40

Mining capability is measured in the number of attempts to find a block a miner can perform. Each attempt consists of creating a unique block candidate, and creating a digest of the block candidate by means of the SHA-256d, a cryptographic hashing function. Or, in short, a hash. Since this is a continuous effort, we speak of hashes per second or [H/s]. Hash ...


21

The user C121 on r/bitcoin explored this topic in the thread Mining Bitcoin by hand. He states that it takes 3385 integer operations to calculate one double SHA-256 hash. His conclusion was that you would reach about 0.00003 H/s, or in other terms, it would take about 9.4 hours for one hash, assuming the human in question could do a 32-bit operation in 10 ...


20

Mining is not won by the miner with the "strongest ability to solve the block". Mining is a random progress-free process. Each block candidate independently has a tiny chance to be a valid block. Each miner is working on a separate, non-overlapping block candidate set. Block candidates assign the block reward to their author with an output in the ...


18

Take the total network Th/s and divide by your total Th/s. That number gives you you a number that tells you how many blocks will occur before you get one (on average). So if there is currently 3,666 Th/s on the network, and you have a 0.55 Th/s (like you would if you have a $5,000 KNCMiner Jupiter ASIC), then 3,666/0.55 = 6,665. That means you have 1/6,...


18

Check this page: How soon might I expect to generate a block? So with the current difficulty 510,929,738, and a 1Ghash/s mining rig (faster than your CPU) you'd do this math: 510929738 * Math.pow(2,32) / Math.pow(10,9) / 60 / 60 / 24 / 365 So to find a block at this difficulty with a 1Ghash mining rig it would take you about 69 years on average. Good ...


16

(If I may repeat myself a bit...) Mining is like having a lot of people throwing weighted coins (such that 1 millionth of the time it comes up heads) and telling you when they hit a heads. If one such "heads" is reported every 10 minutes (600 seconds), you can make a very accurate estimation of how many times per second the coins are being flipped. In this ...


14

As long as you're in good communication with the network and have a hashrate measured in something better than minutes per hash, yes, you technically do have a chance of successfully mining a block, even if your hashrate is tiny compared to the whole network. Then the question is, what are your chances and should you do it? I think an analogy with a lottery ...


13

A supercomputer is way slower than mining with ASICs. A supercomputer only has much CPU power, not even GPU power and ASICs are way more powerfull than GPUs. ASICs represent the hashing algorithm as hardware which means they can't do anything else, that's why they are so fast. At http://bitcoinwatch.com/ you can see the current network hashrate in PetaFLOPS,...


11

You cannot know how many hashes were actually performed for every block, because non-winning hashes aren't published. There is however a simple formula to compute the expected number of hashes a block needs. Across many blocks of the same difficulty, that expected number is the average of the number of hashes per block. The formula is almost exactly: ...


9

Laptop mining worked well in 2009. It is no longer 2009. Your integrated Intel GPU has the speed of a CPU, not a fast gaming GPU. Even in 2011 when CPU mining was dying and people mined on GPUs your GPU would be too slow. Yes, "even" people with 100 MH/s can't mine anymore. That's because 1000x that speed (100 GH/s) is slow at this point. 1 TH/s (1 000 000 ...


9

Mining is a self-adjusting system. The difficulty only rises in accordance to the available mining power. Hence, it can neither go to a difficulty where it will take months for a block to be found, nor can it become prohibitely expensive to mine. Also see How is difficulty calculated?.


8

I do not think the question was about the "how long" it would take in average, but what are the odds, which is something completely different from my point o view. If I understand well the concept of solving blocks then there are always more people/groups/pools trying to solve one block. If that's so then solving a block is always more about the luck than ...


8

Satoshi himself seems to be the inventor of merged mining. In his words (bitcointalk.org): I think it would be possible for BitDNS to be a completely separate network and separate block chain, yet share CPU power with Bitcoin. The only overlap is to make it so miners can search for proof-of-work for both networks simultaneously. The networks wouldn't need ...


8

This is a valid concern and I think nobody can give you a clear answer here. We'll just have to wait how it evolves and how people react; it is an unclear future. There are some ideas about changing the proof-of-work algorithm to make mining pools not that profitable, but the effects of such implementations could be various. I highly recommend this article ...


7

I want to give an extended answer as I found the pre-existing here or elsewhere in need of a bit more clarification, specifically for newcomers. Formula In order to calculate the approximated total bitcoin earnings value per month from a mining operation (not taking into consideration mining costs [electricity, hardware maintenance etc...]) the following ...


