Yes, @ 1200/1500 seem to be working, getting the same 1174h/s for 4 out of 5 GPUs the sick one gets around 445h/s then goes sick again. config from configgen Gettin` 1188 h/s on 280X @ 1200/1500
Now 4 (cards) x 20-25 accepts without HW.
Config from configgen.
|
|
|
|
FAAK, the rig died when rebooting through TW, HAHAHA, have to go and restart it manually tomorrow, that's what you get for being to greedy  @ Wirly Thanks for trying to help! Might be back again when its up again tomorrow... Reboot the rigs. Do not just restart the miners when you make these changes. So this is the batfile:
C:\Users\Mining1\Desktop\Yacminer-3.5.0-yac2-x86\yacminer.exe --scrypt-chacha -o stratum+tcp://stratum2.tumblingblock.com:5555 -u worker.1 -p password -R 2560 -g 1 -w 128 --buffer-size 2590 --lookup-gap 8 --gpu-engine 1000 --gpu-memclock 1250 --temp-cutoff 85 --nfmin 4 --nfmax 30 --starttime 1388361600
gives me: 0 (Sick), 978,978, 450, 130
|
|
|
|
So this is the batfile: C:\Users\Mining1\Desktop\Yacminer-3.5.0-yac2-x86\yacminer.exe --scrypt-chacha -o stratum+tcp://stratum2.tumblingblock.com:5555 -u worker.1 -p password -R 2560 -g 1 -w 128 --buffer-size 2590 --lookup-gap 8 --gpu-engine 1000 --gpu-memclock 1250 --temp-cutoff 85 --nfmin 4 --nfmax 30 --starttime 1388361600 gives me: 0 (Sick), 978,978, 450, 130 You are having memory issues, to much engine speed not enough memory. You can see that your gpu 0, 3 and 4 are affecting each other. Depending on the design of your MOB your GPU may be sharing a data bus. Example, my 6 gpu rigs are the same and gpu1 and 4 share a bus and changing anything on 1 affects 4, but only when there are 6 gpu's running. try gpu-engine 1000 and gpu-memclock of 1250 for start. So tried --gpu-engine 1031, 1031, 1031, 1031, 1031 and get : 0 (Sick/dead), 1,009 Kh/s, 1,009Kh/s, 490h/s, 134h/s. Then I try --gpu-engine 900, 1031, 1031, 900, 900 and get: 0 (Sick/dead), 881h/s, 881h/s, 489h/s, 130h/s Why is GPU 1 and 2 affected by the GPU 0 engine set? Yes Ok, I'll try that. If it says GPU 0 is sick would that be automatically the first engine to slow down, in your example: --gpu-engine 1040,1040,1040,1000,1000 and slow that from 1040 to lets say 1000? I use the data from configgen and have this setup for all my rigs: C:\Users\Mining1\Desktop\Yacminer-3.5.0-yac2-x86\yacminer.exe --scrypt-chacha -o stratum+tcp://stratum2.tumblingblock.com:5555 -u worker.1 -p password -R 2560 -g 1 -w 128 --buffer-size 2590 --lookup-gap 8 --temp-cutoff 85 --nfmin 4 --nfmax 30 --starttime 1388361600 From that I get different results for every rig: 5 x Sapphire Dual-x R9 280x 3GB: 998h/s, 998h/s, 490h/s ,139h/s & one SICK 5 x Sapphire Dual-x R9 280x 3GB: 998h/s, 998h/s, 998h/s, 362h/s & one DEAD 5 x Sapphire Dual-x R9 280x 3GB: 998h/s, 998h/s, 490h/s ,139h/s & one SICK 4 x Sapphire Dual-x R9 280x 3GB: 998h/s, 998h/s, 998h/s, & one DEAD 5 x ASUS Radeon R9 280x 3GB: 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s & one DEAD 5 x ASUS Radeon R9 280x 3GB: 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s & one DEAD 4 x ASUS Radeon R9 280x 3GB: 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s & one DEAD 5 x MSI Radeon R9 3 GB: 998h/s, 998h/s, 998h/s, 998h/s, 998h/s Anyone got any idea why one card is always dead in each rig from Sapphire/ASUS but not from the MSI-cards? Before mininig at N14 they didn't go DEAD/Sick...? Friends share settings for R9 28x 0and R9 270x. Just not here - http://cfg.ultracoin.net/ the result is less than it should be. Thank U. Try slowing down the engine speed of the gpu going sick, example --gpu-engine 1040,1040,1040,1000,1000 or turn down the raw intensity by using individual -R values for each, example -R 2560,2560,2560,2432,2432 (decreased in increments of the work size setting of 128) or if using windows try increasing the amount of virtual memory your hard drive is using |
