How does the performance of 290x compare to 960 when it comes to mining digital currencies?

8 answers

• Nov 28, 2021 · 3 years ago
  The performance of the 290x and the 960 can vary when it comes to mining digital currencies. The 290x is known for its higher hash rate and power consumption compared to the 960. This means that it can mine digital currencies at a faster rate, but it also consumes more electricity. On the other hand, the 960 has a lower hash rate and power consumption, which makes it more energy-efficient. However, this also means that it may take longer to mine digital currencies compared to the 290x. Ultimately, the choice between the two depends on your priorities - if you value faster mining speed, the 290x may be a better option, but if you prioritize energy efficiency, the 960 could be the way to go.
  698349
• Nov 28, 2021 · 3 years ago
  When it comes to mining digital currencies, the performance of the 290x and the 960 can be compared in terms of hash rate and power consumption. The 290x generally has a higher hash rate, which means it can solve more complex mathematical problems and mine digital currencies at a faster rate. However, this also results in higher power consumption. On the other hand, the 960 has a lower hash rate, which means it may take longer to mine digital currencies, but it consumes less power. So, if you're looking for faster mining speed, the 290x is a better choice, but if you want to save on electricity costs, the 960 is more efficient.
  635212
• Nov 28, 2021 · 3 years ago
  When it comes to mining digital currencies, the performance of the 290x and the 960 can vary. The 290x is known for its higher hash rate, which allows it to mine digital currencies at a faster rate compared to the 960. However, this also means that it consumes more power. On the other hand, the 960 has a lower hash rate, which means it may take longer to mine digital currencies, but it consumes less power. So, if you have access to cheap electricity and want faster mining results, the 290x is a good choice. But if you want to save on electricity costs and don't mind slower mining speed, the 960 can be a more cost-effective option.
  638160
• Nov 28, 2021 · 3 years ago
  The performance of the 290x and the 960 can be compared when it comes to mining digital currencies. The 290x is generally considered to be more powerful and efficient in terms of hash rate and mining speed. It can handle more complex calculations and mine digital currencies at a faster rate compared to the 960. However, this also means that it consumes more power and generates more heat. On the other hand, the 960 is more energy-efficient and consumes less power, but it has a lower hash rate and may take longer to mine digital currencies. So, if you're looking for maximum performance and don't mind the higher power consumption, the 290x is the better choice. But if you want to save on electricity costs and prioritize energy efficiency, the 960 is a more suitable option.
  780156
• Nov 28, 2021 · 3 years ago
  When it comes to mining digital currencies, the performance of the 290x and the 960 can be compared. The 290x is known for its higher hash rate and mining speed, which allows it to mine digital currencies at a faster rate compared to the 960. However, this also means that it consumes more power and generates more heat. On the other hand, the 960 has a lower hash rate and mining speed, which means it may take longer to mine digital currencies, but it consumes less power and generates less heat. So, if you have access to cheap electricity and want faster mining results, the 290x is a good choice. But if you want to save on electricity costs and prioritize energy efficiency, the 960 is a more suitable option.
  715120
• Nov 28, 2021 · 3 years ago
  When it comes to mining digital currencies, the performance of the 290x and the 960 can vary. The 290x is known for its higher hash rate and mining speed, which allows it to mine digital currencies at a faster rate compared to the 960. However, this also means that it consumes more power and generates more heat. On the other hand, the 960 has a lower hash rate and mining speed, which means it may take longer to mine digital currencies, but it consumes less power and generates less heat. Ultimately, the choice between the two depends on your specific needs and priorities - if you value faster mining speed and don't mind the higher power consumption, the 290x is a good option. But if you want to save on electricity costs and prioritize energy efficiency, the 960 is a more suitable choice.
  797114
• Nov 28, 2021 · 3 years ago
  When it comes to mining digital currencies, the performance of the 290x and the 960 can be compared. The 290x is generally considered to be more powerful and efficient in terms of hash rate and mining speed. It can handle more complex calculations and mine digital currencies at a faster rate compared to the 960. However, this also means that it consumes more power and generates more heat. On the other hand, the 960 is more energy-efficient and consumes less power, but it has a lower hash rate and may take longer to mine digital currencies. So, if you're looking for maximum performance and don't mind the higher power consumption, the 290x is the better choice. But if you want to save on electricity costs and prioritize energy efficiency, the 960 is a more suitable option.
  78198
• Nov 28, 2021 · 3 years ago
  When it comes to mining digital currencies, the performance of the 290x and the 960 can vary. The 290x is known for its higher hash rate and mining speed, which allows it to mine digital currencies at a faster rate compared to the 960. However, this also means that it consumes more power and generates more heat. On the other hand, the 960 has a lower hash rate and mining speed, which means it may take longer to mine digital currencies, but it consumes less power and generates less heat. Ultimately, the choice between the two depends on your specific needs and priorities - if you value faster mining speed and don't mind the higher power consumption, the 290x is a good option. But if you want to save on electricity costs and prioritize energy efficiency, the 960 is a more suitable choice.
  79789