Thanks very much! I can see it fine when zooming in. So... I checked that directory and I do not have that .bat file in it.  Did you just created that yourself and use that to launch nheqminer in a command window (meaning that you not not use the GUI)?  Or, do you create that .bat file, then launch the NHM GUI exe and that will pick up this new command?  Thanks again, I am still learning this stuff

Nope... thanks, I will give that a try and see what happens.  Out of curiosity, how exactly would you do that?  I know how to make that kind of change like in a .bat file (such as exists in Claymore's work) but I only see EXE and DLL files in the NHM directory.

You're using Nicehash for your ZEC CPU mining?

Firstly, big thanks to Claymore for getting this great miner out to everyone!  I know you mentioned that you still expect you can get better rates down the road but I think I am not alone in appreciation for you publishing this version now so we can mine more efficiently than other options currently available!

I have only read about half of this thread so sorry if I am repeating anything here but I did have a few observations and questions that I wanted to post.

- I have 4 MSI RX 470 4GB (strap 1500 mod, overclocked, undervolted) averaging between 40-42 Sols/s each using your miner. This is a vast improvement over the 13 I was getting using nicehash the last few days, so really appreciate the extra sols!

- I noticed that the power draw for this miner is much lower than your ETH Dual Miner.  Even just solo mining ETH my rig was using ~625W at the wall, while your ZEC miner is only using between 400-450W!  This of course increased the profit margin over ETH mining even more, which is great, but I have a question about the power consumption.  Is it just that mining this coin is inherently less power-consuming than ETH?  Or, does the much lower power draw mean that there is still a lot more headroom to work towards increasing Sols/s even more?

- Finally, after running your ZEC miner stably for about an hour this morning, I launched nicehash miner to use only its CPU ZEC mining function. Unfortunately, almost right at launch, it cut the Sols/s rate in your miner by about 25% on each GPU.  Then after about 5 minutes, it crashed my system. Then crashed again after reboot, so I haven't tried it again.  This seems a bit weird to me since I have used other CPU/memory intensive programs like Claymore Crytponote CPU to mine XMR and plotting & optimizing BurstCoin plots on HDDs and neither affected your ETH GPU miner.

Normally, I wouldn't even bother about CPU but this rig has an i7-6800k that was pulling 23 S/s, which equates to more than half of a GPU, so I hate to waste it idly.  Anyone here been able to CPU mine ZEC with NH and GPU with Claymore successfully?

agree 100% on both statements!

Phil, which CPU miner are you using for ZEC?  I tried to use nicehash at the same time as Claymore GPU ZEC and it first knocked 25% off my Claymore rates, then crashed my system.

Looking for a solution to put my 6800k to use on ZEC that doesnt impact Claymore.

Also, i think Aries calculates his W usage per card differently that some others. Through his help, I have modded the exact same GPUs via the same method and got them close to what he is getting (I'm low to mid-60's vs his 58) but to clarify, these are the wattage readings per card that apps such as Wattman and others show, and they do not necessarily capture all of the power being consumed by the GPU (this is my understanding anyway).  As an example on my rig when it was running ETH using CDM... I showed about 75W per card being used for a total of 300W. But, my total at the wall was 625 or so.  At that time, my system running nothing but MinerGate mining XMR was using 140 at the wall.  So... 625W - 140W = 485W being used by the 4 GPUs (~120W/card)... not the 300W I calc using 4 x 75W.

Although I don't know what else Aries is running on this rig (I suspect not much, if anything at all), you can do a similar calc using his stats to get the "effectve" wattage pull of the GPUs. 

6 x 58W = 348W.  669W at the wall... maybe about 100-120W of that is system at idle or other minor usage... so, say 550W total for 6 GPUs = effective use of about 92W per GPU. I don't claim to understand why there is a difference between what certain apps show per card and what they actually pull, but just trying to say there are difference ways to look at it.  Also, Aries seems to be very adept at getting the most out of his cards at very low wattage.  I have been trying to match his results for a few weeks now and can only get within 5% on 1 card... the other 3 are still using 10-15% more wattage than his 6-card average... for the same exact MSI RX-470 4GB GPUs.

