 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 »
|
|
Greed shouldn’t have any place in Crypto I do agree, and it’s such a pity... however it is and was to be expected as it’s a primarily hyped up dreams that are hyped up beyond reality most of the time.. and since the crypto space is generally a progressive area in life you can expect everyone to always be greedy, people should still be given the option to turn a miner dev fee off though, simply way to many options not to be, I have dev fee off (at least supposed to be) and if I thought it actually worked and the miner app was worth it, I’d definitely donate, however miners are not “ever” going to be jumping to throw away a percentage of cash we’ve already earned, we have transaction fees, pool fees, misc running costs, he’ll for some people 2% is a crazy number to just be handing over for nothing in return, that being said dstm was the best zcash miner I’ve ever used, to bad they don’t have minex algo...
|
|
|
|
Quite new to EWBF to mine Zcash (used other miners before). I have a single 1080 in my rig and wanting to switch to EWBF.
I am a bit confused with the algos, and which to use. With 192_7 I get around 26 Sol/s, 144_5 around 55 Sol/s and 210_9 ets me 240 Sol/s.
So to me on paper I should be using 210_9 is the best option for me to use, am I correct in thinking that? As it's massively higher than any of the others. Or does each algo mine a different coin 192_7 would be Zcash maybe? 210_9 would be Aion? Not too sure how to work out which algo is for which coin.
You have not the choice about the algo to use : this is the coin you choose. For example, you can't mine ZCash with 144_5 (and even if you think you can, you will have no one share and earn nothing). The best coin to mine with EquiHash is BitcoinZ (and it is with algo 144_5). Imho, best coin to mine right now is BTG...looking at current prices I doubt bitcoinZ will get anywhere. |
|
|
|
+1 for Windows version Nvidia owners are too rich to bother setting up Linux although it's probably better than Windows.  Has nothing to do with Nvidia owners to rich lol, everything to do with Nix has "been" dead, why would someone install Nix so they can be locked down lol, people use windows cuz its just better and way more versatile, only thing unix/Linux have going for them, is the fact that its free, you get what you pay for. |
|
|
|
Any news DSTM ? Where are you ?
I second this... =p |
|
|
|
0.6.0 works great with simplemining on various pools. when i try to use 0.6.1 it does not seem to work very well. most of the cards are under performing by quite a bit. any ideas what is going on ? all the same 1070 8gb cards and overclock settings
0.6.0
_ GPU3 53C Sol/s: 442.9 Sol/W: 4.28 Avg: 448.3 I/s: 240.2 Sh: 47.18 1.00 21