7

Miners task is to find a hash below a target T. Obviously if T is smaller, its more difficult to find the hash number. Difficulty D is defined by: D = Tmax/T where Tmax is: 2^224 The probability of finding the hash is: P = T/2^256 which is equal to 1/D2^32 So if you can make h number of hashes in t time, the probability of finding the target hash is: P =...


7

Divide this number by the number of seconds in a day (86400) to get the required number of hashes per second to solve one block per day on average. You might get more than one block on some days and no blocks on others. It's random. Currently, you'd need about 931 TH/s, which is a ridiculous amount of mining power.


7

Let's try to make a rough estimate. Intel's article Intel SHA Extensions gives some details on these instructions as well as sample code. The main feature is the sha256rnds2 instruction, which performs two rounds of SHA256, out of the 64 rounds that are needed to hash one 64-byte block. A Bitcoin header is 80 bytes long, so that's 2 blocks, and because ...


7

The number reported is an estimation of the number of block headers iterated through by all miners on the network. This means it refers to double-SHA256 hashes performed, not broken down to individual SHA256 operations. This makes the most sense, because even in the very early days (2010, perhaps before), no full SHA256 instances were being computed. ...


6

Yes Erik, the mining feature is still built-in and you can check how many hashes your CPU can perform. Although it's pointless and you cannot earn anything, it is still a fun experiment that people like to try. If you have a bitcoin core installed and synced with the network, you can just simply open the command console and type in and enter: setgenerate ...


5

Hello I would refer you to wikipedia Metric prefixes. Hashes are measured in standart SI metric prefixes such as Kilo - 1 000 Hashes/s Mega - 1 000 000 Hashes/s Giga - 1 000 000 000 Hashes/s E.G. 2 Kh/s means that 2 000 hashes can be solved per second. If you would like to know more about Hash visit bitcoin.it From bitcoin.it : A hash algorithm ...


5

You assume that there exists (exactly?) one block for each work unit. This is not true, there are many variables (timestamp, nonce, transactions in a block, extranonce inside the block's coinbase transaction, ...), and all of them influence the block's hash. Each hash has a chance (as of October 2013) of less than 1 in a billion billion (1.15*10^18 to be ...


5

All nodes and all clients have this logic hardcoded into them. So in that sense, everybody is responsible for understanding that every 2016 blocks the difficulty changes. The calculation that is hardcoded into each client is described here: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Difficulty#What_is_the_formula_for_difficulty.3F So it's not a piece of information that ...


5

Correct, one terahash (= 10^12 hashes) equals 1000 gigahashes (=1000*10^9 hashes). Prefixes such as tera, kilo, or milli are SI prefixes (or metric prefixes). Or you can look at it in Wolfram Alpha.


5

Miners are competing to find valid blocks because each block allows the successful miner to collect a mining reward. The mining reward consists of an amount of newly generated coins as defined by the reward schedule (currently 25 BTC per block) as well as any transaction fees attached to transactions they confirmed with the block. At ~$400 per BTC, this ...


5

I think you might be referring to the hypothesis that a large portion of the mining power would switch off right at the halving. This is theorized to kick off a chain reaction: Lower network hash rate causes slow blocks Slow blocks increase block space competition Block space competition increases fees Increased fees push users off network to competing ...


5

That said, when the next block is being mined, again the same person will win because of his computing power. No. Higher mining power means just higher chances to mine a block. If there are 3 miners: Miner A with 4 Gigahashes per second Miner B with 6 Gigahashes per second Miner C with 1 Gigahash per second Together, they can hash 11.000.000.000 times ...


5

We know which miner/pool mined a block only if that miner/pool chose to identify themselves. Most commonly, they do this by inserting their name or other recognizable signature in the block's coinbase transaction, which is allowed to contain arbitrary data. Sites like blockchain.info can then record statistics about how many blocks were mined by which ...


5

Because of the cost, specifically the opportunity cost. If a miner has 10% of the BTC hashrate, then if they pointed all of that mining power to BCH, they would still be losing money. With 50% of the hashrate on BCH, they would mine roughly 50% of the blocks in a day, which is 72 blocks. At 12.5 BCH per block,72 * 12.5 = 900 BCH. Convert that to BTC at the ...


5

No, in the past year, there were only 15 non-empty-non-segwit blocks mined which account for less than 0.03% of all blocks. Non-empty blocks without segwit transactions I've looked up the last twenty blocks that confirmed transactions but did not include any segwit data. The newest of these was mined on 2018-12-18, more than four months ago. The 21st-...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible