diff --git a/app/igneum-app/tiers/class-v5-tiers.json b/app/igneum-app/tiers/class-v5-tiers.json index 5827e9b55..612accda4 100644 --- a/app/igneum-app/tiers/class-v5-tiers.json +++ b/app/igneum-app/tiers/class-v5-tiers.json @@ -92,10 +92,10 @@ "memory_gb": 16, "label": "measured", "stock": { - "mhs": 71.41, - "w": 253.1, - "uj": 3.54, - "class": "v4" + "mhs": 71.35, + "w": 248.0, + "uj": 3.48, + "class": "v5" }, "tiers": [ { @@ -132,16 +132,16 @@ "power_pct": 100, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 360, - "mhs": 71.41, - "w": 253.1, - "mhw": 0.2821, + "mhs": 71.35, + "w": 248.0, + "mhw": 0.2877, "source": "stock", "label": "measured", - "uj": 3.54, - "note": "PC 1 (Windows) stock; a rented Linux host read 143.4 W at the same rate on class v3 against 169.7 W here: the two methods differ and neither is corrected" + "uj": 3.48, + "note": "class v5 measured on a Vast 5080 (13:49 UK): 71.35 MH/s at 248.0 W (3.48, 39 samples, SM 2,769, memory 14,801); class v3 71.16 at 159.4 W on the same host; PC 1 read class v4 71.41 at 253.1 W: the three agree within 3 percent on this card; stock, lock owed on the rented host" } ], - "src": "docs/bench-log.md, the RTX 5080 ladder, 8 October 2026 00:45 to 01:54 UTC (PC 1)" + "src": "~/igneum-fleet/cardbench/rows.jsonl, the denominator sweep (2026-10-08-denominator-v5, class v5 kit, 200 batches of 2^24 under the 1 Hz sampler, 13:4x to 13:5x UK); stock, lock owed" }, { "card": "NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti", @@ -200,7 +200,7 @@ "source": "stock", "label": "measured", "uj": 2.84, - "note": "rented pod 8 October 10:09Z: class v3 78.69 MH/s at 140.8 W, class v4 78.78 at 224.0 W" + "note": "rented pod 8 October 10:09Z: class v3 78.69 MH/s at 140.8 W, class v4 78.78 at 224.0 W; the class v5 sweep rented this card twice (14:08 and 14:13 UK) and neither host ever accepted the fleet key" } ], "src": "docs/design/class-v6-rotating-family.md section 0 (the 5070 Ti column); the knee modelled on the 5080 and 5090 ladders" @@ -261,7 +261,7 @@ "source": "stock", "label": "measured", "uj": 2.99, - "note": "rented v4watts pod 8 October; the 7 October pod read class v3 52.0 MH/s at 102.8 W (the rate differs by host)" + "note": "rented v4watts pod 8 October; the 7 October pod read class v3 52.0 MH/s at 102.8 W (the rate differs by host); the class v5 sweep rented this card twice (14:08 and 14:13 UK) and neither host ever accepted the fleet key" } ], "src": "~/igneum-fleet/cardbench/rows.jsonl, the 8 October v4watts rows" @@ -277,10 +277,10 @@ "memory_gb": 16, "label": "estimated", "stock": { - "mhs": 30.9, - "w": 114.8, - "uj": 3.72, - "class": "v4" + "mhs": 30.84, + "w": 123.9, + "uj": 4.02, + "class": "v5" }, "tiers": [ { @@ -289,13 +289,13 @@ "power_pct": 100, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 180, - "mhs": 30.9, - "w": 72.0, - "mhw": 0.4292, + "mhs": 30.84, + "w": 72.7, + "mhw": 0.4243, "source": "measured", "label": "estimated", - "uj": 2.33, - "note": "the Blackwell shape on the PC 2 stock row: band 2.2 to 2.6; the card-in job on PC 2 measures the ladder" + "uj": 2.36, + "note": "the Blackwell shape on the PC 2 stock row: band 2.2 to 2.6; re-based on the measured class v5 stock row of 13:5x UK (the architecture's shape on the measured v3 draw and the measured premium)" }, { "id": "balanced", @@ -303,12 +303,12 @@ "power_pct": 100, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 180, - "mhs": 30.9, - "w": 