_ GPU0 54C Sol/s: 443.3 Sol/W: 4.25 Avg: 445.0 I/s: 238.6 Sh: 57.57 1.00 31
_ GPU4 54C Sol/s: 436.4 Sol/W: 4.23 Avg: 433.9 I/s: 233.2 Sh: 57.55 1.00 29
_ GPU8 59C Sol/s: 432.2 Sol/W: 4.22 Avg: 433.8 I/s: 233.6 Sh: 63.42 1.00 21
_ GPU9 46C Sol/s: 451.3 Sol/W: 4.26 Avg: 448.4 I/s: 240.9 Sh: 41.52 1.00 22
_ GPU2 53C Sol/s: 439.0 Sol/W: 4.21 Avg: 442.0 I/s: 236.8 Sh: 51.86 1.00 28
_ GPU5 51C Sol/s: 446.9 Sol/W: 4.28 Avg: 447.9 I/s: 239.6 Sh: 33.41 1.00 27
_ GPU7 55C Sol/s: 443.6 Sol/W: 4.24 Avg: 444.8 I/s: 236.8 Sh: 49.51 1.00 28
_ GPU6 51C Sol/s: 450.1 Sol/W: 4.29 Avg: 448.9 I/s: 239.1 Sh: 37.95 1.00 21
_ GPU1 52C Sol/s: 444.8 Sol/W: 4.28 Avg: 447.7 I/s: 238.8 Sh: 39.03 1.00 21
_ GPU10 54C Sol/s: 448.8 Sol/W: 4.21 Avg: 445.0 I/s: 236.8 Sh: 55.26 1.00 39
_ GPU11 47C Sol/s: 442.8 Sol/W: 4.33 Avg: 450.3 I/s: 241.1 Sh: 43.83 1.00 29
========== Sol/s: 5322.0 Sol/W: 4.26 Avg: 5336.0 I/s: 2855.5 Sh: 578.09 1.00 26
0.6.1
_ GPU6 52C 70% | 391.1 Sol/s 391.1 Avg 208.5 I/s | 3.73 S/W 108 W | 59.79 100 27
_ GPU3 53C 70% | 455.7 Sol/s 455.7 Avg 245.5 I/s | 4.36 S/W 102 W | 50.63 100 28
_ GPU1 52C 70% | 454.2 Sol/s 454.2 Avg 243.7 I/s | 4.36 S/W 104 W | 76.15 100 29
_ GPU4 54C 70% | 454.8 Sol/s 454.8 Avg 238.6 I/s | 4.34 S/W 104 W | 78.39 100 26
_ GPU7 55C 70% | 150.2 Sol/s 150.2 Avg 82.0 I/s | 1.61 S/W 95 W | 25.24 100 32
_ GPU8 59C 70% | 373.5 Sol/s 373.5 Avg 199.9 I/s | 3.42 S/W 97 W | 39.10 100 31
_ GPU2 53C 70% | 449.7 Sol/s 449.7 Avg 241.4 I/s | 4.36 S/W 103 W | 39.05 100 24
_ GPU0 54C 70% | 458.9 Sol/s 458.9 Avg 243.5 I/s | 4.36 S/W 104 W | 73.80 100 26
_ GPU5 51C 70% | 164.1 Sol/s 164.1 Avg 85.8 I/s | 1.90 S/W 90 W | 25.29 100 28
_ GPU9 46C 70% | 145.3 Sol/s 145.3 Avg 77.3 I/s | 1.61 S/W 95 W | 18.40 100 24
_ GPU10 54C 70% | 372.3 Sol/s 372.3 Avg 200.5 I/s | 3.44 S/W 112 W | 53.06 100 28
_ GPU11 45C 70% | 128.4 Sol/s 128.4 Avg 69.6 I/s | 1.52 S/W 78 W | 16.02 100 24
============== | 3998.3 Sol/s 3998.3 Avg 2136.2 I/s | 3.25 S/W 1200 W | 554.91 100 27
It looks like the OverClock settings did not apply, try reapplying clock settings, I have had this happen to me a few times on 0.6.1 with windows, i Reapply clock settings etc... and it generally will fix it sometimes i reboot just to refresh things then reapply clocks, try that man =p |
|
|
|
msi gtx Duke 1080 OC +150 core +600 mem @ 70% Power
GPU0 52C Sol/s: 580.0 Sol/W: 4.05 Avg: 580.0
You must be aiming for conserving power because my 1070 ti gets 560ish souls 194/900 89% TPD 4 souls/watt is nice tho i guess |
|
|
|
Hi all,
Need help, last days my output seems very strange, the "+" that indicates one submitted share almost gone
please see my output, only two submitted shares from about 30 lines
Some suggestions?
