘any work’ was convincing enough for 11-year-old me to do more digging into the matter.
To my disappointment, I soon found out that the era of mining Bitcoins with a PC’s CPU or GPU was long obsolete and instead it was all ASICs at that point.
So that summer, for my twelfth birthday, I got a little ASIC machine for €60, an Antminer U3. This little thing took up less space than a graphics card but could mine at 60 GH/s. Because, at the time, I didn’t have a controller device that could be kept up and running all day long so it could run the program that mined Bitcoin using the U3, I went ahead and got a Raspberry Pi. After setting up the Pi and installing all the necessary stuff (took an awfully long time), I connected it to AntPool and plugged the U3 in. Two days past and the mining pool sent the first Bitcoin I ever received to my wallet (I was using Blockchain.info). It was just 30 cents worth of BTC but I felt a bit of a rush because I was earning a bit of money through this completely new thing and the idea of that was thrilling.
Let’s back up for a second. I just used the term ‘earning’ as if I was profiting, and naive me 2 years ago was no different. In reality, I was at first oblivious to the fact that I was most likely LOSING money overall because of how much energy that little sucker was taking in. But, I was comforted thinking that using that machine was just a practical way of learning about this modern currency and that the loss of several cents’ worth of energy was acceptable in the name of education and learning.
Fast forward ten months to the wonderful summer of 2016. I had recently turned 13 and the Antminer U3 had been running on and off throughout. Various pauses and breaks in mining would be observed, as I had to manually get everything up and running after frequent breaks in the Internet connection. You’d expect my newly-turned-teenage brain to lose interest in Bitcoin as it does with many other gimmicks, but – even surprising myself – I miraculously didn’t. Good thing I maintained interest thinking about it now, not so good at the time for my parents. Why do I say this? I felt like it was time to get a little upgrade in my hardware.

Getting an upgrade

Days passed with me comparing every ASIC miner I could at that price point. It was then I set my eyes upon the Antminer S7 (same folks who did my U3, nice). I had put it up against a plethora of other miners and I figured the S7 was my best bet; the thing costs only about 10 times that of my U3 but could run at 4.73 TH/s, almost 80 times as powerful. The only problem being its power consumption was at 1300 watts, which would put a massive dent in the electricity bill and eliminate any profit I would make. Fortunately, I had a secret weapon up my sleeve – or rather my mum did. She had rented out an office outside our apartment where she would keep files and paperwork. The office’s electricity bill was a flat rate as far as I’m aware and it ended up being my saving grace because it virtually got rid of the “oh no I’m actually going to be losing money because of how much electricity I’m eating up” factor, making this whole hardware upgrade viable.
After convincing my parents, they finally agreed to shell out the requested amount, with the initial investment being paid back with time. I went to a local Bitcoin vendor and purchased 1 BTC for about $665 in cash (sigh yes, I know. $665 dollars). Shortly after, I used about 0.9 BTC to purchase the Antminer S7 and a 1600W power supply for a grand total of $600. The products would be made and shipped from China so I was definitely in for a wait.
A month passes and the package arrives at last. I connected all the wires from the power supply into the S7 and – with great anticipation – I plugged it into the wall to start its first ever run. And what do you know? An extremely loud and high-pitched whirring sound blasted out from the fans on both the power supply as well as the S7. After killing the thing, I questioned my choices. I couldn’t dare put that thing anywhere near my mum’s office in the event it drive everyone in the building absolutely nuts. I was at a loss. However, I soon recovered from my temporarily debilitated state and got working on a solution.
The first idea that came to my mind: change the fans. The stocks fans were by Evercool and spun at around 3000 RPM. The power supply used a small, robust fan that looked like a cube that must’ve spun at extremely high speeds judging by how high the sound it produced was. I got my parents to give me some more funding so I could acquire the replacement fans and I did. Bust. After installation and testing, none of the fans would work. I managed to configure the S7 to connect to my Antpool account and the machine would manage mining for several minutes running at peak performance but ultimately be automatically cut off because of how hot the machine was getting (I’m talking about 80 degrees Celsius kinda hot in that thing). The fans got refunded and I was back to the drawing board.
After combing through some forum posts and videos, I came across this video and a forum post in which people have their mining rigs placed inside a ventilated, muffled cabinet. Undertaking a project like this would be time-consuming and risky but I had no better ideas so I decided to go through with the idea anyway.
Firstly, I sought out a cabinet with suitable dimensions. I managed to get just what I needed at a second-hand IKEA shop. Great. Secondly, I went ahead and acquired some sound-absorbing acoustic foam from a local provider. Fantastic. Finally I had to get a ventilation system going within the cabinet, otherwise, all the hot air would roast the machine alive in there in a bloody mess. With the help of my dad, we found a pair cabinet fans on the Internet that were close to silent but could circulate the air well enough.
Eventually, all the materials came and, with the help of my parents, put everything together. The process took quite long time and we had a couple hiccups along the way, but we got it done and it came out pretty nice.
The moment of truth came and, to my relief, it ran so much quieter than without the cabinet. It was nowhere near silent but it reduced the noise a great deal. Soon after, I got the thing into the office and set everything up from there. Unfortunately, I was forced to underclock it because you could still hear the machine’s whining from outside the thin office door. Gunning the hashrate down about 25% to 3.7TH/s, I could lower the fan speed without risking the machine burning up. Sure, I wasn’t getting the full potential of the machine but I didn’t complain because electricity was not an issue there and it was still a whole lot better than my U3. With it up and running, I could leave it there, periodically checking to see if it was mining on Antpool.

The aftermath

In the months that followed, I was getting a solid $2.5 worth of BTC on daily basis. Half a year later, May of 2017, I had accumulated a satisfactory $600. I thought, “At this rate, I’d be able to pay my parents’ investment back in a few months” (the total investment came close to $900). Bitcoin had risen to over $1500 so I was already over the moon at that point because of how well everything was going. Little did I know…
I hit 0.5 BTC midway through September this year. The price of BTC had dropped after a sudden rise to $5000, but I couldn’t have asked for more. Although I possessed only half the amount of BTC I paid for the machine, its value was over twice that of the initial investment. I thought BTC would level off at around $4000 but nope.
In the month of October, the price skyrocketed. Since September, I had only mined 0.017 BTC but the value was already over $3000. It was just a matter of selling it, but I decided to hodl. Good thing I did.
As of November 5, I have approximately 0.52 BTC mined in total from my S7, valued at $4000. If I were to sell it right now, I’d have a profit of over $3100. And as for my miner, it’s churning out 0.0006 BTC daily, sounds like nothing but it’s still the equivalent of $5 today and I couldn’t be happier, at least with the miner and Bitcoin.
You remember that $665 for 1 BTC that I mentioned earlier? In hindsight, it would’ve been such a better idea to just keep that one Bitcoin and not do anything with it until today (in the interest of making much more money), as I’d theoretically have upwards of $7000. The idea of that still haunts me sometimes if I dwell on it too long but knowing that I’m in possession of an already hefty amount, the pain of it had numbed slightly. It’s not all doom and gloom for me from the exponential increase in Bitcoin’s value, however. Those first $0.3 payments from my humble little U3 all those years ago now are now the equivalent of over $6 today!
Bitcoin and everything it encompasses has been and still is a journey of discovery and an adventure. Looking back, starting with a modest €60 Antminer U3 to having a sum of Bitcoin equivalent to two extremely high-end gaming rigs (first thing I could think of as a comparison, sorry) has been something I can’t really describe. Through the course of the past few years, I’ve learned more about technology, I’ve unexpectedly gotten insight into economics and business and – of course – I’ve made a lot of money (if I decide to stop hodling that is).
Also, props to my parents for keeping an open mind throughout, I know some parents would be horrified at their kids being involved in something that has been used in some less-than-savoury ways and it's great knowing mine have been supportive all the way.
TL;DR got into Bitcoin mining 3 years ago at age 11 with an Antminer U3 that ran at 60 GH/s, got an Antminer S7 (4.73TH/s) and built a sound-muffling, ventilated cabinet for it. Am sat here today with $3000 profit if I decide to sell right now.
submitted by xx_riptide_xx to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Mining Profitability: How Long Does it Take to Mine One Bitcoin in 2019?

