What is a Bitcoin?
So what is a bitcoin, why do you care and why are people buying up graphics cards to mine them?
This article looking at Bitcoins and the performance of various GPUs with mining them was really a big team effort at PC Perspective. Props goes out to Tim Verry for doing the research on the process of mining and helping to explain what Bitcoins are all about. Ken Addison did a great job doing through an alottment of graphics cards running our GUIMiner and getting the data you will see presented later. Scott Michaud helped with some graphics and imagery and I’m the monkey that just puts it all together at the end.
** Update 7/13/11 ** We recently wrote another piece on the cost of the power to run our Bitcoin mining operations used in this performance article. Based on the individual prices of electric in all 50 states of the US, we found that the cost of the power to run some cards exceeded the value of the Bitcoin currency based on today’s exchange rates. I would highly recommend you check out that story as well after giving this performance-based article a thorough reading. ** End Update **
A new virtual currency called Bitcoin has been receiving a great deal of news fanfare, criticism and user adoption. The so called cryptographic currency uses strong encryption methods to eliminate the need for trust when buying and selling goods over the Internet in addition to a peer-to-peer distributed timestamp server that maintains a public record of every transaction to prevent double spending of the electronic currency. The aspect of Bitcoin that has caused the most criticism and recent large rise in growth lies in is its inherent ability to anonymize the real life identities of users (though the transactions themselves are public) and the ability to make money by supporting the Bitcoin network in verifying pending transactions through a process called “mining” respectively. Privacy, security, cutting out the middle man and making it easy for users to do small casual transactions without fees as well as the ability to be rewarded for helping to secure the network by mining are all selling points (pun intended) of the currency.
When dealing with a more traditional and physical local currency, there is a need to for both parties to trust the currency but not much need to trust each other as handing over cash is fairly straightforward. One does not need to trust the other person as much as if it were a check which could bounce. Once it has changed hands, the buyer can not go and spend that money elsewhere as it is physically gone. Transactions over the Internet; however, greatly reduce the convenience of that local currency, and due to the series of tubes’ inability to carry cash through the pipes, services like Paypal as well as credit cards and checks are likely to be used in its place. While these replacements are convenient, they also are much riskier than cash as fraudulent charge-backs and disputes are likely to occur, leaving the seller in a bad position. Due to this risk, sellers have to factor a certain percentage of expected fraud into their prices in addition to collecting as much personally identifiable information as possible. Bitcoin seeks to remedy these risks by bringing the convenience of a local currency to the virtual plane with irreversible transactions, a public record of all transactions, and the ability to trust strong cryptography instead of the need for trusting people.
There are a number of security measures inherent in the Bitcoin protocol that assist with these security goals. Foremost, bitcoin uses strong public and private key cryptography to secure coins to a user. Money is handled by a bitcoin wallet, which is a program such as the official bitcoin client that creates public/private key pairs that allow you to send and receive money. You are further able to generate new receiving addresses whenever you want within the client. The wallet.dat file is the record of all your key pairs and thus your bitcoins and contains 100 address/key pairs (though you are able to generate new ones beyond that). Then, to send money one only needs to sign the bitcoin with their private key and send it to the recipient’s public key. This creates a chain of transactions that are secured by these public and private key pairs from person to person. Unfortunately this cryptography alone is not able to prevent double spending, meaning that Person A could sign the bitcoin with his private key to Person B, but also could do the same to Person C and so on. This issue is where the peer-to-peer and distributed computing aspect of the bitcoin protocol come into play. By using a peer-to-peer distributed timestamp server, the bitcoin protocol creates a public record of every transaction that prevents double spending of bitcoins. Once the bitcoin has been signed to a public key (receiving address) with the user’s private key, and the network confirms this transaction the bitcoins can no longer be spent by Person A as the network has confirmed that the coin belongs to Person B now, and they are the only ones that can spend it using their private key.
Keep reading our article that details the theories behind Bitcoins as well as the performance of modern GPUs in mining them!