> GPU0 63C 75% | 543.1 Sol/s 541.3 Avg 289.3 I/s | 3.37 S/W 161 W | 0.33 100 132
GPU0 63C 75% | 541.9 Sol/s 541.4 Avg 289.2 I/s | 3.36 S/W 162 W | 0.30 100 132
GPU0 63C 75% | 539.7 Sol/s 541.2 Avg 289.3 I/s | 3.36 S/W 159 W | 0.27 100 132
GPU0 63C 75% | 538.9 Sol/s 541.0 Avg 289.2 I/s | 3.36 S/W 160 W | 0.50 100 124 +
GPU0 63C 75% | 542.5 Sol/s 541.2 Avg 289.1 I/s | 3.36 S/W 163 W | 0.46 100 124
> GPU0 63C 75% | 543.0 Sol/s 541.3 Avg 289.2 I/s | 3.36 S/W 160 W | 0.43 100 124
GPU0 63C 75% | 540.9 Sol/s 541.3 Avg 289.3 I/s | 3.36 S/W 158 W | 0.40 100 124
GPU0 63C 75% | 538.4 Sol/s 541.1 Avg 289.0 I/s | 3.36 S/W 162 W | 0.37 100 124
GPU0 63C 75% | 536.7 Sol/s 540.8 Avg 289.0 I/s | 3.36 S/W 158 W | 0.35 100 124
GPU0 63C 75% | 539.1 Sol/s 540.7 Avg 289.1 I/s | 3.35 S/W 164 W | 0.33 100 124
> GPU0 63C 75% | 539.7 Sol/s 540.7 Avg 289.2 I/s | 3.35 S/W 162 W | 0.31 100 124
> GPU0 63C 75% | 542.7 Sol/s 540.8 Avg 289.4 I/s | 3.35 S/W 165 W | 0.30 100 124
GPU0 63C 75% | 535.9 Sol/s 540.5 Avg 289.1 I/s | 3.35 S/W 160 W | 0.28 100 124
> GPU0 63C 75% | 550.8 Sol/s 541.0 Avg 289.2 I/s | 3.36 S/W 161 W | 0.27 100 124
GPU0 63C 75% | 533.7 Sol/s 540.7 Avg 289.3 I/s | 3.35 S/W 164 W | 0.26 100 124
> GPU0 63C 75% | 537.0 Sol/s 540.5 Avg 289.3 I/s | 3.35 S/W 163 W | 0.25 100 124
GPU0 63C 75% | 535.7 Sol/s 540.3 Avg 289.1 I/s | 3.35 S/W 164 W | 0.24 100 124
GPU0 63C 75% | 544.8 Sol/s 540.5 Avg 289.3 I/s | 3.35 S/W 162 W | 0.23 100 124
GPU0 63C 75% | 540.6 Sol/s 540.5 Avg 289.3 I/s | 3.35 S/W 161 W | 0.33 100 220 +
> GPU0 63C 75% | 541.1 Sol/s 540.5 Avg 289.2 I/s | 3.35 S/W 162 W | 0.32 100 220
GPU0 63C 75% | 541.6 Sol/s 540.6 Avg 289.2 I/s | 3.35 S/W 160 W | 0.31 100 220
GPU0 64C 75% | 540.1 Sol/s 540.6 Avg 289.0 I/s | 3.35 S/W 163 W | 0.30 100 220
GPU0 64C 75% | 542.6 Sol/s 540.6 Avg 289.0 I/s | 3.35 S/W 154 W | 0.29 100 220
It is completely normal as flypool increased the difficulty for everyone in order to reduce the number of connections to their servers but the payout is not affected. You can look at that on flypool website, click on payout and read the twits over there. It is explained My minimum payout time increased from 30-31 hours to 41 hours, so its not exactly "completely normal" If you mine in flypool that is what happened. My console reports the same low share, you can see my post on page 63 I believe but my payout time is exactly the same. It hasn’t changed. If you mine in nanopool might be a different issue but the miner itself is the same and hasn’t changed Yes, I mine in flypool, OK I will check for two days from now, Thanks for help!  The Payout is "NOT" the same and anyone saying so is a damn fool, and that's wrong to do as noobs will no doubt think things are the same, it's taking me much longer for payouts after going from difficulty of 1.95 to 11.7 and now that asics are on zec we'll no doubt encounter much more problems until we find another coin to goto that doesnt screw over GPU miners, the miner itself has no issues atm unless you have driver problems which *nix is going to be full of, no the miner hasnt upped anyones difficulty flypool has and it'll get much worse, would be nice to have a coin that is anti asic that doesnt screw us lil gpu miner guys over, but i guess that's a pipe dream at this rate, the fact is yes it will take longer to get a payout now as its added 20 hours on my payouts. So for your 14 post I nearly forget you were the real expert in this subject... my payout is exactly the same it hasn’t gone down and I have no need to lie about it. No need to be harsh though calling people noobs or fools when you are no better than anyone here or elsewhere. So go an learn some manners then come back and try to post something helpful. Learn something guy, I never said the payouts changed on Flypool, I did say however that it "will" take longer to get a payout, and that is a fact bud...It isnt my fault ya think ya know everything and were clueless on the biggest thing the zec name atm, the miner works great but on nix youll have lil issues due to things not being setup correctly (user error 90% of the time) If you cant be helpful then simply keep you're comments to yourself as every comment i've made was 100% factual and helpful. |
|
|
|
Hi all,
Need help, last days my output seems very strange, the "+" that indicates one submitted share almost gone
please see my output, only two submitted shares from about 30 lines
Some suggestions?
