Timeline for Which mining software/script provides the greatest MHash/sec and power efficiency balance?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Feb 2, 2016 at 8:30 | history | edited | Murch♦ |
edited tags
|
|
Jan 30, 2012 at 11:12 | vote | accept | Sean Chapman | ||
Jan 9, 2012 at 18:51 | answer | added | Nils Munch | timeline score: 1 | |
Dec 9, 2011 at 12:05 | comment | added | MaxSan | poclmb always had superior speed for me on 6970's | |
Dec 9, 2011 at 11:16 | comment | added | Sean Chapman | It seems that way. However, I have had reduced performance with some of the newer versions of phoenix that's why I stuck to an older version. I think the problems with that have been fixed by now in 1.7 though. I am using a custom kernel so that helps also. | |
Dec 9, 2011 at 7:59 | comment | added | Meni Rosenfeld | @SeanChapman I think you'll find very little difference between the popular miners, as long as you use a recent version. That point is important though, older versions tend to have less performance. | |
Dec 8, 2011 at 23:24 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackBitcoin/status/144920274352091136 | ||
Dec 8, 2011 at 22:15 | comment | added | Sean Chapman | @HighlyIrregular good point(s). It was a bad question but I was interested in asking to find out if there was a general trend of some being more efficient than others. | |
Dec 8, 2011 at 21:33 | comment | added | Highly Irregular | My understanding is that it differs for each piece of hardware, and the OS may affect things too, which complicates things. Because of this, the usefulness of any answers to this question will likely reduce over time (as older hardware becomes obsolete). But others seem to have voted it up... | |
Dec 8, 2011 at 11:43 | history | asked | Sean Chapman | CC BY-SA 3.0 |