Building a Haswell Desktop

I know lots of people are moving to laptops for most of their computing needs. I use laptops plenty, but for use with my older 30" HP LP3065 display I still need something with a dual-link DVI output. There were a few gaming laptops that had such a connection, but these days? Yeah, too bad for me! So I tend to do nearly all of my home computing on a desktop still. If you're like me and prefer to stick with a traditional desktop, and if you happen to be running a system that's several years old or more, the recent launch of Intel's Haswell (4th Generation Core Series) processors may be giving you the itch to upgrade.

Here's a system I'm recommending to a friend. It's pretty easy to put this all together and having a speedy setup for the next five years. I've included a couple options on three key parts: the GPU, the CPU, and the RAM. At the high-end, you might want to go all-out on the performance aspects, and that's where we get the GTX 780, 16GB RAM, and an i7-4770K processor. The nearly as fast but quite a bit more affordable configuration opts for GTX 770, 8GB RAM, and an i5-4570K. For the even less demanding, we can also go with a GTX 760 graphics card -- and if you don't care about gaming, you might just save yourself hundreds of dollars by going with the integrated Intel HD 4600 Graphics. Here's the list of parts:

Intel Core i7-4770K processor ($339)
Intel Core i5-4670K processor ($230)
Corsair H80i Cooler ($75)
ASRock Z87M Pro4 motherboard ($142)
Zotac GTX 780 3GB GDDR5 ($610)
EVGA GTX 770 4GB GDDR5 graphics card ($440)
Gigabyte GTX 760 4GB GDDR5 graphics card ($300)
16GB (2x8GB) G.Skill RipjawsX DDR3-1866 DDR3-1866 memory ($153)
8GB (2x4GB) G.Skill Sniper DDR3-1866 memory ($83)
256GB Corsair Neutron solid state drive ($190)
2TB Western Digital hard drive ($87)
ASUS DVDRW ($22)

Cases:
Rosewill mATX case ($36)
Corsair Obsidian 350D ($80)
Silverstone PS07B ($79)
Bitfenix Prodigy ($80) (White)
Silverstone Tek TJ08B-E case ($100)

Power Supplies:
600W Enermax Platimax 80 Plus Platinum ($184)
450W Antec 80 Plus Platinum ($84)
Corsair RM650 80 Plus Gold ($118)
Corsair CX430 80 Plus Bronze ($40)

Operating System:
Windows 7 Home Premium OEM ($89)
Windows 8.1 OEM ($110)

You'll note that I've gone with a mATX motherboard and case, mostly because I feel the larger cases these days are just way bigger than they need to be. I cheaped out a bit on the case initially, so I added some higher-end options, plus the white Bitfenix Prodigy.

Similarly, the power supply has a few options now; go with the 600W/650W if you want to use the GTX 770 or GTX 780, and 430W/450W for lesser builds. The difference in efficiency between 80 Plus Platinum and 80 Plus Bronze is about 5-7%, so realistically you only save at best 25-50W under load by going with Platinum, and probably 5-10W or less at idle. Running 24/7 at load, that works out to $22-$44 per year, but a more realistic use would be loaded 10% of the time and idle the rest of the time, which would only be $6-$12 per year. Saving $40-$80 on the PSU in the short-term ends up being a wash over five years, but either choice is fine.

The CPU cooler is also optional, but overclocking is possible to if you want to give that a shot I'd grab the cooler. Windows 7 will also save  you $21 right not compared to Windows 8.1 (which is still whatever).

Here's what the totals come down to, using Platinum PSUs and Win8.1:

Maximum Performance (i7, 600W, GTX 780, 16GB, Silverstone, H80i): $2012
High-End Performance (i5, 600W, GTX 770, 8GB, Silverstone, H80i): $1663
Moderate Performance (i5, 450W, GTX 760, 8GB, Rosewill): $1284
Moderate Non-Gaming (i5, 450W, 8GB, Rosewill, no HDD): $897

So basically the total would be anywhere from $900 to $2000, depending on how high you want to go on the graphics mostly. The system is of course more upgradeable over the long terms, and it has room for multiple hard drives/solid state drives if you want. You could add more storage, a fast graphics card (two if your power supply and case can handle it -- I'd suggest switching to a full-size ATX case for that, though), or if something breaks down in a few years you can easily find replacement parts.

If you were to go out and buy a Dell, HP, etc. system, the initial pricing may seem much better than a custom-built PC, but there are a few caveats. First, Dell chooses most of the parts, without too many customization options available. One big item that's missing on many big OEM desktops is a good SSD (solid state drive), which is something I require for every system I build -- it just makes such a difference that I'm not willing to put together a system these days without an SSD. So if you take Dell's $700 configuration for something like the XPS 8700, you'd get a slightly slower CPU, a very mediocre GPU (the GT 635), a motherboard with no frills or overclocking, slower RAM, a smaller HDD, no SSD, and a lower quality power supply. If you wanted to get something close to the moderate build I've recommended, it's $890 just to get the SSD.

The problem with big OEM PCs is that Dell, HP, Lenovo, Acer, etc. make systems that are designed to hit a price point, and they cut lots of corners to get there. They're not as upgradeable in some respects, and the quality of the components is lower. As an example, I could get the price of the base level desktop I listed above down about $250 if I just use a lower quality, lower price motherboard (H81 chipset), power supply, RAM, SSD, and a slower CPU (i5-4430) -- but that's not something I am comfortable building, as long-term reliability is more of a concern. So if you've ever looked at OEM systems and wondered, "How can they get all those components into such a system at that price?", that's how. Buy in bulk, user lower quality parts, and you can save 20% on overall costs...and lose out long-term. Don't forget the bloatware software either!

Anyway, I'm working on a guide for my regular job with similar parts to the above -- I just need to do a bit more research before firming up the recommendations, so stay tuned....

Amazon’s Kindle Paperwhite

With all the advances in tablet technology, the experience of reading a physical book is still preferred by many people – or if not a book, then an e-book with electronic ink instead of an LCD or OLED display. Amazon has had a lot of success with their Kindle e-book readers over the years, and today they’ve announced the latest model, the Kindle Paperwhite.

