21–30 of 136 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
FWIW getting 8 0s took me 30 seconds, 9 0s definitely less than an hour, but after that I only got lower 9 0s, and 10 0s do not seem to be in sight
I guess either my computer or my code is really bad! I only got a mid-8 0s with multiple hours.
I just tried your HN username, and it took me these times:
19 seconds for 7 0s - nonce: 293576344
28 seconds for 8 0s - nonce: 436316829
Earlier quoted context omitted.
ChatGPT says a desktop CPU uses 105Wh for every hour of maxed computations. I think a hash with 8 leading zeros takes around an hour and every additional 0 takes 16x that. I'll ignore anything less than 8 0s and disregard how close the hashes are to gaining or losing a 0. There's 13 8s, so that's 1365Wh. 5 9s is 8400Wh, 2 10s is 53760Wh, 3 11s is 1290240Wh. Total that's ~1.35MWh, which might cost $100 to $180. Very w…
FWIW getting 8 0s took me 30 seconds, 9 0s definitely less than an hour, but after that I only got lower 9 0s, and 10 0s do not seem to be in sight
Luck plays a tiny part too, I'm testing sequentially and I got my 9th zero with only ~7e8 hashes, a whopping 100x earlier than expected.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
FWIW getting 8 0s took me 30 seconds, 9 0s definitely less than an hour, but after that I only got lower 9 0s, and 10 0s do not seem to be in sight
One hour later, it seems like you've got your 10th zero! :) Luck plays a tiny part too, I'm testing sequentially and I got my 9th zero with only ~7e8 hashes, a whopping 100x earlier than expected.
Yep, crazy how long it took, but currently I'm also running multiple 'variants'. All the same program except the nonce generation, one with numbers, one with 32 character long 'base64' and one with 64 character long 'base64'. I got inspired by seletskiy who instead of using numbers used the whole allowed character set for the nonce.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The top competitors are very likely using GPUs, I guess that would make this cost much much lower...
At least I'm not (second place currently), I'm using a single threaded rust program that chatgpt wrote for me. I'm getting 10-15 million hashes per second. But seletskiy is, as you can see in his nonce which tells us that he uses an RTX4090 and has 18 Giga Hashes per second. I'm really curious how he wrote that program, as I have a Rx 7900 XTX and would love to use it for this competition haha
Also have been using ChatGPT to do the code translations.
I'm currently stuck in yak shaving, I cannot compile CUDA programs here yet as on fedora 40 I need an earlier gcc (13.2) which I am now also having to compile from source.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At least I'm not (second place currently), I'm using a single threaded rust program that chatgpt wrote for me. I'm getting 10-15 million hashes per second. But seletskiy is, as you can see in his nonce which tells us that he uses an RTX4090 and has 18 Giga Hashes per second. I'm really curious how he wrote that program, as I have a Rx 7900 XTX and would love to use it for this competition haha
I've also been spending today building a miner. Started in JS, then JS with worker threads (~2.2MH/s), then c++ with openssl (~3.7MH/s) and now attempting CUDA. Also have been using ChatGPT to do the code translations. I'm currently stuck in yak shaving, I cannot compile CUDA programs here yet as on fedora 40 I need an earlier gcc (13.2) which I am now also having to compile from source.
Fun, no way I'm beating any of the top 10 scores though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
ChatGPT says a desktop CPU uses 105Wh for every hour of maxed computations. I think a hash with 8 leading zeros takes around an hour and every additional 0 takes 16x that. I'll ignore anything less than 8 0s and disregard how close the hashes are to gaining or losing a 0. There's 13 8s, so that's 1365Wh. 5 9s is 8400Wh, 2 10s is 53760Wh, 3 11s is 1290240Wh. Total that's ~1.35MWh, which might cost $100 to $180. Very w…
The top competitors are very likely using GPUs, I guess that would make this cost much much lower...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The top competitors are very likely using GPUs, I guess that would make this cost much much lower...
I'm using a janky CUDA miner that's getting around 6GH/s on a 3090. My code is kind of bad though since I hacked it together in a couple of hours last night, so I wouldn't be surprised if a proper/competent implementation got 2-3x the hashrate mine does.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One hour later, it seems like you've got your 10th zero! :) Luck plays a tiny part too, I'm testing sequentially and I got my 9th zero with only ~7e8 hashes, a whopping 100x earlier than expected.
Oh I didn't notice, I've written something so it automatically submits if it's a better value haha. Yep, crazy how long it took, but currently I'm also running multiple 'variants'. All the same program except the nonce generation, one with numbers, one with 32 character long 'base64' and one with 64 character long 'base64'. I got inspired by seletskiy who instead of using numbers used the whole allowed character set…