Jump to content
Carsen

FPGAs or GPUs?

FPGAs or GPUs?  

122 members have voted

  1. 1. FPGAs or GPUs?

    • Allow FPGAs and keep Tribus
    • Fork to a new algorithm for remainder of PoW


Recommended Posts

Maybe FPGAs are just the new GPUs for mining. If you want to mine then get an FPGA. Why use expensive GPU devices that consume a lot of power when a device that is a quarter of the price and consumes much less power is available.

Maybe it's more 'greeny' to use FPGAs, better for the environment.

I may consider buying an FPGA and then Hodl, but I know I cannot use a GPU effectively.

My only concern about the FPGAs now is miners dumping on the exchanges. But maybe that's just in the short term future. Once Denarius switches to POS or nears the switch over to POS then price would probably recover.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd just like to clarify the thing about the Verus fork, saying that FPGAs jumped back on their network within weeks is very misleading. It was only easy because FPGAs were allowed back on the network because the algorithm VerusHash 2.0, that Verus designed themselves, was kept from being memory hard consciously to avoid locking out certain types of hardware, especially with FPGAs in mind. It was specifically designed to better equalize hashrates across hardware types while being tailored for CPU inherent architecture for the greatest decentralization and the best of both worlds. 

It's a very tricky subject, one that they faced months ago and one that looks eerily similar to many conversations popping up all around different discord channels more and more lately.

On one hand you have an established group with some diehard community members and on the other hand you have a newer more efficient tech, holding a current advantage and leading the inevitable march of progress. Ultimately, the issue lies in PoWs insatiable and growing appetite for energy and hardware and where this is PoWs very nature, it seems there's no easy solution.

I certainly don't know the answer. Verus chose what they hoped would be a balanced approach and where the price is still doing well and CPUs and FPGAs can coexist on one network successfully, I think it is working out well for them so far. So perhaps there is a third option?

Whatever way it goes, I wish you all the best. Diversity and cooperation are just a few of the beautiful little bits of this space that seem to make it all worthwhile and when I see a passionate community making democratic decisions, my only hope is that they get to accomplish what it is they set out to do.

Edited by Godballz
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I keep reading about how FPGA miners to pump and dumps, well so do GPU farms. How are you going to keep them from doing that? Forking D is just setting yourselves up for being just like Burst, ultimately D will be just as useless & worthless. I also might add that the negative attitude by Carsen and crew doesn't help. Being so damn defensive and down-right nasty brings nothing but bad JuuJuu. I mine D with my 1 F1 and my Gpu's. I hodl some and exchange some. Most of us aren't whales out to make a fast buck. JM2C.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you fork, fork to an equal distribution algo. If Carsen/devs can come up with a new way to keep the playing field fair that would be amazing. For those that think adding memory usage inhibits fpgas you are wrong, yes it lowers their lead over gpus but you cannot fork away from fpas. Their effectiveness however can be reduced. Unfortunately a biproduct like progpow is high power usage for all which is a shame imo. Verus 2.0 has a really low power usage, and is a good example of what can be done.

 

Edit: Really the poll options should be no fork, or fork to equal distribution algo. Anything else only buys a short period of time.

Edited by Honey
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it possible to change my vote?  I voted against FPGA,  Now after reading a lot of the discussions here I actually think it'd be best just to leave FPGAs.

If people with GPUs want to compete mining then buy a cheap FPGA. 

Who are we benefiting by changing the Algo for GPU over FPGA??  Only really a small group that have invested a lot in GPU mining and have a lot of GPU cards. The average person with 1 or 2 GPUs is most likely not mining D anymore because the power cost is too high (I'm one of those). If it's possible for us 'average' joe miner to buy an FPGA and mine D to HODL then maybe that's a better outcome then a select group with huge amounts of GPU.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

VTC forked away from Lyra2rev2 because both asics and FPGAs were heavily on that algo, to lyra2rev3.  There was no network interruption, and that network didn't see a huge return of either piece of hardware yet in a major way.

Forking is dangerous, and shouldn't be rushed. Give many weeks of notice. FPGAs are hard to design around, but not impossible, you needn't become impossible to mine with them, just less easy or way harder to do than other coins to take the target off your back in the short term to be able to plan another fork later on in the long term.

Yes GPU farms have a power advantage and economy of scale, it is only a matter of time before the same thing happens to FPGAs, and then you're in the same situation as before.  I'd actually guess that by the time a home miner can't gpu mine with $0.10, your network has already been invested with FPGAs and/or asics. 

As soon as your profitability falls below other gpu mined coins, and there isn't any reason to explain it (like much better liquidity causing people to mine at a loss for less risk), then the best explanation is that people are mining on your network using hardware with a much higher hash/watt.  If it was a gpu-mined coin primarily then hashrate markets would like zergpool or nicehash and the like would have the bots operating on there arbitraging its mining profitability using rented hashrate until it was in line with other gpu mined coins.  The fact that this isn't happening points to fpgas/asics, and it would date back to when the coin first diverged in profitability from other gpu mined coins. 