Scheduled to start shipping at the end of the month (September 30, 2013), the Paperwhite boasts an upgraded display, an enhanced backlight for reading in the dark, and faster processing to speed up page turns. All of the new features are certainly welcome updates, but the price is also substantially higher than the standard Kindle: $119 (with the current special offers) will get you the Kindle Paperwhite, while the previous Kindle is available for $69. There’s also a 3G Paperwhite available for $189, which adds free 3G connectivity with no contracts or monthly fees.

There are plenty of reasons for book lovers to prefer the Paperwhite over reading on a tablet. There’s no glare in bright sunlight, for one, and I personally find the reading experience to be more comfortable on the eyes. The Kindle is also lighter than similar size tablets, and battery life (with WiFi off) is listed as up to eight weeks between charges (depending on your usage, naturally). Battery life incidentally is also rated at twice that of the previous Kindle, though whether that’s thanks to improved technology or simply a larger battery I’m not sure (probably a little of both).

I’m still not 100% sold on digital books over normal paperbacks/hardbacks, but the Kindle has some advantages that can be difficult to overcome – like, the ability to pack along hundreds of books wherever you go, in a device that weighs less than half a pound. On the other hand, there are drawbacks: it’s still classified as “portable electronics”, so you can’t use it during takeoff or landing on a flight, and while Amazon does support “loaning” of books to a friend, other than public domain stuff there’s no equivalent of a normal library that I know of. I also like the ability to dog-ear pages, pull out a highlighter for important passages, scribble notes in the margins, etc. – there are analogs to some of these on the Kindle, but they’re not quite the same.

All told, however, there’s a lot to like with the Kindle, and the Paperwhite builds on that legacy. Electronic ink may not draw pages or refresh as fast as a tablet LCD, but it’s far more comfortable to read and you won’t end up recharging every day, even if you read constantly. For the interested, here’s the full set of specifications:

Amazon Kindle Paperwhite Specifications
Display	6" Paperwhite Exclusive Carta e-paper technology Next-generation built-in light 212 ppi, 16-level gray scale
Size	6.7" x 4.6" x 0.36" (169 mm x 117 mm x 9.1 mm)
Weight	7.3 ounces (206 grams)
System Requirements	None; fully wireless and no computer required
On-Device Storage	2 GB internal (~1.25 GB available) Holds up to 1,100 books
Cloud Storage	Free cloud storage for all Amazon content
Battery Life	A single charge lasts up to eight weeks (30 minutes of reading per day, wireless off and light setting at 10) Battery life will vary based on light and wireless usage
Charge Time	Approximately 4 hours from a computer via USB cable
Wi-Fi Connectivity	802.11n (WEP, WPA, WPA2 security) Wi-Fi Protected Setup (WPS) Optional 3G Wireless on Paperwhite 3G
Content Formats Supported	Kindle Format 8 (AZW3) Kindle (AZW) TXT PDF Unprotected MOBI PRC natively HTML Word (DOC, DOCX) JPEG, GIF, PNG, BMP (through conversion)
Warranty and Service	1-year limited warranty included Optional 2-year Extended Warranty available for U.S. customers
Included in the Box	Kindle Paperwhite, USB 2.0 charging cable and Quick Start Guide
Price	Kindle Paperwhite: $119 promotion, $139 normally Kindle Paperwhite 3G: $189 promotion, $209 normally

Shadowrun Returns Review: Kickstarter Rocks

Let me get the fanboy stuff out of the way first: I love cyberpunk, especially when it’s done well. My first blush with the genre came all the way back in the days of the venerable Commodore 64, where an unassuming game called Neuromancer was released. It was seriously flawed in some ways (hello super-slow walking across screens!), but I loved the BBS hacking and implementation of Cyberspace. To my teenage mind in the late 80s, this was perhaps the most awesome game ever created –I even went so far as to craft ideas of what could be done for a sequel and mailed them to Interplay! Sadly, I received a polite “thanks but no thanks” response, but I’m still around while Interplay is gone. Take that, big corporate politics!

Naturally, after playing the game I went on to read the Gibson books – all of them, good and bad – and I branched out into reading anything even remotely cyberpunk that I could find. My favorite of the time was Sir Walter Jon Williams’ Hardwired, which I really wish someone would do a proper game set in that universe. Later, I’d also get into Neal Stephenson (Snow Crash was another instant hit for me), but I’m always looking for more good cyberpunk stories, so if you know of any please post a comment.

Okay, back to the topic of gaming, the number of good cyberpunk computer games is decidedly limited. Besides Neuromancer, we have some more cerebral games like Uplink, or old text games that I won’t even bother mentioning now. Syndicate and Syndicate Wars had some cool ideas back in the day, with Syndicate having recently been rebooted as an FPS. Deus Ex is probably one of the best showcases of the genre, but again more of an FPS than an RPG in my book. And then we have Shadowrun, originally released on the SNES and Sega Genesis. I never got into the Genesis release for some reason, but even years after its release when I first played Shadowrun on an SNES (around 2001), I thought it was great. When I discovered (again belatedly) that there was a modern Kickstarter for Shadowrun, and that the game launched last month, I was thrilled – and promptly bought the game on Steam.

You may have seen other reviews of Shadowrun Returns by now, and that’s fine. As a fan of the genre, let me give you my own take on the game. First, the story and setting are extremely well done and anyone who ever wanted a better adaptation of Shadowrun (not the crappy Team Fortress knockoff that Microsoft tried in 2007 for Vista and Xbox 360!) will be pleased. With the original creator of the Shadowrun pen and paper system being part of Harebrained Schemes, that may not be too surprising, but I’m glad to see the setting given its proper respect. You get a decent variety of skills, equipment, character traits, etc.

Graphics are nowhere near state of the art, but they’re good enough and you get an interesting combination of 2D and 3D that should run well even on low-end laptops. Combat foregoes the real-time trend that has become so popular and instead goes with grid-based turns, and you know what? It works, and I love it. Yup, I’m old school that way.

The story follows you from your humble beginnings as a shadowrunner helping out a dead friend through a climactic battle against the forces of evil set to destroy the Earth. You win, naturally, only “winning” in this case is a bit ambiguous as the corporations that run the world basically bury any knowledge of what you’ve done, and the threat that you helped to stop is still out there. But all told, it’s a good tale and anyone familiar with the Shadowrun universe will have a good time. But all is not perfect in our near-future dystopia, sadly.