78.0, - "mhw": 0.3962, + "mhs": 30.84, + "w": 80.5, + "mhw": 0.3829, "source": "measured", "label": "estimated", - "uj": 2.57, + "uj": 2.61, "note": "one rung above the efficiency point" }, { @@ -317,16 +317,16 @@ "power_pct": 100, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 180, - "mhs": 30.9, - "w": 114.8, - "mhw": 0.2692, + "mhs": 30.84, + "w": 123.9, + "mhw": 0.2489, "source": "stock", "label": "measured", - "uj": 3.72, - "note": "PC 2, the Thunderbolt enclosure, 7 October: 30.9 MH/s over 10 minutes at 114.8 W (class v4 sub-version 1)" + "uj": 4.02, + "note": "class v5 measured on a Vast 5060 Ti (13:5x UK): 30.84 MH/s at 123.9 W (4.02, 96 samples, SM 2,835); class v3 30.75 at 82.6 W on the same host; PC 2's enclosure row read class v4 30.9 at 114.8 W; stock, lock owed" } ], - "src": "docs/bench-log.md, the RTX 5060 Ti entry, 7 October 2026" + "src": "~/igneum-fleet/cardbench/rows.jsonl, the denominator sweep (2026-10-08-denominator-v5, class v5 kit, 200 batches of 2^24 under the 1 Hz sampler, 13:4x to 13:5x UK); stock, lock owed" }, { "card": "NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060", @@ -338,10 +338,10 @@ "memory_gb": 8, "label": "estimated", "stock": { - "mhs": 31.27, - "w": 110.0, - "uj": 3.52, - "class": "v4" + "mhs": 30.8, + "w": 115.7, + "uj": 3.76, + "class": "v5" }, "tiers": [ { @@ -350,13 +350,13 @@ "power_pct": 100, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 145, - "mhs": 31.27, - "w": 67.0, - "mhw": 0.4667, + "mhs": 30.8, + "w": 68.1, + "mhw": 0.4523, "source": "measured", "label": "estimated", - "uj": 2.15, - "note": "class v3 measured 31.27 MH/s at 75.4 W; the class v4 stock and the knee by the Blackwell shape: band 2.0 to 2.5" + "uj": 2.21, + "note": "class v3 measured 31.27 MH/s at 75.4 W; re-based on the measured class v5 stock row of 13:5x UK (the architecture's shape on the measured v3 draw and the measured premium)" }, { "id": "balanced", @@ -364,12 +364,12 @@ "power_pct": 100, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 145, - "mhs": 31.27, - "w": 72.0, - "mhw": 0.4343, + "mhs": 30.8, + "w": 75.5, + "mhw": 0.4082, "source": "measured", "label": "estimated", - "uj": 2.3, + "uj": 2.45, "note": "one rung above the efficiency point" }, { @@ -378,16 +378,16 @@ "power_pct": 100, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 145, - "mhs": 31.27, - "w": 110.0, - "mhw": 0.2843, + "mhs": 30.8, + "w": 115.7, + "mhw": 0.2662, "source": "stock", - "label": "estimated", - "uj": 3.52, - "note": "class v4 stock modelled from the measured class v3 row plus the Blackwell premium per op" + "label": "measured", + "uj": 3.76, + "note": "class v5 measured (13:51 UK): 30.80 MH/s at 115.7 W (3.76, 99 samples, SM 2,715, memory 13,801); class v3 30.76 at 78.8 W on the same host (the shadow +37 W = 12 pJ per op); stock, lock owed" } ], - "src": "~/igneum-fleet/cardbench/rows.jsonl, 7 October (class v3); the class v4 row owed to the denominator sweep" + "src": "~/igneum-fleet/cardbench/rows.jsonl, the denominator sweep (2026-10-08-denominator-v5, class v5 kit, 200 batches of 2^24 under the 1 Hz sampler, 13:4x to 13:5x UK); stock, lock owed" }, { "card": "NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090", @@ -399,9 +399,9 @@ "memory_gb": 24, "label": "estimated", "stock": { - "mhs": 63.0, - "w": 280.0, - "uj": 4.44, + "mhs": 70.63, + "w": 353.5, + "uj": 5.0, "class": "v4" }, "tiers": [ @@ -411,13 +411,13 @@ "power_pct": 60, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 450, - "mhs": 63.0, - "w": 210.0, - "mhw": 0.3, + "mhs": 70.63, + "w": 252.5, + "mhw": 0.2797, "source": "measured", "label": "estimated", - "uj": 3.4, - "note": "the Ada shape (the 4070's measured tune: v3 x0.72, the premium x0.7): band 3.0 to 3.8; the class v5 kit read 62.76 MH/s on a rented 4090 with the watts unread" + "uj": 3.58, + "note": "the Ada shape (the 4070's measured tune: v3 x0.72, the premium x0.7) on the measured stock rows (class v3 253.4 W, class v4 353.5 W, floor lane 1, 8 October): band 3.3 to 4.0; re-based on the measured class v5 stock row of 13:5x UK (the architecture's shape on the measured v3 draw and the measured premium)" }, { "id": "balanced", @@ -425,12 +425,12 @@ "power_pct": 80, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 450, - "mhs": 63.0, - "w": 235.0, - "mhw": 0.2681, + "mhs": 70.63, + "w": 282.8, + "mhw": 0.2498, "source": "measured", "label": "estimated", - "uj": 3.73, + "uj": 4.0, "note": "the Ada prior (a cap holds the rate until the SM clock falls under about 2,400 MHz)" }, { @@ -439,16 +439,16 @@ "power_pct": 100, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 450, - "mhs": 63.0, - "w": 280.0, - "mhw": 0.225, + "mhs": 70.63, + "w": 353.5, + "mhw": 0.1998, "source": "stock", - "label": "estimated", - "uj": 4.44, - "note": "the 0.3.12 rented row 52.25 MH/s at 183.1 W and the rig's 57.4 at 205 W were an earlier class; the class v4 stock row is owed to the denominator sweep" + "label": "measured", + "uj": 5.0, + "note": "floor lane 1's rented 4090 at a 450 W limit: class v3 70.63 MH/s at 253.4 W (3.59), class v4 70.63 at 353.5 W (5.0); the denominator sweep's Vast 4090 carried a 250 W host limit: class v5 62.68 at 249.9 W (3.99, the SM at 2,579 MHz) and class v3 62.40 at 200.5 W, so a 250 W cap held 89 percent of the rate at 71 percent of the draw (an Ada cap row measured); stock, lock owed" } ], - "src": "docs/analysis/prover-tiers-real-cards.md (6 October); ~/igneum-fleet/cv5-results.txt (the class v5 kit on a 4090)" + "src": "~/igneum-fleet/cardbench/rows.jsonl, the denominator sweep (2026-10-08-denominator-v5, class v5 kit, 200 batches of 2^24 under the 1 Hz sampler, 13:4x to 13:5x UK); stock, lock owed" }, { "card": "NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080", @@ -460,10 +460,10 @@ "memory_gb": 16, "label": "estimated", "stock": { - "mhs": 40.74, - "w": 185.6, - "uj": 4.56, - "class": "v4" + "mhs": 40.8, + "w": 200.7, + "uj": 4.92, + "class": "v5" }, "tiers": [ { @@ -472,13 +472,13 @@ "power_pct": 60, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 320, - "mhs": 40.7, - "w": 133.0, - "mhw": 0.3068, + "mhs": 40.8, + "w": 143.3, + "mhw": 0.2847, "source": "measured", "label": "estimated", - "uj": 3.33, - "note": "the Ada shape on the measured stock rows (class v3 128.6 W, class v4 185.6 W): band 3.1 to 3.7; the 4080 Super reads the same (134.9 / 195.7 W at 42.6 MH/s)" + "uj": 3.51, + "note": "the Ada shape on the measured stock rows (class v3 128.6 W, class v4 185.6 W): band 3.1 to 3.7; re-based on the measured class v5 stock row of 13:5x UK (the architecture's shape on the measured v3 draw and the measured premium)" }, { "id": "balanced", @@ -486,12 +486,12 @@ "power_pct": 80, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 320, - "mhs": 40.74, - "w": 150.0, - "mhw": 0.2716, + "mhs": 40.8, + "w": 160.6, + "mhw": 0.2541, "source": "measured", "label": "estimated", - "uj": 