You'd have to be an idiot to think gpu farms are on a coin with $600 in daily volume (according to CMC). A single farm (large enough to actually achieve economies of scale to reduce costs)would crash the price to literally zero. Keeping mining on gpus is a hard goal, it will only get harder over time, ask yourself if you're ready for that fight. If its worth it to keep that low barrier to entry to participating in consensus.

I didn't vote in the poll, I have no stake in either side, but please carefully consider the what the raw data implies for your specific case and history, not just generalities.

Edited by people9087
fixing typos
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would just like to second the comment above (Vagumera). I've been a GPU miner for several years, but it's no longer viable at my electric prices (UK). My rigs are idle, and FPGAs are the only device I can operate with any margin at all, and I'm not alone in this.

The assumption that GPU miners are decentralised is rapidly becoming a false premise - GPU miners are either large farms with bulk, low electric rates, or the often-quoted altruistic 'hobby miner' who knowingly makes a loss on mining their favourite coin. The latter I suspect is largely imaginary, and the former is not decentralised, and only interested in profit - HODLing and supporting the network are anathemas to the large farms.

As others have pointed out, the road of forking is littered with failures - MBC is another example, which recently forked to Rainforest algo to shut out ASICS, only to discover a flaw in the new algo was being actively exploited by a private pool that now controls the majority of the hashrate. Prices have tanked, hashrate has reached tremendous figures, and so GPU mining is no longer practical, only weeks after the fork.  

For the GPU supporters who have chimed in - how much longer will you mine any crypto at a loss? Will you buy new RTX and Vega 7's to built rigs with? Of course not, that would be madness. So what is the medium term future? Greater efficiency and decentralisation, or reliance on GPUs that are no longer operationally viable? 

Edited by huntingthesnark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, huntingthesnark said:

The assumption that GPU miners are decentralised is rapidly becoming a false premise - GPU miners are either large farms with bulk, low electric rates, or the often-quoted altruistic 'hobby miner' who knowingly makes a loss on mining their favourite coin. The latter I suspect is largely imaginary, and the former is not decentralised, and only interested in profit - HODLing and supporting the network are anathemas to the large farms.

You will have miners mining at a loss if your coin is cpu minable. Botnets of cpus from infected call centers, schools, llibraries...ect will externalize all power costs and give zero incentive to ever stop mining to the person controlling it.

Edited by people9087
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, people9087 said:

You will have miners mining at a loss if your coin is cpu minable. Botnets of cpus from infected call centers, schools, llibraries...ect will externalize all power costs and give zero incentive to ever stop mining to the person controlling it.

Agreed. However, it's not much of a utopian ideal, the botnet. Know it's done plenty for XMR over the years, of course!

Fact is, if you want home users to mine in the future, we're all either hoping for another mass spike in the crypto market value, at which point every man and his dog will fire up their RX rigs again, or we'll need 'something' that is actually power efficient.

Just as a point of order, I'm mining with a $200 FPGA that hits c.45mhs - less than a 1080ti. Hashrate there isn't doing any damage to GPU profitability - but on power costs GPU has a problem. That problem is not one that is going away - indeed, the further you look into the future, the worse it gets... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see how FPGAs solve the power cost difference issue.  In 5 years down the line, FPGA miners at home will be complaining they can't complete with farms with lower power costs, or with other home users who nabbed asics.

Embracing FPGAs doesn't solve any of the issues, just pushes the same issues down the line another few years, and you'll again have to make the choice whether to put in the work to maintain a low barrier to consensus and to mitigate the threats to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, people9087 said:

I don't see how FPGAs solve the power cost difference issue.  In 5 years down the line, FPGA miners at home will be complaining they can't complete with farms with lower power costs, or with other home users who nabbed asics.

Embracing FPGAs doesn't solve any of the issues, just pushes the same issues down the line another few years, and you'll again have to make the choice whether to put in the work to maintain a low barrier to consensus and to mitigate the threats to it.

Because it will just go back to Asics, like the previous thread I posted about LTC, all back into a complete circle. Someone will have an advantage no matter what.

As one of those mythical hobby miners. I have 1 GPU rig mining D right now. I did quite well doing this years ago with no cares in the world. Just keep mining however I could. Wish I stayed on BTC with GPU's when everyone said oh you can't do it ASIC's are here. barf.

I am for FPGA's as I don't see why all these coins are forking their algo's. Seems like a waste of time better spent on something else.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let the FPGA keep strengthen the DNR network. There are no reasons to hate or afraid FPGAs. Unlike ASICs FPGAs are relatively expensive in preparation for mining, so I doubt you will ever see a sheds full of FPGAs... So let it be... Please... Personally I have only 6 Acorn CLE-215+ ans 2 BCU1525. Am I dangerous for DNR?..

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...