Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nvidia Limits RTX 3060 Hash Rate

tomshardware.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 520 posts

Re: Nvidia Limits RTX 3060 Hash Rate

#481

Post by jml7c5 »

pantalaimon wrote: post #176
mckirk wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is the effect of 'electromigration' at least, which causes atoms of conducting materials to be transported over time because of the current (if I understand it correctly). That might be an issue over the long term, especially at the ridiculously small scale of chip manufacturing we've reached now.

But how big of an issue is that really in practice? You still see 20+ years old machines chugging along just fine.

Process size matters, so older computers are less affected.

Re: Nvidia Limits RTX 3060 Hash Rate

#482

Post by LMYahooTFY »

imtringued wrote: post #371
LMYahooTFY wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>global MLM scheme. What I'll say is that the absurdity of this trite dismissal presents a large undertaking for anyone to begin to try and teach you what cryptocurrencies are. Most of the silicon valley billionaires acknowledge it as a promising technology, if that doesn't warrant some serious (read: many hours of difficult reading) consideration than expecting strangers on a message board to help you do it seems a…

>I'll grant you that trite dismissal of cryptocurrencies in general is quite common on HN. The unfortunate reality is that Bitcoin advocates all sound like people who bought into an MLM scheme. They desperately convince others that it has value and should go up.

Most of them probably are.

That doesn't make it an MLM scheme any more than Tesla is.

And the counter balance I see generally are similar to the other commenter, people who will unload angry rhetoric but demonstrate no understanding of the Nakamoto Consensus algorithm much less address any of its merits.

Re: Nvidia Limits RTX 3060 Hash Rate

#483

Post by LMYahooTFY »

imtringued wrote: post #379
LMYahooTFY wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>meanwhile wealth was unnecessarily transferred weighted towards the earliest adopters. How many companies and technologies is this true or? Does this make them all MLM schemes? Nothing about your response indicates you're giving me a generous interpretation at all, especially given how much of this response is you dumping rhetoric on me. Being snarky and in the same breath elaborately calling me "holier-than-thou" s…

It's entirely possible to extract value from a stock if the company represented by a stock is doing productive work. Companies exist to make a profit and many of them do so by providing a service or by selling goods. The profit is paid out through dividends or stock buy backs. As an owner of a stock you have to do absolutely nothing to extract value from that stock. The company is automatically paying out money to yo…

I'm sorry this is a large block of text and skimming through it you're straw manning me.

The analogy was simply because GP posited that the pattern of wealth transfer from late to early adopters indicated an MLM scheme and that's clearly a shared trait among companies which are not MLM schemes.

It is not at all the defining trait of an MLM scheme.

I'm not trying to be rude, but the rest of your comments have nothing to do with anything I've said. I'm not taking a maximalist position, and I also don't agree that we should "stop talking about Bitcoin". It's evolving, so whatever you think or observe about it is on some level subject to change.

Re: Nvidia Limits RTX 3060 Hash Rate

#484

Post by ffggvv »

pmiller2 wrote: post #38
josalhor wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Does anybody else think that the "mining is bad for the environment and gamers can't buy the cards" argument is a bit weird? After all, if all these cards weren't used for mining but for gaming, wouldn't the environmental outcome be the same? I never had that specific opinion, but I have another point of view. Games bring inherent value to the table. That is, if you didn't play games you would be reading a book, go…

> I don't see tangible value in crypto. Crypto is worth what other people are willing to pay for it. If you wanted to invest in an asset that does not depend on the currency you could buy gold. Try convincing any crypto "enthusiast" of that, though. Literally none of them have ever been able to explain to me why cryptocurrencies should have value, but that doesn't stop them from proclaiming it the best thing since sl…

i used to be one... there is no real argument. it’s just mania driven by the price going up and hoping for the price to go up. any argument against btc stands between them and the moon so they respond with anger. it’s like on reddit when gamestop stock was 400 trying to tell people to sell was met with anger

Re: Nvidia Limits RTX 3060 Hash Rate

#485

Post by King-Aaron »

myself248 wrote: post #391
ratww wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GPUs are essential for a few jobs that are essential to our society. They're not just for games.

