Pages

▼

Sunday, 14 July 2013

July 14th 2013 weekly pool and network statistics

Welcome, miners.

Changelog:
  • entity "Satoshi Systems" added from coinbase signature. 
  • Triplemining results now being calculated from coinbase blocks.
  • Comparison of ASICMiner and DiscusFish block solve rates.
Usual pools missing from results:
  • Nil
Errors:
  • Nil known

Pools with coinbase signature:


Pool hopping:
  • Nil

Is ASICMiner renting hashes to DiscusFish?
This week I noticed something quite odd. If you scroll down to Figure 3 and compare the two yellow lines, you'll notice they look quite similar. The lines are for ASICMiner and DiscusFish. Here's a second chart comparing their block solved per week:


The relationship between the two is really quite suggestive. Taking variance into account, it does seem that DiscusFish and ASICMiner solo started signing the coinbase at about the same time and have been increasing their hashrates by about the same percentage rate.

Here's a correlation plot:



The linear model statistics:

I had a quick google but couldn't find any posts that described a working relationship between the two. So, can anyone tell me if it there is a known relationship between ASICMiner and DiscusFish? Has ASICMiner been renting hashes to DiscusFish and if so is it being paid to investors?

Polmine's ASICs are mostly blades, and HHTT user's are mostly ASICs.
In Figure 8, most pools show a bulge around the 65 Ghps mark - lots of single Avalons. Two pools are unusual in that they don't: Polmine has had a bulge around 10 Ghps for the last few weeks, which might indicate a large number of ASICMiner blades. HHTT shows little variation overall, showing a very high percentage of ASIC hashes.

As usual, please post comments if there's anything you don't understand, with which you disagree, or just think is wrong.


The charts

Table: Table of all pools with public data and their various statistics averaged for the last seven days - for smaller pools the average may be more or less than seven days, depending on number of blocks solved for the week. Network hashrate and that of some pools are estimates, the upper and lower 95% confidence interval bounds are included.
Figure 1: Pie chart of the percentage of network blocks hashrate by pool. "Unknown" combines those pools for which I can't scrape statistics, solominers and private pools. The percentage of network hashrate will only be approximate since the exact network hashrate is unknown.
Figure 2: Chart of network hashrate, hashrate of the largest mining pool, combined hashrates of the three largest mining pools, and a line representing 50% of the network hashrate. Handy if you're worried about 51% attacks. The upper and lower 95% confidence interval bounds for the network hashrate are in between the shaded areas.
Figure 3: Chart of chronology of pool hashrates, averaged per week.
Figure 4: Chart of average hashrates per pool per round for the week, and per 144 rounds for the network. The upper and lower 95% confidence interval bounds for the network hashrate are in between the shaded areas.
Figure 5: Chart of chronology of negative binomial CDF probability of shares submitted and blocks produced for the week.
Figure 6: Chart of chronology of round length divided by difficulty, averaged per week.
Figure 7: Chart of hashrate vs round length for hoppable pools (the larger the hashrate increase at the start of a round, the larger the loss to strategic miners).
Figure 8: Chart of pool user hashrate distribution. Note that for some pools this average is over twenty four hours, some pools are averaged over an hour or more and some for only fifteen minutes, so expect some variance in the results.





















Thanks to blockexplorer.com for use of their network statistics.

organofcorti.blogspot.com is a reader supported blog:

12QxPHEuxDrs7mCyGSx1iVSozTwtquDB3r
at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comments are switched off until the current spam storm ends.