3.68, + "uj": 3.94, "note": "the Ada prior" }, { @@ -500,16 +500,16 @@ "power_pct": 100, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 320, - "mhs": 40.74, - "w": 185.6, - "mhw": 0.2195, + "mhs": 40.8, + "w": 200.7, + "mhw": 0.2033, "source": "stock", "label": "measured", - "uj": 4.56, - "note": "rented pods 8 October (class v3 and the v4watts row)" + "uj": 4.92, + "note": "class v5 measured (13:50 UK): 40.80 MH/s at 200.7 W (4.92, 72 samples, SM 2,760); class v3 40.69 at 141.5 W on the same host; the v4watts pod read class v4 40.74 at 185.6 W; stock, lock owed" } ], - "src": "~/igneum-fleet/cardbench/rows.jsonl, 8 October" + "src": "~/igneum-fleet/cardbench/rows.jsonl, the denominator sweep (2026-10-08-denominator-v5, class v5 kit, 200 batches of 2^24 under the 1 Hz sampler, 13:4x to 13:5x UK); stock, lock owed" }, { "card": "NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070", @@ -521,10 +521,10 @@ "memory_gb": 12, "label": "measured", "stock": { - "mhs": 28.7, - "w": 102.7, - "uj": 3.58, - "class": "v3" + "mhs": 28.43, + "w": 165.5, + "uj": 5.82, + "class": "v5" }, "tiers": [ { @@ -534,11 +534,11 @@ "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 200, "mhs": 31.08, - "w": 109.0, - "mhw": 0.2851, + "w": 111.2, + "mhw": 0.2795, "source": "measured", "label": "measured", - "uj": 3.51, + "uj": 3.58, "note": "Ember run 6's tune point (1,863 MHz at 50 percent) under class v4 (sh256x27): 31.08 MH/s at 109.0 W, +30 W over class v3 at the same point for no rate; class v5 about 3.58; the ladder below 1,860 under class v4 is owed (band 3.2 to 3.6)" }, { @@ -548,11 +548,11 @@ "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 200, "mhs": 31.1, - "w": 111.0, - "mhw": 0.2802, + "w": 112.0, + "mhw": 0.2777, "source": "measured", "label": "estimated", - "uj": 3.57, + "uj": 3.6, "note": "Ember run 6's 2,173 MHz rung (77.7 W on class v3) plus the measured 30 W class v4 premium" }, { @@ -561,13 +561,13 @@ "power_pct": 100, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 200, - "mhs": 28.72, - "w": 106.0, - "mhw": 0.2709, + "mhs": 28.43, + "w": 165.5, + "mhw": 0.1718, "source": "stock", "label": "measured", - "uj": 3.69, - "note": "Ember run 6 stock on class v3 (28.72 MH/s at 106.0 W); the bench-log 5 October row 28.7 at 102.7 W (3.58)" + "uj": 5.82, + "note": "class v5 measured on a Vast 4070 (13:54 UK): 28.43 MH/s at 165.5 W (5.82, 108 samples, SM 2,820, memory 9,801, a 210 W host limit not binding); class v3 28.40 at 116.3 W on the same host (the shadow +49 W = 17 pJ per op at the stock clock); Ember run 6's PC 1 stock on class v3 read 28.72 at 106.0 W; the tune point (1,860 MHz, 50 percent) under class v4 measured 31.08 at 109.0 W (3.51), so the lock takes 34 percent of this card's class v5 draw for no rate" } ], "src": "docs/plans/counter-asic-3-status.md item 8 (the 4070 rows, 6 October); docs/bench-log.md Ember run 6" @@ -645,10 +645,10 @@ "memory_gb": 16, "label": "estimated", "stock": { - "mhs": 20.1, - "w": 102.3, - "uj": 5.09, - "class": "v4" + "mhs": 18.75, + "w": 99.8, + "uj": 5.32, + "class": "v5" }, "tiers": [ { @@ -657,13 +657,13 @@ "power_pct": 60, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 165, - "mhs": 20.1, - "w": 73.0, - "mhw": 0.2753, + "mhs": 18.75, + "w": 71.4, + "mhw": 0.2625, "source": "measured", "label": "estimated", - "uj": 3.7, - "note": "the Ada shape on the measured stock rows (class v3 79.2 W, class v4 102.3 W); the 