How come a pool hashrate can be higher than network hashrate? For example https://electromine.fr/This pool 31.57 MH/s, network 27.12 MH/s That should not be possible because the pool is also on the network, right? Looking at https://etn.uax.io/#This pool: 44 MH/s, network 54 MH/s OK there seems to be double network hashrate on the second pool so maybe that is the correct value? But then add these twoo pools togehter 44+31 and it is still higher than total network hashrate. Why? Where does the hashrate of the pools go that not show up on the network? I have seen this on other cryptonight pools to, like for intense coin. Something is wrong with hashrate calculation on the pools or somebody stealing hashrate? What is average block time for Electroneum network? I guess it should be possible to calculate network hashrate from difficulty. The difficulty is how many hashes needed on average to win one block? So network hashrate / difficulty should be average block time? Average block time is adjusted to a predefinied time by network by adjusting difficulty? So calculated network hashrate is block time * difficulty Yes, it's strange. I like this pool: http://electroneum.hashparty.io/# It has static diff :3 Also don't use those big pools remember for decentralization. Thanks! By the way no problems at all mining electroneum. First I just compiled the github wallet from source code on Arch Linux (my wveryday OS) just as described on github. Started daemon and let it sync blockchain and when done I started the cli wallet and generated an new wallet address. Then I just used xmrig, xmrig-nvidia and xmr-staxk-amd and just changed pool address and wallet address to electroneum. Mined 57 coins in 2 hours with my 4 kH/s. The coins show up in my wallet without any problems. Too bad difficulty raise so much... |
|
|
|
How come a pool hashrate can be higher than network hashrate? For example https://electromine.fr/This pool 31.57 MH/s, network 27.12 MH/s That should not be possible because the pool is also on the network, right? Looking at https://etn.uax.io/#This pool: 44 MH/s, network 54 MH/s OK there seems to be double network hashrate on the second pool so maybe that is the correct value? But then add these twoo pools togehter 44+31 and it is still higher than total network hashrate. Why? Where does the hashrate of the pools go that not show up on the network? I have seen this on other cryptonight pools to, like for intense coin. Something is wrong with hashrate calculation on the pools or somebody stealing hashrate? What is average block time for Electroneum network? I guess it should be possible to calculate network hashrate from difficulty. The difficulty is how many hashes needed on average to win one block? So network hashrate / difficulty should be average block time? Average block time is adjusted to a predefinied time by network by adjusting difficulty? So calculated network hashrate is block time * difficulty |
|
|
|
This pool is unstable, I think, and some users are leaving it.
The ´Pending Balance´ don´t update, the payments are delayed for fell hours and the amount pay seems incorrect.
Are the pool admins on this forum?
Hello, I am one of the admins for intensepool. We haven't had any recent issues other than with the payment script. This is now resolved. All payments have been paid out within 3 hours of any issue being reported. Coins are usually paid out instantly once the mined block is mature. Our pool luck is 97%. For such a small pool this is very good! There are absolutely no fees or hidden charges and the amount paid out is the amount mined. I have worked with the Intensecoin Devs on setting this pool up and the configuration is almost identical to the official pool. We are also working hard on creating a wiki page to help new miners get started: wiki.intensepool.net And we have also created an app for the official slack to show pool statistics throughout the ITNS network:  If anyone had any suggestions or feedback feel free to PM me on the official slack @james.dawson I can confirm that everything on itns.intensepool.net is running smoothly with frequent payouts and a steady hashrate. We own all of our own hardware and the servers are colocated in a datacenter very close to home that we have access to 24/7 incase of any serious issues. We also have great Latency to all of the UK, Mainland Europe and the East coast of the US. I like your pool and mining on it right now. What is "official slack" and how can I join that? |
|
|
|
ITNS Whitepaper revision I is available here!
