Is there any advantage in plotting k33, k34, k35?

I wonder if there is any plus for the ones plotting bigger sizes, like k33 - 200gb, k34- 400gb, do you have any ideea? Also maybe some support dev to answer?

1 Like

Did your read the Chia Github Wiki? The answer to this is there and on’s starter guides.

1 Like

Yes, i did, they only say ‘‘bigger plots are for the ones that want to show off, for the moment’’. But my question is, is there any difference? Does it count when you compete k32 vs k33/k34? An also, does it receive more chances in a 24 hour cicle for example?

1 Like

I think this is a good one to answer, personally…

No. Right now there is no advantage. Every k32 you plot will be valid for at least 5 years, maybe 10. Moving up to k33 increases the required resources (additional disk, memory, cpu etc requirements) significantly and there’s really no upside of making larger plots at the moment so I’d avoid that.

The official docs are out of date, I think @roybot

You really never need to plot a plot with a k size larger than 32. Those who do plot larger are either doing them to show off (and we encourage this for fun) or to optimally fill the open space on a specific drive. A k32 will take up 101.3 GiB of space once completed but will need a total of 332 GiB of temporary space as it is being created. A single k32 plotting process never needs more than 332 GiB of space. One needs to be careful here as 332 gibibytes uses 1024 as its divisor where GB or gigabytes uses 1000 as the divisor. That means you will need 356.5 GB of temporary space and the final plot file will take 108.8 GB. A k32 plot can be done by one expert we know in just under 4 hours but most experts are creating plots in 5 hours and most folks average around 9-12 hours.

Does anyone have the latest figures on required disk space and ram for k32, k33, k34?


From my reading, It benefits in term of HDD utilization

Ah, I realized I can bring up the GUI, press “add plot”, and the info is there:

name size temp space
k=32 101.4GiB 239GiB
k=33 208.8GiB 521GiB
k=34 429.8 GiB 1041 GiB
k=35 884.1 GiB 2175 GiB

So this is accurate as of 1.1.2.


^anyone reading this, be aware those are in GiB, not Gigabytes (GB).

In Gigabytes, GB (rounding to nearest tenth of a GB), as of version 1.1.2:

name final size temp space
k=32 108.9 GB 256.6 GB
k=33 224.2 GB 559.4 GB
k=34 461.5 GB 1117.8 GB
k=35 949.3 GB 2335.4 GB

Guys have you read my questions? With people like you all threads are destroyed and questions remain unanswered. You are answering total paralel to the questions.
‘’’’’’‘I wonder if there is any plus for the ones plotting bigger sizes, like k33 - 200gb, k34- 400gb, do you have any ideea? Also maybe some support dev to answer?
Does it count when you compete k32 vs k33/k34? An also, does it receive more chances in a 24 hour cicle for example?’’’’’’’

Your question was already answered.

1 Like

My friend, stop freaking adding comments to threads open by me, you are are total paralel with everything. You responded to how much size does a k33,34,35 requires, but anybody asked you that? or do you have some mental problems?

I wasn’t replying to you when I put the chart in GB. I was giving more info for anyone that comes looking.

And again, your question was already answered.

Take a chill pill :pill:


That was uncalled for and offensive to people who actually suffer from mental health problems.

Please make sure to read the FAQ again and note that we want to have civil conversations here:


Looking at the figures above I now realize I could have filled my drives a little better. I’m a bit sad that one of them has a dangling unused 42 GB.

This is the only benefit for now, HDD utilization.

As for the original question, although it has been answered, one additional thought: just like password get weaker over time (faster better hardware can crack them easier) so will plots get more vulnerable over time.
By the time they get TOO vulnerable (but way before they’re critically vulnerable) the Chia network will phase out k32 plots and switch k33.
That switch is years away, and it’s much better now to crank out plots faster with less resources spent, that way you can start earning quicker as well.


I think the question is NOT “Are there any advantage in plotting K33+?”
but instead “Are there any disadvantage in plotting K33+?”

Put the HD utilization aside, I still think it’s in our interest to plot K33+ as @cultiv stated.
The only downside I can think is that K33 takes longer and that on-going plot cannot be mined, but it probably balances out in the future

K33+ of course takes longer.
There are some difference in gib/min written with k32 or k33+?
Is better plotting 10xk32 (1010 gib) or 5xk33 …

I took the HDD utilization route on my 8TB drive:

  • 25x k33
  • 21x k32

Although k33 plots takes more time, it’s basically same as 2x k32 so in terms of TB/day is same for me.
No difference in terms of Proof checks and/or seek times.

Check this video on how to get the right configuration:

EDIT: Here is my setup:

StartingFreeSpace K35 K34 K33 K32 RemainingGB
8001427599360     0   0   25  22  1.11

:thinking: @roybot has been really helpful here, I’m not sure this attack is warranted.

He was answering with details from the chia page. We can all read a 2 min story, maybe he can suppose we are not that stupid.
My real question is still unanswered, for ex a k32(100gb) goes in general about 18 times for a challenge in a 24 hours cicle. What about the bigger ones? k33(200gb) will just go for challenge 36 times? Or maybe the same 18 times, cos like that will be no advantage in plotting higher ones.
Also, if in a challenge, k32 is a against k33, let’s say with the same total plotting amount, will k33 take the proof?
We are not here to talk nonsense like he does, you get me ?

Ok, if there is no difference in proof checks, than k32 is the best for the moment

I think K32 does not have any advantage or disadvantage.

That makes K33+ (K33, K34 and K35) better for future proof.
By that I mean

  1. Your plot time is the same (consider the same space). It’s linear scalability.
  2. Your read time is the same (consider the same space). It’s linear scalability.
  3. Your chance of winning is the same (consider the same space). It’s linear scalability.

I probably need to study more to confirm this linearity. It may be very important if the planned plotting space is like 1PB++… saving here and there would yield much benefit

It’s the same if I say “The big pizza is 2x the size and with 2x the price, but you can keep in the fridge for longer”. There is no reason for me to buy two small pizzas. I will just buy one big one.

If this is the case, I will try to max out the K35 first and then goes down to smaller K.
But the combination of K32-K35 shall also be considered to max out the HD space.
One point is that I heard that we should not max (99.xx%+) out the HD because some reason… which makes the life of HD shorter…? cannot remember exactly

I think most of us answer with “community mind” - literally get nothing from answering. Any explanation, thought or idea are all much appreciated here.

1 Like