First, there’s the save system, which basically has you restarting each level. It’s okay but I’d have liked a “save anywhere” option – it’s never good to run out of time half-way through a level and have to go elsewhere. Thankfully, most of the levels take less than 30 minutes, so you’re usually never more than a half hour away from your next checkpoint/save. The worst is really towards the end of the game where some larger battles may take longer – the final battle for instance can last a good two hours. Either way, I don’t think the save system is the end of the world.

Another complaint is the linearity of the game, which basically has you going through each scene, talking to any active characters, and then moving on to the next scene. There is very little to miss, and other than one optional mission there’s basically nothing extra to do. The game is extremely linear, but there are good aspects to such an approach – like keeping you focused instead of wandering lost in a huge world of emergent game play. I didn’t go back and replay the main story as a different character yet, and I can’t really tell how much variation there is, but my initial play through leads me to believe that most of the changes you can make only affect two things: your credstick and your combat. Certain skills/attributes/etiquettes may open up additional conversation options, but I can’t recall any that did more than provide additional money or an extra item.

Finally, there’s cyberspace/the matrix/the grid/etc. This is an area where I had definitely hoped for something more, and in many ways I almost feel like Neuromancer did it better in 1988 on a C64 than what we get with Shadowrun Returns. The visual representation is fine, but ultimately all you get in the Matrix is a new and different form of combat. To “hack” a node, you simply kill whatever programs or deckers are in the area and then click on the node, and there’s very little else to be done. Also, there’s a time limit for how long you can be jacked in, with an alarm level that continuously increases until you start getting more enemies to deal with and are forced to jack out. Cyberspace is like the rest of the world, with limited exploration available. It’s a shame that there’s no extra content or databases to hack into that might flesh things out.

Here’s the good news, though: Shadowrun Returns was released with a full editor and content creation support, and already there are many people hard at work generating new missions and content. Some have added random missions to the main story (or at least they’re working to do so?), others have completely new stories and worlds to explore, and there are new weapons, skills, spells, etc. available. As with any game that supports user generated content, what will come out is only limited by the imagination and skill of the creators, and I’m looking forward to seeing more of Shadowrun.

Short verdict: for a cyberpunk fanboy like myself, this is a no-brainer. Buy the game, and flawed or not you’ll find something to enjoy right now, with more goodness to come. It’s not a triple-A title with a gigantic budget, but in some ways I prefer a game like Shadowrun Returns to Deus Ex: Human Revolution. It’s sort of like the difference between reading a good book where your mind can fill in the blanks and your imagination gets to run wild versus a highly detailed game world where most of the creativity is done for you. Both options have their pros and cons, but for $20 you can do far worse in terms of digital entertainment.

The other thing I want to briefly mention is how great Kickstarter is proving to be for the indie gaming scene. Back in the 80s, it was possible for a single person to create and release a “cutting edge” game. As games and graphics have become more complex, such an undertaking requires far more money, more people, more time…and the bean counters don’t like risk. Everything is becoming more mainstream, because the idea is you can appeal to “everyone” rather than a small niche and therefore make more money – never mind the numerous failed “mass appeal” games that have come and gone over the years.

With Kickstarter, a developer can get funding up front to make a game, rather than having to create something on their own dime and hope it works out, and the people footing the bill are the same ones that want the game in the first place. Community feedback is improved, there’s food on the table, content gets created that would otherwise not exist, and just about everybody benefits. I missed the initial Shadowrun Kickstarter, but I’ve backed a couple others that I’m eager to play: Wasteland 2 and Torment: Tides of Numenera. Such games likely couldn’t be achieved without Kickstarter; now we just need to get someone to do a Neuromancer Kickstarter.

AMD Never Settle: Reloaded...Some Settling Included

So having purchased quite a few AMD GPUs over the past six months, I had a bunch of Never Settle Reloaded cards with codes for three free games: Bioshock Infinite, Crysis 3, and Far Cry: Blood Dragon. I used one set for myself and then sold the others. Come to find out, somehow AMD is backordered on the codes for Bioshock. How is this even possible?

Well, I know how it's possible, but I don't under stand why this would happen. You print a set number of cards, and I would go off the assumption that you need the three above games for every card that you print. But marketing deals are always weird, and so somewhere along the way AMD ended up buying fewer Bioshock codes than they printed, and now they've run out and are trying to negotiate another purchase of codes. Ugh.

Sorry to the three people that I sold my last Never Settle Reloaded codes to -- you'll get your games eventually, I think, but even that's not guaranteed. You see, the wording of the promotion contains "while supplies last", which means supplies of the codes, not the Never Settle cards. Best case scenario is that if AMD doesn't send out Bioshock Infinite codes, maybe they'll send out codes for some other game instead -- preferably a newer title, as opposed to say Tomb Raider, Hitman: Absolution, or one of the other games they've given away with hardware in the last year.

BTC: 1JSrAuxPUhD2rS6yYLiPPT6X8fvz7c7k1W
LTC: LXpEZcNJtikd263z7Ha3vrdYDcLU7hiKWv

Google AdSense: All Hail Our Digital Overlords

Welcome to the new, advertisement free blogs of yours truly. Apparently, I have violated Google's AdSense policy, and as such, my AdSense account has been disabled. The specific reason(s) for my account being disabled are not known, because such things are secret. Basically, "we could tell you but then we'd have to kill you." Seriously -- it's almost that bad! Check out the information:

"Because we have a need to protect our proprietary detection system, we're unable to provide our publishers with any information about their account activity, including any web pages, users, or third-party services that might have been involved."

So you don't know why your account was deleted, other than that "something" happened that they deemed in violation of their policy. I have a guess as to what may have happened to me (people on my local IP clicking ads, including perhaps young children -- also potentially frequent refreshing of web pages from my home IP), but what's bothersome is this: if Google, at their sole discretion, deems any clicks or page hits to be invalid, they already remove those clicks and/or hits from your earnings. You don't get paid, you don't get warned, and they still shut down your AdSense account. How does anyone make money (other than Google, naturally) from AdSense!? (Other possibilities: me linking BTC and LTC at the bottom of each post may have been a violation, or perhaps any Amazon Affiliate links -- either could potentially be "cause for concern".)