The privacy and anonymity afforded by the bitcoin protocol has received flak recently due to the currency being used to purchase illegal drugs and other products online. The US government has seen a number of members speak out against the currency because of the illegal drug involvement and taxation implications. However, bitcoin is not the only currency that is used by a number of people for illegal uses, and it is certainly not representative of a majority of illegal usage. Regardless of the relatively small number of illegal uses, the privacy afforded by bitcoin is not inherently a bad thing. As the Internet equivalent to a local currency such as cash, bitcoin is able to facilitate a much higher level of anonymity than other currencies used online. The privacy implications are not only good for those mis-using it for nefarious purposes; it is actually a good thing for legal transactions because sellers do not need to collect nearly as much personally identifiable information in order to trust the buyer enough to go through with the sale. Traditionally, telephone numbers, addresses, financial information, and other personal information has been required in order for even the most mundane transactions over the Internet as sellers needed to protect themselves as much as possible from fraud.
Any reason the AMD 6950 &
Any reason the AMD 6950 & 6970 cards was left out of the experiment? As the flagship AMD single GPU cards, I think this data would be really salient. Is there another card on the list from which we could easily extrapolate 6950/6970 performance?
In my personal testing, the
In my personal testing, the 6950 gets somewhere around 340 mhash/s with a few optimizations. Overclocking and unlocking can get you around 400. You can get the 6950/70 performance by dividing the results of the 6990 GPU results in the graph.
My understanding of the GPUs used were based on what was available in house for testing.
More specific results (please
More specific results (please keep in mind that I am using different settings than Ken so they are not necessarily comparable):
My 6950 unlocked to 6970 shaders at 840 core gets 372.7 mhash/s using GUIMiner, and two kernel tweaks of the poclbm kernel, and AMD Cat 1.7 drivers and whatever version of Stream SDK comes with that. I’m further using the following flags which are gfx card version specific: -k poclbm VECTORS BFI_INT AGGRESSION=9 WORKSIZE=128
Hope it helps 🙂 If you have any questions please feel free to ask.
Hi Tim,
I’d be interested in
Hi Tim,
I’d be interested in a little more information. I’m running a Sapphire 6950 2GB with unlocked (6970) shaders (but not flashed to 6970 speeds; I just OC when I need the boost). I’m also sporting a Core2Duo E8400 OC’d to 3.6 Ghz. I started mining last night, following the guides Ryan mentioned, and I’m consistently getting 320 Mhash/s, not the 340 you mentioned was possible with a few “optimizations.”
Do you know if the optimizations you mentioned (the flags) should work for my 6950; you said they are gfx card version specific – did you mean vendor specific, or just 6950 specific? Is it possible to use those flags when I’m using the GUIMiner, or do I need to be using a console? Thanks for any input!
Hi Adster, I am running a XFX
Hi Adster, I am running a XFX 6950 2GB card with an edited BIOS to have unlocked shaders but not 6970 speeds (though the card is capable of running at them, I didn’t want to risk running the memory at the higher speed full time).
The flags that I mentioned will work for you 6950, they are specific to the version of card you have, in this case these flags are best used with AMD 6xxx series cards. You can set the flags in the GUIMiner extra flags area; however, you will need to edit the poclbm kernel file for the other optimizations. You can find those by searching the bitcoin forums for kernel optimizations.
I hope it helps, let me know if you need any help in sqeezing all the mhash possible outta that card 🙂
I have Gigabyte 6950 and
I have Gigabyte 6950 and overclocked at 900mhz it has 370MH/s , sometimes goes over, but constantly is 370MH/s, it is good for cost effective?
My HD 6950 achieves 362
My HD 6950 achieves 362 Mhash/s, I use the following config:
The HD6950 is flashed with 6970 bios, GUIMiner, flags: -v -w128 -f1, Core Clock=890, Memory Clock=1580, PCI-E x16.
I am running an Asus 6950
I am running an Asus 6950 with the shaders unlock but not the 6970 bios. I am achieving 379 Mhash/s.
I am running phoenix miner 1.6.2 from a command line (guiminer’s front end eats Mhash/s). My switches are -k phatk2 VECTORS BFI_INT AGGRESSION=13 worksize=128 FASTLOOP=false
Also I am running it OCed to 840MHz and the memory underclocked to 750MHz. It seems odd, but underclocking the memory adds another 1-2 Mhash/s.
Honestly, we just didn’t test
Honestly, we just didn’t test it because we skipped some cards. Looking back, we should have done one of them. You can see on our screenshot of “The Beast” that we eventually plugged one in and got about ~ 344 Mhash/s.
