Mk2 miner vs Mk1 overclocked

[DaHui]

So everything I read says its better to use Mk2 rather than overclock mk1... but why?

Maybe there was an edit to power consumption in 1.0 cause I do not remember the previous values but currently a Mk1 miner overclocked to 200% uses 12.5MW while a mk2 miner at base uses 15MW. So by overclocking a mk1 miner I can save power? At that point the mk2 miner seems to be pointless unless you need to overclock that to achieve what you want... which belts at that point can't even handle sooo skip from mk1 to mk3?

[Kage Goomba]

MK2 mines twice as much as a MK1 - so by definition if you are overclocking a MK1 by 200% - a MK2 would eat less power.

In some cases less power depending on the node purity.

The only reason you would use a MK1 - is due to construction materials not being on hand.

A better comparison is a MK2 vs a MK3 - you would need particular parts that are not available to you if you decide to get there a bit early.

Better thing to do is to just get the job done - if you got spare parts - upgrade your MK1 to a MK2 - if not - overclock until you can.

Not really a big deal and there's no perfect answer - as you may have plenty of power to spare anyway.

The real question is how much resource you need - and that's where you will find your answer.

[Fenix]

I don't see 2.5mw as a worthwhile thing to worry about.
But your are right is less power, not that matters much, use whatever config you want to max your output, and upgrade as needed, I just replace them when I get a chance just so, all I have to do is change the belts

[DaHui]

Originally posted by Kage Goomba:

MK2 mines twice as much as a MK1 - so by definition if you are overclocking a MK1 by 200% - a MK2 would eat less power.

I think you missed the entire point... a Mk2 uses 15MW and a Mk1 overclocked to 200% uses 12.5... so it does not "by definition" use less power.

Originally posted by Fenix:

I don't see 2.5mw as a worthwhile thing to worry about.
But your are right is is less power, not that matters much, use whatever config you want to max you output, and upgrade as needed, I just replace them when I get a chance just so, all I have to do is change the belts

I mean your're not wrong about the 2.5MW not being a huge deal but spread across 20-30 miners it adds up a bit more. again not a huge amount but early game every bit counts until you can get into fuel generators or nuclear. I just don't understand why the mk2 doesn't follow the general rule of overclocking not being as efficient as advancing. It seems from wikis and guides that the Mk2 used to only draw 12MW would would mean overclocking is less efficient but that apparently is no longer the case.

[Kage Goomba]

Originally posted by DaHui:

Originally posted by Kage Goomba:

MK2 mines twice as much as a MK1 - so by definition if you are overclocking a MK1 by 200% - a MK2 would eat less power.

I think you missed the entire point... a Mk2 uses 15MW and a Mk1 overclocked to 200% uses 12.5... so it does not "by definition" use less power.

Originally posted by Fenix:

I don't see 2.5mw as a worthwhile thing to worry about.
But your are right is is less power, not that matters much, use whatever config you want to max you output, and upgrade as needed, I just replace them when I get a chance just so, all I have to do is change the belts

I mean your're not wrong about the 2.5MW not being a huge deal but spread across 20-30 miners it adds up a bit more. again not a huge amount but early game every bit counts until you can get into fuel generators or nuclear. I just don't understand why the mk2 doesn't follow the general rule of overclocking not being as efficient as advancing. It seems from wikis and guides that the Mk2 used to only draw 12MW would would mean overclocking is less efficient but that apparently is no longer the case.

And you are missing the point when it comes to power - waste of time.

It's a matter of resources you need on hand - if your concerned over 10-20MW's - I think you have bigger concerns to worry about.

The power issues we face are in the TW range - might want to reconsider.

Wrong or right - power will be the least of your concerns when it comes to your mining extractors.

[RadioIesbian Fluid]

Originally posted by DaHui:

So everything I read says its better to use Mk2 rather than overclock mk1... but why?

Maybe there was an edit to power consumption in 1.0 cause I do not remember the previous values but currently a Mk1 miner overclocked to 200% uses 12.5MW while a mk2 miner at base uses 15MW. So by overclocking a mk1 miner I can save power? At that point the mk2 miner seems to be pointless unless you need to overclock that to achieve what you want... which belts at that point can't even handle sooo skip from mk1 to mk3?

This is kinda flawed reasoning imo. While yes, you can save 2.5MW, which in all honestly is nothing in this game.
The point of upgrading a miner is to get a higher output. Mk2 is twice of a Mk1 and Mk3 is twice again that of a mk2.