What bothers me most is the timing of this. I've had an AdSense account for about seven months. During that time, I have not had any violations that I'm aware of (not that they'd tell me, I suppose), and I have basically been using my blog sites in the same way as far as I can tell. Right now, I have "potential earnings" but have not received any actual money as I have not met the minimum payment threshold of $100. Based on my traffic, I should have hit that $100 mark this month, but wouldn't you know it: I violated their policies and now any and all AdSense revenue is gone. Seems like a great way to get out of paying a blogger $100 while still keeping all of the revenue from the actual advertisers!

Nearly 50,000 page views, fought and scrapped for, have all been for naught, at least as far as advertising income goes. Obviously, I'm not doing this blogging for the direct advertising money (I'd be making something like $0.10 per hour I think, if I were to get that $100 AdSense payment). However, the principle of the matter is greatly frustrating. Lately I've been averaging around $20-$30 in revenue per month, which if nothing else is a nice little surprise when you actually get paid. ("Hey honey, let's go out to eat -- my treat!") Barring people actually donating via BTC/LTC, about all that I've gotten out of these blogs is a few nice comments and maybe $5 or so in Amazon Affiliate links. Woohoo! I'm rich! (LTC mining, incidentally, even at the current increased difficulty continues to generate more than $20 in income per day from my computers -- 30X more profitable than AdSense, and thankfully it can't be arbitrarily seized by Google.)

I can also look at my blog traffic (where I don't even include my own visits, as I have the potential to open the site on upwards of a dozen different PCs each day), and from that I can see that at least 75% of all traffic is 100% guaranteed to not be from me (i.e. the traffic comes from the wrong browser -- I never use Internet Explorer, Safari, Android, or iOS, and rarely use Firefox). Of course, the Blogger statistics are also a fair estimate, showing around 200-500 Pageviews every day (and at best only 2% or so would possibly come from me). And any and all YouTube traffic would have been valid -- I don't have time to visit YouTube and watch a video so that I can click on an advertisement, so I only go there when I'm uploading a new video. So most likely, of the blog traffic that actually earned revenue, all of it was legit (since the 2% that wasn't legit was already removed by Google -- I assume if a page hit or click came from my home IP, it didn't count, right?) But, their system has detected some violation, I don't know what exactly, and so I'm out of luck and Google keeps the $90 or whatever that I had almost earned.

Naturally, I have appealed the decision, and I even admit some clicks and refreshes came from my home IP address. (I view my own blogs, duh. So if there's a typo or comment, I'm going to reload a page several times, plus hitting the URL so that I can post it to Facebook. And on occasion, there's an advertisement that is either so bad or in rare instances potentially useful that I've clicked it.) We'll see how the appeal goes, and I'll be sure to report the result here, but I suspect this blog entry alone will be enough to ensure I don't get reinstated. I do love this part of the appeal FAQ: "Once we've reached a decision on your appeal, further appeals may not be considered, and you might not receive any further communication from us." So, they will come to a decision, it will be final, and most likely you'll never hear more from Google again. Nice, guys. Way to take your ball and go home.

Over the many years that I've been in the tech industry, I've heard people express concern about the success of Google -- and their size, data mining, etc. Most of the time someone says, "I wouldn't trust my data to Google..." you'll hear someone else jump to their defense. Well, actions like this in regards to AdSense are part of the reason people don't trust Google. They can do whatever they want, and it's your privilege to serve them. Blogger/Blogspot was one of their many acquisitions, along with DoubleClick and many other companies. People used to be afraid of the size of Microsoft or Intel; these days, I'd say Google and Apple are far scarier propositions!

On the bright side, I won't worry about trying to generate any other revenue through advertising. I suppose there's a chance my AdSense appeal will be heard and those will start showing up again, but it doesn't seem likely. Big Brother was watching, and I got the one strike you're out ruling. Don't bother to try signing up again, as they'll notice that at some point (probably right before you get your first $100 check) -- and if you're related to me, that might be enough for Google to question your account as well!

As for me, I continue to write on the Internet, here and elsewhere. This sort of stuff is nothing new, and as one of the largest and most successful businesses around, Google knows how it's done. One thing is for certain: there is no stopping them; Google will soon buy out any remaining competition. And I for one welcome our new digital overlords. I’d like to remind them that as a trusted blogger personality, I can be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their underground spambot search optimization networks.

BTC: 1JSrAuxPUhD2rS6yYLiPPT6X8fvz7c7k1W
LTC: LXpEZcNJtikd263z7Ha3vrdYDcLU7hiKWv

Sapphire: Trying to Deny My $20 Mail-In Rebate

Sapphire, for shame. Your rebate process is a joke, with documentation that doesn't make it clear what you're after. What's more, when someone provides the correct UPC, your rebate department rejects it thanks to your incompetence. This all started with me ordering a bunch of GPUs for Litecoin mining. Sapphire was offering $20 off via rebate, and since their cards were already the cheapest it was a free $20 per GPU discount, right? Wrong. But I'm getting ahead of myself. Let's start with the rebate email. This is what I received from their rebate company:

"Your Rebate was not approved for the following reason(s)
- Original UPC Barcode Label (#840777061794) (Not the shipping label barcode) is missing"

Okay, here's an image from a second card that I ordered, since I'm sure no one can get a rebate from it now. Let's just send this little box to the scrap heap (or recycle bin), shall we?

What's the problem? Well, it appears Sapphire is reusing boxes, so the original UPC on the box is hidden under the new UPC sticker (which they call the "shipping label barcode" in their email). So the UPC I cut out (from a different box, but it has a similar number) says "HD7950 3G DDR5 PCIE" but the rebate people want the code underneath that sticker where you can see the label, "HD7950 3D GDDR5 PCI-E HDMI/DVI-E/DUAL MINI DP WITH BOOST".