|
|
|
So tried --gpu-engine 1031, 1031, 1031, 1031, 1031 and get : 0 (Sick/dead), 1,009 Kh/s, 1,009Kh/s, 490h/s, 134h/s. Then I try --gpu-engine 900, 1031, 1031, 900, 900 and get: 0 (Sick/dead), 881h/s, 881h/s, 489h/s, 130h/s Why is GPU 1 and 2 affected by the GPU 0 engine set? Yes Ok, I'll try that. If it says GPU 0 is sick would that be automatically the first engine to slow down, in your example: --gpu-engine 1040,1040,1040,1000,1000 and slow that from 1040 to lets say 1000? I use the data from configgen and have this setup for all my rigs: C:\Users\Mining1\Desktop\Yacminer-3.5.0-yac2-x86\yacminer.exe --scrypt-chacha -o stratum+tcp://stratum2.tumblingblock.com:5555 -u worker.1 -p password -R 2560 -g 1 -w 128 --buffer-size 2590 --lookup-gap 8 --temp-cutoff 85 --nfmin 4 --nfmax 30 --starttime 1388361600 From that I get different results for every rig: 5 x Sapphire Dual-x R9 280x 3GB: 998h/s, 998h/s, 490h/s ,139h/s & one SICK 5 x Sapphire Dual-x R9 280x 3GB: 998h/s, 998h/s, 998h/s, 362h/s & one DEAD 5 x Sapphire Dual-x R9 280x 3GB: 998h/s, 998h/s, 490h/s ,139h/s & one SICK 4 x Sapphire Dual-x R9 280x 3GB: 998h/s, 998h/s, 998h/s, & one DEAD 5 x ASUS Radeon R9 280x 3GB: 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s & one DEAD 5 x ASUS Radeon R9 280x 3GB: 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s & one DEAD 4 x ASUS Radeon R9 280x 3GB: 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s & one DEAD 5 x MSI Radeon R9 3 GB: 998h/s, 998h/s, 998h/s, 998h/s, 998h/s Anyone got any idea why one card is always dead in each rig from Sapphire/ASUS but not from the MSI-cards? Before mininig at N14 they didn't go DEAD/Sick...? Friends share settings for R9 28x 0and R9 270x. Just not here - http://cfg.ultracoin.net/ the result is less than it should be. Thank U. Try slowing down the engine speed of the gpu going sick, example --gpu-engine 1040,1040,1040,1000,1000 or turn down the raw intensity by using individual -R values for each, example -R 2560,2560,2560,2432,2432 (decreased in increments of the work size setting of 128) or if using windows try increasing the amount of virtual memory your hard drive is using |
|
|
|
Ok, I'll try that. If it says GPU 0 is sick would that be automatically the first engine to slow down, in your example: --gpu-engine 1040,1040,1040,1000,1000 and slow that from 1040 to lets say 1000? I use the data from configgen and have this setup for all my rigs: C:\Users\Mining1\Desktop\Yacminer-3.5.0-yac2-x86\yacminer.exe --scrypt-chacha -o stratum+tcp://stratum2.tumblingblock.com:5555 -u worker.1 -p password -R 2560 -g 1 -w 128 --buffer-size 2590 --lookup-gap 8 --temp-cutoff 85 --nfmin 4 --nfmax 30 --starttime 1388361600 From that I get different results for every rig: 5 x Sapphire Dual-x R9 280x 3GB: 998h/s, 998h/s, 490h/s ,139h/s & one SICK 5 x Sapphire Dual-x R9 280x 3GB: 998h/s, 998h/s, 998h/s, 362h/s & one DEAD 5 x Sapphire Dual-x R9 280x 3GB: 998h/s, 998h/s, 490h/s ,139h/s & one SICK 4 x Sapphire Dual-x R9 280x 3GB: 998h/s, 998h/s, 998h/s, & one DEAD 5 x ASUS Radeon R9 280x 3GB: 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s & one DEAD 5 x ASUS Radeon R9 280x 3GB: 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s & one DEAD 4 x ASUS Radeon R9 280x 3GB: 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s & one DEAD 5 x MSI Radeon