Transaction

4ba3c0f451f09d12794f33e45db73e1ea32c6473ed81f4e0feb2f4fabd41ba2a
Timestamp (utc)
2024-03-23 15:49:07
Fee Paid
0.00000013 BSV
(
0.02731986 BSV
-
0.02731973 BSV
)
Fee Rate
10.56 sat/KB
Version
1
Confirmations
98,283
Size Stats
1,230 B

2 Outputs

Total Output:
0.02731973 BSV
  • j"1LAnZuoQdcKCkpDBKQMCgziGMoPC4VQUckMÒ<div class="post"><div class="quoteheader"><a href="https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1007.msg12316#msg12316">Quote from: tcatm on September 09, 2010, 03:02:27 PM</a></div><div class="quote">You should benchmark all implementations (using cpu time, not realtime) and choose the fastest and while benchmarking check whether the algorithm actually works.<br/></div><br/>Yeah, while implementing the cuda hasher I thought about this. There should be an interface to the hashing handler (or even a full miner per implementation) and we should have a simple way of giving it a known block, ask it to hash 1000 nonces and compare the result, while benchmarking at the same time. Shouldn't be too hard to implement and would help when developing new algorithms.<br/><br/>The interface schema would also help if we were to plug in an fpga based engine or something of the kind, having specific entry points into the code without having to tweak on the default mining schema.</div> text/html
    https://whatsonchain.com/tx/4ba3c0f451f09d12794f33e45db73e1ea32c6473ed81f4e0feb2f4fabd41ba2a