 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 »
|
any place you can exchange it to something like BTC?  I played with Bytom over a week... all profit went down to drain when I transferred it to gate.io just to find out that their withdrawal fee (USDT) is 15 USDT  silly... not worth it... I wonder how bitman s3 owners even go around exchanging anything? |
|
|
|
I tried a few days, returns on 1080TI were promising, the problem however is what to do with this token... I mined against f2pool, which does payouts every 10 BTM (unlike previously stated here that it is min. 50BTM). But then what? mainnet (?) transition, means I can only trade it on some exotic exchanges that support bm1 wallet, that charge you min. 10BTM per withdrawal (gate.io). Cryptopia does not support bm1 addresses... so... I simply wasted 15 BTM and cannot even withdraw it now  |
|
|
|
|
since the block hickup, all seems stable now... as long as you set up the node following the official guide and don't miss anything, then it is just a fire and forget deal... with 0.6 USD / day returns as per today's prices...
|
|
|
|
am I the only one using ethminer? its capable of 54Mh if your overclock is, what is the benefit of phoenix/claymore? don't they have dev fees? why pay that if you don't have to
I dont know to be honest. Its NVIDIA people. Ethmine is updated all the time too. I guess Claymore and Claymore Clone and Bminer are scratching their heads to why people use their software with nvidia cards. I suppose it is *less* plug and play, or click to play. to be honest, this is the first time I hear you can do eth on nvidia on sth other than claymore... ? I guess marketing works.... |
|
|
|
Hm, cant start second masternode because of qbiq failed allocate tx id to vps ip. In the explorer i see this id in red color. Not enough 40 confirmations?
got the same behavior last night when setting up a new MN. I did the instant transfer though... 12 confirmations later it was also displayed as red... I gave up looking eventually - just did another self 1000 qbic transfer, waited overnight for it to get confirmed and set it up with no issues this time in the morning. |
|
|
|
Is it known what exactly causes the problems, on a technical side?
have a look at difficulty/network hash rate charts... there were two spikes in diff on 17 June and 25 June... few hours after that sudden spike all my nodes went down. Twice... I am not an expert, but it sounds like what I hear a nicehash attack or some form of 51% would look like. It stopped 1/3 of nodes from processing certain block. Second attempt was even worse... Only full resync would work, but damage was done already. And it happened twice so far. Worse, that there are still 500+ node owners who did not notice (yet another reminder to use a monitor like mnode.club) ... and they will be mad when they find out there were no payouts since 2 weeks... |
|
|
|
when I run zminer (linux) and add the global setting that looks like this: dev=0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11
The output gets crazy... I get like 100 lines per second with each GPUs status and no output summary appears. It looks like it's working - I see hashrate on poolside, but it is not fast enough (I get average of 400sol/s per 1080TI card, while system seems to be busy generating the output, not mining as usual). And there are no more summaries available... When I remove dev line, everything gets back to normal - 10-12 lines, then summary line, easy, slow moving log... any hints? and yeah... I need to exclude that one device that is somehow causing me issues... |
|
|
|
|
can tpruvot be used to mine hush/equihash ? it has option to mine zec, but everybody talks ewbf, dstm, bminer... ?
|
|
|
|
here's my problem... I want to identify failing card or riser - (id=00e8) and (id=00e5) I learn how to identify broken card playing with fans (duhh), but can't interpret syslog or dmesg to pinpoint the faulty one. any ideas? dmesg dump  [54616.169199] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: AER: Corrected error received: id=00e5
[54616.169205] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: PCIe Bus Error: severity=Corrected, type=Physical Layer, id=00e5(Receiver ID)
[54616.169208] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: device [8086:a295] error status/mask=00000001/00002000
[54616.169209] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: [ 0] Receiver Error (First)
[54616.172459] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: AER: Corrected error received: id=00e5
[54616.172465] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: PCIe Bus Error: severity=Corrected, type=Physical Layer, id=00e5(Receiver ID)
[54616.172467] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: device [8086:a295] error status/mask=00000001/00002000
[54616.172470] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: [ 0] Receiver Error (First)
[54616.181447] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: AER: Corrected error received: id=00e5
[54616.181452] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: PCIe Bus Error: severity=Corrected, type=Physical Layer, id=00e5(Receiver ID)
[54616.181455] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: device [8086:a295] error status/mask=00000001/00002000
[54616.181457] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: [ 0] Receiver Error (First)
[54616.186888] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: AER: Corrected error received: id=00e5
[54616.186894] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: PCIe Bus Error: severity=Corrected, type=Physical Layer, id=00e5(Receiver ID)
[54616.186897] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: device [8086:a295] error status/mask=00000001/00002000
[54616.186899] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: [ 0] Receiver Error (First)
[54616.191988] pcieport 0000:00:1d.0: AER: Corrected error received: id=00e8
[54616.191994] pcieport 0000:00:1d.0: PCIe Bus Error: severity=Corrected, type=Physical Layer, id=00e8(Receiver ID)
[54616.191997] pcieport 0000:00:1d.0: device [8086:a298] error status/mask=00000001/00002000
[54616.191999] pcieport 0000:00:1d.0: [ 0] Receiver Error (First)