As was suggested by a community member here, we are initially releasing the whitepaper with the premise of accepting comments, feedback and criticism to yield a more thoroughly refined plan for design, implementation and execution. We look forward to hearing your thoughts. Thanks for the documentation. How do you manage numbers of exit nodes? If there are too many VPN nodes, the connection speed will crawl (like Tor browser). As I understand it you choose one exit node that you want to use for VPN connection an then all traffic goes through that exit node as long as you pay for it to the owner of the exit node. Other exit nodes are not used for your connection so the number of nodes should not affect your speed. But the number of users on that single node could be too high that it start to crawl. More nodes should get less users on each node. ronnylov is correct; the VPN connection is 1-to-1 for a client node, and 1-to-many for exit nodes. You raise a good point in that limitations need to be available for exit nodes to specify maximum # of clients, as more bandwidth/traffic will inevitably affect the speed of an exit node. If I want to host an exit node - what is the system requirements needed in order to deliver good VPN performance for the users?
Thinking I might have a limit of maximum 20 users charing the total bandwidth of maximum 100 Mbit/s (5 Mbit/s to each user on average).
I guess there already are OpenVPN benchmarks available for different kind of computers?
Or can I just run some kind of benchmark tool to get an answer that is valid for my computer?
Edit: Maybe we could integrate a benchmarking tool in the wallet to be able to get recommendations of what kind of VPN offers this computer is able to perform?
Great question. In terms of network speed/bandwidth, it really depends on how much bandwidth you are offering each user. In terms of processing power and memory, requirements are often minimal and probably on-par with what it takes to run a normal Intense blockchain node. It's anecdotal, but see example 1, example 2, etc. The limiting factor will likely only be uplink/downlink speeds. Benchmarking bandwidth would be a strong addition. It might be considered overcomplicating the software, though, as it's simple for a user to head to speedtest.net and measure connection capabilities, while in-software integration of a feature like that is quite labor intensive. Yes you are right we don't need overcomplicating the software. Some guidelines in text could be enough with links to external tools or examples of hardware that work well. |
|
|
|
|
If I want to host an exit node - what is the system requirements needed in order to deliver good VPN performance for the users?
Thinking I might have a limit of maximum 20 users charing the total bandwidth of maximum 100 Mbit/s (5 Mbit/s to each user on average).
I guess there already are OpenVPN benchmarks available for different kind of computers?
Or can I just run some kind of benchmark tool to get an answer that is valid for my computer?
Edit: Maybe we could integrate a benchmarking tool in the wallet to be able to get recommendations of what kind of VPN offers this computer is able to perform?
|
|
|
|
ITNS Whitepaper revision I is available here!
As was suggested by a community member here, we are initially releasing the whitepaper with the premise of accepting comments, feedback and criticism to yield a more thoroughly refined plan for design, implementation and execution. We look forward to hearing your thoughts. Thanks for the documentation. How do you manage numbers of exit nodes? If there are too many VPN nodes, the connection speed will crawl (like Tor browser). As I understand it you choose one exit node that you want to use for VPN connection an then all traffic goes through that exit node as long as you pay for it to the owner of the exit node. Other exit nodes are not used for your connection so the number of nodes should not affect your speed. But the number of users on that single node could be too high that it start to crawl. More nodes should get less users on each node. |
|
|
|
|
Only the first picture link is working for me.
|
|
|
|
well I'll give another vote for aeon! mine it, it you have 4 cores CPU, with proper setting, it will be running in 50% of load when mining
the cryptonight-lite version of AEON algo is more power efficient so your cpu do not consume to much energy
with i5 like 6400 or something similar you'll get about 400-600 h/s
it will give you like 0,5 aeon per 2 days I guess.