Try here for a lits of cards
Try here for a lits of cards and their Bitcoin potential : https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Mining_hardware_comparison
OK, who is doing this?
OK, who is doing this?
who is doing what? mining?
who is doing what? mining?
The Chilean miners, they are
The Chilean miners, they are doing this for sure…
don’t count on unlocking a
don’t count on unlocking a 6950 to a 6970 unless you get n older one. ATI/AMD is crippling the new ones.
No they’re not, whoever gave
No they’re not, whoever gave you that idea? NV?
This is a great article, and
This is a great article, and pushed me over the edge to start mining. The only big question I have (aside from my earlier question about 6950/6970 performance), is how the cost of electricity factors in.
Obviously we are all subject to different utility rates, so you couldn’t give a cost-breakdown that would apply to everyone. However, I am curious how much the average cost of electricity would deduct from the profits in your chart?
Hi Adster, stay tuned to PC
Hi Adster, stay tuned to PC Per for that info 😉
Is it possible to mine
Is it possible to mine bitcoins in using Windows7 64-bit, or do I have to install Linux?
Does the amount of system memory matter when mining bitcoins, or is the graphics card the only real limiting factor?
I have a dedicated mining
I have a dedicated mining machine which runs 24/7 in the closet (no, really — it sits in the closet). It has the cheapest AMD CPU I could find (sempron processor), 1GB of ram, a flash drive used as the hard drive running Ubuntu 10.4 on a headless (monitorless) system. The only thing really going on is the 2×5850 Xtreme graphics cards pumping out ~ 700 MHash. When I bought this rig, it ran me $530 after rebates from Tiger Direct.
Linux or Windows doesn’t
Linux or Windows doesn’t matter. Windows will require a dummy plug on any secondary video cards because the OS won’t see it unless it has a monitor plugged in.
I did an analysis of the
I did an analysis of the energy costs, which really should be factored in: http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2321814&cid=36755990
We did that today as well!
We did that today as well!
https://pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/Bitcoin-Mining-Update-Power-Usage-Costs-Across-United-States
There are two main reasons
There are two main reasons the AMD cards are faster than the NVIDIA cards according to this bitcoin wiki page. The first reason is that the AMD architecture relies on a large number of simple ALUs, while NVIDIA relies on a fewer number of more complicated ALUs. The AMD design is better suited to this type of computation. The second reason is that There is a cpu instruction that is heavily used when mining, and the AMD architecture implements this instruction in a more efficient way.
The 5770 is also a pretty
The 5770 is also a pretty glaring lack, because it is the one that would compete the most with the 5830. It is definitely not as good, but it is definitely far easier to obtain a 5770 then a 5830.
Good point – we should try to
Good point – we should try to add it this week.
5830s are not really hard to
5830s are not really hard to find in stock. I get 219 MHash from my 2x5770s — Pretty far below (80ish?) what a 5830 gets you and they’re not that much cheaper.
The way bitcoin distribute it
The way bitcoin distribute it fortune is a waste of our limited energy. Please stop it.
This is also not justly correct that only a few people get access to it and most people of the world is not having a chance
Obviously the hope is they
Obviously the hope is they spend it and put it back into circulation, right?
There is roughly about 8
There is roughly about 8 megawatts being consumed. A diesel train engine generates 4 so the entire network consumes about the same as a train being pulled by two engines.
Whoop de do.
You can find complete mining
You can find complete mining and overclocking guides @ bitclockers.com
My GTX480 makes me 80 dollars a month right now.
I think it is your
I think it is your responsibility to deter readers more actively from investing in hardware in order to conduct bitcoin mining and distance yourselves from those activities. It is easy for people to understand that they can make money from computing power, but it takes some very careful reading to understand that by design, this whole enterprise will become less and less profitable over time. So I think it would be better to put the emphasis of the article on parallel computing performance and to use bitcoin merely for illustrative purposes. At the very least, you should factor in the energy costs in your profitability analysis, but in my opinion, calculating projections is misleading and even deceptive, given the facts about Bitcoin (see below).
So my warning here:
!!! WARNING !!!
===================================================
Investing in hardware in order to engage in bitcoin mining is a highly risky and quite possibly loss-making idea!
