Test Results are listed below:

SATA                3.3v*                        5v*                        12v               
GPU Pwr    Amps    Watts      Amps    Watts     Amps    Watts      Neutral Current   Efficiency (%)       Core Clock    Memory Clock
75.00%     0.01     0.033       0.015     0.075    3.88     46.56           -2.5                 64.0%                1930             4050
100.00%    0.015   0.0495      0.006     0.03     4.05     48.6            -3.39                83.3%                2100             4050
75.00%     0.011   0.0363      0.005     0.025    3.76     45.12           -2.59                68.6%               no-OC           no-OC
100.00%    0.01     0.033        0           0         3.88     46.56           -3.5                 90.0%               no-OC           no-OC
* Appears no direct load on the 3.3v and 5v rails, this is likely cable loss only.
                              
Molex                  5v*                    12v                     
GPU Pwr      Amps   Watts   Amps   Watts   Neutral Current   Efficiency (%)     Core Clock   Memory Clock      
80.00%       0.003   0.015   4.73    56.76        -2.98                 63.0%               1860         4050      
100.00%       0         0       4.85    58.2          -3.8                 78.4%                 2025         4050      
80.00%         0         0       4.55    54.6          -2.95                 64.8%               no-OC       no-OC      
100.00%       0         0       4.65    55.8          -3.82                 82.2%               no-OC       no-OC      
* Appears no direct load on the 5v rails, this is likely cable loss only.
                              
PCI                     12v                           
GPU Pwr     Amps    Watts   Neutral Current   Efficiency (%)    Core Clock    Memory Clock            
75.00%       4.62    55.44          -4                   86.6%            1800                4050            
100.00%     4.8      57.6          -5.3                  90.6%             2035                4050            
75.00%       4.44    53.28          -4                   90.1%            no-OC              no-OC            
100.00%     4.56     54.72        -5.3                  86.0%            no-OC              no-OC            
                              
GPU Pwr Limit    Total Rig Power    Other                        
      75%                  465               w/ OC                        
     100%                 610               w/ OC                        
      75%                 465                no-OC                        
     100%                 595               no-OC

Looking at these results, all power cable types draw nearly the same current and power as they all supplied by 12v.  SATA appears to have the lowest power draw (unsure why).  Note that i noticed differences in riser power when mining different algorithms.  However, this was within probably +/- 10% of other algorithms.  GPU power limits had the largest effect on riser power draw.

When i switched to Molex, i had to up my power limit to 80% otherwise one of my GPUs would throw errors.  I believe this was my GTX 1070 mini-ATX which is more likely the reason for that anomaly.

One note is riser power increases with higher GPU power limits and only slightly higher with overclocking.  My power cables are 18 AWG rated at 80C which are rated for 15 amps in short lengths.  However, you need to consider the ratings of the connectors and their pins!  Below are connector ratings for SATA, Molex, and PCI.

SATA connector rating = 4.5 amps (54 watts total for 12v pins)
Molex peripheral connector rating = 5 amps  (60 watts total for 12v pins)
PCI connector rating = 6.25 amps (75 watts total, only 12v pins)

Source: https://www.moddiy.com/pages/Power-Supply-Connectors-%26-Pinouts.html

Based on this test, you shouldn't daisy-chain more than two risers, especially if you are running high power graphics cards (i.e. 1080 ti) as you may exceed the amp rating of the connector pins (or the cable).  However, if you are running your GPUs at reduced power limits using nvOC for instance, than you may be able to get away with powering two risers with one cable.  However, in general I would not recommend it, as typically everyone would have the ability to run an extra molex peripheral cable or PCI cable from their power supplies.  

Hope this was helpful and prevents some burnt connectors

You people need to relax, why is everyone so quick to jump to conclusions.  So maybe i left out some details.  That is correct both SATA and molex connectors utilize multiple voltages but where do you think the 3.3v and 5v are coming from.....lets think....maybe its the 12v rail right??? No its the 5v or 3.3v rails!!  Dammit people use your head...