> GPU0 63C 75% | 543.1 Sol/s 541.3 Avg 289.3 I/s | 3.37 S/W 161 W | 0.33 100 132
GPU0 63C 75% | 541.9 Sol/s 541.4 Avg 289.2 I/s | 3.36 S/W 162 W | 0.30 100 132
GPU0 63C 75% | 539.7 Sol/s 541.2 Avg 289.3 I/s | 3.36 S/W 159 W | 0.27 100 132
GPU0 63C 75% | 538.9 Sol/s 541.0 Avg 289.2 I/s | 3.36 S/W 160 W | 0.50 100 124 +
GPU0 63C 75% | 542.5 Sol/s 541.2 Avg 289.1 I/s | 3.36 S/W 163 W | 0.46 100 124
> GPU0 63C 75% | 543.0 Sol/s 541.3 Avg 289.2 I/s | 3.36 S/W 160 W | 0.43 100 124
GPU0 63C 75% | 540.9 Sol/s 541.3 Avg 289.3 I/s | 3.36 S/W 158 W | 0.40 100 124
GPU0 63C 75% | 538.4 Sol/s 541.1 Avg 289.0 I/s | 3.36 S/W 162 W | 0.37 100 124
GPU0 63C 75% | 536.7 Sol/s 540.8 Avg 289.0 I/s | 3.36 S/W 158 W | 0.35 100 124
GPU0 63C 75% | 539.1 Sol/s 540.7 Avg 289.1 I/s | 3.35 S/W 164 W | 0.33 100 124
> GPU0 63C 75% | 539.7 Sol/s 540.7 Avg 289.2 I/s | 3.35 S/W 162 W | 0.31 100 124
> GPU0 63C 75% | 542.7 Sol/s 540.8 Avg 289.4 I/s | 3.35 S/W 165 W | 0.30 100 124
GPU0 63C 75% | 535.9 Sol/s 540.5 Avg 289.1 I/s | 3.35 S/W 160 W | 0.28 100 124
> GPU0 63C 75% | 550.8 Sol/s 541.0 Avg 289.2 I/s | 3.36 S/W 161 W | 0.27 100 124
GPU0 63C 75% | 533.7 Sol/s 540.7 Avg 289.3 I/s | 3.35 S/W 164 W | 0.26 100 124
> GPU0 63C 75% | 537.0 Sol/s 540.5 Avg 289.3 I/s | 3.35 S/W 163 W | 0.25 100 124
GPU0 63C 75% | 535.7 Sol/s 540.3 Avg 289.1 I/s | 3.35 S/W 164 W | 0.24 100 124
GPU0 63C 75% | 544.8 Sol/s 540.5 Avg 289.3 I/s | 3.35 S/W 162 W | 0.23 100 124
GPU0 63C 75% | 540.6 Sol/s 540.5 Avg 289.3 I/s | 3.35 S/W 161 W | 0.33 100 220 +
> GPU0 63C 75% | 541.1 Sol/s 540.5 Avg 289.2 I/s | 3.35 S/W 162 W | 0.32 100 220
GPU0 63C 75% | 541.6 Sol/s 540.6 Avg 289.2 I/s | 3.35 S/W 160 W | 0.31 100 220
GPU0 64C 75% | 540.1 Sol/s 540.6 Avg 289.0 I/s | 3.35 S/W 163 W | 0.30 100 220
GPU0 64C 75% | 542.6 Sol/s 540.6 Avg 289.0 I/s | 3.35 S/W 154 W | 0.29 100 220
It is completely normal as flypool increased the difficulty for everyone in order to reduce the number of connections to their servers but the payout is not affected. You can look at that on flypool website, click on payout and read the twits over there. It is explained My minimum payout time increased from 30-31 hours to 41 hours, so its not exactly "completely normal" If you mine in flypool that is what happened. My console reports the same low share, you can see my post on page 63 I believe but my payout time is exactly the same. It hasn’t changed. If you mine in nanopool might be a different issue but the miner itself is the same and hasn’t changed Yes, I mine in flypool, OK I will check for two days from now, Thanks for help! The Payout is "NOT" the same and anyone saying so is a damn fool, and that's wrong to do as noobs will no doubt think things are the same, it's taking me much longer for payouts after going from difficulty of 1.95 to 11.7 and now that asics are on zec we'll no doubt encounter much more problems until we find another coin to goto that doesnt screw over GPU miners, the miner itself has no issues atm unless you have driver problems which *nix is going to be full of, no the miner hasnt upped anyones difficulty flypool has and it'll get much worse, would be nice to have a coin that is anti asic that doesnt screw us lil gpu miner guys over, but i guess that's a pipe dream at this rate, the fact is yes it will take longer to get a payout now as its added 20 hours on my payouts. |
|
|
|
Thank you guys!