The good news is that I called the support number for the rebate, and when they tried to tell me I didn't have a Boost card I argued with them and said, "It most certainly does have Boost -- it's right there on my Newegg order, and the same Newegg page links to the Sapphire rebate form." He checked out the order apparently and then agreed I had the right card and made whatever "changes" were necessary to process my rebate. And it only took 35 days since the time I placed my order. How's that for fast? (/sarcasm)

I guess the real question is: who's to blame on this one? Newegg.com, perhaps -- did they reuse a box somehow, or slap on a new UPC code? Maybe Sapphire is the one slapping new UPC codes on boxes, which would make it rather difficult to actually get a rebate. My feeling is that this is more than just an accidental slip-up, and in fact when I called the support line I could hear a conversation going on in the background:

Support Guy: "Is this that same guy again?"
Support Gal: "No, this is someone different."
Support Guy: "And he's got the exact same problem?"
Support Gal: "It would appear so."
Support Guy: "Okay, let me talk to him...."

There's more to the story of course. I purchased more than one of these cards, on the assumption that I could get the $20 rebate on each card. Oops: it's only one rebate per household! So not only did they try to rip me off for $20, they did so after I purchased five of their cards (actually, eight counting those from a friend -- the Dual-X cards are definitely worth the extra $25 in my opinion). My advice, then, is something I've said many times to people:

Never buy a product because of the mail-in rebate. If you're not willing to pay the asking price, then don't buy it. If you want the product anyway and the rebate is simply a nice bonus, go ahead -- just don't have your heart set on getting that money, because there's a good chance the "paperwork got lost", or "you have the wrong UPC code", or even "sorry, the company the processed our rebates went out of business; we're not the ones that offered the rebate, that was a third party." I've heard all of the above over the years, and others besides. In some instances, there was no communication and the rebate simply never came; any attempts to find someone to call or write about the problem met with no success. The whole mail-in rebate thing feels like a red herring to me; I think I've received rebates about 50% of the time, and it's always about two or three months after the initial purchase.

BTC: 1JSrAuxPUhD2rS6yYLiPPT6X8fvz7c7k1W
LTC: LXpEZcNJtikd263z7Ha3vrdYDcLU7hiKWv

Detailed Settings for ~600kHash/sec Litecoin with Radeon 7950

So I have a few Litecoin mining rigs running, and the latest has three Radeon HD 7950 cards in it. I detailed most of the hardware in my previous post, but this time I wanted to provide some clear steps and settings for mining that get close to 600kHash/sec on a single 7950. If you look at a list of scores, for example this list, you might think hitting 600kHash is trivial. Well, I suppose it can be, but don't expect it to happen by just running with the default settings. Here's what I ended up doing to get there.

First, my latest HD 7950 cards are from Sapphire, this time the dual-fan model with a stock clock of 925MHz on the cores. (As far as I can tell, that's the stock clock and not the Boost Clock.) They're available for $300 each, and they come with the Never Settle Reloaded bundle of Bioshock Infinite, Crysis 3, and Far Cry: Blood Dragon -- you can typically get close to $50 for the bundle via eBay. As I already have three other Radeon 7950 cards, you'd think I have a decent handle on settings by now, but I'm still tweaking and learning.

My main PC has a single 7950 in it, and I game occasionally on this system. I also use it to surf the web, email, write, etc. If you're not using a PC that's mining Litecoin, you can go for Intensity 20, but for a PC that you're actually trying to use for other things you'll never be able to use it properly with Intensity more than 13. So, I have two folders, with two different CGminer configuration files: one for when I'm not using the PC, and the other for when I'm working. The Intensity 13 version gets about 10-15% less hashing performance, but there's a catch: I'm using practically all of the GPU's 3GB of RAM! With a single thread, I get around 330kHash, but with two threads I'm at 510kHash. Here are the two cgminer.conf files I'm running on my "daily use" PC:

cgminer.conf Usable:

{
"pools" : [
{
"url" : "coinotron.com:3334",
"user" : "[USER].[WORKER]",
"pass" : "[PASS]"
},
{
"url" : "newlc.ozco.in:9332",
"user" : "[USER].[WORKER]",
"pass" : "[PASS]"
}
],

"intensity" : "13",
"vectors" : "1",
"worksize" : "256",
"lookup-gap" : "2",
"thread-concurrency" : "17920",
"shaders" : "1792",

"gpu-engine" : "900-1025",
"gpu-fan" : "40-100",
"gpu-memclock" : "1550",
"gpu-powertune" : "20",
"gpu-vddc" : "1.100",
"temp-cutoff" : "99",
"temp-overheat" : "95",
"temp-target" : "80",

"api-port" : "4028",
"expiry" : "120",
"failover-only" : true,
"gpu-threads" : "2",

"log" : "5",
"queue" : "1",
"scan-time" : "60",
"temp-hysteresis" : "3",

"scrypt" : true,
"kernel" : "scrypt",
"kernel-path" : "/usr/local/bin"
}

cgminer.conf High Hashing:

{
"pools" : [
{
"url" : "coinotron.com:3334",
"user" : "[USER].[WORKER]",
"pass" : "[PASS]"
},
{
"url" : "newlc.ozco.in:9332",
"user" : "[USER].[WORKER]",
"pass" : "[PASS]"
}
],

"intensity" : "20",
"vectors" : "1",
"worksize" : "256",
"lookup-gap" : "2",
"thread-concurrency" : "21712",
"shaders" : "1792",

"gpu-engine" : "900-1025",
"gpu-fan" : "40-100",
"gpu-memclock" : "1550",
"gpu-powertune" : "20",
"gpu-vddc" : "1.100",
"temp-cutoff" : "99",
"temp-overheat" : "95",
"temp-target" : "80",

"api-port" : "4028",
"expiry" : "120",
"failover-only" : true,
"gpu-threads" : "1",

"log" : "5",
"queue" : "1",
"scan-time" : "60",
"temp-hysteresis" : "3",

"scrypt" : true,
"kernel" : "scrypt",
"kernel-path" : "/usr/local/bin"
}

That might seem like a pretty simple configuration for some, but let me run through some of the specifics. First, the "Usable" configuration has thread-concurrency at 17920. I arrived at that number by trying different values until I could get cgminer to start; I think I'm hitting maximum RAM use perhaps, though maybe I could increase it slightly. Either way, it's not running much faster I don't think so I leave it alone. The second configuration file is basically what you often see recommended for Radeon 7950, but I usually see talk of 650+ kHash, which is only going to happen with some serious overclocking and tuning!

