# 2x USED R9 290x vs. new GTX 980



## Oterspiser (Sep 27, 2014)

one of my ole faithful HD 6990 died in my arms today and I'm taking that as a sign that an upgrade is in order.
I looked up my options and I'm wondering:

2 used AMD R9 290x for approx 700$
2 new Nvidia GTX 780 for 750$
or
Nvidias new succubus of a card: the GTX 980 for about 700$

As far as CPU goes I think my I7-3770K will do for a while, but I'm wondering if a bump to 16Gb Ram would be worth it.


----------



## Oterspiser (Sep 27, 2014)

Oh, forgot to mention.
I intend to run a landscape Eyefinity setup 5750x1080.


----------



## Arjai (Sep 27, 2014)

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_980/28.html


----------



## Durvelle27 (Sep 27, 2014)

2x 970s yelds better price/performance and is more efficient 

2x 970s roughly $650


----------



## Oterspiser (Sep 27, 2014)

Cheapest GTX 970 I could find would cost me about 400$ a piece


----------



## GhostRyder (Sep 27, 2014)

If your not able to get GTX 970s then my suggestion is for the 290X pair as they are darn good at eyefinity compared to the other options.


----------



## Durvelle27 (Sep 27, 2014)

Oterspiser said:


> Cheapest GTX 970 I could find would cost me about 400$ a piece


Are you in the USA


----------



## Oterspiser (Sep 27, 2014)

Durvelle27 said:


> Are you in the USA


No, Norway


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 27, 2014)

290s hands down. A lil easier to implement since you had a 6990 already


----------



## arbiter (Sep 27, 2014)

eidairaman1 said:


> 290s hands down. A lil easier to implement since you had a 6990 already



Likely 290's would be easier but if you want to save $ on power 970's use about half the power of 290x's. looking around 300-350watts under real use vs 600watts (290x CF)


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 27, 2014)

arbiter said:


> Likely 290's would be easier but if you want to save $ on power 970's use about half the power of 290x's. looking around 300-350watts under real use vs 600watts (290x CF)



power savings are minimal at best


----------



## yogurt_21 (Sep 29, 2014)

idk the 780's aren't too far behind the 290x and 50$ more nets you new? I'd go 2x 780 if it were me. fastest performance that includes a full warranty and getting to be the first to touch the cards since factory. The 290X's will be the fastest solution overall but no warranty and you have to worry about what the last guy did to them. The 980 will also work if you don't want the headaches of multicard solutions.


----------



## Frick (Sep 29, 2014)

eidairaman1 said:


> power savings are minimal at best



A few hundred watts is not minimal in this day and age.


----------



## newconroer (Sep 29, 2014)

First, why buy the 290x and not regular 290s?
Second, at that extreme resolution, you want 4GB products.
Third, I noticed you said 780, not 780ti. If not the ti, then the AMD vs NVidia comparison here is heavily in AMD's favor.
Fourth, any combination of the two cards you've listed will beat a single 980.

Two used r9 290 for the win!


----------



## Nordic (Sep 29, 2014)

If you care about your power bill I would go 970 sli. If not, 290x crossfire is an easy choice. It is a significant amount more power used though, and would be hot and loud. It would have the performance you want though.


----------



## newconroer (Sep 29, 2014)

james888 said:


> If you care about your power bill I would go 970 sli. If not, 290x crossfire is an easy choice. It is a significant amount more power used though, and would be hot and loud. It would have the performance you want though.



The power will be less with the 970s. However the heat and noise will be about the same, if not more depending on the cooler and sink setup(particularly in contrast to non X 290 models).
Additionally, we don't know yet how well the new Nvidia cards undervolt, while we do know that the R290 undervolt exceptionally well.

If someone is hell bent on Nvidia with budget in mind, then the smart play here is to give it a month or two until the 780ti come down in price, and get two of those.

The new GTX cards are just architecture refreshers, to wipe out existing Kepler products from the market, so that Maxwell can take their place and then rightfully be superseded by Pascal.


----------



## Nordic (Sep 30, 2014)

newconroer said:


> The power will be less with the 970s. However the heat and noise will be about the same, if not more depending on the cooler and sink setup(particularly in contrast to non X 290 models).
> Additionally, we don't know yet how well the new Nvidia cards undervolt, while we do know that the R290 undervolt exceptionally well.