When it comes to Bitcoin (BTC) mining, the major questions on people’s minds are “how profitable is Bitcoin mining” and “how long would it take to mine one Bitcoin?” To answer these questions, we need to take an in-depth look at the current state of the Bitcoin mining industry — and how it has changed — over the last several years.
Bitcoin mining is, essentially, the process of participating in Bitcoin’s underlying security mechanism — known as proof-of-work — to help secure the Bitcoin blockchain. In return, participants receive compensation in bitcoins (BTC).
When you participate in Bitcoin mining, you are essentially searching for blocks by crunching complex cryptographic challenges using your mining hardware. Once a block is discovered, new transactions are recorded and verified within the block and the block discoverer receives the block rewards — currently set at 12.5 BTC — as well as the transactions fees for the transactions included within the block.
Once the maximum supply of 21 million Bitcoins has been mined, no further Bitcoins will ever come into existence. This property makes Bitcoin deflationary, something which many argue will inevitably increase the value of each Bitcoin unit as it becomes more scarce due to increased global adoption.
The limited supply of Bitcoin is also one of the reasons why Bitcoin mining has become so popular. In previous years, Bitcoin mining proved to be a lucrative investment option — netting miners with several fold returns on their investment with relatively little effort.
bitcoin mining hardware
Mining Hardware
The mining hardware you choose will mostly depend on your circumstances — in terms of budget, location and electricity costs. Since the amount of hashing power you can dedicate to the mining process is directly correlated with how much Bitcoin you will mine per day, it is wise to ensure your hardware is still competitive in 2019.
Bitcoin uses SHA256 as its mining algorithm. Because of this, only hardware compatible with this algorithm can be used to mine Bitcoin. Although it is technically possible to mine Bitcoin on your current computer hardware — using your CPU or GPU — this will almost certainly not generate a positive return on your investment and you may end up damaging your device.
The most cost-effective way to mine Bitcoin in 2019 is using application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) mining hardware. These are specially-designed machines that offer much higher performance per watt than typical computers and have been an absolutely essential purchase for anybody looking to get into Bitcoin mining since the first Avalon ASICs were shipped in 2013.
When it comes to selecting Bitcoin mining hardware, there are several main parameters to consider — though the importance of each of these may vary based on personal circumstances and budget.
Performance per Watt
When it comes to Bitcoin mining, performance per watt is a measure of how many gigahashes per watt a machine is capable of and is, hence, a simple measure of its efficiency. Since electricity costs are likely to be one of the largest expenses when mining Bitcoin, it is usually a good idea to ensure that you are getting good performance per watt out of your hardware.
Ideally, your mining hardware would be highly efficient, allowing it to mine Bitcoin with lower energy requirements — though this will need to be balanced with acquisition costs, as often the most efficient hardware is also the most expensive. This means it may take longer to see a return on investment.
In countries with cheap electricity, performance per watt is often less of a concern than acquisition costs and price-performance ratio. In most countries, operating outdated mining hardware is typically cost prohibitive, as energy costs outweigh the income generated by the mining equipment.
However, this may not be the case for those operating in countries with extremely cheap electricity — such as Kuwait and Venezuela — as even older equipment can still be profitable. Similarly, miners with a free energy surplus, such as from wind or solar electric generators, can benefit from the minimal gains offered by still running outdated hardware.
Longevity
The lifetime of mining hardware also plays a critical role in determining how profitable your mining venture will be. It’s always a good idea to do whatever possible to ensure it runs as smoothly as possible.
Since mining equipment tends to run at a full (or almost full) load for extended periods, they also tend to break down and fail more frequently than most electronics — which can seriously damage your profitability. Equipment failure is even more common when purchasing second-hand equipment. Since warranty claims are often challenging, it can often take a long time to receive a warranty replacement.
Price-Performance Ratio
In many cases, one of the major criteria used to select mining hardware is the price-performance ratio — a measure of how much performance a machine outputs per unit price. In the case of cryptocurrency mining hardware, this is commonly expressed as gigahashes per dollar or GH/$.
Under ideal circumstances, the mining hardware would have a high price-performance ratio, ensuring you get a lot of bang for your buck. However, this must also be considered in combination with the acquisition costs and the expected lifetime of the machine — since the absolute most powerful machines are not always the cheapest or the most energy efficient.
Acquisition Costs
Acquisition costs are almost always the biggest barrier to entry for most Bitcoin miners since most top-end mining hardware costs several thousand dollars. This problem is further compounded by the fact that many hardware manufacturers offer discounts for bulk purchases, allowing those with deeper pockets to achieve a better price-performance ratio.
Acquisition costs include all the costs involved in purchasing any mining equipment, including hardware costs, shipping costs, import duties, and any further costs. For example, many ASIC miners do not include a power supply — which can be another considerable expense, since the 1,000W+ power supplies usually required tend to cost several hundred dollars alone.
Ensuring your equipment runs smoothly can also add in additional costs, such as cooling and maintenance expenses. In addition, some miners may want to invest in uninterruptible power supplies to ensure their hardware keeps running — even if the power fails temporarily.
asic mining
Current Generation Hardware
One of the most recent additions to the Bitcoin mining hardware market is the Ebang Ebit E11++, which was released in October 2018. Using a 10nm fabrication process for its processors, the Ebit E11++ is able to achieve one of the highest hash rates on the market at 44TH/s.
In terms of efficiency, the Ebang Ebit E11++ is arguably the best on the market, offering 44TH/s of hash rate while drawing just 1,980W of power, offering 22.2GH/W performance. However, as of writing, the Ebang Ebit E11++ is out of stock until March 31, 2019 — while its price of $2,024 (excluding shipping) may make it prohibitively expensive for those first getting involved with Bitcoin mining.
Another popular choice is the ASICminer 8 Nano, a machine released in October 2018 that offers 44TH/s for $3,900 excluding shipping. The ASICminer 8 Nano draws 2,100W of power, giving it an efficiency of almost 21GH/W — slightly lower than the Ebit E11++ while costing almost double the price. However, unlike the E11++, the 8 Nano is actually in stock and available to purchase.
ASICminer also offers the 8 Nano Pro, a machine launched in mid-2018 that offers 80 TH/s of hash rate for $9,500 (excluding shipping). However, unlike the Ebit E11++ and 8 Nano, the minimum order quantity for the 8 Nano Pro is curiously set at five, meaning you will need to lay out a minimum of $47,500 in order to actually get your hands on one (or five).
While the 8 Nano Pro doesn’t offer the same performance per watt as the Ebit E11+ or AICMiner 8 Nano, it is one of the quieter miners on this list, making it more suitable for a home or office environment. That being said, the ASICminer 8 Nano Pro is easily the most expensive miner per TH on this list — costing a whopping $118.75/TH, compared to the $46/TH offered by the E11++ and $88.64 offered by the 8 Nano.
The latest hardware on this list is the Innosilicon T3 43T, which is currently available for pre-order at $2,279, and estimated to ship in March 2019. Offering 43TH/s of performance at 2,100W, the T3 43T comes in at an efficiency of 20.4GH/W, which is around 10 percent less energy efficient than the Ebit E11++.
The T3 43T also has a minimum order quantity of three units, making the minimum acquisition cost $6837 + shipping for preorders. All in all, the T3 43T is more costly and less efficient than the E11++ but may arrive slightly earlier since Ebang will not ship the E11++ units until at least end March 29, 2019.
Finally, this list would not be complete without including Bitmain’s latest offering, the Antminer S15-28TH/s, which — as its name suggests — offers 28TH/s of hash power while drawing just under 1600W at the wall. The Antminer S15 is one of the only SHA256 miners to use 7nm processors, making it somewhat smaller than some of the other devices on this list.
Like most pieces of top-end Bitcoin mining hardware, the Antminer S15 27TH/s model is currently sold out, with current orders not shipping until mid-February 2019. However, the S15 is offered at a significantly lower price than many of its competitors at just $1020 (excluding shipping), with no minimum quantity restriction. At these rates, the Antminer comes in at just $37.78/TH — though its energy efficiency is a much less impressive 17.5GH/W.
Mining Hardware Mining Hardware Comparison
Performance (GH/W) Price Performance Ratio ($/TH)
Ebang Ebit E11++ 22.2GH/W $46/TH
ASICminer 8 Nano 21GH/W $88.64/TH
ASICminer 8 Nano Pro 19GH/W $118.75/TH
Innosilicon T3 43T 20.4GH/W $53/TH
Antminer S15-28TH/s 17.5GH/W $37.78/TH
How To Select a Good Mining Pool
Mining pools are platforms that allow miners to pool their resources together to achieve a higher collective hash rate — which, in turn, allows the collective to mine more blocks than they would be able to achieve alone.
Typically, these mining pools will distribute block rewards to contributing miners based on the proportion of the hash rate they supply. If a pool contributing a total of 20 TH/s of hash rate successfully mines the next block, a user responsible for 10 percent of this hash rate will receive 10 percent of the 12.5 BTC reward.
Pools essentially allow smaller miners to compete with large private mining organizations by ensuring that the collective hash rate is high enough to successfully mine blocks on regular basis. Without operating through a mining pool, many miners would be unlikely to discover any blocks at all — due to only contributing a tiny fraction of the overall Bitcoin hash rate.
While it is quite possible to be successful mining without a pool, this typically requires an extremely large mining operation and is usually not recommended — unless you have enough hash rate to mine blocks on a regular basis.
Although it is technically possible to discover blocks mining solo and keep the entire 12.5 BTC reward for yourself, the odds of this actually occurring are practically zero — making pool collaboration practically the only way to compete in 2019 and beyond.
Selecting the best pool for you can be a challenging job since the vast majority of pools are quite similar and offer similar features and comparable fees. Because of this, we have broken down the qualities you should be looking for in a new pool into four categories; reputation, hash rate, pool fees, and usability/features:
Reputation
The reputation of a pool is one of the most important factors in selecting the pool that is best for you. Well-reputed pools will tend to be much larger than newer or less well-established pools since few pools with a poor reputation can stand the test of time.
Well-reputed pools also tend to be more transparent about their operation, many of which provide tools to ensure that each user is getting the correct reward based on the hash rate contributed. By using only pools with a great reputation, you also ensure your hash rate is not being used for nefarious purposes — such as powering a 51 percent attack.
When comparing a list of pools that appear suitable for you, it is a wise move to read their user reviews before making your choice — ensuring you don’t end up mining at a pool that steals your hard-fought earnings.
Hash Rate
When it comes to mining Bitcoin, the probability of discovering the next block is directly related to the amount of hashing power you contribute to the network. Because of this, one of the major features you should be considering when selecting your pool is its total hash rate — which is often closely related to the proportion of new blocks mined by the pool
Since the total hash rate of a pool is directly related to how quickly it discovers new blocks, this means the largest pools tend to discover a relative majority of blocks — leading to more regular rewards. However, the very largest pools also tend the have higher fees but often make up for this with sheer success and additional features.
Sometimes, some of the largest pools have a minimum hash rate requirement ù leaving some of the smaller miners left out of the loop. Although smaller pools typically have more relaxed requirements with reduced performance thresholds, these pools may be only slightly more profitable than mining solo.
Pool Fees
When choosing a suitable pool, typically one of the major considerations is its fees. Typically, most pools will charge a small fee that is deducted from your earnings and is usually around 1-2 percent — but sometimes slightly lower or higher.
There are also pools that offer 0 percent fees. However, these are often much smaller than the major pools and tend to make their money in a different way — such as through monthly subscriptions or donations.
Ideally, you will choose the pool that offers the best balance of fees to other features. Usually, the pool with the absolute lowest fees is not the best choice. Additionally, pools with the lowest fees often have the highest withdrawal minimums — making pool hopping uneconomical for most.
Usability and Features
When first starting out with Bitcoin mining, learning how to set up a pool and navigating through the settings can be a challenge. Because of this, several pools target their services to newer users by offering a simple to navigate user interface and providing detailed learning resources and prompt customer support.
However, for more experienced miners, simple pools don’t tend to offer a variety of features needed to maximize profitability. For example, although many mining pools focus their entire hash rate towards mining a single cryptocurrency, some are large enough to offer additional options — allowing users to mine other SHA256 coins such as Bitcoin Cash (BCH) or Fantom if they choose.
These pools are technically more challenging to use and mostly designed for those familiar with mining, happy to hop from coin to coin mining whichever is most profitable at the time. There are even some exchanges that automatically direct their combined hash rate at the most profitable cryptocurrency — taking the guesswork out of the equation.
bitcoin mining pool
Best Mining Pools for 2019
The Bitcoin mining pool industry has a large number of players, but the vast majority of the Bitcoin hash rate is concentrated within just a few pools. Currently, there are dozens of suitable pools to choose from — but we have selected just a few of the best to help get you started on your journey.
Slushpool was the first Bitcoin mining pool released, being launched way back in 2010 under the name “Bitcoin Pooled Mining Server.” Since then, Slushpool has grown into one of the most popular pools around — currently accounting for just under 10 percent of the total Bitcoin hash rate.
Although Slushpool isn’t one of the very largest pools, it does offer a newbie-friendly interface alongside more advanced features for those that need them. The pool has moderately high fees of 2 percent but offers servers in several countries — including the U.S., Europe, China, and Japan — giving it a good balance of fees to features.
BTC.com is another potential candidate for your pool and currently stands as the largest public Bitcoin mining pool. It is responsible for mining around 17 percent of new blocks. Being the largest public mining pool provides users with a sense of security, ensuring blocks are mined regularly and a stable income is made.
Image courtesy of Blockchain.info.
BTC.com is owned by Bitmain, a company that manufacturers mining hardware, and charges a 1.5 percent fees — placing it squarely in the middle-tier in terms of fees. Unlike other platforms, BTC.com uses its own payment structure known as FPPS (Full Pay Per Share), which means miners also receive a share of the transaction fees included within mined blocks — making it slightly more profitable than standard payment per share (PPS) pools.
Another great option is Antpool, a mining pool that supports mining services for 10 different cryptocurrencies, including Bitcoin, Litecoin (LTC) and Ethereum (ETH). AntPool frequently trades places with BTC.com as the largest Bitcoin mining pool. However, as of this writing, it occupies the title of the third-largest public mining pool.
What sets Antpool apart from other pools is the ability to choose your own fee system — including PPS, PPS+, and PPLNS. If you choose PPLNS, using Antpool is free but you will not receive any transaction fees from any blocks mined. Antpool also offers regular payouts and has a low minimum payout of just 0.001 BTC, making it suitable for smaller miners.
Last on the list of the best Bitcoin mining pools in 2019 is the Bitcoin.com mining pool. Although this is one of the smaller pools available, the Bitcoin.com pool has some redeeming features that make it worth a look. It offers mining contracts, allowing you to test out Bitcoin mining before investing in mining equipment of your own. According to Bitcoin.com, they are the highest paying Pay Per Share (PPS) pool in the world, offering up to 98 percent block rewards as well as automatic switching between BTC and BCH mining to optimize profitability.