There's more to starting CGminer going than the above, however. First, nearly all of my 7950 cards have default voltages that are far too high to run reliably without water cooling, at least in my ~75F environment. The dual-fan Sapphire cards for instance all come set to 1.250V, but under mining load even at lower intensities I can hit 95C and higher on some of the cards. What's more, three of the cards at 1.250V running slightly overclocked settings consume 1000W and more from the outlet, with an 80 Plus Platinum PSU even. Wow! The trick for me has been undervolting and overclocking, which isn't what you'd immediately expect.

MSI Afterburner is a great little utility for overclocking and undervolting, but it doesn't work with all cards -- the dual-fan Sapphire cards for instance don't allow voltage adjustments with it. Sapphire has their own TRIXX utility that works with their cards, however, so that's what I used. Here are my standard settings for reasonably reliable operation:

Vcore: 1.100V
GPU Clock: 1025MHz
RAM Clock: 1550MHz (6200MHz effective)
PowerTune: +10 (or +20 -- this doesn't seem to matter much)

I've managed to use those settings successfully on six different Radeon HD 7950 cards now, so I'm pretty confident they'll work for most users (at least if you're in a decent climate -- if the room is above 85F, you'll probably have issues). Okay, that gives us the overclock/undervolt settings as well as CGminer settings, so we're done, right? Not quite!

The final step is launching CGminer properly. For that, I created a batch file (a sequence of commands for Windows to run). Since I have CGminer starting up with Windows, I had to play around a bit. MSI Afterburner (or Sapphire TRIXX) is set to load automatically and restore my clocks, but depending on the PC this can take 10-30 seconds before it's complete (more on a slower CPU/HDD). If CGminer launches before the clocks and voltage are set properly, there's a very good chance your PC will crash and require a hard reboot! The other lines are to ensure the thread-concurrency options work properly, and then to tell CGminer to automatically tune fan speed. Here's the batch file (paste this into "LaunchCGminer.bat"):

@echo off
set GPU_MAX_ALLOC_PERCENT=100
setx GPU_MAX_ALLOC_PERCENT 100
@ping 1.1.1.1 -n 1 -w 30000>nul
cgminer.exe --auto-fan --failover-only


Create a shortcut to that batch file and place it in C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\Programs\Startup and you should be set. But there are a few final items to mention! I have two different CGminer (currently 3.1.0) folders, one for high intensity and one for low intensity. There appears to be a bug with AMD's drivers or CGminer or something, with the result being that if I run CGminer, quit, run it again, quit, etc. then maybe on the third or fourth cycle I usually get a system crash. Ugh. So rebooting between runs is often required. Also, you'll want to close out of most other programs (especially your web browser!) before starting CGminer, as if it can't get enough VRAM it won't run properly. Oddly, after it's started and working well, you can start Firefox, Chrome, etc. without issue. Also also, if you run Photoshop, I suggest just exiting CGminer until you're done -- it's not worth the potential hassle, trust me!

I think that's it for now. Happy Litecoin mining! My latest build is named "Frankenmine" because it's sort of in a disassembled mess right now while I wait for a few more pieces to arrive (specifically the PCIe slot extenders). It's definitely not safe for kids to be around at this point in time! If there's interest, I can provide the cgminer.conf files for this as well, and I have some other stories to relate involving the joys of Linux. But for now, this is what I'm using to get ~1800kHash/sec:

As always, if you find this stuff useful, please feel free to kick a few digital pennies my way!

BTC: 1JSrAuxPUhD2rS6yYLiPPT6X8fvz7c7k1W
LTC: LXpEZcNJtikd263z7Ha3vrdYDcLU7hiKWv

Or if donating directly is too much, go play at the LTC4You faucet and typically win 0.04 LTC every hour. That's a free $1.20 for clicking a button and typing a captcha. :-)

Update: Need help? See my Toubeshooting Guide.

Bitcoins and Litecoins: How to Build a Mining Rig

Some of you might think the time is past for building Bitcoin miners, and perhaps you're right. With Avalon talking about open sourcing their ASIC and Butterfly Labs shipping "any day now", we could see a flood of hashing power coming online in the next couple of months. Of course, I suspect the time it will take to actually get a wafer made, cut, and distributed -- and then tested, assembled, and more testing -- is more likely to be another six months, unless the original creator lines up everything so that you just have to order one. In that case, it would probably only take three or four months to get your ASIC from China.

As for Butterfly Labs, the jury is still out on whether they're a scam, an unintentional ponzi, or just highly incompetent with a horrible public relations/customer support staff. I actually emailed them to see if they'd be interested in sending me a unit for review; no response to the email so far, which means they're likely completely understaffed, or they're trying not to let any reputable hardware sites do any coverage. The ponzi aspect is pretty easy to get, though: you offer preorders for an "amazing ASIC" that can hash at 60GH/s while drawing 60W. Eventually, that comes out as 25GH/s at 150W, but demand is so high that instead of fulfilling long-standing orders for the 1500GH/s rigs, you start by shipping a few of your lowest performance solutions (5GH/s).

So far, apparently four units have shipped out, one to a blogger, and naturally that results in a ton of new interest. $274 for a 5GH/s Jalepeno? SIGN ME UP! Except, the current wait time is at least two months according to some sources, and more likely it's two or three times that long -- and that's assuming you ever get the hardware. If I could get a firm deadline, like four months, even now I would be willing to fork over the $1100 or so for four of their Jalepenos. That would net me 20GH/s and use a whopping 120W, which is 4X my current hash rate in about 1/30 the power use, or approximately two orders of magnitude better in efficiency! But they're still unproven, so until I have $1000 around that I can afford to lose, I'm going to hold off.