Noise does depend upon cooling setup, but you must admit a 970 will run cooler at load compared to a 290 or 290x. It is easier to cool and will more likely be significantly quieter.

I am a fan of undervolted as opposed to overclocking in many circumstances. Saying this, undervolting ability I don't think it is a valid reason to purchase. You can not undervolt a 290 or 290x to match a 970.

It really comes down to if this buyer values. In fact he seems to not want to pay the extra to get 970's so out of his options a 290x crossfire would be his ideal option.[/QUOTE]


----------



## arbiter (Sep 30, 2014)

eidairaman1 said:


> power savings are minimal at best





Frick said:


> A few hundred watts is not minimal in this day and age.



power savings minimal at best? A 290x, 1 card alone draw's ~300watts, 1 gtx970 is rated around 150watts, even with boost clock 2 of them probably only 300-350watts. So you are saving 300watts power electric and HEAT. If it was under 100watts it would be minimal but its almost 3x that.


----------



## EarthDog (Sep 30, 2014)

Their power rating includes the boost clock...overclocking beyond that point is of course, not. 

There is significant savings between the two clearly though as as was mentioned its a 2 300W cards vs 2 150W cards. While its only a couple of bucks a month in typical gaming usage, that is a big difference. 

I don't understand why it would be 'easier to implement' 2 290's either... that makes no sense because its the same level of effort as drivers have to be reinstalled anyway.


----------



## arbiter (Sep 30, 2014)

EarthDog said:


> I don't understand why it would be 'easier to implement' 2 290's either... that makes no sense because its the same level of effort as drivers have to be reinstalled anyway.



Reason is he had a Radeon HD 6990. which is a dual gpu card in CF so he already has the experience with that hence the easier part.


----------



## EarthDog (Sep 30, 2014)

Oh enabling it. Ok. seems worthy to say its easier... (?).


----------



## Naito (Sep 30, 2014)

Out of what you have listed, the 290X would give you the most performance, but the downsides are that they are used (thus no warranty?) and will use more power. The GTX 780s aren't that far behind and have the benefit of being new, giving you the cover of warranty. However, mimicking what most others have said here, I'd go a set of GTX 970s in SLI, for that little bit more. Use less power, cooler, etc.


----------



## Cybrnook2002 (Sep 30, 2014)

2 x 290X's, easy. That is the most raw power for your use. Forget the small power savings of a single card. Oooh, extra few dollars a month. (Plus you mention you want to run "eyefinity". that is only AMD. Nvidia has "surround".)


----------



## tajoh111 (Sep 30, 2014)

The problem with used 290x's, particularly the well priced ones is that they went through  the mining ringer. At that point, you don't want to touch the cards. 

Mining cards are left on 24 hour a day and the workloads they went through typically cause them to run full tilt. While mining, a single 290x can consume 350watts or more. Significantly more than a gaming load. 

Running a card full tilt 24 hours a day for 6 months for example is the equivalent someone gaming 3 hours a day for 4 years. It could be even more aged than this considering the card went through worse workloads than a typical gaming situation and it didn't get a breather.

In addition, your in Norway. From the charts I see, Norway has some of the highest electricity costs in europe at around 0.20 euros per kWh. This is about 2.5 times what you see in USA. So 300watts of power of additional usage is not small small chunk of change in the long run.

I repeat what every one else is saying. Go for gtx 970s SLI, even if you have to save a little longer. It will save you money in the long run and the risk of your cards dying without a warranty is averted.


----------



## RCoon (Sep 30, 2014)

970 is an obvious choice, if you're really desperate for bleeding edge frames, then get the 980 instead. Every other GPU at this point is entirely irrelevant, both performance and pricewise, until somebody brings something better to the table.


----------



## The N (Sep 30, 2014)

Depending upon Resolution, if 1080p then single 980 would be more than enough. infact 970 fulfils all you need or requirments.

a single 290 well OCed beating 780Ti, so 2x290 will be crusher. but i doubt on optimization of Crossfire in Games and benchmarks. AMd always facing problem, drivers aren't fully optimized. in that way i would suggest to go NVIDIA way.  a single 980 would be more than enough. its already beating 780Ti and after driver it will perform nevertheless much faster.

OR

2x780 would be great too. but i dont recommend Crossfire of especially 290 as there are alot of optimization issue in that. single will give 100 FPS, if double give perform around 150 FPS then they aren't worthy at all.


