I too can confirm 30% difference in actual (client side) and pool reported hash rate. Using wolf's cpu miner.
For me, using Claymore GPU miner, I see 10% difference. That includes Claymore's 5% take. So the actual difference is 5%. |
|
|
|
have anyone are mining XMR by solo or by P2Pool?
Tell me how to do it ?
P2Pool is currently not implemented. You could solo CPU mine from the daemon: start_mining <your_address> <number_of_threads> You could solo mine on a single address from multiple machines. Currently if you have 3500 H/s you should get about a block each 2 days on average (more if you are lucky or less if you are not). With the difficulty raising each day I would not recommend you to solo mine with less then 2000-3000 H/s, but if you have 7000 H/s (this is a lot) you should solo mine for sure. If you want to GPU solo mine you should set a private pool of yours in order to do it (the pool software is open source), because you can't GPU mine from the daemon. If you set a pool you should automate the checking if the daemon freezes and restart it, because it's happening with the current code and you won't find blocks. that is very helpful what you said upon,thanks a lot! Any guide on how to set up a private pool to GPU mine ? Yes, take a look at README there https://github.com/zone117x/node-cryptonote-poolI always can set up a pool for you for small bounty like 0.12 BTC on Linux. But I believe you can do it easy. BTW, you can just use my pool, it's small and you will get normal payouts if you want just avoid dust. From the readme, I cannot find the exact way to set up the pool. Is there a step by step guide to integrate the Coin daemon(s), Node.js v0.10+, Redis key-value store v2.6+ and libssl in Windows? |
|
|
|
Is there a parameter in the miner with which I could increase the fan speed? Cards are running at 93-94 celsius.
No. You have to use software such as MSI afterburner. |
|
|
|
How can I determine what memory I have? I still have the boxes would it say on them?
You can use GPUz. |
|
|
|
I noticed that I'm getting WAY more shares accepted, though they are all of a much lower target diff than I usually get. Right now they're 7500, earlier they were 10000. Usually my 7970 rig submits shares in the 50000-100000 range. Is this something to do with the new diff adjustments you were talking about? Also the overall pool mh/s is down to just over 1mh/s, error in hashrate reporting? Once in a while I'm getting this error: Error in server response : {"id":1,"jsonrpc";"2.0","error":{"code":-1,"message":"Unauthenticated"}} then it reconnects and resumes as usual, just wanted to let you know  Still a great pool! Yes we changed the difficulty settings. Apparently some miners got disconnected during the change. We wait for all of them to reconnect. We'll wait for a day and see if we get an improvement. We deleted the history of blocks to start calculation from zero. ------ What diff would you like ? I also have this problem using Claymore's GPU miner. I used port 7777,8888,9999 all have the same error. I do not have the same problem with other pools. |
|
|
|
|
I have 4X7950+2X7990 = 8 GPUs on MSI Z77A GD55. Windows 8.1, Catalyst 14.4.
I installed the Catalyst without the Catalyst Control Centre. Then I used the Register modifier, there was no Code 43 in the device manager on any of the GPUs. However, 2-3 GPU would show 0 MHz in GPUZ. That means only 5 GPU is recognised and can mine.
Then I installed Catalyst with the control centre. I used the Register modifier, none of the GPU showed 0 MHz. They could all be used.
So, why no code 43 but showing 0 MHz?
|
|
|
|
Ok I give up. I need help
I have a
MSI-Z77A-GD65
Intel G1620
4GB Ram.
2 PSU's 1 powering the mb the other powering the cards (500w on the mb, 2000w server psu on the cards)
Sapphire r9 290x cards
I'm using usb power risers. I've tried win 7,8. I'm using all Sapphire r9 290x cards with the 13.12 drivers. I can't seem to get anything to run with more than 3 cards. I've tried every pcie slot combo possible. PCIe-Gen3 is set to auto in the bios and the pcie latency settings is set to 65 (also tried 32 and 128)
What am I missing? Why can't I get past 3 cards? Any ideas? This rig is pretty stable with 3 but I can't get it to boot with 4. ideally I'm shooting for 5.
You can set the PCEI to generation 1 or 2 if possible. You may short the PCIE pin A1B17, the card presence pin. |
|
|
|
|
In the future, when the blocks are filled more than now, then some transparency transactions will not compromise the other anonymous transactions.
|
|
|
|
Maybe we can pay rad 1 million MUN to get him working again.
it's more than 3% of supply including premine. 1 million is quite a bit high. (equivalent of 6800 households). 500 households should be maximum we discuss. It's not that more coins is better - it's that the value of the single coin needs to be higher and that's where it becomes full circle. I can donate to Rad and developers 5,000 MUN each month for the next 24 months if they revive the coin. |
|
|
|
Nice update ty claymore  csa1234 1800 WATT ?? Look my rig 750W only R9 290 BIOS 1.12 MV I think his is well overclocked. 761H/s for each 290x. |
|
|
|
|
Maybe we can pay rad 1 million MUN to get him working again.
|
|
|
|
just to let you know 4 cards run fine on 4gb ram on windows 8.1 but 5-6 cards need 8gb...
at least for me;)
I have 6 cards (8GPU in total )with combination of 4 X 7950 and 2 X 7990 run fine on 4GB. The virtual memory is larger than 16 GB. Win 8.0. |
|
|
|
Do 14.6 drivers capable to run 6 GPU's in win8.1? I've already tried to install but only 5 GPU's are running okay, can't get rid of code 43 error for the 6th gpu. Any clue?