Which brings me back to building a mining rig. Bitcoin mining with GPUs is still quite profitable. For example, a Radeon HD 7950 can run at about 500MH/s without too much effort, and it will draw about 250W for the system. At the current exchange rate of $137 per BTC, that works out to around $110-$125 per month in BTC with a power cost of around $18 per month. So let's just call it earnings of $100 per month, for a $300 graphics card. Right now, difficulty is increasing about 10% every two weeks, so if pricing stays static you'd make $90 on month two, $80 month three, and after four months you've more than paid for the hardware and as long as the difficulty doesn't get above 60 million or so you should still at least break even -- and in the winter months, you can deduct some of the power cost from your heating bill! :-)

Litecoins are a different story, as ASICs aren't available and may never become available. With a 7950 and a bit of tuning, you can readily get 550kHash/s out of a single 7950. At the current price of roughly $3.80, that works out to $155 per month, or $140 in net income. In less than three months, you could more than pay for a Litecoin mining rig, even in today's pseudo-ASIC Bitcoin landscape. And yes, recently I even put together another Litecoin mining rig for just such a purpose.

Here's what I used and recommend, keeping in mind that you ideally want a motherboard that supports as many GPUs as possible. That rules out AMD's Trinity (FM2) platform, as those motherboards only have two x16 slots as best, and given the price and power considerations I decided Intel was a better choice. There are some big Extended ATX board that support four or more x16 slots, but they're expensive at around $300 minimum, so I figured a solid ATX board was best.

3 x Gigabyte HD 7950 GPUs @ $310 each (the triple fans mean less noise)
3 x PCIe x16 extenders @ $5 each (so you can better separate the GPUs for cooling)
1 x ASUS P8Z77-V Motherboard @ 165 (supports 3 x16 slots and has WiFi)
1 x Kingwin Lazer Platinum 1000W PSU @ $180 (room to spare on power)
1 x Intel Celeron G1620 CPU @ $52 (no need for a fancy CPU)
1 x Mushkin 2x8GB DDR3-1600 RAM @ $98 (you could get 2x4GB, but this gives you room to spare)
1 x ADATA 60GB SSD @ $70 (you could get a slightly cheaper HDD, but you don't need a lot of storage and the SSD is faster booting, cooler running, and generally more desirable)

Now, here's the big question: where to store all the components. I can tell you from experience that having everything in a case just makes for hotter quarters, so if you don't mind going ghetto you can grab a plastic crate and store stuff in there. Otherwise, I'd suggest getting a really inexpensive case that you can dismantle a bit, since you want to spread out the GPUs to provide better cooling opportunities -- the Gigabyte case should work. If you want a "real" case, though, I'd get a full ATX tower, and Silverstone has some good options like the TEK SSI-CEB for $100. What about the OS? Well, get yourself a copy of Windows if you must, or get comfortable with Linux for free. I may see about doing a Linux configuration guide for Litecoin in the near future, once I've gotten familiar with the process, so stay tuned.

Grand Total: $1510
Expected Returns: $500 per month

Note that rate of return could go up or down depending on price and difficulty. I expect it should pay for itself within four months at most. There's more good news as well. The GPUs come with a game code good for three free games, which you can sell on eBay for typically $50 or so each. Second, even if Bitcoin and Litecoin become unprofitable for GPU mining at some point, you still have a very nice system -- well, the CPU is weak so you might want to upgrade to a Core i5-3570K or a Core i7-3770K. You should be able to sell such a system for at least $750, even if you only have one GPU in it -- $1000 would be reasonable with two GPUs.

So mine for as long as it's profitable, make a few upgrades, sell the hardware, and you could easily earn $5000 extra this year. That's my plan at least! And I'd seriously consider saving all of your Bitcoins and/or Litecoins for a while -- I could see Bitcoin hitting $1000 in the next few years, so at 2.5BTC per month, decreasing 10% each month, you'd end up with around 25 BTC by that time. Or if you hold LTC, you could have 1200 LTC by the end of a couple years, possibly more. At that point, sell them for $25 each and pay off all of your debt!

If you find this guide useful, I gladly accept donations:
BTC: 1JSrAuxPUhD2rS6yYLiPPT6X8fvz7c7k1W
LTC: LXpEZcNJtikd263z7Ha3vrdYDcLU7hiKWv

Update: Need help? See my Toubeshooting Guide.

TopPower Nano: When Is Gold Not Gold?

Okay, I admit it: I got duped! I was in the market for a good power supply to run my new Litecoin mining PC, so naturally I went to Newegg and searched for "80 Plus Gold" efficiency power supplies. As the PC currently has two high-end Radeon 7950 GPUs running full tilt (and I might add a third), I also wanted at least a 1000W power supply. A quick search at Newegg gets you these results. The TopPower 1000W is currently out of stock, most likely thanks to other unwitting purchasers like myself.

What really amazes me isn't that someone tried this -- it's that they so far have gotten away with it! Well, that or they changed the packaging? Anyway, check this out: TweakTown calls it an 80 Plus Gold, and so does HardOCP. It looks like the front of the box had an "80 Plus Gold" sticker for both reviews, but look at the back of the box (these are my photos, but the above reviews have the same image, more or less):

Okay, so now it gets interesting, right? The box says 80 Plus Bronze, but that's because the box is sort of made for all of the six PSUs in the same family. The front of the box is clearly different (it says 1000W), but that's just a sticker over the original label (most likely 700W). So the question is: is this an 80 Plus Gold or an 80 Plus Bronze?

To answer that, let's turn to the HardOCP review. Oh, what's that? It fails to reach 80 Plus Gold certification levels? Color me not surprised. They pretty much skewer the TopPower, and rightfully so (good job, [H]. It did better over at TweakTown, where it appears to actually meet the requirements. They gave it an award as well, based on the value proposition. So which is it, Bronze or Gold?

Unfortunately, in my book it's neither -- at least in terms of awards. I've read a few other reviews, and I've come to the conclusion that there's a good reason this is the least expensive 1000W "gold" power supply around: it's also one of the worst. Thankfully, even a bad "80 Plus Gold" is usually good enough, but hopefully I don't end up eating my words. You see, a PSU may not seem like a big deal -- it just supplies power, right? -- but if you end up with a PSU failing at some point, it can take out most of the rest of your PC as well.

If I had it to do over, I'd spend more to get a power supply with better reviews and a real 80 Plus Gold efficiency, like this KingWin. In fact, all things considered at that price I would just go whole hog and upgrade to 80 Plus Platinum, which once again lands me with KingWin, this time with the LZP-1000. The Platinum model even gets a JohnnyGuru Recommended award, which is about as good as you'll find.