----------



## Ja.KooLit (Sep 30, 2014)

RCoon said:


> 970 is an obvious choice, if you're really desperate for bleeding edge frames, then get the 980 instead. Every other GPU at this point is entirely irrelevant, both performance and pricewise, until somebody brings something better to the table.



he does mentioned resolution . 5750 x 1080


----------



## RCoon (Sep 30, 2014)

night.fox said:


> he does mentioned resolution . 5750 x 1080



Seen and amended


----------



## Oterspiser (Sep 30, 2014)

Ah damn, the R9 290X setup i was gonna buy got sold a couple of days ago, the cheapest R9 290X-setup would cost me a litte more than a 970 SLI-rig would.
As far as power goes, it doesn't matter, I've got a 1200 W PSU and I pay a fixed amount monthly so...

And according to Techpowerup's review of GTX 970 SLI and R9 290X CF it looks like the 970 SLI generally outperforms the 290X CF.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_970_SLI/20.html
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_290X_CrossFire/21.html

Noise is also irrelevant to me, I mean, compared to two HD 6990s most things are a gentle breeze.


----------



## adulaamin (Sep 30, 2014)

2 x 970s... $100 more than the 290Xs but they're brand new with warranty and consume less power... 


Edit:

Oops... didn't see your post while I was replying... 970s FTW!


----------



## Oterspiser (Sep 30, 2014)

Yup, pretty much Michael Jackson-leaning towards a GTX970 SLI setup now.


----------



## JethroBodine (Sep 30, 2014)

Oterspiser said:


> Yup, pretty much Michael Jackson-leaning towards a GTX970 SLI setup now.



Two 970s is definitely the "bang for buck" champion these days, and likely will be for some time.


----------



## The N (Sep 30, 2014)

i think ou need to go for 2 gpus but the one that are most efficient in power. as more gpu more heat. 2x970 would b your best bet.  also in future you will get good resale value. 290 too much heat and noise.


----------



## Stardust342 (Sep 30, 2014)

Oterspiser said:


> And according to Techpowerup's review of GTX 970 SLI and R9 290X CF it looks like the 970 SLI generally outperforms the 290X CF.
> http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_970_SLI/20.html
> http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_290X_CrossFire/21.html


If you are running at 5760x1080, the 290x CF outperformed the 970 SLI...


----------



## newconroer (Sep 30, 2014)

Not speaking specifically of you, though I hear a lot of people talk about R9 heat and yet they've never had one or used one.



james888 said:


> Noise does depend upon cooling setup, but you must admit a 970 will run cooler at load compared to a 290 or 290x. It is easier to cool and will more likely be significantly quieter.


I disagree about this. Average temperatures of a 290 vs 970 are within +/- 10 degrees. I'm actually disappointed in how hot the 970s run even with third party coolers.
Now if it can undervolt well, maybe there's something to be gained there.



james888 said:


> I am a fan of undervolted as opposed to overclocking in many circumstances. Saying this, undervolting ability I don't think it is a valid reason to purchase. You can not undervolt a 290 or 290x to match a 970.



What I mean is that with a multi card setup you most often get your 60 frames capped in 90% of situations. Overclocking would just result in unnecessary gains that you won't see. Furthermore, the 290s can undervolt and still overclock their frequencies : )




RCoon said:


> 970 is an obvious choice, if you're really desperate for bleeding edge frames, then get the 980 instead. Every other GPU at this point is entirely irrelevant, both performance and pricewise, until somebody brings something better to the table.



Speaking strictly brand new then maybe, but that's not what's being asked here.
All Nvidia have done is release a lower power draw 780 card with 4GB and a new AA technology.

If the question was previously 290 vs 780?, then it effectively it still is.


----------



## Stardust342 (Sep 30, 2014)

newconroer said:


> Not speaking specifically of you, though I hear a lot of people talk about R9 heat and yet they've never had one or used one.
> 
> 
> I disagree about this. Average temperatures of a 290 vs 970 are within +/- 10 degrees. I'm actually disappointed in how hot the 970s run even with third party coolers.


Yes, I've heard complaints of extremely hot 970's, and there are 290/x's that have very good coolers and can remain almost silent.