R9 3 GB: 998h/s, 998h/s, 998h/s, 998h/s, 998h/s Anyone got any idea why one card is always dead in each rig from Sapphire/ASUS but not from the MSI-cards? Before mininig at N14 they didn't go DEAD/Sick...? Friends share settings for R9 28x 0and R9 270x. Just not here - http://cfg.ultracoin.net/ the result is less than it should be. Thank U. Try slowing down the engine speed of the gpu going sick, example --gpu-engine 1040,1040,1040,1000,1000 or turn down the raw intensity by using individual -R values for each, example -R 2560,2560,2560,2432,2432 (decreased in increments of the work size setting of 128) or if using windows try increasing the amount of virtual memory your hard drive is using |
|
|
|
I use the data from configgen and have this setup for all my rigs: C:\Users\Mining1\Desktop\Yacminer-3.5.0-yac2-x86\yacminer.exe --scrypt-chacha -o stratum+tcp://stratum2.tumblingblock.com:5555 -u worker.1 -p password -R 2560 -g 1 -w 128 --buffer-size 2590 --lookup-gap 8 --temp-cutoff 85 --nfmin 4 --nfmax 30 --starttime 1388361600 From that I get different results for every rig: 5 x Sapphire Dual-x R9 280x 3GB: 998h/s, 998h/s, 490h/s ,139h/s & one SICK 5 x Sapphire Dual-x R9 280x 3GB: 998h/s, 998h/s, 998h/s, 362h/s & one DEAD 5 x Sapphire Dual-x R9 280x 3GB: 998h/s, 998h/s, 490h/s ,139h/s & one SICK 4 x Sapphire Dual-x R9 280x 3GB: 998h/s, 998h/s, 998h/s, & one DEAD 5 x ASUS Radeon R9 280x 3GB: 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s & one DEAD 5 x ASUS Radeon R9 280x 3GB: 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s & one DEAD 4 x ASUS Radeon R9 280x 3GB: 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s, 1,047Kh/s & one DEAD 5 x MSI Radeon R9 3 GB: 998h/s, 998h/s, 998h/s, 998h/s, 998h/s Anyone got any idea why one card is always dead in each rig from Sapphire/ASUS but not from the MSI-cards? Before mininig at N14 they didn't go DEAD/Sick...? Friends share settings for R9 28x 0and R9 270x. Just not here - http://cfg.ultracoin.net/ the result is less than it should be. Thank U. |
|
|
|
I'm not sure I'm answering your question, but you can clear the orphans in the transaction tab by rightclick on any transaction and a new window will appear, choose "clear orphans" and the orphans will disappear... Gday just a question is there anyway to limit "generated but not accepted".  Regards Dan |
|
|
|
Great news UTC team! Can you please provide the donation adress again! That would be the BTC, not the UTC... Best of luck for the Conferance and don't forget to have some fun in the sun!  Hey guys, sorry about the late reply. Tomorrow marks the beginning of the North American Bitcoin Conference, one of the largest and most esteemed cryptocurrency conventions in the world. Last year at Hashers United, there was an attendance of a number of high profile developers, entrepreneurs and key players in the cryptocurrency community and about 200 attendee's. This years conference is much larger, and blows with over 2,000 people set to attend, with heavy press from large press outlets such as Forbes, the Bitcoinist, amongst many others. We will be setting up a table this for the conference tomorrow and preaching the gospel of Ultracoin to all 2,000 attendee's present! We will also be using this opportunity for networking and reaching out to the many vendors for potential partnerships. Exposing Ultracoin at a premiere event like this will surely stir the pot, we are packing new marketing material, Ultracoin paper wallets and tons of t-shirts. We hope to see some of you out there if you are in the South Florida area or around the city!