Take a normal node for example. by default a mk1 is 60/min, Mk2 120/min and Mk3 240/min. with a full overclock that will go to 150/300/600.

So why would you want less production? The whole idea of the game is to build more and more, and you will absolutely need more and more as you progress.
You produce more items, make more power to make even more items and so on.

[Padds]

Originally posted by DaHui:

At that point the mk2 miner seems to be pointless unless you need to overclock that to achieve what you want... which belts at that point can't even handle sooo skip from mk1 to mk3?

Yes there are times when you dont need a mk2 miner if your belt capped or just dont need that many.

But a mk1 miner @200% on a impure node is only 120 and that belt is a very expensive belt, your much better off working towards t3 which move 270 and only take a single basic steel output.
and a t2 miner @200% on an impure node is still only 240 . its a very small niche time when your using 120 belts and you want to keep it to a minimum.

a small advantage with propagation of manifolds and relying on precise feeds to things like coal plants is a recipe for a power shortage

[RadioIesbian Fluid]

Slightly off on the numbers there. a Mk1 miner on an impure node with a 200% overclock is 60/min. 30/min without overclock and 75/min with a full overclock. a mk2 miner is 60 on an impure and 120 on a 200% overclock. and 150/min on a full overclock.

[Maehlice]

Originally posted by DaHui:

So everything I read says its better to use Mk2 rather than overclock mk1... but why?

Better is subjective. Better to them may not be better to you.

Do you need twice as much ore or four times as much ore? It's really that simple.

If at this time all you need is twice as many resources, then either overclock the Mk1 to 200% or upgrade it to Mk.2; it makes almost no appreciable difference.

But if you need four times as much ore, then upgrade to Mk2 and overclock it.

As long as you get what you need, who cares what someone else thinks is better?

[Still B0r3d]

Originally posted by DaHui:

I think you missed the entire point... a Mk2 uses 15MW and a Mk1 overclocked to 200% uses 12.5... so it does not "by definition" use less power.

Here is the bigger picture, you are not thinking at all about scale.
You need two power crystals per overclocked mk1 miner for your situation right? You still can't produce nearly as much ore as an mk2 miner right?

Miners should always be fully overclocked. Anything Slooped should be overclocked. We have no mk1 constructors so at least currently there is no reason to worry about those power differences at scale because this power savings actually has a downside.. End game if you have the power do whatever you want.

[TheSkimMilkGorilla]

Because you can overclock the Mk2. . . Also, power consumption.

[Nekogod]

They changed it in 1.0, pre 1.0 the mk2 miner used 12MW so was better in all regards vs a 200% mk1. After 1.0 the mk2 will now always use more power for the same amount of resources, but can get you much more resources. When I unlocked mk2 miners I was still using biomass burners and didn't have a lot of power shards so I found a use for both. Once I got coal power up an running and had automated the mk2 components there was 0 reason to use mk1 anymore.

One other thing I suppose is that mk2s use twice as many portable miners so it depends how many of those you wanna sit and hand craft.

Not long unlocked mk3 miners and I've got the alt to automate the portable miners now so working on automating the parts for mk3s then will use them exclusively.

[Huren Ogeko]

I always use the highest level miner I can. I can under clock them if I get too much out of it but in general all my miners are clocked to 250%/ The only nodes that give me issue are the pure nodes as overclocking them to 250% will generally overrun the current belt tech I have at the time. But normal nodes and impure nodes I Can generally overclock and my best belt can keep up or nearly keep up. I typically dont worry about power consumption once I am beyond biomass burners and on to coal.

[kLuns]

Soon as you unlock mk4 belts the mk2 miner makes up for that 2,5 MW difference.

[NukeAJS]

That's a very narrow-use case. It's almost always better to upgrade your miners and then underclock them to the limit of the belt. That or overclock them to the limit of the belt for more production.

In fact, 'over-building' or building more production machines than you need and underclocking them can save you a ton of energy provided you have enough space to accommodate them.

[Huren Ogeko]

about the time I get to phase 3 I start engineering all new factories with mk3 overclocked production and mk6 belts in mind...then I underclock things to the mk4 belt and mk2 miners speeds. so as I unlock mk5 and mk6 I can just push the clocks up to 100% later on without having to do a major expansion of the factory to account for the far greater amount of ore the nodes will be producing.

in the early game (phase 1-2) I tend to design things with mk4 belts and mk2 miners in mind. but those factories will eventually be replaced when I hit phase 3 and begin planning out end game factories.