so do not sell it, wait. once it will pump, say once in 2-3 month sell and earn x3 or x5 more profit
I get 1550h/s with my dual xeon X5650  how is it possible ? i have i5 6500 and i have something about 150 H / s but i use the Minergate. do you have any advice on which program to use? or settings? I will be very grateful  With my Core i7 2600 with 8 MB cache I get around 700 H/s by using 4 threads of 2MB each with the miner XMRig and settings av=2, t=4 and cryptonight-lite. A core i5 6500 has 6 MB cache so you can run 3 threads of 2 MB each and it should be around 500 H/s for Aeon. With a miner like Aeon-stak-CPU or XMRig you can choose using 1MB or 2 MB cache for each CPU thread and also set number of threads. The trick is to let the threads using only the cache memory in CPU and use a setting that use all of the CPU cache memory. You should not use more threads than supported bu the CPU. Core i5 6500 has 4 threads (one for each core) and using all 4 cores with 1MB memory each is only using 4MB cache memory and 2MB is left unused. You probably get higher hashrate by using 3 threads of 2MB each. Test both options and see what is best. Also check power usage and if the computer can run other tasks when mining on CPU. With 3 threads for CPU mining you should be able to run GPU mining also or use the computer for other tasks without having to stop CPU mining. |
|
|
|
I am mining intensecoin with CPU now. Of course, it is too low. So i want to buy some GPU cards, But which card is much better for CryptoNight, AMD or Nvdia?
http://monerobenchmarks.info/AMD Vega 56 looks good for cryptonight. |
|
|
|
It is interesting to have more info about ryzen/epic hash rate on different algos(not only cryptonote). Maybe it isn't work on some algos but Intel cpu is? Write please if you have such info Ryzen 7 1700 @ stock Cryptonote-light 1900 H/s using XMRig on Linux for mining Aeon. I have not tested Verium myself but there is a spreadsheet here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1O-hyFS-bqsopttmql6NgYWlWej9rZk_lm5MWivnehXg/edit#gid=0It say Ryzen 7 1700 @ 3.8 GHz get 2200 H/min For Verium it seems good using intel CPU too. For example Core i5 3550 seems to be almost as fast as Ryzen 7. Regarding cryptonote: http://monerobenchmarks.info/What other algos is worth testing? You can also mine PoC with burstcoin mining on hard drives but the profitability is not very good. But if you already have free unused HDD space why not. Another option is renting out HDD with storj or sia. Don't know if it is better than burst mining. I think there is a limit of one storj node per CPU core so a Ryzen with many cores could be a good choice if you have many hard drives to share with storj. |
|
|
|
You still need a CPU for the GPU rigs so why not just choose a CPU that is profitable for mining like Ryzen 5 1600. I mine with both CPU and GPU and get more profit than by GPU alone. |
|
|
|
well I'll give another vote for aeon! mine it, it you have 4 cores CPU, with proper setting, it will be running in 50% of load when mining
the cryptonight-lite version of AEON algo is more power efficient so your cpu do not consume to much energy
with i5 like 6400 or something similar you'll get about 400-600 h/s
it will give you like 0,5 aeon per 2 days I guess.
so do not sell it, wait. once it will pump, say once in 2-3 month sell and earn x3 or x5 more profit
I get 1550h/s with my dual xeon X5650 2150 H/s with a Ryzen 1700X @ 4.0 ghz --- A Threadripper CPU would be about double that. I was sorely tempted to get one of them for my workstation, but aside from mining, I don't really need 32 threads so I stuck with my 8c/16t Ryzen instead. Those Ryzen CPUs are some of the best value I've ever had in a PC. Hello, 2150 H/s is it on a monero with 1 processor Ryzen 1700x? what settings did you apply? how much on a monero does it give out on average after overclocking? Monero use algorithm cryptonight and Aeon use Another algorithm cryptonight-light which gives a higher hashrate on the same hardware. My Ryzen 7 1700 without overclocking get around 500 H/s on Monero and 1900 H/s on Aeon. My CPU runs at 3.0 GHz. I also have an AMD FX-8350 which do 380 H/s on Monero and 1330 H/s on Aeon without any overclocking (4.0 GHz). |
|
|
|
Interesting build! I like the concept of building a large miner of many smaller energy effecient units. I wonder how the odroid XU4 compares to an Intel Atom X5-Z8350? These small boards are based on Z8350: http://www.up-board.org/upcore/Alternatively buy many cheap Z83II miniPC on ebay. But maybe they are not so good at mining, I have not tried. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