Just tried to run NHM CPU on ZEC concurrently with Claymore GPU ZEC and had bad results. Firstly, the hashrate on Claymore dropped by about 25% from 40/card to 30/card.  That alone won't do since Im only getting 23 S/s from my 6800k CPU... so that would be a net loss of 17 S/s.  But, even worse, after about 5 minutes, it crashed my system.  Rebooted, reset GPU settings in Afterburner, launched Claymore again and crash within 1 minute without anything else running.  Reboot again and now Claymore running stable for close to 20 minutes, but Im disappointed about not being able to run both at same time.

I think this is a NHM issue more than Claymore ZEC since as I mentioned, NHM CPU also hosed my CDM ETH miner yesterday while trying to run both.  As it stands I am more than double my sol-rate on this rig vs yesterday but it sucks to have to leave the CPU idle when it could be pulling 23 S/s.  Also, this equates to a double suck (unless somehow rectified) as I just ordered a 4790K CPU yesterday for my 2nd rig.

Yup! just got it up and running on my 1 4-RX 470 rig.  Running nicely at 40-44 S/s per card (over-clocked & under-volted).  This is WAY up from the 13 I was getting using NHM and while certainly not near the 100 that was initially hoped for, that's a 3x increase that I will gladly pay the 2.5% fee for!

Another thing is that this takes WAY less power than mining ETH.  My full 4-card system only pulls 400-450W running this (and nothing else)... it was using 630-650 with CDM solo mining ETH, so about a 35% reduction is a nice additional bonus!

Waiting a bit to start up NHM for CPU mining. Hopefully there won't be any conflict. When I ran NHM CPU yesterday concurrently with CDM ETH, it completely hosed my ETH returns.

Thanks Lone! This is great information for sure!  The 4790K iI'm considering does indeed have AVX/AVX2... as do both of my current CPU's (2600k & 6800k), and they are pulling a pretty decent combined 40+ S/s.  

I also checked the 3 G-series CPUs i was considering and none of them have even AVX... only SSE2.  So, I think this was the extra nudge I needed to pull the trigger on that 4790k  

Also, even my laptop's i5-5200u has AVX & AVX2 and it is only getting 8.5 S/s. I know there are other variables to consider but I would assume that those G-series CPUs without AVX would not be getting more than this i5 mobile that I have, so just doing a rough calc using a likely generous estimate of 8 for G-series, I would ROI the extra $100 pretty quickly... in 1-2 months at current rates.

yes, will be interesting to see what Phil's 6700 will pull... I would guess around the 21-22 mark but we'll see.

Interesting this I noticed after running NHM in my 6800k for a while. I was still mining ETH using CDM and it initially seemed ok.  But after a while I saw that not only my total shares were down about 20-25% but my stale shares were through the roof! Like about 4-5x what they normally are.  So, I decided to stop CDM and enable my 4 470's in NHM.

After doing so, I am now getting about 75 S/s from that machine... deduct the 23 for the CPU and that's about 42 (or 13 per GPU). Certainly not anywhere near what is expected from Claymore's new ZEC GPU miner but also WAY better than what it was making mining ETH, so I will keep that running and hope it stays stable.

Also wanted to add that this rig as it is running now is pulling about 425W.  It was around 650W when running CDM & NHM concurrently, so clearly, the GPUs are not being anywhere nearly fully utilized by NHM.  The other thing I noticed is that the NHM CPU miner piece does not seem to overwhelm any of my PCs like running other memory/CPU intensive apps seem to do.  I would assume this means the CPU is not being fully utilized either but I don't mind this as much since I can now multitask on those PCs when I couldnt effectively before.

yeah... depends on your perspective i guess. Compared to the minuscule amount of XMR it was mining before today, I will gladly take ~$100/month for as long as it lasts... but point taken that ROI'ing that CPU at current rates paying full price for it would take 4-5 months. Luckily, I got this one for free so everything is gravy for me in that regard.

Still though, since I can get a 4790k at half price, it's probably going to be worth it for my new rig... depending on what others have gotten from G-series CPUs.