Also, this is very cool, someone is making Ultracoin poker chips. I ordered a couple for myself, not bad!  Check out http://cryptochips.net/ for more information on how to order yours.
Sincerely,
Steven "Rapture"
Management Director
Steven@Ultracoin.net
Ultracoin |
|
|
|
this coin is dead im so stupid i didnt sold when it was 0.0001...i just thought that the devs were serious and i was decevied from fabietech who told that the price will rise to 0.0003 ..i was so idiot for believing to such words..i hope to god for this coin to rise over 0.0001 again and i will unload my bag like there is not tommorow
I'm pretty sure I can speak on the behalf of the rest of the team when I say this, when I see posts like yours after working so hard and so long, it starts to upset me, but then I realized it was never people like you who actually helped us get anywhere. It's easy for you to complain and moan without ever having to lift a finger, or invest hundreds of hours or thousands of dollars into developing, nurturing and working on this coin. All I can say is, good riddance, you are dead weight anyway, especially with that loser attitude. Dump your coins, and leave the hard work to the rest of us. Btw, you are not the first one to say this coins dead, yet we're still here. Heck, we're above Vertcoin and they have been popular in the scene for a long time, making us the biggest adaptive N-Factor coin that I know of (correct me if I'm wrong). Plus we are going to be attending The North American Bitcoin Conference next week, the most esteemed cryptocurrency conference in North America and possibly even the world; how many other altcoins can say that? I'm with you Steven! |
|
|
|
WARNING - contains references to other Crypto-currencies !
Just a tip to the UTC Official UTC team, devs and community.
You MUST announce that UTC will link its blockchain with Ethereum and Ether to achieve limitless utility. You must announce this at the Conference. Then start talking with Vitalik and his group to put this in stone and make it work.
You all really need to realise that these guys have got the future covered and UTC can massively benefit from cooperation and linking blockchains to enable all the features of Ethereum.
If you disagree thats fine but let history be the judge in 2 years time. The $15m injection has enabled MUCH MORE than critical mass and nothing is going to keep up with the mass dev from every angle to create the crypto utopia. Ethereum has the funds to continue devs for years - BTC is not even in the league in terms of dev power and applications across every sphere. Ethereum has already stolen the best minds and will continue to do so.
Ethereum will make Bitcoin look like a brick and Ethereum is about to break open in the next few months and its going to be a the most signif step in crypto for a very long time. Ethereum will be the main media item - full stop. When people realise whats happened here its going to break open crypto and turn it upside down.
Anything associated with Ethereum is going to fly. Bitcoin is going to suffer - this is the turning point I am afraid.
Miss this opportunity to put UTC in the mix and you have missed the one thing that can make UTC be in the top 10 and above.
Please consider seriously.
Steve - thanks for your update - rest assured that the community is behind UTC - but please take this one VERY seriously.
This is the big one.
+1 @ Steven, I think this might be worth looking into, what do you think? |
|
|
|
|
Updated two wallets from ver. 733 to 733.1, no problems!
|
|
|
|
|
Wow, I have an encrypted wallet with stake minting enabled and thus unlocked for stake minting, but I was still being able to send UTC from that wallet to another wallet without being asked for the password for that transaction...which means that when its unlocked for stake minting its unlocked for any outgoing transaction, how can that be?