Electricity Costs
While your mining hardware is most important when it comes to how much BTC you can earn when mining, your electricity costs are usually the largest additional expense. With electricity costs often varying dramatically between countries, ensuring you are on the best cost-per-KWh plan available will help to keep costs down when mining.
Most commonly, large mining operations will be set up in countries where electricity costs are the lowest — such as Iceland, India, and Ukraine. Since China has one of the lowest energy costs in the world, it was previously the epicenter of Bitcoin mining. However, since the government began cracking down on cryptocurrencies, it has largely fallen out of favor with miners.
Technically, Venezuela is one of the cheapest countries in the world in terms of electricity, with the government heavily subsidizing these energy costs — while Bitcoin offers an escape from the hyperinflation suffered by the Venezuelan bolivar. Despite this, importing mining hardware into the country is a costly endeavor, making it impractical for many people.
Finding ways to lower your electricity costs is one of the best ways to improve your mining profitability. This can include investing in renewable energy sources such as solar, geothermal, or wind — which can yield increased profitability over the long term.
if you are looking to buy bitcoin mining equipment here is some links:

Model Antminer S17 Pro (56Th) from Bitmain mining SHA-256 algorithm with a maximum hashrate of 56Th/s for a power consumption of 2385W.
https://miningwholesale.eu/product/bitmain-antminer-s17-pro-56th-copy/?wpam_id=17
Model Antminer S9K from Bitmain mining SHA-256 algorithm with a maximum hashrate of 14Th/s for a power consumption of 1323W.
https://miningwholesale.eu/product/bitmain-antminer-s9k-14-th-s/?wpam_id=17
Model T2T 30Tfrom Innosilicon mining SHA-256 algorithm with a maximum hashrate of 30Th/s for a power consumption of 2200W.
https://miningwholesale.eu/product/innosilicon-t2t-30t/?wpam_id=17
mining wholesale website:
https://miningwholesale.eu/?wpam_id=17
submitted by mohamadk to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

1/17/18 Obelisk Core Commentary on Bitmain A3

Some of the important information can also be found on the main discussion thread. Most statements from David Vorick (taek), who heads both Obelisk and Sia.

Statement in Obelisk discord #general

[11:42 PM] taek: Well, if they do anything stupid...
we took precautions and put an extra feature on the Sia chip. We can soft-fork Sia to invalidate the bitmain hardware without invalidating the Sia chip we're creating
[11:42 PM] taek: There's no need as long as they don't do anything stupid
[11:42 PM] Starbuckz8: I suspected you might have done that
[11:43 PM] taek: @Starbuckz8 and we're going to do it for every coin we make chips for
[11:43 PM] taek: If some actor starts behaving poorly, we want the devs to have a knife they can pull out, so they can hardfork without losing 100% of the network hardware
[11:44 PM] taek: We did it for decred too
[11:44 PM] taek: And we'll do it for Bitcoin, and we'll do it for the alts we're working on

Sia discord #announcements

[1:11 AM] taek: Bitmain has announced ASICs for Sia, shipping in 7 days. 1275w, 815 GH/s, ~$3200 USD. They are more expensive and less efficient than the Obelisk SC1, but they ship several months sooner (7 days as opposed to several months).
Bitmain has a long history of being abusive towards coin communities, their customers, and towards coin developers.We prepared for something like this by adding an extra feature to the SC1. We can do a soft-fork that slightly changes the PoW algorithm which would invalidate the bitmain ASICs, but allow the SC1 units to continue working. In the event of an attack from Bitmain, we can activate this soft fork. At this time, I do not think it is necessary, but if they start mining empty blocks or otherwise prove problematic for the network, we have recourse that does not involve destroying the usefulness of the SC1 units. This fork would of course require community adoption, it's not something the devs could decide to activate on their own. It would be a UASF, because the majority hashrate would not be standing behind the soft fork.
Overall, I do not think we have much to worry about. Hopefully (and very likely), this soft-fork will never be necessary. But I wanted to remind everyone (including Bitmain) that, at the end of the day, it is the community that has control, not the miners. If ASIC manufacturers act in a way that is harmful to the network, we have recourse.

Other Discussion

[12:14 AM] taek: @Pizard it's certainly not centralized control to build extra features into your hardware
[1:30 AM] taek: Yeah that's why I wanted to share our best simulation results. It's better than 2.25 GH/w btw. Our best result for the Sia miners is 3.7 GH/s per watt. But, that is really pushing it, we'd have to have a stable chip at 0.5V. Not clear it will be stable at 0.5V. 2.25 GH/w was at 0.6V, which is much more likely to work
Also, see https://www.reddit.com/siacoin/comments/7r4spy/dev_team_thoughts_on_the_bitmain_a3/?st=jcjn9kjx&sh=7e7a18c9
submitted by muunshot to siacoin [link] [comments]

I've been working on a bot for crypto subs like /r/bitcoin for a few days now. Say hello to crypto_bot!

Hey guys, I've been working on crypto_bot for some time now. It provides a bunch of features that I hope will enhance your experience on /bitcoin (and any other subreddit). You can call it by mentioning it in a comment. I started working on this a few days ago. I'm constantly adding new features and will update this post when I do, but if you're interested I'll post all updates and some tips at /crypto_bot. Please either comment here, message me, or post there if you'd like to report a bug, request a feature, or offer feedback. There's also one hidden command :)
You can call multiple commands in one comment. Here's a description of the commands you can use:

Market Data:

crypto_bot 
Responds with the USD price of one bitcoin from an average of six of the top bitcoin exchanges (BTC-E, Bitstamp, Bitfinex, Coinbase, Kraken, Cryptsy).
crypto_bot ticker 
Responds with the USD price of one bitcoin at seven exchanges (all of the ones listed above, plus LocalBitcoins). Also lists the average at the bottom.
crypto_bot [exchange] 
Responds with the USD price of one bitcoin from [exchange] (any of the seven listed above).
crypto_bot [litecoin|ltc|dogecoin|doge] 
Responds with the USD price of one litecoin, or the price of 1 doge and 1,000 doge.
crypto_bot litecoin|ltc [exchange] 
Responds with the USD price of one litecoin from BTC-E, Bitfinex, Kraken, or Cryptsy.
crypto_bot [currency] 
Responds with the price of one bitcoin in the specified currency. Available currencies (symbols): JPY, CNY, SGD, HKD, CAD, NZD, AUD, CLP, GBP, DKK, SEK, ISK, CHF, BRL, EUR, RUB, PLN, THB, KRW, TWD.