[54616.192004] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: AER: Corrected error received: id=00e5
[54616.192009] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: PCIe Bus Error: severity=Corrected, type=Physical Layer, id=00e5(Receiver ID)
[54616.192010] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: device [8086:a295] error status/mask=00000001/00002000
[54616.192012] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: [ 0] Receiver Error (First)
[54616.192015] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: AER: Corrected error received: id=00e5
[54616.192022] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: can't find device of ID00e5
[54616.192365] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: AER: Corrected error received: id=00e5
[54616.192370] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: PCIe Bus Error: severity=Corrected, type=Physical Layer, id=00e5(Receiver ID)
[54616.192373] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: device [8086:a295] error status/mask=00000001/00002000
[54616.192374] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: [ 0] Receiver Error (First)
[54616.193515] pcieport 0000:00:1d.0: AER: Corrected error received: id=00e8
[54616.193520] pcieport 0000:00:1d.0: PCIe Bus Error: severity=Corrected, type=Physical Layer, id=00e8(Receiver ID)
[54616.193522] pcieport 0000:00:1d.0: device [8086:a298] error status/mask=00000001/00002000
[54616.193528] pcieport 0000:00:1d.0: [ 0] Receiver Error (First)
[54616.193793] pcieport 0000:00:1d.0: AER: Corrected error received: id=00e8
[54616.193798] pcieport 0000:00:1d.0: PCIe Bus Error: severity=Corrected, type=Physical Layer, id=00e8(Receiver ID)
[54616.193800] pcieport 0000:00:1d.0: device [8086:a298] error status/mask=00000001/00002000
[54616.193801] pcieport 0000:00:1d.0: [ 0] Receiver Error (First)
[54616.194941] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: AER: Corrected error received: id=00e5
[54616.194947] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: PCIe Bus Error: severity=Corrected, type=Physical Layer, id=00e5(Receiver ID)
[54616.194949] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: device [8086:a295] error status/mask=00000001/00002000
[54616.194951] pcieport 0000:00:1c.5: [ 0] Receiver Error (First)
nvidia-smi  Tue Jun 26 15:31:27 2018
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| NVIDIA-SMI 384.130 Driver Version: 384.130 |
|-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| GPU Name Persistence-M| Bus-Id Disp.A | Volatile Uncorr. ECC |
| Fan Temp Perf Pwr:Usage/Cap| Memory-Usage | GPU-Util Compute M. |
|===============================+======================+======================|
| 0 GeForce GTX 108... Off | 00000000:01:00.0 Off | N/A |
| 90% 57C P2 192W / 190W | 1010MiB / 11172MiB | 100% Default |
+-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| 1 GeForce GTX 108... Off | 00000000:02:00.0 Off | N/A |
| 90% 56C P2 186W / 190W | 1010MiB / 11172MiB | 100% Default |
+-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| 2 GeForce GTX 108... Off | 00000000:03:00.0 Off | N/A |
| 90% 58C P2 186W / 190W | 1010MiB / 11172MiB | 99% Default |
+-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| 3 GeForce GTX 108... Off | 00000000:04:00.0 Off | N/A |
| 90% 53C P2 186W / 190W | 1010MiB / 11172MiB | 100% Default |
+-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| 4 GeForce GTX 108... Off | 00000000:05:00.0 Off | N/A |
| 90% 55C P2 188W / 190W | 1010MiB / 11172MiB | 100% Default |
+-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| 5 GeForce GTX 108... Off | 00000000:07:00.0 Off | N/A |
| 90% 60C P2 185W / 190W | 1010MiB / 11172MiB | 100% Default |
+-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| 6 GeForce GTX 108... Off | 00000000:08:00.0 Off | N/A |
| 90% 56C P2 193W / 190W | 1010MiB / 11172MiB | 99% Default |
+-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| 7 GeForce GTX 108... Off | 00000000:09:00.0 Off | N/A |
| 90% 52C P2 186W / 190W | 1010MiB / 11172MiB | 99% Default |
+-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| 8 GeForce GTX 108... Off | 00000000:0A:00.0 Off | N/A |
| 90% 49C P2 192W / 190W | 1010MiB / 11172MiB | 99% Default |
+-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| 9 GeForce GTX 108... Off | 00000000:0B:00.0 Off | N/A |
| 90% 55C P2 193W / 190W | 1010MiB / 11172MiB | 99% Default |
+-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| 10 GeForce GTX 108... Off | 00000000:0C:00.0 Off | N/A |
| 90% 56C P2 189W / 190W | 1010MiB / 11172MiB | 100% Default |
+-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| 11 GeForce GTX 108... Off | 00000000:0D:00.0 Off | N/A |
| 90% 54C P2 192W / 190W | 1010MiB / 11172MiB | 100% Default |
+-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
context: not sure if this actually is a problem, other than 100GB of syslog events per hour (I managed to suppress that). claymore is rock solid, but eth is no longer funny to mine ccminer will always die in 5 to 10 minutes, so I am assuming it is pulling some instructions that flip these broken raisers or cads... |
|
|
|
 bminer 9 against f2pool, GPU 0 - 1080 TI GPO 1 - 1070 GPU 2 - 1080 TI MEM + 500, CPU 0, Power limit as on screenshot... can you share the command line to use bminer on f2pool? I'm getting "invalid response from the stratum server: false" thanks I just edited mine_btm.bat file (and removed the "start" command cuz I wanted to see it in the same window) SET ADDRESS=btm_addresss
SET USERNAME=%ADDRESS%.w
SET POOL=btm.f2pool.com:9221
SET SCHEME=tensority
bminer.exe -uri %SCHEME%://%USERNAME%@%POOL%
EDIT: BTW. it wasn't working yesterday - some nonsense about illegal operation... I only tried in the morning because I wanted to submit a bug report in bminer thread and guess what... with current hashrate I am getting around 1.5 BTM/hour (bad math) 0.56BTM/h from these 3 cards... |
|
|
|
bminer 9 against f2pool, GPU 0 - 1080 TI GPO 1 - 1070 GPU 2 - 1080 TI MEM + 500, CPU 0, Power limit as on screenshot... |
|
|
|
|
I ran into similar issue with onda - I just started with single card connected directly into first slot. Then I accessed BIOS with no issues...
