skaughtz

Using the onboard controller on an old ASRock Z75 Pro 3 (LGA 1155). I have never had to rebuild a RAID volume before, so before I potentially brain fart while installing the new drives and wipe the existing one or something stupid like that, I thought I would get the details on it.

I will try to keep this simple. I have a two 250GB drives in a RAID 1 setup that I use for simple file storage for personal and work. One of the drives is on its way out (acting wonky and CrystalDiskInfo indicates a Current Pending Sector Count of 200). I have two more 250GB drives on the way. My understanding is that if I swap the bad drive for the new drive, the setup will rebuild from the existing good drive (if anyone could confirm this, I'd appreciate it) and no muss no fuss there. But I snagged two drives, and would like to add another to have redundancy across three drives. If I did that, would I need to wipe and create a new volume across all three drives, or would the good drive rebuild the setup by mirroring itself on the other two? If the former, I have read but am still somewhat confused about a RAID 1 that utilizes something like a 2+1 setup, where one drive exists as an emergency backup to step in should one of the other two fail. Any info on that would be helpful. I just finished backing up the files on a few external sources, so the data is safe regardless of what I do. Thanks in advance.

I also have an EVGA 2060 KO Ultra Gaming card that is shorter than my 2070 (EVGA Black Gaming) but has sensors for memory temp. That card runs warmer just because of its smaller size and cooler. I realize that it is not apples to apples, but if the 2060 hits a certain memory clock overclock with its memory running at a safe temperature (say, +1000MHz at 74C), would it be safe to assume that the 2070 is not running any higher than that at the same speeds? The 2070 runs cool but does not have sensors for the memory temperature. At +500MHz on the 2060, the memory is reading 72C with 85W total draw, while at +1000MHz it rose to 74C and 91W total draw.

Thanks, man. Any suggestion on what memory temperatures are safe to run constantly?

I have a 2070 I use for mining Ethereum (but this question should apply to any card). I have the voltage locked in at 700mV, with the core clock at stock, and the memory clock at +500MHz. The card runs at 47C and only pulls 92W. All good. Yesterday I tinkered with the memory clock and managed to get it up to +1350MHz stable, before I decided to look more into what I was doing. The card temperature remained at 47C, but the power draw increased to 99W. The hash rate increased 5Mh/s, but I was concerned that I was destroying the memory, either through heat or stress (there is no monitor for the memory temp) so I took it back down to +500MHz. +1350MHz seems like a crazy amount to just be luck of the silicon. Is it dangerous to run an overclock like that, or should I be grateful that the card can do it (and potentially more) and rock it out? Appreciate any advice.

That's exactly my concern. There is a notable hash rate increase with each step from +1000 on, but I have no way of telling what the temps are outside of the main GPU temperature reported, which is 47C, through Precision X1 (all of the cards are EVGA, and I use that program for everything but the voltage, which is locked at 700mV in the mining command line). I figured that by locking in the mV through trex it wouldn't feed anything on the card more than it could handle, since that is quite a bit undervolted to begin with. My original goal was to drop the total power draw. Now that I have that down I'd like to eek out what hash rate I can, but not at the expense of burning the cards up in a month. Edit: With all of that said, it did increase the reported power draw from 93W to 99W. That worries me since the GPU temp didn't increase.

I would really love some more insight into the whole memory degradation thing. I decided to just mess with my EVGA RTX 2070 Black Gaming to see what I could get out of it. As of me writing this, I stopped at +1350MHz on the memory clock and found that -150MHz was the sweet spot on the core clock. -200MHz core clock would drop the hash rate, while anything above -150MHz didn't make a difference. It is still locked in at 719mV, running at 47C, and I increased the hash rate more than 5MH/s. It still has not crashed, which worries me. Am I burning up something unknown? +1350MHz seems way too good to be just silicon luck. Or is that all that it is? Forgive me that I am not in the habit of massively overclocking hardware. I like to protect my investments.