First it comes up a note: Are you sure you want to sent lalala
Then Confirm transaction fee lalala
Click yes, yes and then the transaction goes through and have been seen by the network...
It feels very unconfortable...
|
|
|
|
I installed the wallet on 12PCs and staked 100-200 coins on each one.
I suggest we all do the same.
If I understand right, the more NEW nodes staking, the better the chances for the network to stabilize., am I right Kracko
Did you use the same wallet.dat in each and every one of the 12 computers with all your UTC on, or did you install new wallets on every one with 0 UTC on? Thought you needed UTC in the wallet to be able to stake mint them? |
|
|
|
|
Is it possible to enable stake minting AND mining in the wallet at the same time? If so what settings to use in the mining options?
Is it possible to mine in the wallet on the same computer/motherboard you use with GPUmining (5GPUs)?
Did I understand it right that there will be another hard fork and a new wallet update soon/tonight?
|
|
|
|
|
Looks like the test pool is up and running again. All my miners are connected and mining at normal hashrate. Changed one rig from port 64444 to port 64445, so now two rigs are running on the static port and the rest on variable diff, all yacminer NF 14.
|
|
|
|
I think the TestPool is telling me its on N-factor 16So any new miners that I try to connect get rejected (yacminer) And a friend of mine all ways tells me there is no such thing as "Bad publicity" so maybe the price will go UP after this fuckUP  From "getting started" page on the Test pool I read this: Yacminer GPU Miner [example config for 7790. Use static diff port 5555] yacminer --scrypt -w 128 --lookup-gap 2 -I 17 --thread-concurrency 8000 -g 1 -o stratum+tcp://stratum2.tumblingblock.com:5555 -u Weblogin.WorkerName -p WorkerPassword Got NF 14 (yacminer) and low hashrate, tried to change the batfile with the above settings and got NF 16 but no connection to the pool, changed back to the original settings and still can't connect with this miner to the test pool. The other miners have 0,1 difficulty and very low hashrate with the original settings... The test pool is at NF14 just like the live chain. Have you tried the static diff port I just added? Try port 64445 with your yacminers. Strange, now when I looked at the testpool, all my original rigs with yacminer pointed at stratum+tcp://stratum2.tumblingblock.com:64444 had high variable difficulties (1-5) and normal hashrate. Tried my first rig which got rejected before and pointed it towards port 64444 and got low difficulty (0,1), switched to port 64445 and it seem to be hashing at normal speed and difficulty around 1. So it seem to be working on both ports with yacminer, the original ones with port 64444 and the first one that got rejected now works on port 64445, if you can make something out of that... |
|
|
|
I think the TestPool is telling me its on N-factor 16So any new miners that I try to connect get rejected (yacminer) And a friend of mine all ways tells me there is no such thing as "Bad publicity" so maybe the price will go UP after this fuckUP From "getting started" page on the Test pool I read this: Yacminer GPU Miner [example config for 7790. Use static diff port 5555] yacminer --scrypt -w 128 --lookup-gap 2 -I 17 --thread-concurrency 8000 -g 1 -o stratum+tcp://stratum2.tumblingblock.com:5555 -u Weblogin.WorkerName -p WorkerPassword Got NF 14 (yacminer) and low hashrate, tried to change the batfile with the above settings and got NF 16 but no connection to the pool, changed back to the original settings and still can't connect with this miner to the test pool. The other miners have 0,1 difficulty and very low hashrate with the original settings... |
|
|
|
Hi Kracko.
I support you.
I 300Kh / s stars on test your pool receives only 84kh / s
When the test is complete, please notify me
Me too, I also only get about 1/10 of my hashrate on the testpool: 10kh vs 110kh |
|
|
|
|
Hi, can anyone provide me with the stratum adress and port for the test pool so I can point my rigs.
I'll support you too kracko! Great work with the wallet!
Welcome back DCgirl :-)
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