----------



## newconroer (Sep 30, 2014)

I was impressed with AMD's caution to the wind approach with the r9 290's power requirements.  A) They said fu** the green movement and B) Despite a few hiccups and poor reference coolers, the end result has been quite fantastic.
Meanwhile, already with third party coolers Maxwell isn't showing a reduced heat foot print to scale evenly with it's energy footprint - as expected. I wonder what they've sacrificed to get this interim product out the door. We can't even say it's a market test bed for the upcoming Pascal because it doesn't offer anything that we hope Pascal will.

Meanwhile the performance isn't much better than 780 Keplers.
Personally I don't get it.


----------



## Nordic (Sep 30, 2014)

Cybrnook2002 said:


> 2 x 290X's, easy. That is the most raw power for your use. Forget the small power savings of a single card. Oooh, extra few dollars a month. (Plus you mention you want to run "eyefinity". that is only AMD. Nvidia has "surround".)


Forgeting peak and maximum power usage and focusing on only average power usage the 970 uses 161w and the 290x used 246w from w1zzards reviews. 246-161= 85w. 85*2= 170w.


newconroer said:


> Not speaking specifically of you, though I hear a lot of people talk about R9 heat and yet they've never had one or used one.
> 
> 
> I disagree about this. Average temperatures of a 290 vs 970 are within +/- 10 degrees. I'm actually disappointed in how hot the 970s run even with third party coolers.
> ...


The heat the gpu shows and the amount put into air are another thing, but I see your point on this matter.

Also, the majority of people who buy gpu's don't overclock or undervolt.


----------



## Stardust342 (Oct 1, 2014)

james888 said:


> Also, the majority of people who buy gpu's don't overclock or undervolt.


People always say this, but is it true? Has there really ever been so much as a survey on this? If someone buys a pre-built computer, I don't think they are likely to overclock it, but if they buy a a graphics card and install it themselves, I think it makes them a lot more likely to overclock it.


----------



## The N (Oct 1, 2014)

well guys, AMD is still can't be ignorable ............check these score. the graphics score. a single 290 close to single 980 with good Ocing

290

980


----------



## arbiter (Oct 1, 2014)

The N said:


> well guys, AMD is still can't be ignorable ............check these score. the graphics score. a single 290 close to single 980 with good Ocing
> 
> 290
> 
> 980



few questions on those results,
1. How many those 290 cards get that overclock? What i seen in most reviews that one is one the picks of the litter of hawaii gpu's. Doubt most hawaii gpu's can get 1300mhz OC stable.

2. on the 980 is that 1360 mhz what it topped out as? A lot of people get closer to 1500 and up on maxwell chips, Seems like 1400+ is what mostly all them can do.


----------



## RCoon (Oct 1, 2014)

newconroer said:


> Meanwhile the performance isn't much better than 780 Keplers.
> Personally I don't get it.



The performance is better than the Keplers though. I went from 780 to 970 and there is a clear performance improvement. Look at W1zzard charts and the evidence is there. Not to mention they overclocked quite admirably. Granted the performance per hz isn't that great in terms of over clocking performance potential, but to a neutral party looking in, maxwell is an obvious choice over hawaii, particularly at stock clocks, which most of the population of users has. Not everyone over clocks, it's a very small number.

Also, do note that most 970's actually have much smaller cards, therefore coolers than most flagships cards. The cards are shorter, the coolers are shorter, on most of the brands, in comparison to almost every 290/X which has triple fan coolers attached to big blocks of aluminium. My current 970 is about 3/4's of the size of my old Windforce 780. The smaller real estate alone of the cooler should explain why the cards run at average temperatures.

There is also the simple fact that if you OC one card to kingdom come, you will not be able to do so with crossfire/sli without watercooling, as the general temperature of the entire case will rise with the extra card, so either temps will be crazy, or you're going to have to scale back. Claiming a well OC'd 290 beats out a 780ti (does it really though, if you include the potential OC of a 780ti as well?), is irrelevant. Try OCing two 290's to that level in a generic standard midi tower case.


----------



## Naito (Oct 1, 2014)

newconroer said:


> I was impressed with AMD's caution to the wind approach with the r9 290's power requirements. A) They said fu** the green movement and B) Despite a few hiccups and poor reference coolers, the end result has been quite fantastic.