Information:

crypto_bot [about|info] [arg] 
Responds with a short description about [arg], as well as a link to an external site (Wikipedia, bitcoin.it, and some others) for more information. You can list multiple arguments and get a description for each. Available arguments: bitcoin, block chain, transaction, address, genesis, satoshi, mining, confirmation, coinbase, gox, cold wallet, hot wallet.
crypto_bot legal 
Responds with a chart about the legality of bitcoin in 40 countries, copied straight from Wikipedia.
crypto_bot [explain transaction delay|explain tx delay] 
Responds with an explanation of why transactions may take longer to confirm (the bot specifically discusses spam-transaction attacks in this command).

Network information/tools:

crypto_bot difficulty 
Responds with the current difficulty of the bitcoin network.
crypto_bot [height|number of blocks] 
Responds with the current height of the block chain.
crypto_bot retarget 
Responds with what block the difficulty will recalculate at, as well as how many blocks until the network reaches that block.
crypto_bot [unconfirmed transactions|unconfirmed tx] 
Responds with the current number of unconfirmed transactions.
crypto_bot [new address|generate address] 
Responds with a newly-generated public and private key. This is mainly to provide an explanation of what both look like, and contains a clear warning to not use or send bitcoins to the address.
crypto_bot blockinfo [height] 
Responds with information about block #[height], including its hash, time discovered, and number of transactions.
crypto_bot [address] 
Responds with information about [address], including its balance and number of transactions.
crypto_bot [transaction_id] 
Responds with information about [transaction_id], including what block it was included in, its size, and its inputs and outputs.

Calculators:

crypto_bot calc <# miningspeed> [#][w] [#][kwh] [#][difficulty] [hc$#] [$#] [#%] 
Responds with calculations and information about how a miner would do with the above data (mining calculator). The only required field is mining speed. Order of the arguments does not matter. Everything other than hashrate defaults to the following if not given: w (watts): 0, kwh ($kilowatt cost/hour): 0, difficulty: current network difficulty, hc$ (hardware cost): $0, $: current bitcoin price in usd (according to Coinbase), % (pool fee): 0. The calculator does not account for nor allow for input of the increase/decrease of difficulty over time, though I may add this feature soon. Working hashing speeds: h/s, kh/s, mh/s, gh/s, th/s, ph/s.
Example usage: "crypto_bot calc 30th/s 10w .12kwh hc$55 1.5%" (to make it easier to remember, th/s can also be inputted as ths). This calls the bot with a hashrate of 30 th/s, electricity usage of 10w, a cost of $.12 kWh, a hardware cost of $55, and a pool fee of 1.5%.
crypto_bot number of btc <$amount to convert> [bp$bitcoin price] 
Responds with the number of bitcoins you could buy with <$amount to convert>. If the comment specifies a [bp$bitcoin price], it calculates it with that exchange rate. Otherwise, it uses the rate from Coinbase.
Example usage: "crypto_bot $419.29 bp$180.32" This calculates how many bitcoins you can buy if you have $419.29 and the bitcoin exchange rate is $180.32.

Broadcasting

SignMessage! "" 
Signs a message in the bitcoin block chain in a transaction using OP_RETURN. The message must be less than 40 characters.
Example usage: "SignMessage! "Post messages in the block chain!""
I hope you find this bot useful! Again, if you have any questions or comments, please either comment on this post, message me, or post on /crypto_bot.
Update 1 (June 24, 2015, 17:35): The bot now responds with information if you post a link to a block, transaction, or address on Blockchain.info in a comment, even if you don't call it. For example, if I wrote "https://blockchain.info/block/0000000000000000126448be07fb1f82af19fbbf07dd7e07ebcd08d42c2660cb" in a comment, it would respond with information about block #362,377.
Update 2 (July 10, 2015, 1:59): The bot now has two additional commands: "unconfirmed transactions" (or "unconfirmed tx") and "explain transaction delay" (or "explain tx delay"). The first command responds with the number of unconfirmed transactions, and the second explains why transactions might take extra time to confirm.
Update 3 (August 24, 2015, 1:34): The bot now responds in a better way than before when transaction ids or addresses are posted. Before, it only responded when the transaction id or address was used in a link to Blockchain.info. Now the bot will respond whenever a transaction id or address is posted at all; a link to Blockchain.info is no longer necessary.
Update 4 (August 27, 2015, 3:00): The bot can now sign messages in the Bitcoin block chain using OP_RETURN.
submitted by busterroni to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Best of Buttcoin: 2014

There's been some fantastic work done in this subreddit spreading disinformation researching, criticising, and debunking bitcoin and its sacred cows over the past year, which I would like to celebrate.
So here's some posts I saved on bitcoin-related topics. But I started saving things too late... So if you have and/or remember any great posts from the past year, dig them up and post them here.
Also, unironically, maybe someone should start a buttcoin wiki

First, three pieces of investigative journalism from Buttcoin's top minds. Here Charlie_Shrem examines the environmental impact of bitcoin mining. Key finding: For every Bitcoin transaction, 47 kilograms of CO2 is released into the atmosphere from the miners alone.
Current hash rate: 261,900,382 GH/s
Number of transactions per day: 71,331
If we assume rather conservatively that 1GH/s = 1 watt on average, then this would mean 261,900,382W is being used to power the network. We can simplify this to 261,900 kW.
Some miners can do better than 1W per 1GH/s, but many if not most do worse (i.e. 2W per 1GH/s to 10W per 1GH/s).
Going by the figure of 0.527kg CO2 / kWh found on this page,
0.527kg CO2 x 261,900 kW x 24 hours = 3,312,511.2 kg CO2 per day
Now,
3,312,511.2 kg CO2 / 71,331 transactions = 46.44 kg CO2 per transaction
For comparison, even going by this Coindesk Article, an ATM produces daily 3.162kg in CO2 emissions.
0.25kwH x 0.527kg CO2 x 24 hours = 3.162kg/day.
That means that the carbon emission for one Bitcoin transaction is equivalent to about 15 ATMs processing perhaps hundreds or thousands of transactions in a day combined.

Earlier this month Frankeh abruptly interrupted remittance-focused annular onanism by issuing a challenge: to find a single instance where bitcoin works out cheaper than a fiat alternative. In case you need to ask... Nope.
Right, there's a bunch of circlejerking happening in /Bitcoin right now so I think it's time to cut through the bullshit one way or another.
Country to send money to.
The biggest remittance markets are China, Indian and the Philippines.
I believe that since /Bitcoin often gives the Philippines as an example of successful Bitcoin remittance then it is the perfect country to use in our challenge.
Country to send money from.
According to this wikipedia article Malaysia and Canada have the biggest expat Filipino communities. 900,000 and 500,000.
So I think we should do the calculations based on both countries.
The methodology
Most people are not paid in Bitcoin. This is a fact. So for our calculation you must start with fiat, and end in fiat. We're not doing these calculations based on future utility of Bitcoin (No, neo. I'm saying...), we're doing them on the current utility.
We will also be doing a bank to bank remittance, because that is nice an constant. We don't need to take into account pick up locations Bitcoin remittance allows and pick up locations normal remittance allows. They'll vary too much.
Time will also not be taken into account, as time doesn't actually matter when it comes to remittance. Now, Bitcoiners might shout about this particular rule but let me explain my logic behind this.
A foreign worker gets paid every Friday. They start the remittance process on the Friday and regardless of if it takes 0, 3, or 5 days their family back in their home country just needs to base their life around money coming in on remitters pay day + 0, 3, or 5 days. Time taken is of no real value when it comes to remittance. All that matters is that it consistently arrives on day x.
As such, any remittance services that take over 5 working days are to be ignored for the sake of this challenge.
The amount
The amount is going to be 25% of the average wage in each of the countries. This isn't extremely scientific because it doesn't particularly need to be, and the figures are hard to come by.
So 1826.75 MYR for Malaysia and 1,398 CAD for Canada.
Don't bother complaining about these, they're just examples.
Few more ground rules
  • We're going to be going from bank/bank card to bank regardless, so we're not interested in banking fees on either side. They will be the same regardless of Bitcoin or WU (for example)
  • It must be from local fiat to foreign fiat.. You can't palm off the conversion fee to the receivers bank to keep fees down.
  • Any remittance service can be used, as long as Bitcoin is involved for people fighting the Bitcoin corner and Bitcoin isn't used for people fighting the WU (or similar) corner.
  • You must go through the process and document all the fees for each. Fees to look out for are currency spreads, transaction fees on exchanges, etc

Finally a recent thread, but commendable all the same. Hodldown presents some research leading to facts overturning years of knowledge in the bitcoin wiki. Even us shills have been laughing at bitcoin's pathetic capability of 7 transactions per second. It turns out, we were out by at least a factor of 2:
The average number of transactions per block right now is: 665 transactions
The average block size is 0.372731752748842mb.
That means the average transaction is 0.00056049887mb. Which means 1mb of transactions (the limit) is 1784 transactions
Assuming a 10 minute block (a whole other can of worms) that means there is 10*60 seconds.
1784/600 isn't 7. It's a 2.97.
Bitcoin at a technical level can not handle even 3 transactions per second.