Also, keep in mind that I have not done any kind of tweaking to the 6800k (either over-clocking or even changes settings in NHM), so maybe it is capable of more... the 22.9 was just straight NHM "out of the box" with no changes to anything.

Thanks Citronick!  I was actually surprised at how easy NHM was to set up... only real problem is getting it past AV but I was finally able to get it running on all 3 of my PCs.  Starting with CPU only, as I am under the impression that NHM GPU is not quite as stable as CPU?  Correct me if I am wrong on this but I may do some experimenting since these returns seem too good to pass up any longer.

This is what I am getting from my 3 CPUs:

- i7-6800k:  22.9 S/s
- i7-2600k:  17.5 S/s
- i5-5200u:    8.3 S/s  (laptop)

So, just shy of 50 S/s combined for a projected monthly income of about $200.  Suffice to say... WAY better than the measly amount of XMR I was getting from CPU mining lol.

So, back to my original question of whether or not it's worth spending an extra $100 to get an i7-4790k (over something like a G3250).  Given the benchmarks above, it would seem that a 4790k should get around 20 S/s. At current rates, that would mean about $80/month from that CPU.  But in order to do a proper ROI, would really need a benchmark of what one of those G-series CPUs can do on ZEC.

Citronick, Phil or others with G-series like G3250, 4400-4500, or even Celeron like G1840... what Sols/s rates have you seen using these CPUs?

Hi Citronik... I have not yet run NH miner but wanting to test CPU only mining of ZEC on my 2 PCs (2600k & 6800K).  Is it possible to run CPU mining ONLY with NH?  Or, does it only do both CPU & GPU?

Hello fellow miners... thanks again to everyone that helped me get my first mining rig up and running (4 MSI 470's on a ASRock x99 with i7-6800k.  I've been getting 110 h/s on ETH over the past weeks, along with HDD mining BurstCoin and sporadically CPU mining XMR (although the latter is going to end very soon due to horrible price of XMR).  The rig has been stable for the most part and I do have interest in mining ZEC but waiting for Claymore's GPU miner and CPU miners to stabilize a bit before jumping in and risking down-time on my 1 rig.

Anyway, I am actually looking for some advice on building my 2nd rig, keeping in mind that I want to build it with ZEC mining factors in mind. I actually have most of the piece already, except for the CPU, which is what I want to get some feedback on.  Before ZEC hit, I was really planning to go cheap... likely a G3250 or 3258... maybe even a Celeron G1840.  Note that I am dedicated to LGA-1150 since I am building this on an H81 Pro BTC R2 Mobo. 

However, now I see Phil and some others postings that indicate a "better" CPU like i5 or i7 can add to ZEC hashing power, so I am a bit back to the drawing board. I know that it is early in the game and it seems the CPU miners are still not either 100% stable or optimized, so given that, just looking for opinions or gut feel rather than time-proven facts at this point.

Here's my situation:  I can get an i7-4790k for about half retail price ($170). The low-end CPU's I was considering run between $50-$75... so roughly $100 less than the discounted 4790k.

Here's the question:  how much extra hashing power for ZEC would the 4790k provide over say the G3250?  And, how would those extra hashes translate into monthly $ at current ZEC rates?  I know that it is likely that ZEC price will drop eventually, so mainly looking to assess if I can ROI that extra $100 for a better CPU within the next 2-3 months or so.  I would just hate to build a new rig with a cheap CPU and miss out on the extra ZEC hashes... if, of course, it's a relatively decent bump to use an i7.

Hmmm... so are you saying that 480s can generally be under-volted to 470 stock levels? or that both can be undervolted to about the same level?  The latter seems a bit strange to me (although granted, I am still learning this stuff) because the the 480's have a much higher starting point, power-consumption wise.  Most of my 470's are capable of over-clocking to 2000 (from 1650 base) with between -10% & -20% voltage offset (after strap-modding the bios).  Granted, I'd assume that 480s are capable of what... 2100 Mhz?  But, it would be surprising if they could truly match the low power consumption of 470s.

i7-2600k Win7 Ultimate 64-bit:
 -  150 H/s using MinerGate
 -  250 H/s using Claymore Cryptonote CPU miner v3.5 (4 threads used)

i7-6800k Win7 Pro 64-bit:
 -  260 H/s using MinerGate
 -  360 H/s using Claymore Cryptonote CPU miner v3.5 (7 threads used)

Note that the 360 above was achieved by using 7 threads (it was getting about 330 at the default of 6).  I plan to eventually try to bump this up and see what happens but I doubt it will increase much if at all above 7 since this CPU only had 15MB of cache, and most of what I have read indicated that XMR mining relies heavily on cache, needing 2MB per thread to produce. So, the 7 / 360 is probably max for this system but I will check it eventually and report back here if there are any changes.

