I pay $0.08125 per KwH. 1.2*24*0.08125*31 = $70. I actually pay $100-$130 so I know my GPUs aren’t the most efficient Hash:Watt ratio.
Not sure what you mean by “1.3”, but it is about 140 MH/s.
Actual hardware I use:
Obl-Win is a Radeon Pro Duo (two Fury Nanos) - 250-300w and about 50-60 MH/s
I didn’t buy a single PSU because I realized it wasn’t necessary. Went for best Price:Wattage Ratio and found these to be that using PCPartPicker:
That’s accurate. I spent about $2,000 or so. Not sure on the cheaping out bit. Everything I have has worked almost flawlessly beyond typical miner problems (Windows 10 auto installing drivers is a blessing and a curse).
Again, there are too many variables with equipment overhead to reliably consider if you are profitable or not.
If I resold all my hardware right now, I don’t know what I’d get for it. Even if I did know, for a fact, I’d get over $1500 for it, then I’m profitable because $640+$1500 = $2,140 and I spent about $2,000 so I made $140. Which is profit.
That’s why I don’t consider it. It’s retarded to only consider the negative side of equipment overhead and not the positive if you know you intend to sell it later. It is too much work and probably impossible to try and estimate what you’d make on selling the hardware later anyway to see if you’re profitable.
So the only real, reliable, way to discern whether you will make money in the end, or not, is to ignore equipment overhead altogether and focus on making money through resource trading, electricity to coins.
On an infinite time frame, or even a 2 year time frame, that will likely lead to certain profitability even when ignoring equipment overhead, assuming you don’t mine the same thing the entire time.
crypto was measured against raw investment
How does that mean that one thing is not profitable if another thing is more profitable? Because that’s the definition you keep using. As a hypothetical, if I can make $1,000 mining, or I can make $2,000 renting compute power, you are saying mining is not profitable, even though you can make $1,000 with it, because you can make $1,000 more with renting.
How does this statement equate to that definition? If it doesn’t, then why are you using that definition? If you’re not, then why make statements that say that?
No. It is logical that if you use a definition as I stated above that people will have more F.U.D. towards mining when their numbers don’t match what you are saying. If you’re saying mining is not profitable, the “industry standard” way, when it is in fact profitable, the “general standard definition” way, it creates confusion, and thereby, F.U.D.
It’s not about what I disagree with. I don’t have to disagree with what you’re saying to understand what you’re saying likely has that effect.