We must have different definitions of "essential". I'm curious which jobs you're referring to, because to my understanding, every aspect of society that I consider essential, has existed since before the advent of GPUs.

> every aspect of society that I consider essential, has existed since before the advent of GPUs

Modern computers have allowed these 'forever existing' technologies to scale to our population growth. Try building freeways without modern computers, or performing modern medical interventions without them.

Re: Nvidia Limits RTX 3060 Hash Rate

#487

Post by mseidl »

sellyme wrote: post #456
mseidl wrote: post #446

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the other thing I don't understand. I'm from Germany and our power is around 35 cents per khw. Even using a 14th/s asic with bitcoin as high is it is now, you're losing lots of money. It uses 1,3 kilowatts. The fact that the prices of the cards are so high in Germany now too... the 3080s are at 2000€ plus.

> I'm from Germany and our power is around 35 cents per khw. I don't know if this is a typo or just a slightly different way of writing it in German, but now I'm trying to work out exactly what a "kilohour watt" would be. I think it's just a millionth of a kilowatt hour? Definitely wouldn't want to be paying those prices! I can't find anywhere genuinely using that unit, although it is mentioned in this 1979 9th grade…

It was a typo.

Re: Nvidia Limits RTX 3060 Hash Rate

#488

Post by mrb »

arcticbull wrote: post #468
mrb wrote: post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

« it doesn’t make sense to break that down on a per transaction basis with division » Because the division result is meaningless as it just reflects how full a block was, not the cost of a transaction. Again: miners expend the same amount of energy regardless if they are validating 1 or 1000 transactions in a block. Exactly the same amount. And whatever math you might be doing doesn't account for batched transactions…

> Again: miners expend the same amount of energy regardless if they are validating 1 or 1000 transactions in a block. For one that’s horrifyingly wasteful - you say it like it’s a good thing but it’s really not. And two, I’m describing the network as it exists today. That’s not dishonest; there’s no plan to increase the quantity of transactions per block. If it ever changes we can run the numbers again. But saying it…

«For one that’s horrifyingly wasteful - you say it like it’s a good thing but it’s really not. »

It is a great thing: it means Bitcoin can scale without increasing energy consumption. See, that's my problem with the way you phrased your post. You misrepresent the system. You imply transactions consume energy when they don't.

Re: Nvidia Limits RTX 3060 Hash Rate

#489

Post by diroussel »

Closi wrote: post #306
hobofan wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It’s straight to the landfill every 6 months. Isn't that a trend that has mostly ended or is about to end now? It looks like that was mostly caused by nm process improvements for ASIC chips in the past. With 7/5nm ASIC chips it seems like it should now progress as fast/slowly as the nm process capabilities of chip manufacturers in general. Not pro-BTC, but this seem very much like faulty interpolation based on a pa…

Technology continues to advance - I don’t think there is enough evidence to say that we have hit a fundamental limit on computer/asic power/speed performance yet. 3nm will hit in 2024, but until then there will always be advances in chip design. It’s not just about speed, it’s also about thermals, power consumption and manufacture price to work out the TCO of mining.

No matter how much faster and more efficient the mining becomes, the hash rate will adjust. It’s a self balancing system.

Re: Nvidia Limits RTX 3060 Hash Rate

#490

Post by sonthonax »

pornel wrote: post #4

I have no sympathy for miners, but purely from software freedom perspective this is maximally evil: closed-source software that decides what you can use your hardware for. The CMP version is a straight-to-landfill product. As soon as it stops being profitable for mining it will have zero resale value, and become e-waste.

It's only evil if you believe in absolute software freedom. But in reality NVidia is perfectly within its rights to apply differential pricing for people who want to play games, and those who want to mine bitcoin.

Who can really blame NVidia for this? The actual target market for these products, gamers and the lower end graphics professionals, have been plagued by supply issues. In the long term NVidia stands more to gain by providing consistent supply.

Post reply on HN