thank you for the easy instructions to upgrade my s3. Within 15 minutes in my web interface I saw marked improvement with best share and it seems to be speedier too.
I use M's Miner Monitor v5.2 and it shows ERROR still for the s3 that I upgraded.
Is there something I need to change within the config you posted so that Miner Monitor can observe it?
You need to add the ip address of the machine running the monitor to the API Allow field on the Miner Config tab, that's what I had to do. Just updated my S3+, couple issues:
1) Under API allow, if I use W:[my local ip address], then CryptoGlance reports the S3+, but the web page doesn't show any stats under Miner Status. If I use W:127.0.0.1, then it shows stats under Miner Status, but CryptoGlance shows the S3+ as dead.
Right so you use both, since you want both to have access ... W:127.0.0.1,W:[my local ip address] https://github.com/ckolivas/cgminer/blob/master/API-README#L18If you had it before as W:0/0 anyone on the planet could change your miner to mine for them if they had network access and found it ... e.g. your neighbours if you have Wifi and they can hack into it  I also have no idea what Bitmain did to the API - but it SHOULD ONLY give access to what you tell it to have access as how I designed and wrote the API and api-allow |
|
|
|
I've put an updated AntS3 update archive in my binaries git hub of latest 4.9.2 cgminer. For details and installing: https://github.com/kanoi/cgminer-binaries/tree/master/AntS3It's an update to the previous AntS3 release I did: 2015-Jul-7 Update cgminer-ants3-4.9.2-94e04f6-2.tgz
---------------------------------------------------
Update the cgminer init.d script to run ntpd a few times trying to set the date
Add more frequencies to the Web Advanced Settings tab
Warning, the higher frequencies marked with a warning can risk damage
Tested and running on my pool of course Lovely, will update the next time my S3+ needs a reboot, thanks again! |
|
|
|
One might even say that the GekkoScience Compac is the miner that the Antminer U3 should have been.
With the Antminer U3 instead being the Antminer P1, and preferably tested better
Great review, and I agree with your closing statement. In fact, I posted something almost identical yesterday in the dev thread. |
|
|
|
Thanks for running great campaigns, I'll watch the thread and hope to see twitter come up on the dice again in the future. |
|
|
|
that would be 59W for 115GH or 0.51W/GH all in. Not too bad.
Not too bad at all, especially if you compare to the U3, which for the same wattage on 4 of the older chips was only netting about 60GH/s, so you've basically doubled up on it (and without any of the hardware issues that come with a U3). And this is where I just realized I'll never use my U3s again...  |
|
|
|
You are looking at the 5s number which is borderline random because of how close it is to the average work replies.
Right, and generally what I see reported at 5s doesn't get me excited. I only mentioned it in the recent posts because I'd never seen it report back as high (or low) as it has been since updating to 4.9.2. For clarification, my other comments re:500GH and dying down to 480GH after 1-5 days is not looking at the 5s number, obviously, but at the average for the entire uptime. 20 hours since last restart and average hash rate is holding at 506GH/s, all systems go. |
|
|
|
Does it have to do with the massive tx flood the network is seeing? |
|
|
|
I've seen several single transaction blocks with same size and name $ amount the past few days. Often they appear right after AntPool finds a real looking block. This can't be right.
364026 14 minutes 1 $ 6,720.25 AntPool 0.2
If AntPool is collecting on these and in turn, paying us on these blocks, I would imagine the other pools would not be happy.
Is this the outdated software problem?
No, that's a separate "problem" (that some pools don't think is a problem) of creating empty blocks, blocks without transactions. When the purpose of a block is to handle transactions and a pool solves a block that contains 0 transactions, to me that's a problem. You need to be careful how you word that. "a pool solves a block that contains 0 new transactions" Luke likes to argue about how it's ok because you are confirming old transactions with an empty block using his word games as usual. It's not ok (yes as should be obvious I agree it's not ok) but his word games will cause grief if you miss technicalities, he likes to claim that everyone says the non-obvious that he wants when they say something, not the obvious that he doesn't want, even though we know what is being said. Yes he's a griefer. Funny that you mention technicalities, because after I posted that I thought, "Well, an empty block really has 1 tx, the coinbase tx that generates 25 BTC, but I'm going to leave it as 0 because everyone should know what I mean." So yes, when I wrote "contains 0 transactions" I should have wrote "contains 0 new transactions, excluding the coinbase generation of 25 BTC", but who has time to type all that out?  |
|
|
|
|
As someone who has some BTC invested here, I totally agree with you. An expected withdraw time and "best service hours" would be very useful. It would also be nice to receive an automated email when our withdraw request is first received, and again when it is processed letting us know when we should expect to receive the payment.
|
|
|
|
and this is the worst time to clog up the system because new adopters won't understand that it isn't business as usual.