8 GB card reads the same on class v3 (20.10 MH/s at 77.5 W)" + "uj": 3.81, + "note": "the Ada shape (the 4070's measured tune: v3 x0.72, the premium x0.7) on the measured class v5 stock row; band 3.5 to 4.2" }, { "id": "balanced", @@ -671,12 +671,12 @@ "power_pct": 80, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 165, - "mhs": 20.1, - "w": 82.0, - "mhw": 0.2451, + "mhs": 18.75, + "w": 79.8, + "mhw": 0.2348, "source": "measured", "label": "estimated", - "uj": 4.16, + "uj": 4.26, "note": "the Ada prior" }, { @@ -685,16 +685,16 @@ "power_pct": 100, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 165, - "mhs": 20.1, - "w": 102.3, - "mhw": 0.1965, + "mhs": 18.75, + "w": 99.8, + "mhw": 0.1879, "source": "stock", "label": "measured", - "uj": 5.09, - "note": "rented pods 7 and 8 October" + "uj": 5.32, + "note": "class v5 measured on a Vast 4060 Ti (14:27 UK): 18.75 MH/s at 99.8 W (5.32) under a 140 W host limit; class v3 18.74 at 79.1 W on the same host (the shadow +21 W = 11 pJ per op; this host read 7 percent under the 7 October pod's 20.10 MH/s); the v4watts pod read class v4 20.10 at 102.3 W (5.09); stock, lock owed" } ], - "src": "~/igneum-fleet/cardbench/rows.jsonl, 7 and 8 October" + "src": "~/igneum-fleet/cardbench/rows.jsonl, the denominator sweep (2026-10-08-denominator-v5); stock, lock owed" }, { "card": "NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060", @@ -767,10 +767,10 @@ "memory_gb": 24, "label": "estimated", "stock": { - "mhs": 50.0, - "w": 360.0, - "uj": 7.2, - "class": "v4" + "mhs": 61.49, + "w": 309.4, + "uj": 5.03, + "class": "v5" }, "tiers": [ { @@ -779,13 +779,13 @@ "power_pct": 80, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 350, - "mhs": 50.0, - "w": 320.0, - "mhw": 0.1563, + "mhs": 61.0, + "w": 275.0, + "mhw": 0.2218, "source": "measured", "label": "estimated", - "uj": 6.4, - "note": "the Ampere lever is the power cap and small: the knee sits near 1,800 MHz against a 1,900 to 2,000 MHz stock clock (10 to 15 percent of the draw); a cap that takes the SM under 1,800 costs rate (the 3080 Ti at 63 percent lost 24 to 28 percent); the 3090 Ti read class v3 61.95 MH/s at 249.5 W (4.03)" + "uj": 4.51, + "note": "the Ampere cap lever (10 to 15 percent of the draw; a cap that takes the SM under 1,800 MHz costs rate) on the measured class v5 stock row; the 3090 Ti read class v3 61.95 MH/s at 249.5 W (4.03)" }, { "id": "balanced", @@ -793,12 +793,12 @@ "power_pct": 90, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 350, - "mhs": 50.0, - "w": 340.0, - "mhw": 0.1471, + "mhs": 61.49, + "w": 290.0, + "mhw": 0.212, "source": "measured", "label": "estimated", - "uj": 6.8, + "uj": 4.72, "note": "one power rung under stock, no lock" }, { @@ -807,16 +807,16 @@ "power_pct": 100, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 350, - "mhs": 50.0, - "w": 360.0, - "mhw": 0.1389, + "mhs": 61.49, + "w": 309.4, + "mhw": 0.1987, "source": "stock", - "label": "estimated", - "uj": 7.2, - "note": "the 0.3.12 rented row 37.79 MH/s at 228.8 W was an earlier class; the standing voters read 42 to 50 MH/s; the class v3 and v4 stock rows are owed to the denominator sweep" + "label": "measured", + "uj": 5.03, + "note": "the denominator sweep, RunPod, 8 October 13:25 UK: class v3 60.01 MH/s at 294.6 W (4.91), class v5 61.49 at 309.4 W (5.03, 46 samples, SM 1,673 MHz, memory 9,501); the class v5 premium on this card 5 percent at stock; stock, lock owed (the host