I have the same problem and been trying to fix it for 2 weeks now. Since I updated to 14.6 I can only get 5 gpu's to work and get error 43 on the other. Runnings Windows 8.1 64 bit. I used the amd cleanup utility to wipe 14.6 and went back to 13.12 since thats what I had before but it didn't help. Does anyone have a fix for this? You can go to https://litecointalk.org/index.php?topic=11761.0There is a 14.6 7GPU mod there before. I use the 14.4 mod and copy the 14.6 opencl files in the miner folder. |
|
|
|
|
I do not like the PoS idea as there are too many out there. We are too late in PoS and we need a multipool to support the price if LGC has no daily use.
The new feature I would like is the anonymity. That would be complementary to BTC. So there will be many uses for that.
|
|
|
|
Considering quick & dirty subsidy fix while waiting for pulse:
When difficulty is under 50 then reward is 20
if difficulty is under 100 reward is 10
otherwise reward is 5
I am not sure about this change. You should implement it very carefully. Or may be you should not at all. Now reward is 6.25 and have transparent schedule of changing. You want to increase it 3 times at once (to 20), increase inflation 3 times - what is a point? And if hashrate start to increase - reward will be halfed. This is incomprehensible for common miners. Multipools don't care - they have automated algorithms. All coins are in the same boat regarding to multipools. I think every stable coin shoud touch block reward and inflation changes only in special cases - we have not such situation. Look at vertcoin - price has fallen 10 times, but devs don't hurry to change inflation in spite of bugholders weeping.
Logicoin.info please think carefully about this moment. upd: at least don't implement this dirty fix while waiting for pulse. Pulse is new technology and can attract new miners and investors, but dirty fix is just... dirty I agree with the above comments. I do not agree with changing the block reward hastily. We can make the 6.25 reward lasting longer than a month and wait for the new features. This will not devalue the existing LGC and will not reduce the difficulty too much. There is no time to hard fork the chain to implement that if we want to give 2~3 weeks notice. So the new implementation can happen after 3.125 block reward. I would suggest making the block reward 0.1 when the reward is supposed to be below .1 after halving. A little bit inflation is healthy to compensate the loss of coins and economy growth. We need to find use for the coins, otherwise it has no value whatever we do to the coin itself. However, if we make the coins attractive, we may find use for the coins. It is cyclical. |
|
|
|
I tried those two files. There are 20% increase of nist5 hash with 10% increase of power consumption. But for X11, there is only 1-3% increase of hash, with 10% increase of power consumption. This is compared to the sgminer 4.1 by djm34. I use 7990, 7970 and 7950. |
|
|
|
I also can confirm NIST5 uses both more wattage and more amperage in my readings. My temperatures were also slightly higher. I would see a gain of 60-85 watt per 4 card rig. All of my rigs are undervolted through BIOS mod so that shouldn't have been a factor in my readings. I may get 150 Mh/s total with NIST5 but I don't think many of the coins are worth it quite yet to switch algorithms.
Same here. About 5-8% more. |
|
|
|
Working config for scrypt/nscrypt/x11/x13/x14/x15/keccak/nist5/qubit algos on 3x 290X (shaders 2816) rig on CGWatcher 1.4.1, W7x64 CCC 14.7RC
updated with badman74's advice on temperature targets; overclocks with lower intensities to avoid driver failures; removed redundant settings, globally specified "gpu-threads" : "2", and removed redundant gpu-threads settings on relevant profiles; disabled ULPS in MSI AB; substituted 65KB groestl.cl in place of 67KB groestl.cl; #define SPH_LUFFA_PARALLEL 1 in darkcoin-mod.cl, marucoin-mod.cl, x14.cl, bitblock.cl; #include "aes_helper.cl" in 39KB darkcoin-mod.cl; dropped worksize to 64 like bullus; recalibrated speedfactors for nicehash password field.
Do you use the 65k or 67kb version? Is it possible to upload the modified files? |
|
|
|
|
Is system memory critical to the miner performance? I use low memory, e.g. 800MHz as I only use GPU mining. If I increase to 1600MHz, how much is the performance gain?
|
|
|
|
|
I get about 9MH/s, with core frequency = 920MHz, memory=1250MHz. I also use Sg4.1. You need use Catalyst 14.6.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