In one of the frequent bitcoin user invasions, PayingWithActualMone outlines why the "solution in search of a problem" isn't that great of a solution to much either.
On the transaction side: the Bitcoin community seems convinced that banks are ripping them off (which imo they are not), and that it can be fixed by applying some magicsauce over a transaction that is facilitated by banks regardless. So far in practice I haven't seen any evidence of the 'fast' 'cheap' and 'easy' transactions, like most recently with Mollie. They usually compare the fees of BTC>BTC transactions to the fees of Chase Mastercard > a fucking nomad in the Sahara (with consumer protection) to prove their point. The community also seems convinced that the entire world banks the way America does, not realizing that in Europe banking has been dirt cheap for years.
And the security... oh boy the security. Half the population can't manage to go without a virus for one year (not an actual statistic), and now you expect them to secure their coins? People are dumb as shit, and software is always one step behind the exploits. We could of course create Bitcoin banks, but then there isn't much left of the original idea.
On the 'intrinsic value' side: what the hell is wrong with people. If the underlying product is no good in any aspect, why is it worth much? Right now (that's like 5 years after introduction mind you) BTC is used in 3 types of transactions: Silk Road, SatoshiDice & extremely questionable transactions. It does its job well in that aspect, and that's all it will ever be. The community just turned the technology into a giant ponzi, and they don't care as long as they get paid. The people actually doing business in Bitcoin probably don't care about the price that much.

Someone who deleted their account, on the argument that merchant adoption is a cause of the price drop:
That's just an excuse butters use for the price going down.
There's no real difference between selling bitcoin for fiat and exchanging bitcoin for goods and services. Both are a form of sale of bitcoin, an expression of preference for something other than bitcoin.
If on balance, there's more flow of bitcoin into fiat, goods or services than there is a corresponding opposing flow, then it is simply the market expressing the view that bitcoin is overvalued. Therefore, the reduction in the value of bitcoin (as valued in fiat) is a sincere expression of the market's view of what the correct price for bitcoin is.
Think of an example: A true believer has 20 BTC. He exchanges 10 BTC with Dell for a whizzy server. Dell (or another intermediary) sell the 10 BTC at an exchange in return for fiat. The market price of BTC goes down.
The price goes down, simply because a true believer cut his bitcoin holding, he got out. He thought having a server now was worth more to him than 10 tickets to the moon. Which is an expression of a negative view of the future value of bitcoin. A simple "aggressive" sale in trading parlance.

A late entry from jstolfi. A concise description of the Satoshi/Bitcoin origin story .
My understanding is that "Satoshi" had been trying to solve the technical problem of convincing a bunch of anonymous, volunteers to maintain and protect a distributed ledger, with no central authority.
He thought that he had a solution, in the form of a protocol that included PoW, miner rewards, longest chain, etc. The solution seemed to work on paper; but, as a good scientist, he started an experiment in order to check whether it would also work in practice.
For that experiment to be meaningful, it would have been enough if the coin was mined for several years only by a few hundred computer nerds, with the cooperation of some friendly pizza places and bars.
The US$ price of the coin was not important to the experiment, and it was never meant to be a weapon for libertarians, a way to buy drugs or evade taxes, a competitor to credit cards or Western Union, a sound investment or item for day-trading. All those "goals" were tacked onto it afterwards.

bob237 comments on the the absurdity of coinbase and it's touted 'rebuy' scheme,
It gets even better than that, actually. A lot of bitcoiners don't like 'losing' bitcoin, and so coinbase added a popular 'repurchase bitcoin' feature that automatically debits your bank account to replenish the BTC in your coinbase account after a purchase.
The ultimate result then is that you pay coinbase fiat, they take their cut, and then send that fiat on to the merchant. All 'bitcoins' used in the middle of the transaction are not really bitcoins, but just abstractions in coinbase's internal [off-chain] accounting system.
It's a crap version of paypal, no consumer protection and a ton of fees hidden in the spread when you buy your chuck-e-cheese tokens from them.

saigonsquare explains why ubiquitous tipping isn't the the killer app that it has been touted as, and why bitcoiners may fail to grasp this
Most people understand that there are different sorts of interaction. There are purely social interactions, there are quid-pro-quo interactions, and there are market interactions. Mixing those up causes embarrassment and insult. I wouldn't try to pay my mother-in-law ten bucks for cooking Christmas dinner, and I certainly wouldn't try to pay her ten cents. If a waiter suggests I try the raspberry tart, I won't get away with offering to bake him some cookies next week in compensation; if an office mate suggests I have a slice of her birthday cake, I'll be insulted if she brings me a bill for it. If I spend an hour helping my friend move apartments and he thanks me, I'm fine; we're friends helping each other out. If he pays me two bucks, I'm insulted; he's canceled the social nature of the interaction and instead simply bought my labor for a fraction of its going rate. I'm up two bucks but down a friend.
Ancapspergers, not particularly understanding any sort of interaction more complicated than buying a cheeseburger at Wendy's, assume that all interactions are a form of market transaction, and set pricing accordingly. Normal humans get offended by a penny shaving, because it cancels the social nature of the interaction and turns it into a market transaction--and then informs the recipient that his contribution to the transaction was of negligible value.
submitted by occasionallyrude to Buttcoin [link] [comments]

For every Bitcoin transaction, 47 kilograms of CO2 is released into the atmosphere from the miners alone.

Current hash rate: 261,900,382 GH/s
Number of transactions per day: 71,331
If we assume rather conservatively that 1GH/s = 1 watt on average, then this would mean 261,900,382W is being used to power the network. We can simplify this to 261,900 kW.
Some miners can do better than 1W per 1GH/s, but many if not most do worse (i.e. 2W per 1GH/s to 10W per 1GH/s).
Going by the figure of 0.527kg CO2 / kWh found on this page,
0.527kg CO2 x 261,900 kW x 24 hours = 3,312,511.2 kg CO2 per day
Now,
3,312,511.2 kg CO2 / 71,331 transactions = 46.44 kg CO2 per transaction
For comparison, even going by this Coindesk Article, an ATM produces daily 3.162kg in CO2 emissions.
0.25kwH x 0.527kg CO2 x 24 hours = 3.162kg/day.
That means that the carbon emission for one Bitcoin transaction is equivalent to about 15 ATMs processing perhaps hundreds or thousands of transactions in a day combined.
submitted by Charlie_Shrem to Buttcoin [link] [comments]

bitcoin mining profitable in the US? Where are my calculations off?

Someone tell me where my calculations are wrong. Amazon has this miner advertised:
Antminer S9 ~14.0TH/s @ .098W/GH 16nm ASIC Bitcoin Miner
So that would consume 14000*0.98=1372 watts.
Given my electricity costs (0.12 $/kwhr), I would make $8.19 for every $1 of electricity. In a month, I would make $884.
That can't be right. Where did I screw up?
Here is a python script to calculate that:
dollars_per_kwhr= 173.17 / 1390 dollars_per_btc= 6000 miner_kwatts=1.372 miner_terahashes_per_second= 14.0 network_terahashes_per_second= 9e6 block_time=600 block_reward=25 rev_dollars_per_sec= dollars_per_btc * block_reward * miner_terahashes_per_second / (network_terahashes_per_second * block_time) cost_dollars_per_sec= dollars_per_kwhr*miner_kwatts/3600 print "rev={}".format(rev_dollars_per_sec) print "cost={}".format(cost_dollars_per_sec) print "ratio={}".format(rev_dollars_per_sec/cost_dollars_per_sec) print "profit per month={}".format(3600*24*30*(rev_dollars_per_sec-cost_dollars_per_sec)) 
edit: thanks to Personthingman2. 25 vs 12.5 block reward. when I change that, my script outputs: rev=0.000194444444444 cost=4.74798641087e-05 ratio=4.09530330582 profit per month=380.93219223
This is a $4000 unit, so it pays for itself in 10 months. OK. So whether I will ever make money on this depends heavily on the growth of the network hashing rate over time, and the increase in BTC price.
edit2: I am guessing that the answer to my question is that I would be lucky for the unit to keep working long enough to pay for itself. It would likely break down before reaching that point.
submitted by SilencingNarrative to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

The $22,484.00 Butterfly Labs Mini Rig bitcoin miner is a huge, broken, unstable piece of shit.