Quite the contrary, if you want attention this is the best time to get it, when everyone is looking. Bigger blocks can be filled up with dust transactions just as easily. |
|
|
|
Hi guys, even though I'm a senior member I never really got into btc mining,
Funny, because if you look through your post history you were pretty active mining earlier this year, for example. You've also been here since 2013, so you were here for the ASIC rush of 2014, but you should know this already. Then around april this year you joined a signature campaign and the tone of your posts completely changed. What you meant to write was, "Hi guys, I just bought this account and want to post to earn for my signature campaign" If I had a bitcoin for every post that is titled identically to yours I would be rich. Try reading the forum. |
|
|
|
If you're mining BTC, stop. You're just burning your Mac's GPU for no reason because you won't see any returns. If this really is a "just for fun" exercise, pick up an Antminer U2 and plug it into a USB port on your Mac. It'll give you a much higher hash rate than your GPU and won't turn your Mac into a very expensive paperweight. The U2 won't earn you much of anything... But it will spare your Mac's life After you master stick mining you can pick up a used S3 for a very reasonable price and play with that. The S3 is just complicated enough to be interesting, just old enough to be cheap used, and just fast enough/power efficient enough to still be worth using today. |
|
|
|
|
If I could just get a million people to send me $1 then I'd have $1,000,000...
|
|
|
|
I'm certainly hoping it's not a bunch of miners firing back up old gear just to mine and dump. I'm also hoping that it's not a new 20PH farm that's come online either... in any case, though, certainly looks like we're in for a positive adjustment. Hopefully this is just some variance spiking and it'll come back down I suspect some big farms keep some marginal gear on hand just for an occasion like this. Price spike of 10% flip a switch and turn on 1ph of s-3's Do you? I was thinking something like that, but then I had to think of the space that would take up, the effort to maintain all the hardware that you rarely use, etc. etc. and I just don't see it as a very profitable or workable theory. If a farm has the rack space then they're probably using it for gear that's running. Marginal gear does not get left sitting around, hooked up and ready to go. It gets removed from the farm to make room for more gear! I think the profit margin dictates this behavior and the corners farms cut to maintain a profit lead me to think that the scenario of keeping marginal gear around and connected to network and power to only be used on rare occasions just doesn't make accounting sense. |
|
|
|
|
Coinbase is a wallet and Bitmain is a hardware manufacturer; not sure why you are comparing either company to this service which is neither.
As they've mentioned, they process all withdraws manually. It's the middle of the morning before dawn in China right now. Patience...
|
|
|
|
|
The fan display is something from the hardware, not software. It's probably like you seem to have already guessed, it's on the control board somewhere and that somewhere exists on the S3 board but not the S1.
AFAIK no one has ever determined how to get S1 hardware to show the second fan speed in the gui.
|
|
|
|
This is ridiculous. I think people are ignoring the fact that 30 confirmations is freakin 12 hours. What a coincidence right? So everyone was talking about forks last week, and now there are rogues and new chains being built.
30 tx (x) ~10 min/tx (/) 60min/hour = 5 hours What coincidence are you alluding to? Sounds to me like you're some sort of conspiracy nut who's bad at math. If you talk bitcoin/blockchain, you talk forks. People have been talking about them since the network first came on line. Back to topic, latest Coindesk article on the fork: http://www.coindesk.com/double-spending-risk-bitcoin-network-fork/ |
|
|
|
If it's consistent, then it is hashing faster.
Where it starts, depends on the luck in the early time after the start ... up to an hour or so ... then it will gradually average out to the expected rate.
If you are lucky at the start it can be quite high, I've had my S3 mine at around 500GHs for an hour - luck/variance - but eventually it settles down and heads towards 440.
Yes, it consistently hashes faster for one to several days after a restart. With my overclock settings I should expect it to hash at 500GH/s. After a day or several days, however, this machine will slowly ratchet down to about 480GH/s. I like to restart it between 485-490 to keep that extra hash on my side. I reset it last night and took a screen cap this morning to show it holding 500+ over night, I noticed the 5s hash rate was doing it's crazy swings again so I screen capped it high and low. Variance I expect, especially right at start up as you mentioned, but a swing of order of magnitude 10X is pretty substantial, wouldn't you say? Especially after running for over 9 hours.   |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
