Nvidia GTX 1650 Profitability
767.43%
Profitability
Period | /Day | /Month |
---|---|---|
Income | $0.01 | $0.30 |
Cost $0.1/kWh |
$0.00 | $0.00 |
Profitability | $0.01 | $0.30 |
Algorithms
Algorithm | Efficiency | Profit |
---|---|---|
Octopus
3.37939Mh - 0.0W |
j/h |
$0.02
/day
|
KAWPOW
7.148Mh - 66.0W |
0.11 j/h |
-$0.06
/day
|
BeamHashIII
6Hh - 53.0W |
0.11 j/h |
-$0.08
/day
|
CryptoNightR
378Hh - 46.0W |
0.12 j/Hh |
-$0.10
/day
|
Etchash
14.34816Mh - 49.0W |
0.29 j/h |
-$0.10
/day
|
Zhash
19Hh - 70.0W |
0.27 j/h |
-$0.12
/day
|
NeoScrypt
530.53Kh - 67.0W |
7.92 j/h |
-$0.11
/day
|
RandomX
304Hh - 51.0W |
j/Mh |
-$0.11
/day
|
Autolykos2
29.56546Mh - 70.0W |
0.42 j/h |
-$0.12
/day
|
KHeavyHash
188.221719Mh - 50.0W |
j/Gh |
-$0.12
/day
|
Cuckatoo32
0Hh - 51.0W |
Inf j/Hh |
-$0.12
/day
|
X16R
4.484008Mh - 53.0W |
0.08 j/h |
-$0.13
/day
|
Ethash
13.952Mh - 61.0W |
4.37 j/Mh |
-$0.14
/day
|
Keccak
404.32467Mh - 67.0W |
6.03 j/h |
-$0.14
/day
|
Blake3
425.341436Mh - 60.0W |
j/Gh |
-$0.14
/day
|
Lyra2z
1.698288Mh - 61.0W |
0.03 j/h |
-$0.15
/day
|
NexaPoW
2.037735Mh - 64.0W |
31.41 j/Mh |
-$0.14
/day
|
Blake (2s)
2.193159059Gh - 65.0W |
0.03 j/h |
-$0.16
/day
|
X16Rv2
11.92071Mh - 65.0W |
0.18 j/h |
-$0.16
/day
|
Eaglesong
359.8Mh - 66.0W |
j/Gh |
-$0.16
/day
|
Lyra2REv2
24.97233Mh - 72.0W |
2.88 j/Mh |
-$0.17
/day
|
CuckooCycle
1Hh - 87.0W |
0.01 j/h |
-$0.18
/day
|
Description
Model Nvidia GTX 1650 from Nvidia mining algorithm CryptoNightR with a maximum hashrate of 378H for a power consumption of 0w.
Specification
Base Clock | 1485 MHz |
Boost Clock | 1665 MHz |
GPU Power | 75 W |
Max Memory Bandwidth | 128 GB/s |
Max Memory Size | 4 GB |
Memory Type | GDDR5 |
OpenGL | 4.6 |
Mining pools
Pool | Start Mining |
---|---|
Nicehash | nicehash.com |
Mining Rig Rental | miningrigrental.com |
zpool | zpool.ca |
XmrPool | xmrpool.net |
Zergpool | zergpool.com |
XmrPool Hub | xmrpoolhub.com |
Mining Pool Hub | miningpoolhub.com |
Carbon Footprint
Estimating the carbon footprint from the cryptocurrency mining operations of the Nvidia GTX 1650 in a year, based on energy consumption and various energy sources
Energy Source | Carbon Intensity (gCO2e/kWh) | Yearly Power Consumption (kWh) | Yearly Carbon Footprint (kgCO2e/year) |
---|---|---|---|
Wind | 0 | ||
Nuclear | 0 | ||
Hydroelectric | 0 | ||
Geothermal | 0 | ||
Solar | 0 | ||
Biofuels | 0 | ||
Gas | 0 | ||
Coal | 0 |
Warning: The numbers provided above are merely an estimate of the carbon footprint resulting from cryptocurrency mining. They are presented for informational purposes and should be seen as references only, not as an absolute exact figure. The actual carbon emissions can vary based on many different factors such as the approach, calculation methods, and specific parameters of each mining technology type. We recommend users to consider these figures as a small part of a larger environmental picture and the impact of cryptocurrency mining on it.