As you can see, there's quite a large difference in productivity between these 2 miners. Granted, MinerGate has a GUI that is quite easy to use (which is why I was on it for over 1 month due to my newness to mining).  But, once I got familiar with running Claymore's Dual GPU miner for ETH, I decided to give his CPU miner for XMR a  try and now very glad I did.  Granted, with the current price of XMR, not going to get rich off this but until a good and stable CPU miner for ZEC is released, might as well point my CPUs somewhere when not being used.
Bottom line is that anyone interested in mining XMR with CPUs should absolutely move to Claymore, since it is probably going to bump your production anywhere between 40-65%!

Agreed!  Not sure why anyone would opt for 480's vs 470's at this point.  My modded MSI 470's can get over 28 on ETH, cost $40-$60 less than 480's and consume significantly less electricity than the 480s.  Best stable HR you will probably eek out with a modded 480 is around 30, so that extra 1-2 vs a 470 will simply never be worth it due to the excess cost up front, but more so due to the extra watts needed to run 480s.  Certainly if you already have 480s in your rigs there is no point in switching to 470s, but for new setups it really seems like a no-brainer between the 2.

Granted I am still relatively new to all of this but your statement about Claymore's profit above doenst make logical sense to me.  With your givens that 50% of ETH miners moving to ZEC but it will in turn be twice as profitable to mine, isnt that a net wash to Claymore?  Example using round numbers:  100 ETH miners making $10/day = $10 for Claymore (1% of $1,000).  assuming your givens:  50 ETH miners (half) making $20/day (double) = the same $10/day for Claymore (50 x $20 X 1%).  What am I missing?  If anything, I don't see how a 50% drop in miners equates to a doubling of profit.  Are you saying if 50% of resources currently dedicated to mining ETH move elsewhere that everyone reamaining doing ETH profits will double?  Isn't the main factor in mining ETH the difficulty? While it seems the difficulty should eventually move downward with fewer miners, it seems crazy to think it could do so to effect a 2x impact.  Anyway, I am probably missing a big factor in this but it's pretty interesting stuff.

Claymore... can I ask for your help addressing this "Cannot Connect" error shown below?  I assume my command line is fine because I used the exact same one on my other PC and it connected fine.  I read your readme file thoroughly but didnt see any mention of this error in there. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks!


NsCpuCNMiner64.exe -o stratum+tcp://mine.moneropool.com:3333 -u 46shm7maKo9Ev35kJiAoW6ZsWSxGWkNeuBrfgcN49g9KKWQe7yE513SGRiqsdea1uG9T1xFDFH3inMS G7hrKW2oMHGrTDez -p x


14:43:32:328   1598   
14:43:32:328   1598   ษออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออป
14:43:32:328   1598   บ            Claymore CryptoNote CPU Miner  v3.5 Beta            บ
14:43:32:328   1598   ศออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออผ
14:43:32:531   1598   64-bit version
14:43:32:531   1598   CPU supports AES-NI - faster mining!
14:43:32:531   1598   Logical CPU cores: 12
14:43:32:531   1598   Number of threads: Autoselection...
14:43:32:531   1598   Using 6 threads
14:43:32:531   1598   scfg: 1
14:43:32:531   1598   3 pools specified.
14:43:32:547   1598   Press "m" key for tune mode.
14:43:32:562   1448   Stratum - connecting to 'mine.moneropool.com' <138.201.31.14> port 3333
14:43:32:562   1448   Stratum - Cannot connect  to mine.moneropool.com port 3333
14:43:32:562   1448   Stratum - Failed to connect, retry in 20 sec...
14:43:52:577   1068   Stratum - connecting to 'mine.moneropool.com' <138.201.31.12> port 3333
14:43:52:577   1448   Stratum - Cannot connect  to mine.moneropool.com port 3333
14:43:52:577   1068   DevFee: Stratum - Failed to connect, retry in 20 sec...
14:44:02:655   1598   watchdog - thread 0, hb time 78
14:44:02:655   1598   watchdog - thread 1, hb time 78
14:44:02:655   1598   watchdog - thread 2, hb time 78
14:44:02:655   1598   watchdog - thread 3, hb time 78
14:44:02:655   1598   watchdog - thread 4, hb time 78
14:44:02:655   1598   watchdog - thread 5, hb time 78