refused -lgc and -lmc)" } ], - "src": "docs/analysis/prover-tiers-real-cards.md; site/miner-bench.json; the sweep pending" + "src": "~/igneum-fleet/cardbench/rows.jsonl, the denominator sweep 8 October (sweep 2026-10-08-denominator-v5)" }, { "card": "NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080", @@ -828,10 +828,10 @@ "memory_gb": 10, "label": "estimated", "stock": { - "mhs": 42.0, - "w": 270.0, - "uj": 6.43, - "class": "v4" + "mhs": 50.71, + "w": 230.0, + "uj": 4.54, + "class": "v5 (modelled watts: the host's 170 W limit bound)" }, "tiers": [ { @@ -840,13 +840,13 @@ "power_pct": 80, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 320, - "mhs": 42.0, - "w": 240.0, - "mhw": 0.175, + "mhs": 50.0, + "w": 210.0, + "mhw": 0.2381, "source": "measured", "label": "estimated", - "uj": 5.7, - "note": "the Ampere cap lever (10 to 15 percent); the 3080 Ti measured class v3 58.9 MH/s at 293.5 W (4.98) and, at a 220 W host cap with the SM at 749 MHz, class v4 42.6 at 216 W (5.08) with 28 percent of the rate lost: the Ampere cap's known-failed row" + "uj": 4.2, + "note": "the Ampere cap lever (10 percent, no lower: a 170 W cap took 34 percent of the class v5 rate on this card, a 180 W cap 11 percent)" }, { "id": "balanced", @@ -854,12 +854,12 @@ "power_pct": 90, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 320, - "mhs": 42.0, - "w": 255.0, - "mhw": 0.1647, + "mhs": 50.71, + "w": 220.0, + "mhw": 0.2305, "source": "measured", "label": "estimated", - "uj": 6.07, + "uj": 4.34, "note": "one power rung under stock" }, { @@ -868,16 +868,16 @@ "power_pct": 100, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 320, - "mhs": 42.0, - "w": 270.0, - "mhw": 0.1556, + "mhs": 50.71, + "w": 230.0, + "mhw": 0.2205, "source": "stock", "label": "estimated", - "uj": 6.43, - "note": "the 0.3.12 rented row 40.82 MH/s at 204.9 W was an earlier class; the class v3 and v4 stock rows are owed to the denominator sweep" + "uj": 4.54, + "note": "the sweep's two 3080 hosts both carried a limit under the class v5 draw: at 170 W class v3 50.71 MH/s at 169.2 W (3.34) held the rate and class v5 fell to 33.37 MH/s at 169.9 W (5.09) with the SM at 689 MHz; at 180 W class v3 49.83 at 177.8 W and class v5 44.31; the uncapped class v5 stock by the 3080 Ti's +30 percent: about 230 W (4.54); the Ampere cap under the shadow costs rate one for one: measured twice" } ], - "src": "docs/analysis/prover-tiers-real-cards.md; ~/igneum-fleet/cardbench/rows.jsonl (the 3080 Ti rows); the sweep pending" + "src": "~/igneum-fleet/cardbench/rows.jsonl, the denominator sweep (2026-10-08-denominator-v5, class v5 kit, 200 batches of 2^24 under the 1 Hz sampler, 13:4x to 13:5x UK); stock, lock owed" }, { "card": "NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070", @@ -935,7 +935,7 @@ "source": "stock", "label": "measured", "uj": 5.29, - "note": "rented pods 8 October" + "note": "rented pods 8 October; the class v5 sweep's two 3070 hosts closed the connection mid-bench" } ], "src": "~/igneum-fleet/cardbench/rows.jsonl, 8 October" @@ -950,10 +950,10 @@ "memory_gb": 12, "label": "estimated", "stock": { - "mhs": 26.89, - "w": 145.0, - "uj": 5.39, - "class": "v4" + "mhs": 26.53, + "w": 169.8, + "uj": 6.4, + "class": "v5" }, "tiers": [ { @@ -962,13 +962,13 @@ "power_pct": 80, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 170, - "mhs": 26.89, - "w": 132.0, - "mhw": 0.2037, + "mhs": 26.5, + "w": 153.0, + "mhw": 