|
|
|
|
|
sounds too good to be true, but website does not work, linux urls not available?
|
|
|
|
|
what's the lowest wattage you managed to squeeze and maintain 50MHs on 1080ti ?
example:
rig 12x rog strix 1080TI, each set to 195W ~ 49-50MHs and doesnt seem to work any more efficient if I squeeze power limit below that. If I just touch the PL, hashrate drops to 46-48...
rig 6x msi gaming x 1080TI- 160W ~ 49 to 51MHs and works steady with 5454MHs mem clocks... power limit set to 200, actual usage 150-160... numbers measured on the wall seem to back up what nvidia-smi says.
And I can't figure out what's causing such a huge difference... any ideas? I mean - I'm happy, but curious...
biostar tb250, xubuntu 16.04, 384.111, gpuclock offset set to +900, resulting in 5454MHz as reported by nvidia-smi --query-gpu=clocks.current.memory.
|
|
|
|
I am trying to make this work but looks like I'm an idiot.
I have two Asus ROG Strix 1080Ti.
On stock clocks without ETHlargement I get around 70 Mh/s with Claymore 11.7 on Windows 10.
(EthDcrMiner64.exe -epool eu1.ethermine.org:4444 -ewal myaddress -eworker adzi1 -epsw x)
When I change clock settings to 70% Power Limit, Core +0 and Memory +650 I get 36-40 Mh/s with ETHlargement running.
How long do I need to leave it running to get around 100 Mh/s? Does it show after 3-5 hours?
This thing work instantaneously. Open it as admin and just keep running in the background. Nothing more. You will see 50MH/s within few seconds... |
|
|
|
Profitable zcoin mining is dead for nVidia GPUs. Even Eth mining for example on GTX 1070 is giving 40% higher revenue than Zcoin mining
yeah... right... and you were told that or you actually bothered to try? Source code? You know what license ccminer is released with.
I believe that there is not enough pressure from the community, and they won't release the source code... zfastminer owners keep responding to all feedback yet till not every comment about gpl was ignored... no matter how many times we ask here  It is sad, but they are developers too. They just don't get the idea of the gpl... And people will mine on these miners just to get extra $... |
|
|
|
guys, long way ahead... I spent two days trying to figure out whether it will be worth switching over to windows and my answer so far is -> no. All my production rigs are running linux perfectly... My Win dev rig is currently showing literally no improvement, mostly because the app basically stops with no errors and automating anything in Windows is... just not my thing. It does show some crazy high kH/s, but MPH doesnt agree... I honestly can't tell lookling at the mph chart if there is any improvement over standard ccminer_cuda9 that I use on Windows. Sure - it shows 4100++ kH/s per 1080TI with +100MHz core bump, but I dont see any improvement on MPH side... See for yourself... it's been running like that since yesterday, somewhere mid day today I switched to 266... dual 1080TI:  Excited with that initial reporting I failed over one 6-card node to Win10RS3 and I was shocked how much resources it needs to run... (3 hours to deploy, constant nvidia drama, reboots taking minutes instead of seconds, logging on, UI penalty on headless machine, etc), then one thing hit me (I honestly forgot the experience, but all Windows 95 memories came back) - the thing starts with B... ends with luescreen... Two days wasted invested. Now time to earn money with good old ccminer-msvc2015... I'll wait for stable ubuntu release... |
|
|
|
custom intensity? |
|
|
|
I jumped on qbic long time ago just to disengage when it all started to smell bad... but I must say I am impressed with the level of attention users get on discord.com today. Looks like the team totally recovered and doing its job! Good job, guys. I set up two master nodes (not without issues, but with plenty of live support), and I am super happy so see it growing  |
|
|
|
|