In the meantime, my Liteminer PC is chugging along merrily at around 1100kHash/s from the combined GPUs. That should get me around 4-5 LTC per day, which works out to a mere $6.75-$8.50. You see, Litecoin (and Bitcoin) just took a tumble on pricing, to about half their former value. Still, with a power use of around 600W for Liteminer, that's about $1.50 per day in electricity, so $5-$7 in profit isn't terrible. It does mean that it might take a few more months to pay off the hardware in Liteminer, at least if I were selling my LTC.

You see, I did that before with BTC; I could have stocked up on roughly 1000BTC if I had just been patient, and that would have been worth more than my house just last week! It might take a while, but we've been here before and I expect BTC and LTC are both here to stay; now, it's only a matter of waiting for the pricing to get high enough! My current MtGox has a standing sell order in for the crazy eights: $888.88. I wonder how long it will take us to get there? I'm hoping before the end of 2014, as that will take care of all my debts and then some. :-)

BTC: 1JSrAuxPUhD2rS6yYLiPPT6X8fvz7c7k1W
LTC: LXpEZcNJtikd263z7Ha3vrdYDcLU7hiKWv

Bitcoin Breaks $100, Litecoin Rising As Well

A little known fact is that I started mining Bitcoins back in June of 2011 -- right around the height of the initial Bitcoin bubble. I had some spare hardware handy, read an article, and decided to give it a shot. After mining a couple coins in a couple days and selling them for over $20 each, I did some math and figured as long as the price stayed above $3 or so and difficulty wasn't too high, I could make a bit of extra money with Bitcoin.

My initial set of hardware allowed me to hit roughly 2000 MHash/sec, which was good for over 1 BTC per day. As the price came crashing down, eventually bottoming out at just under $2, many people quit Bitcoin and so with an improved 2500 Mhash/sec and an electricity cost of about $125 per month for the PCs I was mining with, I started seeing as many as 4-5 BTC mined per day. At $2 I was right around the break even point, and other than a week or two I kept mining. Sadly (for me), I kept selling the coins to pay for power and other bills, and I lost 80 BTC with the Bitcoinica disaster.

Last January, I watched the price go from $3 or so back into the $10+ range and suddenly I was clearly making a profit again. Hindsight is always 20/20, but I sure wish I had hoarded a few coins, because in the past two months BTC went from $20 to the current price of $135! Over the nearly two years I've been toying with Bitcoin, I figure I've mined in the neighborhood of 800 coins (primarily with the Deepbit.net mining pool, if you're wondering). Had I saved those coins rather than selling, I could have paid off all my debt and half of my house today!

So why this post, and why now? With custom ASICs coming online and the mining reward halving late last year, Bitcoin mining is becoming increasingly questionable on GPUs, and CPUs are totally out of the equation. But there are alternate cryptocurrencies, like Litecoin. Due to differences in the cryptography algorithms backing the currencies, ASICs aren't likely to touch Litecoin for a while, and it was designed to actually be more CPU mining friendly. So, now I've decided that while my high-end Bitcoin mining GPUs will continue in that realm for now, I'm going to see about mining some Litecoins with the lower end GPUs as well as my various CPUs.

What does that get me? At the current difficulty, a single quad-core Intel processor will manage somewhere in the neighborhood of 50 KHash/sec. That may not seem like much, but do a quick run over the LitecoinMiningCalculator.com and look at the reward estimates. A single CPU mining at 50 KHash/sec will get you nearly 10 LTC per month. With Litecoin now trading at over $4.00, that's $40 per month of potential income, with one of the worst ways of mining for LTC. (Doing Bitcoin, that same CPU would only manage about 15 MHash/sec, with a potential monthly income of around $5.)

Where does all this take me? First, I've started mining LTC now at around 500 KHash/sec, which means potential earnings of $400 or more per month. Second, my Bitcoin mining is now making me around $1100 per month, and currently rising. So, while I might sell a few coins here and there, my plan is to only sell enough to pay for power if needed, and just keep all the LTC and BTC I mine for the foreseeable future.

I thought a year ago that Bitcoin would never reach $20 again, let alone $50 or $100. Now, with the massive increase in public awareness over the past couple of weeks I'm thinking $1000 might not be all that crazy -- and that's a tame estimate compared to the bulls over on Bitcoin.org forums talking about $10K and more for a single Bitcoin! Meanwhile, I can see Litecoin potentially following a similar path, and even if it remains valued at 1/25 of Bitcoin it's actually currently more profitable to mine LTC with the prices we're seeing.

If you'd like to know more, or if you're a friend who lives nearby and would like to give Litecoin or Bitcoin mining a shot, I'd be happy to build you a potent mining rig. I talked with a friend last night about this and ran some numbers, and I figure $2000 for a system that could mine at around 1500-1600 KHash/sec (or MHash/sec if you do Bitcoin) is entirely possible. I think BTC mining is set to get even more difficult as more people start doing it, plus all the ASICs, so Litecoin looks to be the better long-term proposition. That $2000 PC would end up mining roughly 300LTC in the first month, which would be $1200. In less than two months it would pay for all the high-end hardware inside, at which point everything else is profit! (Bitcoin would be more like $500 per month, and less if/when the difficulty goes up.)

Okay, there's a TON of terms and phrases used above that I didn't bother to explain, but let's end this simply: cryptocurrencies have serious potential to outperform gold and silver, so long as we have the Internet. If you want help setting something up, drop me a note and I'll be happy to provide some input. I'll even accept payment in LTC if you want a "no risk" proposition! My plan is to have well over 1000LTC stored up by the end of the year, and if all goes well at some point down the road I'll have several thousand LTC that are each worth the $135+ Bitcoin is currently valued at.

I missed out on stockpiling BTC because I was too timid, but I'm not going to make the same mistake with LTC! So come join the fun, and if you find this useful then please donate to one of the following addresses:

BTC: 1JSrAuxPUhD2rS6yYLiPPT6X8fvz7c7k1W
LTC: LXpEZcNJtikd263z7Ha3vrdYDcLU7hiKWv