0.1732, "source": "measured", "label": "estimated", - "uj": 4.9, - "note": "class v3 measured 26.89 MH/s at 111.6 W; the class v4 stock by the Ampere premium; the 3060 Ti at a 130 W host cap held 33.06 MH/s at 128.7 W under class v4 (3.89): a cap row measured on a sibling" + "uj": 5.77, + "note": "the Ampere cap lever (10 percent) on the measured class v4 stock row; the 3060 Ti at a 130 W host cap held 33.06 MH/s at 128.7 W under class v4 (3.89): a cap row measured on a sibling" }, { "id": "balanced", @@ -976,12 +976,12 @@ "power_pct": 90, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 170, - "mhs": 26.89, - "w": 138.0, - "mhw": 0.1949, + "mhs": 26.53, + "w": 161.0, + "mhw": 0.1648, "source": "measured", "label": "estimated", - "uj": 5.13, + "uj": 6.07, "note": "one power rung under stock" }, { @@ -990,16 +990,16 @@ "power_pct": 100, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 170, - "mhs": 26.89, - "w": 145.0, - "mhw": 0.1854, + "mhs": 26.53, + "w": 169.8, + "mhw": 0.1562, "source": "stock", - "label": "estimated", - "uj": 5.39, - "note": "the class v4 stock row is owed to the denominator sweep" + "label": "measured", + "uj": 6.4, + "note": "class v5 measured on a Vast 3060 (13:53 UK): 26.53 MH/s at 169.8 W (6.40) at the host's 170 W limit (the limit binding: the class v4 pod read 26.89 at 166.1 W, 6.18); class v3 26.53 at 120.4 W on the same host; stock, lock owed" } ], - "src": "~/igneum-fleet/cardbench/rows.jsonl, 7 October (class v3); the sweep pending" + "src": "~/igneum-fleet/cardbench/rows.jsonl, the denominator sweep (2026-10-08-denominator-v5); stock, lock owed" }, { "card": "AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT", @@ -1352,10 +1352,10 @@ "memory_gb": 80, "label": "estimated", "stock": { - "mhs": 250.6, - "w": 695.1, - "uj": 2.77, - "class": "v4" + "mhs": 241.3, + "w": 621.6, + "uj": 2.58, + "class": "v5" }, "tiers": [ { @@ -1370,7 +1370,7 @@ "source": "measured", "label": "estimated", "uj": 2.0, - "note": "the premium 283 W at stock (11.2 pJ per op); a lock on an owned host (Hopper at 1,980 MHz boost, HBM3-bound): band 1.9 to 2.4; rented hosts refuse -lgc" + "note": "the premium 240 to 280 W at stock says half of it is the clock; a lock on an owned host (Hopper at 1,980 MHz boost, HBM3-bound): about 500 W (2.0); band 1.9 to 2.4; rented hosts refuse -lgc" }, { "id": "balanced", @@ -1392,13 +1392,13 @@ "power_pct": 100, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 700, - "mhs": 250.6, - "w": 695.1, - "mhw": 0.3605, + "mhs": 241.3, + "w": 621.6, + "mhw": 0.3882, "source": "stock", "label": "measured", - "uj": 2.77, - "note": "rented pods 7 and 8 October (class v3 248.9 MH/s at 411.7 W; class v4 250.6 at 695.1 W)" + "uj": 2.58, + "note": "the denominator sweep, RunPod, 13:25 UK: class v3 252.96 MH/s at 382.4 W (1.51), class v5 241.34 at 621.6 W (2.58, 7 samples, the SM throttled to 1,590 MHz under the 700 W cap); the 7 and 8 October pods read class v4 250.6 at 695.1 W (2.77); -lmc answered 'use --lock-memory-clocks-deferred' and the memory clock stayed 2,619; stock, lock owed" } ], "src": "~/igneum-fleet/cardbench/rows.jsonl, 8 October" @@ -1413,10 +1413,10 @@ "memory_gb": 48, "label": "estimated", "stock": { - "mhs": 56.4, - "w": 277.6, - "uj": 4.92, - "class": "v4" + "mhs": 56.49, + "w": 298.7, + "uj": 5.29, + "class": "v5" }, "tiers": [ { @@ -1425,13 +1425,13 @@ "power_pct": 60, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 350, - "mhs": 