Not factoring in the load demand of the P/S originally will change things based on how many cards are plugged in, I'm going to measure current and voltage directly with my Arduino board to get actual riser power and run the cards with SATA, Molex, and PCI power cables at different GPU power levels.

This is what i plan to do next to put this to bed for good.

You made a good point, the power supply losses will be different with different load, thanks for pointing that out.  But measuring mobo vs. riser would only determine the difference in power.  The goal is to find the total consumed power of each individual riser.  I think the only true way to do this is to measure the voltage and current directly to take the power supply loss out of the equation...perhaps i'll try and rig something up to measure that directly.

So i wanted to do a test to validate the power consumption of PSI risers and determine what is safe for powering them based on their consumption.  I've heard many claims that you cannot use SATA cables, Molex, etc. due to the high power consumption of these risers.  Some posts I found stated as high as 65 W of power which is around 5.5 amps at 12V supply.  This power draw seemed unusually high too me.  Below is the parts list applicable to the test.

- Gigabyte Z270p-D3 Motherboard
- Intel G4400
- 6 x GTX 1070
- Zijiez PCI risers (excellent quality, highly recommended)
- 2 x Seasonic Focus Platinum 750W
- Newforshop electricity power monitor
- Running nvOC v0019

The test was simple, I determined the power draw of my normal rig.  I have a separate power supply which provides power to 3 GPUs including the PCI risers.  I determined the steady state power usage of my rig with all cards running and removed one GPU and recorded the difference.  I also ran the GPU at a different power limit settings to see if that had any effect on riser consumption.  Below are the results.

Rig running 6 x GTX 1070s with 115W power limit = ~ 800 Watts @ 0.99 - 1 P.F.
Rig running 5 x GTX 1070s with 115W power limit = 670 Watts* @ 0.99 - 1 P.F.
* Additional PCI riser still powered

Rig running 6 x GTX 1070s with 115W power limit = ~ 800 Watts @ 0.99 - 1.0 P.F.
Rig running 6 x GTX 1070s with 125W power limit = 860 Watts @ 0.99 - 1.0 P.F.

It should be noted that I noticed no difference in power consumption with the additional PCI riser card being powered or non-powered with no GPU inserted.

Based on the above, the difference in wattage between my 5 and 6 card rig was 130 watts while using a 115 watt GPU power limit.  I verified the GPU power consumption on my power monitor and in the driver settings.  This equates to a PSI riser consumption of around 15 watts.  Since I was running these on the 12V rail this is a little over 1 amp.  I noticed when I increased the card power that riser consumption did not change.  Perhaps i can re-run the test at higher power limits to see the effects.  

Even though the test shows that the power consumption is fairly low, you need to confirm your power supply can handle the load demand based on what connector you are using.  In my opinion it is best to power risers from the 12 V rail with a PCI power cable or a molex cable (both run off the 12 v rail).  SATA is not really meant to power risers and i'm no even sure why they design risers with this option.  Since they use 3.3 V rail this increases the current to about 4-5 amps (15 watts / 3.3 V =  4.45 Amps) per SATA power cable.  Based on the specifications below, if you are powering 5 risers from the 3.3 V rail you will be exceeding the rail power limits (4.45 x 5 = 22.7 Amps) which can damage the power supply or catch it on fire.  So in conclusion, power your risers with INDIVIDUAL (not daisy-chained) PCI power cables or molex cables and you should be okay.  PCI and molex cables both run off the 12V rail and this rail can handle the highest power demand.  

Seasonic Platinum Focus 750 Specifications
DC Output    Rail        +3.3 V       +5 V    +12 V    -12 V    +5 VSB
Maximum Power           20 A         20 A     62 A     0.3 A    3 A
                                      100 W          744 W    3.6 W    15 W
Total continuous power    750 W

Regarding XVG pools found this out the hard way with Suprnova.  Wasn't seeing any coins building up or very little of what i should have been getting.  Probably stay away from Verge for a little while until they get this wallet issue figured out.

https://twitter.com/suprnovapools/status/953622940175695874?lang=en

Okay okay, i'll say i am a pretty reasonable guy.  But the engeneer technician crap just erks me in a bad way (i think Google helped CryptAtomeTrader44 on that one unfortunately...).  I know when things are written down in email or a forum they completely leave out context or emotion.  I am perfectly fine with ending this whole deal now.  I want to keep this crypto mining stuff going, because it's awesome and nvOC rules.  I say we blame Google translator for this entire misunderstanding...this may be my last post before Google takes me away...