Thanks for the info. The bit about Pascal and ECC memory makes sense. My 1080 Ti gives me the best hash rate with a -400MHz memory clock. The 1080 and 1070's both showed improvement bumping it up to +500MHz. The Pascal cards also do not like the decrease in power. The 20-series cards didn't drop a blip locking in the power at 700mV. I guess I just need to go through one by one and increase until it crashes. Any advice on the core clocks? My understanding is that the Ethereum algorithm is memory clock reliant, so I have not even bothered touching the core clocks. Since the cards are all way undervolted and running in the upper 40C, I might as well squeeze every bit of hash rate out of them that I can.

I have my rig set up mining Ethereum and I plopped a +500MHz memory clock offset on all of my mining cards. 2070, 2060 Super, 2060, 1080, and 2 1070s. Everything but my 1080 Ti (which needs it reduced because 1080 Tis are the spaz of the GPU world). All of the cards are fine and +500MHz seemed like a reasonable offset. But I have seen people discuss pushing the memory clock as high as it will possibly go stable, sometimes putting something like a +1000MHz or more memory clock offset on their cards. As I would like to reuse the cards for other purposes when they are done mining, I have been leery about going too high with the MC. As such I keep them cool and undervolted. But does it matter? Is there any appreciable difference in memory degradation between +500MHz and +1000MHz if the card is stable and greatly undervolted (my 20 series cards are all locked in at 700mV and my 10 series at 900mV... 711W draw for all of them)? Am I just leaving hashing power on the table or is it safer not to push things too far?

Just playing Devil's Advocate here, but I would put it on them to put the manpower towards pouring through the blockchain with my wallet address (when they found it... probably through IP connections or something) to confirm that I received X share on X date. That is probably a pretty solid roll of the dice on the part of the basement miner. They don't have enough resources to deal with people filing normal taxes. It seems silly to me that they would even attempt to collect on the income when there are so many barriers in the way to it being at all accurate. Anyway, fun conversation. I learned something.

Okay. This is what I was after. Hypothetically for the sake of argument, outside of storing it in an exchange wallet, they could not track it back to you though, correct? Cold wallets can be lost. Hot wallets don't collect identifying information. I'm sure with the latter they could figure it out if they really, really tried, but that isn't happening for your average citizen. I'm not trying to skirt paying my taxes... only they and death... I am just curious as to the ins and outs of this whole thing being relatively new to it. There seem to be some gray areas here.

But how would they know if you mined it on April 7, 2016 or April 7, 2021? Pretty big difference in what you would owe them. And while you might not be able to prove it, neither could they (I imagine without expending WAY more resources than they have available for your average home miner), and you aren't guilty until proven innocent.

I'm not worried about me. They have far bigger fish to fry than me and my laundry room rig. But I do like to know the ins and outs of things that I am involved in and this just seems silly that the best tactic that they can employ is only fear of audit... which anyone with some sense should be able to get out of at this point, for the reasons I mentioned above. Uncle Sam always gets his in the end, but I see why crypto pisses off the government so much.

Hm. This seems to be something of a shitshow. Some Googling came up with "Pursuant to IRS Notice 2014-21, when a taxpayer successfully “mines” virtual currency, the fair market value of the virtual currency as of the date of receipt is includible in gross income. This means that successfully mining cryptocurrency creates a taxable event and the value of the mined coins must be included in the taxpayer’s gross income at the time it is received." That isn't feasible in the least, lest you sit at the mining computer every second of the day and record the time/date/value of the coin every share you mine. You can also apparently write off equipment and electricity costs, but with the latter having the same issue. It appears it is more or less an honor system at this point until you sell it, but then there is the question of how you obtained it, which I suppose you have to answer... but how can they prove you are lying if you said you mined it when it was worth $20 in 2016?

I've recently been mining ETH and have been storing it away, hoping for the price to rise again. I have also been reading about how the IRS plans to come down harder on crypto profits through capital gains taxes. What I don't understand is how can they know/verify how long you have held onto the coin if you store it in a non-exchange wallet? It would be the difference between short- and long-term capital gains rates. Would they only go by when it was transferred into/out of an exchange wallet and when it was sold/traded? What if you mined it and have held it for over a year in a Trezor on your desk or hot wallet that doesn't know your identity? I imagine there is a catch somewhere but I'm not able to piece this all together yet.