Hello everyone... I have been mining XMR via CPU on 2-3 PCs for the past 1-2 months.  I recently built a mining rig with 4 MSI RX470s but currently have those on ETH mining (using Claymore GPU dual miner), mainly due to the current price difference.

I have been doing my CPU via MinerGate since it was easy to use for a noob like me. However, now that I have successfully been running Claymore GPU I wanted to convert over to his CPU XMR miner... but am having an issue getting it to work, at least on my mining rig.

Here's the story... I finally got the "running as Admin 1st time" thing squared away on the mining rig, but now when I run the miner, it will not connect to the pool (I'm using moneropool.com).  Here is the log for my latest session:

14:43:32:328   1598   
14:43:32:328   1598   ษออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออป
14:43:32:328   1598   บ            Claymore CryptoNote CPU Miner  v3.5 Beta            บ
14:43:32:328   1598   ศออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออออผ
14:43:32:531   1598   64-bit version
14:43:32:531   1598   CPU supports AES-NI - faster mining!
14:43:32:531   1598   Logical CPU cores: 12
14:43:32:531   1598   Number of threads: Autoselection...
14:43:32:531   1598   Using 6 threads
14:43:32:531   1598   scfg: 1
14:43:32:531   1598   3 pools specified.
14:43:32:547   1598   Press "m" key for tune mode.
14:43:32:562   1448   Stratum - connecting to 'mine.moneropool.com' <138.201.31.14> port 3333
14:43:32:562   1448   Stratum - Cannot connect  to mine.moneropool.com port 3333
14:43:32:562   1448   Stratum - Failed to connect, retry in 20 sec...
14:43:52:577   1068   Stratum - connecting to 'mine.moneropool.com' <138.201.31.12> port 3333
14:43:52:577   1448   Stratum - Cannot connect  to mine.moneropool.com port 3333
14:43:52:577   1068   DevFee: Stratum - Failed to connect, retry in 20 sec...
14:44:02:655   1598   watchdog - thread 0, hb time 78
14:44:02:655   1598   watchdog - thread 1, hb time 78
14:44:02:655   1598   watchdog - thread 2, hb time 78
14:44:02:655   1598   watchdog - thread 3, hb time 78
14:44:02:655   1598   watchdog - thread 4, hb time 78
14:44:02:655   1598   watchdog - thread 5, hb time 78
14:44:12:592   1068   Stratum - connecting to 'mine.moneropool.com' <138.201.31.12> port 3333
14:44:12:592   1448   Stratum - Cannot connect  to mine.moneropool.com port 3333
14:44:12:592   1068   DevFee: Stratum - Failed to connect, retry in 20 sec...


Here's the kicker... I ran the exact same code in my .bat file (see below) on my personal PC, and although I couldn't seem to fix the Admin rights issue, I was able to connect to the pool (albeit in slow mode due to the Admin rights issue).  So, my question is, what are some likely causes of not being able to connect to the pool is the problem is not in the code of the bat file?

Here is the contents of my bat file, but again, this exact script is working on my other PC.

NsCpuCNMiner64.exe -o stratum+tcp://mine.moneropool.com:3333 -u 46shm7maKo9Ev35kJiAoW6ZsWSxGWkNeuBrfgcN49g9KKWQe7yE513SGRiqsdea1uG9T1xFDFH3inMS G7hrKW2oMHGrTDez -p x

Any suggestions would be appreciated.