Fuck those hoarders. I have around 100 which I bought and have been able to cpu mine 18 since yesterday, yet you don't see me begging for coins.

I agree, leave it to the community to donate or not.

I for one say no to paying to be on an exchange. (like I actually have any say in anything )

I was looking at Qubit on the list which has 5 hashes overlapping with DRK. Fastest cpu miners are developed by the same people that develop our DRK miner. This means that GPU acceleration is 100% possible in it by "downgrading" our sgminer and making it run the 5 hashes instead of 11. Some other cpu coins have overlapping hashes too which mean GPU acceleration for them too.

So here's an interesting note:

Core i7-4670K gets about 410KHash/s on DRK while using around 77W
R9 290X gets about 2000KHash/s on DRK while using around 225W (?)

Clearly the GPU is faster and more efficient, but we're only looking at a different of about 40%. Unless someone can get a speedup out of the GPU miners to the point where it's more like 1000% more efficient, CPU mining should remain viable. Just my two cents. :-)

What's more, if you were to throw an R9 290X at DRK and get 2MHash/s, you'll generate roughly 0.02 BTC per day. If you throw the same GPU at something like VTC, you'll generate roughly 0.02 BTC per day. And currently mining MAX (whether you like the ideas behind the coin or not!), you can get around 0.02 BTC per day. If tons of people shift to GPU mining DRK, difficulty will go up, rewards will go down, and suddenly one of the other alt-coins will be more profitable. I suspect we're going to see some big fluctuations in difficulty in the near term on DRK as people jump on and off the bandwagon.

All I know is that the temp has dropped 15 degress and now my 20m^2 shoe box of an apartment won't risk flying away as the space ship it is

Ok, here the link for the Windows binaries -> https://mega.co.nz/#!pBZzQAII!yuvzhcnx3ezLre9fek_G67D0_IyiNqIbEHKY4cKdovA
Read the README for choose the right version for your processor.
Remember, only Windows 64 bit, and only for processors that supports at least AES-NI instructions.


P.S. I hate and I still hate compiling binaries on MinGW, I spent 2 days to set a working crosscompiling environment for this.
The problem was that new versions of build of MinGW64 have a gcc that is hard linked with a new pthread library, called libwinpthread, that it's not good for compiling this... thanks to ig0tik3d for pointing to me the working version of MinGW64...

maybe phm help us to porting darkcoin gpuminer on qubitcoin gpuminer))
p.s. if i dont wrong, the same part hashes is in quarkcoin, sifcoin and others forks of this coins...

Ok, but we have to compare with total wattage right?
4xR9 -> 900W/4= 225W, 2000khs/225 = 8.88 kh/sec for Watt
i7-4670k -> 77w, 410Khs/77 = 5.32 kh/sec for Watt

Surely then, it's easier a rig of GPUs than a rig of CPUs. But this for now it's a 30% improvement for Watt, depending on what CPUs and what GPUs.
So I want to see if there is a 30% margin to improve the cpu miner.

Let me know if you and the others think that I am wrong about something...

Yes, you are wrong again, because you didn't include total PC wattage in CPU calculations, just CPU wattage. I bet PC eats at least 200 W when running, so it would be 410Khs/200 = 2.05 kh/s per watt. Now CPU looks even worse.