The 'green movement' is important, generally the more energy efficient architecture, the easier it is to scale. This is particular important if the chips in question are being built larger on an existing node. Who knows, a change of node and a large scale up of Maxwell, we may see some pretty darn impressive chips next year (i.e. GM200/GM210). I mean look at Intel, they have Xeon chips using the 2011-3 Haswell platform with 18 cores and a TDP envelope of 145W. Sure the core clocks are a good 1GHz or so below consumer chips, but it does go to show Intel's pursuit of energy efficiency works wonders for scaling architectures.



newconroer said:


> Meanwhile the performance isn't much better than 780 Keplers.
> Personally I don't get it.



1. You're seeing a mid-tier GM204 going against what was considered the flagship, the GK110. So pretty impressive there. 
2. The price/performance ratio is excellent.
3. For a chip that is being built on a mature node (28nm) with less transistors and smaller die overall (I know you can't really compare core config across generations), it is very impressive to see such performance

I'm sure I could think of more reasons.



newconroer said:


> All Nvidia have done is release a lower power draw 780 card with 4GB and a new AA technology.



I guess you missed the memo on the redesigned SMM units?


----------



## Oterspiser (Oct 2, 2014)

Stardust342 said:


> Yes, I've heard complaints of extremely hot 970's, and there are 290/x's that have very good coolers and can remain almost silent.


The particular GTX 970's I'm considering are the EVGA ones with the ACX 2.0 coolers, so they should do a bit better than reference



Stardust342 said:


> If you are running at 5760x1080, the 290x CF outperformed the 970 SLI...


Yes, but that is almost exclusive to 5760x1080, considering the fact that many games don't run properly or at all at this resolution, I also have to factor in lower resolutions.

Also, there is:
The bonus of brand new cards, warranty, wear and tear
DirectX 12 compatability
PhysX and such goodness
Hopefully better drivers than what AMD has been giving out lately


----------



## Stardust342 (Oct 2, 2014)

Oterspiser said:


> Yes, but that is almost exclusive to 5760x1080, considering the fact that many games don't run properly or at all at this resolution, I also have to factor in lower resolutions.
> 
> Also, there is:
> The bonus of brand new cards, warranty, wear and tear
> ...


Almost all modern games support it, and most old games can be easily modded to support it.
AMD 7000 cards and up support DX12...
Not very many games support PhysX....
There is nothing wrong with AMD drivers... they just released some new ones which increased performance and added new features...


----------



## Oterspiser (Oct 2, 2014)

Stardust342 said:


> Almost all modern games support it, and most old games can be easily modded to support it.
> AMD 7000 cards and up support DX12...
> Not very many games support PhysX....
> There is nothing wrong with AMD drivers... they just released some new ones which increased performance and added new features...


Like 14.4 that only enabled 2 of my three screens at the same time, a problem that support had been notified of by several users.....
or 14.7 RC1 and RC3 that both caused artefacts in BF4 eyefinity and constantly crashes Watch_Dogs shortly after launch
and which one of the 13 drivers was it that made brown, black and blue the only colors displayed?
and it goes on...


----------



## Stardust342 (Oct 2, 2014)

Oterspiser said:


> Like 14.4 that only enabled 2 of my three screens at the same time, a problem that support had been notified of by several users.....
> or 14.7 RC1 and RC3 that both caused artefacts in BF4 eyefinity and constantly crashes Watch_Dogs shortly after launch
> and which one of the 13 drivers was it that made brown, black and blue the only colors displayed?
> and it goes on...


And do you have any of these problems with the new patch?


----------



## Mindweaver (Oct 2, 2014)

Oterspiser said:


> Cheapest GTX 970 I could find would cost me about 400$ a piece


If you are already spending $700 then I wouldn't cheap out now because of $100. Right now 2x 970's overclocked are the best bang for the buck.


----------



## Oterspiser (Oct 2, 2014)

Stardust342 said:


> And do you have any of these problems with the new patch?


Still getting artefacts in BF4 eyefinity and Watch_Dogs won't go further than main menu....


----------



## newconroer (Oct 2, 2014)

I'll rephrase what I said before... I don't get the point of the big lean towards forking out cash for a brand new Maxwell card, when the other options in your budget will achieve the same at less cost. 

I do appreciate that the 970s - as per this example - provide you an edge in performance over the Kepler and with a smaller physical footprint. 
However I do not support this assumption that they have a more energy efficient architecture, to the point that it will set the ground works for Pascal.