But I do have some fixes and useful tips for tweaking hashrates for different algos, how to easily add coins, swap miners, etc. Being a miner you need to understand the base code structure, how to configure miners, and how nvOC works (I still have a lot to learn here...).  But I feel like i can share some useful info that i know would of helped me in the beginning.  Just start with something small that we can build on ya know...

I understand damNmad, but i'm not sure how I could have taken it any other way, and honestly i think his responses are ultimately useless as there was no need for it.  The code does not work, even if you don't use algo specific OC, as it generates stratum authorization errors.  Zpool only uses wallet address not username.workername.  Also i had memory overflow issues due to intensity being too high, so i had to set this to "auto" intensity to prevent that error.  It wasn't tested to confirm it works.  My post was intended to take all those posts, corrections, and what worked for me into one place.  As a quick guide to add a profitable coin to nvOC for other users.

So i still don't get the issue why posting was such a useless idea.  I guess were saying its better to search several pages to piece together a puzzle of several corrections to figure out how to add a coin?  If you guys want to keep this a dev only forum then fine, i'll signoff and keep to myself.  I appreciate the dev's efforts, but that was pretty sh**ty.  I just think he's looking for low hanging fruit because a user has "newbie" next to their username.  If it weren't for engineers there would be no computers let alone hardware to even mine so don't get me started on engeneer technicians, he really has no clue.  

I'm confused by your response, as it sounds your making some rash assumptions on my part.  I did use the search tool and found your posts.  I wasn't asking for support, i was providing it to users because using the code you posted DID NOT WORK.  Which is why i re-posted.  But since your so smart...maybe you can figure out what is wrong with it and let us know  You know because us "engeneer" technician types need help

I've since gone back and corrected it to use Suprnova, and if you took the time to read my post (and not immediately go into troll mode) i did say that you need to disable Groestl on the WTM website.  Which i also found using the search function.  Look at the bigger picture buddy, don't try to knock people trying to help.

Happy trolling....mate

Honestly damNmad you read my mind.  I like doing this kind of stuff (i'm an engineer) and i'm anal as hell about everything.  I'd like to put together a post on hardware setups for mining rigs and converting a trio rig to a 6 x card rig (this is what i did) as that was lacking information.  I'd like to do some testing to prove out some of my theories on things.  But let me see what i can put together in about a week or so regarding adding coins.

Also fyi, i revised the post you quoted because I learned later that Zpool doesn't actually mine that specific coin (XVG), it mines a group of Lrya2rev2 algo coins.  So i switched to suprnova pool and revised to code to utilize that server instead as it mines that coin directly.

I've noticed recently Verge (Lyra2rev2 algo) XVG coin shooting up to three times the profit of other coins on WTM auto switcher by papampi so i wanted to provide this short guide to add XVG coin to nvOC.  I am using v0019-2.0, so i apologize if it's already included in the latest build.

Firstly, when you setup WTM you must uncheck the "Groestl" algo, as Verge coin allows for multiple algo mining.  WTM will only report out current profits for Groestl algo and not Lyra2rev2, which we want to mine.  If you don't uncheck Groestl algo, XVG coin will always be at the bottom of the WTM profit checking list and will never auto switch.  Once you have your WTM configured correctly, hit calculate, and follow the instructions in 1bash to add it (add in .json after coins).  Then add "XVG" to the list of coins for WTM to profit check.

Add "XVG" to list of coins for WTM to profit check (example below)

Next add the following code to 1bash

Add "-o $COIN == XVG" to this portion of code if you are using algo specific OC settings (these are my settings for GTX 1070)

Add the following code to 0miner

I confirmed this works on Suprnova.