(This was a rather controversial article posted on Buttcoin.org and became quite popular, even moving to the top of /bitcoin. It's since been mysteriously edited on the site [maybe by g-g-g-ghosts!] so it's being reposted here for posterity's sake. Some numbers may be off by now, but it was all accurate at the time of posting.)
Butterfly Labs has a long and horrible history with their mining rigs. They started taking pre-orders over a year ago, with a ship time sometime in late July. After numerous delays in production, shipping problems and general incompetence, the only thing they’ve managed to get out the door are some of their tiniest miners, the Jalapenos. And those mainly ended up in the hands of reviewers and blogs in order to keep pumping the Butterfly Labs hype train and securing millions of dollars of pre-orders still in limbo.Lucky BFL forums user Luke-JR however scored a sweet Mini Rig from Butterfly Labs (it’s just a coincidence he’s a driver developer for them I’m sure). This rig was originally promised to produce 1500 GH/s hashing power at 1500 watts for $30,000, but has since seen it’s hashing power slashed to a third of what was promised and it’s power consumption increased 75%, now just offer 500 GH/s at 2400 watts. They’ve promised to make good on pre-order buy sending out 3 rigs to match the initial hashing rate, so now it’s only 1500 GH/s at 6900 watts, a reduction in GH/Watt by a factor of 5.
So what does $22,484 buy you? Take a look!
Minirig is here! Today, my Minirig arrived.
http://i.imgur.com/Yp0WPvE.jpg
FedEx apparently dropped it somewhere along the way, and the weakest part of the case, the thin metal part around the back of the PSU, broke.
http://i.imgur.com/lFcOHxP.jpg
I’m not sure how sturdy the back side was supposed to be, but its two pieces aren’t quite together either.
http://i.imgur.com/AVttcOt.jpg
The power supplies (EVGA 1500W) also created havoc interfering with the neutral on the power line. This disrupted X10 communication significantly enough that the pool overflowed because the system controlling it was unable to turn off the pump. Workaround: This PSU supports 240V, so we rewired the outlet. 240V does not use neutral, so now all should be okay.
Edit: 240V workaround is only partial. Still having problems
But the good news is, it all seems to be working for the most part.
Next up, installing it in the window so the heat goes outside
A twenty two thousand dollar box of electronics that is broken out of the box, that required the guy to do a sketchy electrical workaround to get partially working, that he is going to install in a window… and he’s happy about it?
In case you didn’t notice it, the delivered unit is different than the picture on the website. They had to install 2 power supplies instead of 1 and had to modify the case to fit. Also, if you didn’t notice, the LCD/Phone thingy in the front has been replaced by … a piece of cardboard spray painted black. Wonderful.
You could maybe chalk this up to a careless Fedex postman, but when you’re shipping something that costs as much as a mid-sized sedan, how bought putting a little more effort into packing? Dell and HP can ship bigger and heavier servers across the world without this kind of problem.
The unit had to hit its huge power draw increase by putting dual EVGA consumer grade power supplies in the unit. We’re talking almost a 75 amp load (6*1500/120), disregarding power factor. He could very well overload the circuit panel and trip the main breaker for the house.
Let’s take a look inside this guy.
This is from an earlier version of the Minirig (note the single power supply) This is apparently from an earlier FPGA but it will give you a good glimpse at what kind of craftsmanship you can expect from a computer that is half the average household income in the United States.
Consumer grade PSU and cheap USB hubs glued to the inside case.
Electrical tape and random velcro glued to the insides
A closer look at the USB hubs. Plugs are hot glued to stay secured.
Electrical tape everywhere, splices and voided hardware are the theme.
You can view the entire album here.
Despite all that, this thing can still mine bitcoins and it should be profitable. Keep in ind that many people jumped in on the preorders a year ago when bitcoins were still hovering around $6.50 per. Meaning customers paid 1562 bitcoins for that particular piece of shit, which at today’s value is $156,200. Aston martin money. How long will it take them to make their money back (as apposed to just hanging on to them)? If the difficulty didn’t change, they would make 37 bitcoins a day and recoup the initial investment in 124 days. Difficulty is jumping pretty much 20% every 12 days or so, so in the next week before adjustment, they’ll make 259, the next 12 days 369, the next 12 days 312, then 256, then 213, etc.
So by day 127, they’ll be halfway to breaking even, but by day 151 they’ll be making less than 5 bitcoins a day, and even if difficulty stopped rising at that point(which it won’t), it would take another 435 days for a total of 586 days to break even. If difficulty kept rising at the same pace, by day 200 they’d be making 2.4 bitcoins per day, and it would take 1024 days to break even with no difficulty increase. Assuming 25 cents per kw/h, and $100 a bitcoin, it would cost 0.43 of a bitcoin per day in electricity which means the unit would no longer be profitable on a power usage basis by day 307, at which point it will have produced 2620 bitcoins.
Bear in mind this is only for the first few units, and that’s running 24/7 pumping out around 24,000 BTU, so yes, medical bills from heat stroke will be on top of that.
But Alas, the chips don’t run nearly as well as they’re supposed to, frequently running too hot and giving multiple hardware failures. Coindesk noted in one of the first ever runs of the Minirig by hosting provide gigavps that it was running much too hot and erroring out.
At the time of posting, gigavps warned that the unit would be repeatedly shut down while ckolivas, who was assisting, modified the machine’s software to optimise performance. After some tweaking, the device was said to have been left to run continuously for two hours, and was shown to have an average hash rate of 478.1 GH/s. As you can see in the table below, ASIC number four (of a total of eight hashing chips) ran significantly hotter (86 degrees) and consequently gave the highest hardware (HW) error rate.
http://i.imgur.com/q3iGrnb.jpg
So, what happens if you just decide you don’t want this, you don’t want to wait over a year to get a $22,000 broken piece of shit? Nothing, because BFL won’t let you cancel your preorder because they’re now “shipping”, i.e. they sent out one unit to their own company shill.
http://i.imgur.com/0p3Up03.jpg
Which is of course illegal regardless of what Butterfly Labs may say.
So in summary: Don’t buy anything from Butterfly Labs … ever.
submitted by borderpatrol to Buttcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin transaction fees actually ~$50?

This has been done a couple times, but I tried to figure out the best case scenario for cost per transaction in BTC with current technology. Using the most electric efficient (and un-released) ASIC mining chip in existence and pretending that's what every single miner's efficiency is, the average US electric cost, it comes out to:
2,193,081,010 GH required per block mined at current difficulty. That means 1,664,810,757 watts, or 166,641 Kw/H. That translates to about $20,000 per block, or roughly $50 per transaction. That's only factoring in the cost of electricity, not equipment/maintenance. Incidentally, that means the network as a whole is running at about a $5,000 deficit per block at current price even after the 25 BTC reward per block. This doesn't cost a lot of money for your average miner, but it does mean that transaction fees are currently being subsidized by the hopes and dreams of Bitcoin's eventual value. (Transaction fees should be about $12.50 in a rational world)
submitted by tulipfutures to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Energy Use Is Not a Concern

So I've been pouring over the "energy crisis" data this evening and I'm convinced that it is wrong (see http://bitcarbon.org/faq.html).
  1. A rational miner will spend far less than 90% on energy.
This is fueled primarily by speculation. A $4m monthly investment in BTC would net $207m after one year at 10X growth in USD/BTC. The direct cost would be $48m.
No rational miner would spend $186m on mining to get the same return as an investor spending $48m.
  1. Energy efficiency is a ceiling, not a floor.
The new ceiling for performance is 1 watt/GH/s. All new ASIC hardware will meet or exceed this target since we can do computation in parallel.
The network will quickly equalize to new efficiency rates due to exponential growth. So we can expect each additional 7 PH/s to be roughly equivalent to 7 megawatts.
In the course of a year without growth, the network would require 61,360 MWh of energy. Adjust this by whatever the actual efficiency value is today, but long-term it will drop below 1 watt/GH/s.
  1. Bitcarbon's carbon usage numbers are off by about two orders of magnitude.
Guy Lane claims that we'd be using 8,254,000 tons CO2e per year right now.
Using his own conversion of 0.77 tons CO2e per MWh, I get a value of 47,250 tons CO2e per annum. The network would have to hit 1200 PH/s before we reach the level quoted.
TL;DR - Bitcoin energy use is simply not a concern at this time.
submitted by wbic16 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Need help choosing hardware/what to mine with just 200$ or less.

Hello guys, I am digging deep on the internet to try and find this question but any help is really appreciated.
Noticing how my country is getting really awful in terms of currency exchange (Venezuela), getting USD is pretty valuable in here so I'm considering to mine for profit. I am really new on this, and I've just heard the bitcoin basics and the mining basics a couple of weeks ago.
I only have available around 200$ to invest on an ASIC miner if it's really worth it, seeing that my 'calculator' is really awful to use as a miner (Gave it a try, and I could only get 80 H/s tops). The question is: What to mine? What can be truly be spent for a profit?
I know miners can break even but here's the thing: Watts doesn't matter. Here where I live the electricity bill is around 0.0003 kWh, so no need to go green.
My choices are either spend 3 AntMiner U3 (45$ each, 63 GH/s SHA-256), or 1 single ZeusMiner Cyclone (195$, 22MH/s, Scrypt), but I'm all ears if there are other more profitable choices.
Any suggestion is appreciated, thank you.
submitted by Ronaldo1024 to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Bitcoin network power consumption... is this correct?

After the announcement of http://realtimebitcoin.info/ I was really surprised that bitcoin mining was consuming the staggering amount of 2500 MW! That is A LOT of energy.
I run some simple numbers and I arrived to a different figure. Lets ignore power consumption not directly related to hashing power (like networking equipment, refrigeration, etc).

Best case: 1) Current Hashrate: 300,000,000 GH/s (https://blockchain.info/charts/hash-rate)
2) Hashcoins Uranus v1 Miner: (6000 GHs, 1600watts) (still preorder, but just getting a best case scenario)
So, you would need 50k Uranus miners to match the power: 50k * 1,600 watts = 80,000 kW = 80 MW

Worst case: Say that we use a much modest miner: 2) Triton Adaptive N-factor Miner 4.5 GS/s, 18watts
You need 66,666k Tritons to mach the network: 66,666k * 18 watts = 1,200 kW = 1,200 MW

So best case: 80MW, worst case 1200 MW I guest we are some were on the middle, probably closer to 80MW. Much better that the announced 2500MW on http://realtimebitcoin.info/.
What you think? Is this calculation correct?
submitted by Ematiu to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Is all mining now negative return-on-investment?

