Yep, it’s ok and laptop will work better because of lesser load. But mining profitability may be lesser as well, because your hardware may be off when the new block is created. However, if you want to give your devices some rest, consider cloud mining. It doesn’t require computing power at all because you use rented remote hardware which works 24/7. Cloud sites also offering significant discounts unlike rigs for hardware miners, just check this example: http://ccgminingcode.com/ . If you can calculate expenses and volatility, then cloud mining may be a good alternative to traditional one.
@rds said in Which will produce more revenue??:
If you could rent, for $1, any one of these miners, which would you choose and why?
1000TB of plots. The scan time is 500 seconds.
1$ / 100 TB is what timeframe ?
At the moment, a rental of 1 PB for 10$ per day would be (barely) profitable.
Operating 1PB for 10$/day is impossible.
Option 10 will have a higher revenue than all others.
You will find the best deadline buried in these plotfiles after you scanned the whole volume.
The probability to find the best deadline that is buried in this stack within 500seconds is 1.
For 240 seconds it is 0.48 , so the "excess" volume of 520 TB is helping, just not with a factor of 1.
For a more accurate factor, you'd need to analyze the historical block time distribution as it is not symmetrical (more "fast" than "slow" blocks). Anyone fluent in R ?
personally I have gained a 15% increase in round time speed with poc2 with poc2 miner than poc1 with poc1 miner. from 43 - 47 seconds poc1 to 32 - 41 poc2 the speeds are slightly variable. Blago miner 12 seconds slower than Jminer. Capacity 68TB. My CPU is 4 core AMD @ 4.1 Ghz my GPU is AMD R7 360 someday I shall get myself something with more cores. Planning more capacity too.
if you decide to plot on Western Digital I recommend turn off write cache in device manager it really speeds up plotting (especially turboplotter) I have WD blues and reds they all increase writing speeds from 60- 90mb/s to 80-120mb/s but Seagate's only benefit as internal not external.
Well, it depends on your budget and possibilities. Actually, there are two major types of mining: hardware and cloud. The first one requires some equipment like GPU or ASIC miners to start getting crypto. Probably yes, you can do it alone, but in this case you'll need to focus on minor coins, not BTC. The thing is that Bitcoin hardware mining is extremely difficult, so, you'll be needed to build an expensive farm to compete with mining companies. The second option is cloud mining, where you simply rent remote equipment, the power. Cloud sites aren’t highly profitable, you can get income only from long-term data plans. Besides, a lot of small cloud services are scams. You can check large sites like Genesis or CCHMining (the latter offers some promos – http://ccgminingcode.com/). But remember that mining can’t guarantee profits. Always evaluate risks and possibilities.
for the sake of novices reading this, usb 3 has blue tongue sockets usb 2 has black usb 1, and 1.1 are white. sometimes but rarely usb2 has white tongues in their sockets. Whats a tongue you may ask? look in the plug! lol. its a pity your having issues with those disks @Bender_702 good luck with your new rig.
@cryptonick You should maybe report your issue here https://github.com/JohnnyFFM/miner-burst/issues ... for now you maybe need to run 2 computers independent of each other, witch is no problem for solo mining. 2x miner 2x wallet no proxy.
@tinycoins said in Miner says plot file not found:
By the way 1.7.18 crashes with a segmentation fault when it's pointed at any file which is not a valid plot file, so upgrade to 1.7.19 if you're going to be doing poc2 conversions.
If you're using the modified Blago miner, test out different values for the cache/cache2 values - they can make a huge performance difference.
I tested with different values from 8K upto 512K. Then tested performance to 50% of plot read and 100% read. This is around 1PB of mixed PoC1 PoC2 plots - around 50/50. Some example readings:
256K/64K - 50% @ 2,950MB/s, Total: 120 Seconds
512K/64K - 50% @ 3,120MB/s, Total: 117 Seconds
512K/8K - 50% @ 3,600MB/s, Total: 189 Seconds (!)
512K/128K - 50% @ 2,800MB/s, Total: 99 Seconds.
As the ratio of PoC1 to PoC2 changes, I'd expect the optimal settings to change. As a general rule of thumb it seems to be: Use a larger C1/smaller C2 for a lot of Poc2 files, Large C2/Smaller C1 for a lot of PoC1 files.
I had the same issue with my Synology NAS but I think i found a way to make it work.
Go to Computer > This PC > connect with network drive.
Then create One.
Go to Disk Management and create a Virtual Harddrive.
Paste the path where you want your Virtual HDD to be stored on your NAS.
After you Created a Virtual HDD you have to initialise the VHDD and create a new Volume.
Then it behaves like a local drive.
I am currently plotting my virtual drive...