Firstly i would recommend using nvOC, but with windows make sure you have changed windows power settings to "high performance" and do the following. Click “Change advanced power settings” and look for “PCI Express” -> “Link State Power Management“, make sure it is set to “OFF“.  Your motherboard may have a specific mining BIOS made specifically for mining as well, i would research that first.

hey papampi and developers, love working with the OS and tweaking the build.  I've been doing some work on v0019-2.0 lately trying to get a few coins to work and here's some issues i found.

For FTC coin i had to change 0miner to this below to make it work, it had incorrect miner listed

To get XMR to work i had to do the following,

Added this to 0miner for XMR

Section i had to comment out in 0miner for XMR, as I believe it was screwing with what i have above.

In order to get XVG (lyra2rev2 algo) working had to put in auto intensity setting (0) as it had memory errors instantly.  Is there any disadvantage to using auto intensity setting?  I think it would help with people getting memory errors for having too high of intensity setting.  

Addition to 1bash for XVG

and this for Algo specific OC setting in 1bash

Added this to 0miner for XVG.  Can also use $BTC_ADDRESS in place of $ADDR

After making these changes, i'm able to mine XMR and XVG successfully.  Getting about 4700 h/s for XMR using Klaus and around 217 MH/s for XVG. Just wanted to give that feedback, thanks.

Okay, i would lead to think that i wouldn't OC my memory clock by 2000 Mhz...haha

I'm just trying to determine how to use the Windows OC settings from damNmad to get a ballpark OC setting for nvOC.  So are you saying its not possible?

I'm trying to figure out the conversion from Windows to Ubuntu OC settings on http://krypto-mining.blogspot.co.uk/2017/09/gtx-1070-oc-settings_15.html.  I see the note stating Linux is double windows memory clock but some of the Windows OC settings are in the 2000 Mhz which would equate to 4000 Mhz on Linux.  Also for Windows core clock, are these total clock speeds or are the they OC setting past the nominal clock speed?  Seems i'm missing something here.  Can anyone help me better understand that conversion from Windows to Ubuntu OC settings from damNmad?

I just check that the auto switch is reporting a coin and verify the GPUs are hashing by opening "screen -r miner" in the quake terminal.  That will show if your rig is running.

I recently got this working today after a couple hours of testing, you need to go to each individual pool on MPH and use the 20XXX port for each coin in 1bash.  If you use the 17XXX or 12XXX ports it will point your rig to MPH auto switching servers which we don't want to use.  Also ensure you set your auto exchange settings.  Once its setup i've instantly noticed more profit by about a couple dollars (hovering lately around $15-16/day before going to WTM papampi).  As the WTM papampi switching is much more up to date than MPH which severely lags on checking for most profitable coin.  I noticed that the rig was mining a completely different coin for about 15 minutes and MPH website still hadn't updated showing which coin i was actually mining.

As an example:

Do this the same for all the coins you set papampi WTM to check profitability.  Make sure your calculated settings from WTM reflect your rigs performance before you add the URL to 1bash.

If you want to add Ethereum i had some issues getting this working too.  You have to connect to server "us-east.ethash-hub.miningpoolhub.com", port 20535, and you have to add "-esm 2" as an additional claymore miner extension argument, otherwise you will get errors.  Hope this helps.

Epicly awesome feature, and version 2.0 is so much better, great work!

Is there a way to use MPH pool auto exchange feature using papampi WTM auto switching?  I have not tried this but i assume if i point all the different coins to the correct 72XXX ports that it would work?  Has anyone tried this or have any ideas on how to implement this in the code?

Honestly papampi and the developers if you ever feel like this, I (and probably many) would have no problem with you guys setting up a permanent 1% fee for using your OS.  Its only fair, as it takes a lot of your time and effort to develop, de-bug, and answer everyone's questions.  It's something you don't have to do but you do anyway.  I for one appreciate your efforts.