I have been closely watching the mining scene for only about 3 months, so excuse me if this sort of question is asked frequently, or is too speculative.
Is all BTC mining now underwater, with a negative ROI?
That's what it looks like to me. I initially got interested years ago, when the return was small and BTC was not worth much. I didn't mine because it seemed like a miniscule return on investment. Oh I wish I had started back then, those "worthless" BTCs would be worth a lot now.
But I started getting more interested again when that Ars Technica article on the BFL Jalapeno appeared. Holy crap, a machine that prints free money. He made hundreds of bucks in a week.
So I started checking it out. With the delays in BFL's product shipping, all the mining calculators show that any new investment in mining hardware will never break even. Difficulty is increasing so fast, that the only machines making money are already in place, and soon they won't even pay for the cost of electricity.
Now just to screw this up even further, BFL did a classic "Osborne Effect" announcement of their new Monarch board. Their existing ASIC machines are obsolete. The new 28nm machine that does not exist yet, is promised to deliver 600Gh for 350 watts, and costs $4680. I ran the numbers through the mining calculator at The Genesis Block. Unfortunately their calculator seems to be down at the moment, but I recall running numbers on a Monarch, delivered even in December, would not break even unless BTC went up to 2000 per dollar!
Now even accounting for BFL's broken promises, if I could buy mining hardware like this today and turn it on now, it would make a negative ROI. I run the numbers for every possible hardware I could buy, none of them are as cheap in dollars/Gh or Gh/watt as the Monarch. And none of them break even.
I decided to track the existing performance of mining using my dinky Mac mini's GPU. It won't mine much, and GPU mining will never break even in a network full of ASICs. But it would give a rough index of how difficulty is affecting mining. Here's a rough description of my results. At this point, it looks like mining is doubling in difficulty every month. Nobody can make money unless either BTC rises in value dramatically, or the majority of miners give up and unplug their unprofitable mining hardware.
So someone tell me if this assessment is realistic or not. At the moment, it looks like any new investment in mining hardware will result in turning every dollar of investment into 50 cents worth of BTC at most. With increasing difficulty, soon even existing mining hardware will be turning every dollar of electricity into less than a dollar worth of BTC. ROI is underwater now for new hardware, and soon will be underwater for all hardware, even advanced ASICs that haven't even shipped yet. There are only two ways that mining might ever make a profit. One is if almost everyone gives up when their miners become unprofitable. The other is if BTC goes up massively in value to like $2500/USD, which will only fuel the arms race even more.
Yeah, I know there is a big incentive to spread disinformation to convince people to drop out of mining. So don't try to BS me. Let me hear your honest assessments, or please point me in a direction where I can do research to figure this out.
submitted by nmrk to BitcoinMining [link] [comments]

Why the high cost of protecting against a 51% attack makes proof of work unsustainable.

Let's do the math for a moment.
Right now, the network consists of 2,369,000 GH/s.
If we go by KNC miner and Bitfury's mining products, we can say that a cautious estimate would be that we require about 1 watt per hour for every GH/s. This is not yet the case, as people are still using older less efficient Bitcoin miners, but we can sustain the present mining difficulty at 1 watt per GH/s.
The average price Americans pay is 12 cents per kilowatt-hour (which is 1000 watt per hour).
Thus, we can calculate the price of the network per hour as following:
2,369,000 watt per hour / 1000 = 2369 kWh.
2369 kWh x 0.12 = 284.28 dollar per hour.
We have on average 2491 transactions per hour right now, according to Bitcoin charts.
Thus the price of a single Bitcoin transaction right now can be as low as 284.28 / 2491 = 0.1141 dollar.
Compare this to an earlier, 2011 estimate. Back then, the average price for a transaction was $4,20 dollar. So, there has been some progress in this regards.
However, in reality we are paying the miners a subsidy, in the form of the block reward, which reduces the value of our Bitcoin, and has to be included in the calculations. The current block reward is 25 bitcoin. If we assume 6 blocks are mined per hour, this means that we pay miners 150 bitcoin per hour. With one bitcoin valued at 150 dollar, this means we pay 22,500 dollar per hour in "mining subsidies" to protect against a 51% attack.
22500 + 284.28 = 22784.28 dollar per hour, paid to sustain the network. Divide this by 2491 transactions, and we pay 9.14 dollar per transaction.
This is all meant to sustain the present difficulty level, and encourage investment in Bitcoin mining.
The problem is that the block reward won't be sustained forever. Every transaction on the Bitcoin network has to pay a transaction fee, which is required due the price it costs us to protect the network against a 51% attack.
The bigger problem we have is that a 51% attack funds itself. After all, the same reward that is paid to legitimate miners is paid to an attacker. Thus, engaging in a 51% attack would only cost the attacker money when mining itself costs him money.
This is made worse that a 51% attack can pay for itself in the form of a price crash. A man who engages in a 51% attack can bet on the price of Bitcoin to collapse, for example, by selling bitcoin short.
Our insurance against 51% attacks is very expensive right now, and we're not even sure whether our current difficulty is high enough. The problem is that this problem won't be solved by an increase in use of Bitcoin, because an increase in Bitcoin use increases the financial reward to be gained from a 51% attack.
This is why Bitcoin is valued at a low price right now. We don't know whether the network is capable of paying for the 51% insurance required to keep the network secure.
The solution to this may be found in the form of responsive mining. In the scenario of responsive mining, people only start mining blocks when there is a threat of a 51% attack. It's the equivalent of only hiring bodyguards when you think you may get shot.
However, the problem is that responsive mining is still a tragedy of the commons situation. When we see indicators of an upcoming 51% attack, we all expect each other to start mining, but if there is no profit to be made in protecting the network against the 51% attack, we will have no direct incentive to insure the network.
The solution to this could be argued to be proof of stake. Under proof of stake, anyone who mines would be forced to prove that he owns a significant amount of Bitcoin. Therefore, the miner would likely lose more money by attacking Bitcoin than he gains by betting on its downfall.
Quoting from the Bitcoin Wiki:
In a competitive market equilibrium, the total volume of txn fees must be equal to opportunity cost of all resources used to verify txns. Under proof-of-work mining, opportunity cost can be calculated as the total sum spent on mining electricity, mining equipment depreciation, mining labor, and a market rate of return on mining capital. Electricity costs, returns on mining equipment, and equipment depreciation costs are likely to dominate here. If these costs are not substantial, then it will be exceptionally easy to monopolize the mining network. The fees necessary to prevent monopolization will be onerous, possibly in excess of the 3% fee currently charged for credit card purchases.
My fear is that with every block-halving the difficulty is going to decline, and the incentive to engage in a 51% attack will increase, which would permanently destroy Bitcoin's credibility and encourage people to step over to an alternative cryptocurrency.
We may require a hard fork to implement a more sophisticated protection against a 51% attack, rather than "waste a lot of energy coming up with solutions to difficult mathematical problems".
submitted by accountt1234 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Starting into bitcoin mining.

So I got alittle lucky last week, I had 30 remaining $ in my bitcoin wallet, I've had them for months. I found a bitcoin betting website, I deposited $10, Turned it into $300. Cashed out, I ordered 2 Antminer S3+'s with a 1000W HP server power supply kit with wiring/adapter for the miners. Electricity costs me .08$/kWh, $10 invested, How accurate are bitcoin miner calculators? Like coinwarz for example, you can insert difficulty, electricity costs, watts, and GH/s, Based off that calculator, I'm looking at $27 a month profit, Which is next to nothing. But it costs me $10 to start so who cares right? Does anyone have any tips for someone new to it (I've followed bitcoins and mining a bit but never done it) Also any pool advice for when I get my miners?
submitted by OneFastGSR to BitcoinMining [link] [comments]

When are we going to tackle the environmental issue of Bitcoin?

Firstly, let me state I'm a proponent of Bitcoins although I still think it has a lot of maturing to do (and any honest supporter should agree), but I see in the future a 400 pound gorilla in the room, and that is the electrical (read: natural resources) consumption of the network.
We are now reaching unprecedented levels of mining power in the network, around 7 Petahashes by the end of this year and growing. This network consumes energy and converts it into Bitcoin (as well as processing transactions).
The network cannot survive without power. This power comes at a cost, not just financially, but in terms of the cost of getting a lump of coal into a coin, there's a high social cost attached to this as well.
I'm wondering if we can produce some hard figures on how much energy the network consumes, what this costs in terms of pure watts, and the environmental impact of the network?
We as a community need to do this. We need to prepared for when the question is asked, and we need to be able to address/rationalise this.
It's worth noting that next gen miners are producing more GHs for cheaper, which is fantastic in terms of addressing this issue, but it's only a matter of time before some environmental group weighs in on the issue and starts asking questions.
It's better we already have the answers, rather than some wild assumptions being made and publicised to the masses.
Thoughts?
submitted by DoctorDbx to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

[SG] In-Stock in US: USB DualMiner 300-350Kh/s at 60 watts + 8Gh/s-11.25Gh/s Bitcoin - 260k Doge each

Finally in Stock.
These ASIC miners will mine Dogecoin and Bitcoin at the same time. These are low power consumption units, so you will save money in energy cost. They draw about 60 watts each while mining.
The worlds first ASIC miner that can operate in three modes. Mode 1: Scrypt only (Litecoin/Dogecoin) Mode 2: SHA only (Bitcoin) Mode 3: SHA & Scrypt combined.
Each unit is capable of producing up to the following: Scrypt only mode: 350 KH/S SHA only mode: 11.25 GH/S Combined Scrypt & SHA mode: 8Gh/s SHA + 300Kh/s Scrypt
All figures are approximations.
Note: you will need a power supply for each these. It needs to be: 12Volt 7Amp , adapter : 5.5mm x 2.1mm.
300k Doge each, Includes US shipping. (upped the cost due to weak Doge.) New listing here: http://www.reddit.com/dogemarket/comments/1zeaju/sg_asic_350400khs_at_7watts_dogecoinscrypt_mine
http://imgur.com/i6LfdpL
http://imgur.com/pZ0zt6C
http://imgur.com/qBQRx5G
submitted by Sseleman to dogemarket [link] [comments]

12-10 23:33 - 'Lets have a discussion about energy consumption in bitcoin mining and what that means towards the carbon footprint today.' (self.Bitcoin) by /u/Cryptolution removed from /r/Bitcoin within 1-11min

