I have Gateless Gate (the previous iteration of GGS) by only used it for Neoscrypt coins (TZC and FTC), where it performed very well (and devfee is optional). If GGS improves on GG enough to offset the devfee and has generates less invalid shares then I'm all for it.

The only halfway plausible way of evaluating miner speed - that I know of, anyway - is to see how many coins you earned over a 24 hour period and compare it to what you should have gotten based on the average difficulty for the last 24 hours on the minethecoin.com calculators. Otherwise you are trying to calculate a continuously moving target.

Your always going to get some incorrect/invalid/rejected shares if for no other reason than latency (aka "ping time") between you and the pool. In fact, this is the main reason why you should try to use pools with low ping times, which are generally, but not always, the ones closest to you.

Console, so bminer could very well be lying err, stretching the truth, but I will verify using the average difficulty for the last 24 hours once it has been running for that long.

I'm going to build my own case, but one thing I would be wary of if buying a pre-made case is that the hole pattern on the Onda mobo will almost certainly be non-standard. Maybe the portion of the board that is within the ATX dimensions will have the ATX hole pattern, but the remainder of the board could be anything.

Better watch out, dstm; I just switched over to bminer 4.0.0 and am getting about 5-7 Sols/s more out of each of my two GTX 1060 compared to dstm 0.5.7 and at the same power draw...

Lol, a response that is as cryptic as the coin itself. On account of the persistent shenanigans I have demoted the mining of DERO down to my lowliest rig, a bare mobo sitting on a stool with an unactivated copy of Win10 that reboots every night just to annoy you and a single GTX 1050 Ti cranking out a blistering 340 H/s. The Ryzen desktop with the RX 570 is mining a shitcoin that I can actually sell or hold* - MUSIC - on a pool that has never done me wrong - Pool Sexy.

Maybe not so much a problem with the math as what is considered the end of the devfee period - I marked it as when my mining pool acknowledged receipt of my credentials with "39 bytes".

The swiftness of the OP's response convinced me to give this Yet Another Chance... and it now works fine on luckpool. It's only been running a few minutes so I hesitate to report on performance, but dstm 0.5.7 was delivering a fairly consistent 610 sols/s with (2) GTX 1060 3GB and a total draw of 360W (ie - not just the cards).

So far, bminer 4.0.0 is reporting around 625 sols/w at the exact same draw of 360W, so it appears to have made significant improvement in the power draw while pulling just enough ahead of the competition to make the devfee worth paying.

I still would like to see cumulative run time reported to the console (calculating sols/w, which dstm does, seems superfluous unless you try out a lot of different cards in one slot while keeping the rest the same).

Yes, -mode 1 in the batch file.

Based on what you posted here are the relevant entries from the log file earlier:


So I guess the devfee all told takes up about 43 seconds, not the 72 that appeared to be the case just looking at the timestamps in the command window.

My apologies - carry on!

Hmmm, I thought the OP was talking about memory errors - something reinforced by reporting what HWInfo said - and not merely rejected shares reported by the miner. Memory errors do result in rejected shares, but rejected shares are not just caused by memory errors!

Look at the post history - pretty much all shilling for some sketch coin or another.

I don't know what to think about DERO at this point, though. I definitely feel a bit burned, but at least I only lost about 12 - 16 hours in total with a single RX 570; if this was a full 6+ GPU rig, though, I'd be pissed.

Daemon is still awfully busy doing lots of daemony things, and wallet still reports it is out of sync; pool.dero.live now says it has sent me 31.4 DERO while wallet still says only 22.9. Talk about kicking you while you are down, lol...

Okay, got the log file pulled up in notepad but I'm not sure what to look for here. There are some seemingly relevant entries, but I can't quite figure out the start and stop points. Any pointers so I don't have to upload a wall of text?

I have -allcoins -1 because it generates the ETH DAG first, and this is supposed to reduce the time it takes to do devfee switching, but I admit I may not understand this option correctly.


Hmmm... I'll try to pay closer attention next devfee round and put a stop watch to it rather than just scroll back through the timestamps, but I know for sure the process took > 1 minute, and not 36 seconds.

Seeing that answer is why I asked mine, because I wanted to know if there was an option to use the UBQ DAG like can be done with EXP. I assumed that these coins use different DAGs, or that UBQ is not a valid coin for the devfee to mine. So, no, my question was not answered on the same page by Coroto today.

Apologies if this was covered in the previous 18739 posts, but I want to understand the devfee mining process better as it seems I am getting unduly penalized because I am mining an ETH fork, Ubiq, and to a different pool than what Claymore uses for the devfee.

For example, I just restarted Claymore at 6:50AM and it immediately launched into mining the devfee, then it switched over to Pool.Sexy to mine UBQ for me, taking about 72 seconds in all to do so. At 7:44:23 it once again switched over to mining the devfee, so less than an hour later (granted, not much less, but still less), and the total time it took before resuming mining for me was again at least 72 seconds. And yes, this is in single mining mode, since I don't have much interest in roasting my GPUs just to mine a shitcoin like SIA.

I understand that if I were mining Expanse I could save some wasted time for devfee mining by using the DAG for that coin - e.g. -allcoins EXP; is there a similar option for UBQ? If not, then Claymore 10.2 is just marginally faster for me than Ethminer 0.12.0...

I believe I was on the official pool - pool.dero.live; at least that is the one that the OP suggested I use.

In an earlier PM to the OP I reported that I was kicked off the pool in the middle of the night yet again - around 05:30 UTC, based on time of last share submitted, since I didn't have xmr-stak configured to generate a log file (that has since been changed!). So I wonder if that is when the blockchain got out of sync?

That's good news; I've got two of the same board (with the Celeron CPU) on their way from China now.

Question for you and the group in general: do you bother with activating Windows 10, buy sketch keys from Kinguin, et al., or pony up for an OEM license from Newegg or the like? I wouldn't bother but it looks like you need to activate Windows if for no other other reason to stop Update from rebooting your machine every night, as it seems prone to do...

If two miners are charging a 2% devfee but one of them is faster and just as stable than the other is it not fair to say the slower miner's devfee is too high? That doesn't mean the devfee for the slower miner should be 0% (unless it really sucks), just that it either needs to reflect its second place position or else improve.

Check the wallet daemon messages - I don't understand them but there seems to be a lot of "Block added as alternative on height xxxxx"... sounds ominous.

EDIT - also, my wallet has been running continuously for a couple of days and was caught up but now it says it is 75 blocks behind.

EDIT2 - just refreshed my wallet and saw that the pool says I have been paid 27.3 but wallet only shows 22.9 and that network is out of sync. So, yeah, we're mining air, folks.