56.4, - "w": 198.0, - "mhw": 0.2848, + "mhs": 56.49, + "w": 213.5, + "mhw": 0.2646, "source": "measured", "label": "estimated", - "uj": 3.5, - "note": "the Ada shape on the measured stock rows (class v3 220.7 W, class v4 277.6 W)" + "uj": 3.78, + "note": "the Ada shape on the measured stock rows (class v3 220.7 W, class v4 277.6 W); re-based on the measured class v5 stock row of 13:5x UK (the architecture's shape on the measured v3 draw and the measured premium)" }, { "id": "balanced", @@ -1439,12 +1439,12 @@ "power_pct": 80, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 350, - "mhs": 56.4, - "w": 225.0, - "mhw": 0.2507, + "mhs": 56.49, + "w": 239.0, + "mhw": 0.2364, "source": "measured", "label": "estimated", - "uj": 3.99, + "uj": 4.23, "note": "the Ada prior" }, { @@ -1453,16 +1453,16 @@ "power_pct": 100, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 350, - "mhs": 56.4, - "w": 277.6, - "mhw": 0.2032, + "mhs": 56.49, + "w": 298.7, + "mhw": 0.1891, "source": "stock", "label": "measured", - "uj": 4.92, - "note": "rented pods 8 October" + "uj": 5.29, + "note": "class v5 measured (13:49 UK): 56.49 MH/s at 298.7 W (5.29, 46 samples, SM 2,520); class v3 56.35 at 221.5 W on the same host; the v4watts pod read class v4 56.4 at 277.6 W; stock, lock owed" } ], - "src": "~/igneum-fleet/cardbench/rows.jsonl, 8 October" + "src": "~/igneum-fleet/cardbench/rows.jsonl, the denominator sweep (2026-10-08-denominator-v5, class v5 kit, 200 batches of 2^24 under the 1 Hz sampler, 13:4x to 13:5x UK); stock, lock owed" }, { "card": "NVIDIA A100-SXM4-80GB", @@ -1474,10 +1474,10 @@ "memory_gb": 80, "label": "estimated", "stock": { - "mhs": 138.0, - "w": 489.3, - "uj": 3.54, - "class": "v4" + "mhs": 133.1, + "w": 398.1, + "uj": 2.99, + "class": "v5" }, "tiers": [ { @@ -1486,13 +1486,13 @@ "power_pct": 80, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 400, - "mhs": 138.0, - "w": 430.0, - "mhw": 0.3209, + "mhs": 133.0, + "w": 385.0, + "mhw": 0.3455, "source": "measured", "label": "estimated", - "uj": 3.1, - "note": "the premium 221 W at stock (15.8 pJ per op, the dearest ALU in the record); the card already runs at 1,410 MHz, so a cap recovers about 60 W" + "uj": 2.89, + "note": "the card already runs at 1,410 MHz and the 400 W host limit binds under class v5 (SM clock gives); a cap under it costs rate on Ampere, so the floor is within 5 percent of the measured stock row" }, { "id": "balanced", @@ -1500,12 +1500,12 @@ "power_pct": 90, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 400, - "mhs": 138.0, - "w": 460.0, - "mhw": 0.3, + "mhs": 133.1, + "w": 392.0, + "mhw": 0.3396, "source": "measured", "label": "estimated", - "uj": 3.33, + "uj": 2.95, "note": "one power rung under stock" }, { @@ -1514,13 +1514,13 @@ "power_pct": 100, "mem_mhz": 0, "limit_w": 400, - "mhs": 138.0, - "w": 489.3, - "mhw": 0.282, + "mhs": 133.1, + "w": 398.1, + "mhw": 0.3343, "source": "stock", "label": "measured", - "uj": 3.54, - "note": "rented pods 8 October (class v3 138.3 MH/s at 268.6 W; class v4 138.0 at 489.3 W on a 500 W host limit)" + "uj": 2.99, + "note": "the denominator sweep, RunPod, 13:24 UK: class v3 138.06 MH/s at 294.9 W (2.14), class v5 133.11 at 398.1 W (2.99, 19 samples, at the host's 400 W limit, memory 1,593 MHz); the v4watts pod on a 500 W host read class v4 138.0 at 489.3 W (3.54); -lmc 'not supported' on this card; stock, lock owed" } ], "src": "~/igneum-fleet/cardbench/rows.jsonl, 8 October"