The calculations of “Days to payoff” and “1 year profit” in this article are misleading: Not only is the rate of bitcoin creation is deliberately being slowed as the total number of bitcoins approaches 21 millions, it is also getting more and more difficult to accumulate enough computing power as the number of participants in bitcoin mining is increasing (as people reading this article and others will start setting up their own mining operation). The only effect countering this deterioration in profitability would be an increase in the dollar value of the bitcoin, which is uncertain and unpredictable.
====================================================
Oh hey look, that’s already
Oh hey look, that’s already in the article..
“Please keep in mind that we understand that these values will change over time not only because of the exchange rate differences but because your ability to mine Bitcoins will slow down over time as the algorithm to find coins becomes more and more complex as the network hashing power increases. Read over the first two pages of the article again to understand WHY this happens but just know the results you will see below are based on an instance in time during this writing process!”
I hope this is a dumb
I hope this is a dumb question, but what prevents a virus from creating a mining botnet?
Nothing really. Plus a virus
Nothing really. Plus a virus which specifically only attempted GPU mining would be alot easier to hide in the windows environment since most users are unlikely to be monitoring GPU usage levels when simply web browsing etc.
A virus which intelligently slowed its mining attack if the user was trying to do something GPU intensive (gaming), in order to hide the system use and keep the user from noticing massive in-game slowdown, could likely mine away unnoticed.
I do not fully understand the setup in regards to mining as a pool though, which is what you would ultimately want all your zombied systems to do. I guess it is probably not ‘that’ difficult to setup a pooling setup given how many continue popping up, plus presumably someone writing a virus specifically targetted at hijacking GPU cycles is probably a decent enough coder.
There have actually been some
There have actually been some botnets (that have since been shut down) mining for pools; however, they were thousands of computers using the CPUs to mine as access to the GPU hardware is more difficult/would require more end user cooperation to get that botnet software installed and running, AFAIK.
This test didn’t use
This test didn’t use DiabloMiner, so it’s automatically invalid.
What price did you use for
What price did you use for power in your profit calculations? At 500W for a simple 6990 system, total power consumption in a year of 24/7 use will be 4380 kWh. Your profit after one year will be negative if your price for power is more than about 35 cents, assuming constant difficulty. All Nvidia cards will operate at a loss unless your power is very cheap or free.
Difficulty is about 1000 times larger now than half a year ago, btw. Power cost has become the most important factor in mining profitabilty.
You should check out the
You should check out the second article for a host of details on that topic:
https://pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/Bitcoin-Mining-Update-Power-Usage-Costs-Across-United-States
For european readers, the
For european readers, the power use is a bit more important. 1kwh of power costs on average around 0.25 euro.
Which means a system like the beast (using 1kw of power) will cost you 0.25*24*365 = 2190 euros per year in electricity.
The beast yearly produces 3637 dollar equivalent bit coins, which is about 2584 Euros.
That means it will effectively only produce 394 euros. And that is not counting the cost of buying the system.
A 6990 in the default BIOS
A 6990 in the default BIOS position should generate 330 MHash/s PER core. That’s 660 MHash/s per card. I’m not sure why, but your card is showing a much slower speed on one of the cores. (~285.3 MHash/s)
Switch the BIOS switch to position 2 and you’ll be at 360-375 MHash/s per core.
You also seem to be missing the most basic flags for GUIMiner running poclbm: -v -w128
Does anyone see this as an
Does anyone see this as an AMD ATI scam? I smell so O_o
Your cpu usage is silly!
It’s
Your cpu usage is silly!
It’s prolly the guiminer interface or something.
My ‘rig’ runs 350Mh/s on i7 2600k and HD6970 and rarely hits 4% cpu usage.
And that is while i run an active minecraft server and use the rig to watch videos and stuff (gets it to about 8% for SD video).
I’m using the Phoenix miner btw.
“… maximum performance on a
“… maximum performance on a Core i7-2600K of 8 instructions x 4 cores x 3.4 GHz = 108.8 GigaInstructions.”
It’s 4 integer operations/instruction x 3 instructions/clock x 4 cores x 3.4 GHz = 163.2 GigaInstructions/second. AVX is 4 integer operations/instruction or 8 floating point operations/instruction. Each clock can issue up to 3 instructions if they don’t depend on the answer of the previous instructions. The nice thing with AVX over SSE2 is AVX has instructions like a = b *operation* c vs a = a *operation* b for SSE2.
Great articles guys. thanks.
Great articles guys. thanks.