'''
There was a [very good coindesk article in July 2014]1 that broke down the carbon footprint of the bitcoin mining network. At the date of the article, our hashrate was 146,505 TH/s. Now that we are at above 13 exahashes/s this represents a 94 fold increase hashing power.
[Here is the cost breakdown chart from the coindesk article]2 .
As you can see from this image, the carbon footprint of bitcoin in 2014 is a tiny fraction compared to the carbon footprint of the traditional banking system. Yet at a 0.78 Billion per year cost in 2014, at a 94 fold increase of power that would now be 73.32 billion, which would make bitcoin 9.52 billion more in electricity costs.
But this is trying to extrapolate data in a non-accurate way. In order to understand why this is inaccurate, we must look at how all of this technology works and how technology has scaled upwards while decreasing electricty consumption.
The bitcoin network at 13 exahashes is roughly 130 times greater than the largest super computer (Sunway, 93 petahashes per sec in china, see [top500.org]3 )
So when you make that statement, you think "wow, bitcoin must use a lot of energy to be 130 times more powerful than the largest super computer network!"
But, its not apples to oranges. These super computer networks are non-specialized hardware (comparably to bitcoin) in that they have generalized computing capabilities. This means that these systems require more standardized hardware so that they can preform a large amount of different computing functions.
So, for example, the largest Sunway supercomputer @ 93 petaflops (roughly 1/130th the power of the bitcoin network) preforms its calculations at 93,014.6 petahashes @ 15,371 kW = 93014000 Gh @ 15370000 watts. Doing the maths, this comes out to a 0.16524 W/Gh.
The AntMiner S9 currently operates at 0.098 Gh ....so nearly double the energy efficiency of what the most powerful super computer network in the world operates at.
You have the Dragonmint miner coming out Q1-Q2 in 2018 which uses 0.075J/GHs ....a 30% efficiency increase over the Antminer S9.
And next year japanese giant GMO is launching into the bitcoin mining business, stating they will be releasing a 7nm ASIC design, which is more than double the efficiency of the current 16nm design the Antminer S9 uses. This will mean a more than doubling of energy efficiency. They said they have plans after the release of the first product to research "5nm, and 3.5nm mining chips"
So, what is the point of understanding all of this? Well, you have to understand how technology scales (think Moore's law) to understand how we can achieve faster computational speeds (more exahashes per second) without increasing the carbon footprint.
So if you look at a proof of work chart, you'll see it has scaled linearly upwards since the birth of bitcoin. And it would be logical to assume that the more hashes per sec thrown into the network, that it would equate to more power being spent. Yet this is not true due to advancements in ASIC chip design, power efficiency, and basic economic fundamentals.
You see, as new miners come out, because they are more efficient, people can run much faster mining rigs at much lower cost. This immediately adds much more hashing power to the network, which decreases the profitability of old miners. And to give you an idea of how much more cost efficient these are, lets look at Antminers products.
S9 - 0.098 W/Gh
S7 - 0.25 W/Gh
Avalon6 - 0.29 w/Gh
You can see the S9 is 3 times more power efficient than the Avalon6. That translates to "It costs 3 times more to operate this equipment". That aint no small difference.
These differences, combined with energy costs are what forces miners to stop running old hardware and to upgrade to newer models or exit mining completely. So as new mining equipment hits the market, old less efficient mining rigs go offline. The amount of hashes per sec continues to climb, yet the actual power usage of the entire network does not scale at the same rate that the hashes per sec scale at, due to increased energy efficiency.
The question that I would like to see answered by the community is this -
What has changed between now and 2014 in terms of total watts consumed? How can we calculate the real carbon footprint of todays bitcoin mining network compared to this data from 2014?
What equipment was running in 2013-2014, what were their W/Gh and how many of these machines do we speculate are still running vs more efficient mining rigs powering the network today? What is the Th/S differences between these mining rigs, and how much more power do we contribute towards the network today because of these optimized rigs?
Mining is not my specialty and there are going to be many people here who are better suited to tackling these problems.
I think these questions need to be answered and articulated because these are questions that im starting to see a lot from the mainstream as criticism towards bitcoin. I know the generic answer, aka "Bitcoin mining still uses a fraction of the cost that the entire global banking system does", but we really need to do better than that. We need to examine the different power types used in bitcoin mining -
How much of bitcoin mining is from hydroelectric? Nuclear? Wind? Solar? Coal? Natural Gas? What regions contribute the largest hashing power and can we evaluate whether these regions are Hydroelectric, Coal, Nuclear etc dependent?
If we are to articulate effective arguments against those who naysay bitcoin over its carbon footprint, then we must do so with good data to backup our positions.
Hopefully the numbers above are accurate/correct. Honestly only spent a few minutes doing napkin math, so I expect there to be mistakes, please let me know and thank you very much all.
'''
Lets have a discussion about energy consumption in bitcoin mining and what that means towards the carbon footprint today.
Go1dfish undelete link
unreddit undelete link
Author: Cryptolution
1: https://www.coindesk.com/microscope-conclusions-costs-bitcoin/ 2: https://imgur.com/a/eKipC 3: ww**top500*org/*ists*2*17/11*
Unknown links are censored to prevent spreading illicit content.
submitted by removalbot to removalbot [link] [comments]

Hash Rate going to 2bn GH/s - this is why!

Lets calculate the hash rate at the marginal cost of electricity;
0.10 $/kWatthour 800.00 Bitcoin price 150.00 Bitcoins per hour (using 25 per 10 mins target) 120,000.00 $ Payout per hour 1,200,000,000.00 Watt (price times payout) 0.70 Watts/GH/s (here I used the Neptune 20nm miner) 1,714,285,714 Giga Hash/s (Watt/0.7)
This is where I think we will eventually end up should the price stay at this level.
submitted by bitcoinliberty to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Cryptominer.de Avalon 200GH/S Bitcoin Miner Asic 55nm Mining Cryptocurrency Bi•Fury - Fastest USB ASIC Bitcoin Miner in the world ... S9 Bitcoin Miner Overclock Hash Rate / Temps / Watts - YouTube Unboxing Mining Bitcoin Redfury 2,5 Ghz Butterfly Labs 5 GH/s ASIC Bitcoin mining rig, the ...

Aladdin Miner 16Th/s Bitcoin. Jul 2018. 16 Th/s. 1400 W. 76 db. SHA-256-$2.60 /day. Bitmain Antminer S9 (13.5Th) Sep 2017. 13.5 Th/s. 1323 W. 85 db. SHA-256 -$2.61 /day. Dayun Zig Z1+ Oct 2018. 7.25 Gh/s. 1200 W. 70 db. Lyra2REv2-$2.61 /day. Holic H22. Dec 2018. 22 Th/s. 1700 W. 70 db. SHA-256-$2.64 /day. Canaan AvalonMiner 741. Apr 2017. 7.3 Th/s. 1150 W. 65 db. SHA-256-$2.66 /day. Dayun Zig ... 5 x Antminer S5 + 3 PSU's - 1360Watts - Bitcoin Miner - 1155GH/s von Antminer S9. Derzeit nicht verfügbar. Ob und wann dieser Artikel wieder vorrätig sein wird, ist unbekannt. Dieser Artikel passt für Ihre . Geben Sie Ihr Modell ein, um sicherzustellen, dass dieser Artikel passt. Hashrate 1,155Gh/s (+/- 5%) Bitcoin mining ASIC: 28nm ASIC 590Watts - 0,51 J/GH 3 PSU's - 1360Watts › Weitere ... ↑ 5.0 5.1 "Products". Butterfly Labs. Archived from the original on May 14, 2012. Retrieved February 7, 2013. ↑ "Order Form – BitForce SHA256 – Mini Rig". Butterfly Labs. Retrieved January 30, 2013. ↑ The Seven (June 3, 2011). "Re: Official Open Source FPGA Bitcoin Miner (Smaller Devices Now Supported!)". Bitcointalk.org. Retrieved ... Bitcoin USB-Stick Miner bitshopper GekkoScience 2Pac 5,5 bis 25 GH/s 33 GH/s max. bitshopper - Hash-geschwindigkeit: 5, 5 bis 25 gh/s max. Taktrate der beiden bitmain bm-1384 ASICs kann über CGMiner Softwareparameter eingestellt werden. A 5 GH/s Bitcoin Miner is running at around 270 Watt. I tested it with an Wattmeter. Is that a reasonable amount of Watt? In the comparison list on Bitcoin.it it says that those devices are running at 30 Watts! What is wrong with this miner?

[index] [16117] [25753] [562] [41334] [31823] [203] [7105] [662] [30226] [16641]

Cryptominer.de Avalon 200GH/S Bitcoin Miner Asic 55nm Mining Cryptocurrency

Butterfly Labs 5 GH/s ASIC Bitcoin Miner (Jalapeno) Review - Duration: 11:42. andrewesquivel 22,169 views. 11:42. How to quickly start mining bitcoins [Easy] - Duration: 7:59. ... [Video of devices in our unit testing facility] Bi•Fury Hashrate: 5 GH/s (+/-5%) Power usage: ~0.85 W / GH Dimensions: 46 x 26 mm Miner is built on two "5GH"... Butterfly Labs 5 GH/s ASIC Bitcoin Miner (Jalapeno) Review - Duration: 11:42. andrewesquivel 22,069 views. 11:42. Cannabis Grow Lighting Myths and FAQs with Dr. Bruce Bugbee - Duration: 44:12. ... Check out the hash rate / watts / temps of my s9 while they are overclocked. USB Asic Miner Red Fury bitcoin miner 2.4~2.9 GH/s ~new and improved version~ - Duration: 3:17. Eyeboot 223,429 views. 3:17. King of 2 Miles - Ep 1813 - Duration: 21:34. ...

#