Whatever is happening with Pascal I believe will be an actual real leap forward in every way.

I also stand by my comment that in accordance with the so called energy angle of these products, that they are not as 'green' impressive as I would have expected.
Furthermore what's glaring is the heat they output, despite these 'energy' improvements.

As far as I'm concerned it's Kepler 2.0 and that's fine, but lets not treat it like the coming of Christ, when in fact there's other options out there.


----------



## Stardust342 (Oct 2, 2014)

Oterspiser said:


> Still getting artefacts in BF4 eyefinity and Watch_Dogs won't go further than main menu....


Do you have an overclock? And do other eyefinity games work?


----------



## Oterspiser (Oct 3, 2014)

Stardust342 said:


> Do you have an overclock? And do other eyefinity games work?


Never OC'd and most other games work in eyefinity


----------



## broken pixel (Oct 3, 2014)

tajoh111 said:


> The problem with used 290x's, particularly the well priced ones is that they went through  the mining ringer. At that point, you don't want to touch the cards.
> 
> Mining cards are left on 24 hour a day and the workloads they went through typically cause them to run full tilt. While mining, a single 290x can consume 350watts or more. Significantly more than a gaming load.
> 
> ...



My 2 290x have been mining almost 24/7 since Nov of 2013, they have not degraded one bit. They are undervolted and underclocked during mining and dont hit above 70c. When gaming I run them at 1075/1325 +31, when mining I run them at 850/1250 -38. People who mine do not run full tilt as you say.


----------



## Stardust342 (Oct 3, 2014)

broken pixel said:


> My 2 290x have been mining almost 24/7 since Nov of 2013, they have not degraded one bit. They are undervolted and underclocked during mining and dont hit above 70c. When gaming I run them at 1075/1325 +31, when mining I run them at 850/1250 -38. People who mine do not run full tilt as you say.


You're seriously not still mining are you? You realize at this point the power costs more than what you'll make...


----------



## fullinfusion (Oct 3, 2014)

RCoon said:


> 970 is an obvious choice, if you're really desperate for bleeding edge frames, then get the 980 instead. Every other GPU at this point is entirely irrelevant, both performance and pricewise, until somebody brings something better to the table.


I haven't agreed with you in some time, but I have to agree with you. Ya cant beat the price to performance on the 970's when in SLI vs 2 R290 or X amd cards.

God did I just say SLI 

Makes me wonder if AMD even have anything up there sleeves this time around besides all the heat from the 290's


----------



## broken pixel (Oct 4, 2014)

Stardust342 said:


> You're seriously not still mining are you? You realize at this point the power costs more than what you'll make...



Well it depends on how you obtain the currents. (Grid tie man) I still mine BTC with my S1s and still use 2 290x & 1 7970 Lightning to mine HBN, that is a PoS so it gains interest like your banks but has a higher return since banks do not care to pay a decent interest rate these days. Shit! four years ago my checking and savings account received around 3.9%, today not even one fucking %.

I have been mining Crypto for almost three years and have done well. Lived off of Scrypt mining during 3 months of being unemployed waiting on a new commissioning project that was not out of State. Payed my ROI & enjoying new tech in the process, I also have a nice fat bag of Crypto worth thousands of USD Fiat currency, cough, cough, puff. (the  cough, cough is for the state of USD Fiat)


----------



## fullinfusion (Oct 4, 2014)

broken pixel said:


> Well it depends on how you obtain the currents. (Grid tie man) I still mine BTC with my S1s and still use 2 290x & 1 7970 Lightning to mine HBN, that is a PoS so it gains interest like your banks but has a higher return since banks do not care to pay a decent interest rate these days. Shit! four years ago my checking and savings account received around 3.9%, today not even one fucking %.
> 
> I have been mining Crypto for almost three years and have done well. Lived off of Scrypt mining during 3 months of being unemployed waiting on a new commissioning project that was not out of State. Payed my ROI & enjoying new tech in the process, I also have a nice fat bag of Crypto worth thousands of USD Fiat currency, cough, cough, puff. (the  cough, cough is for the state of USD Fiat)


Why would you even reply to that post lol, Its your biz and nobody else 

Who cares what one does as long as your making it work, so fu#k it!!
I'm happy for you BP may as well let it pay some bills and give ya some extra cash, cough cough ~ pass


----------