Very good result for my rig 6x 1070ti
Equihash algoritm:
Average rate - 3.38 KSol/s
Energy per card - Sol/w 4.20
to get 4 souls/watt on a 1070 ti, means you have the TPD about 58-60% lol you should post you're config cause I just dont see that type of hash rate with that low of TPD. |
|
|
|
This thread should be CLOSED, project has been abandoned for some time, all the while n00bz without any clue come here looking for support for something that simply does not exist, look into DSTM (better miner in every aspect, active development, a non greedy dev) with miners like dstm that have no reliability issues except for user error, it's really a no brainer, i checked back here for lulz just to find dev has either skated, been robbed, or shot, or all the above or just simply got so rich so fast he doesnt know how to maintain, poor people should never get rich they do not know how to act when they do have a decent amount of cash. lol @ faken millenials I r Entitled to all jur zcash kthx haha |
|
|
|
sorry I'm kinda new here.
I have somequestion, first the correct format for my worker name on nanopool is --user[SPACE]Mywalletaddress[DOT]Worker'sname[SLASH]Email right?
And does this miner have API option like EWBF's one
Thank you
Everything you just asked for is in the readme man. |
|
|
|
|
yes you def need to turn power back up, i can tell those are 1070 ti, and also reading 50 less than it should be, and then about 100 less than on full tilt, power should be never below 84%, pretty much never above 92% unless catching up or something, currently my 1070 ti's are set to kernel mode, extended msi setting, 94% TPD, +176/+604 (lots of wiggle room with the 1070 ti's, once u go under about 88% the 1070z suffer really hard, keep that in mind when finding a lower efficiency setting.) hopefully a dstm update for windows comes out soon, as we have been waiting a while, 0.7 can be released now and 0.7.1 released in few weeks, we dont have much time so the dev needs to understand we need the miner up to date asap before asics hit and we have to switch coins to mine q=] PS: 4 sols per watt is possible, but who is going to want nor need to turn a 1070 ti down to 58% TPD lol
|
|
|
|
For people with NVIDIA cards specially those with GTX 1070 Ti.
Has someone tried the new drivers 397.31 released on the 25th of april? if so any improvements compared to previous version 391.35??
I have installed 391.35 and with 70%TDP, +200 clock and +700 memory I get 3090 average hashrate with 6 GTX 1070 Ti.
Thanks everyone
yes I have, and its about the same, wasnt really that big of a downfall one the driver before that tho at least not enough to make me rollback a GPU driver, I use Kernel Mode, 91% TPD, +184/+852 on mine, i get around 538-540ish with my 1070 ti, u can take it atw up to 1000 at the TPD you're at tho lol i'd turn it up to 94-106% if i were u tho No thanks I can get the same performance you get with 80% TDP/ +200 clock/ +700 mem that is 530-535 sols/s ish using far less elecricity than what you are using. It actually seems you are wasting it so I assume you do not pay for it. I do not know what brand you are using but mines are EVGA and MSI and they do not like more than +750 mem. Combined clock and mem they do not like more than +220 clock/+730 mem otherwise they crash (at least that is my experience) There is also a compromise between what you get from the cards, the electricity you pay and the life expectancy of the equipment and I would say with your settings last one is not going to be long enough to make profit out of them. You will not get the same hash rate, and you are right I do not pay for Power, however if I did i'd still want the most hashrate I can get, life expectancy of cards is also irrelevant to me, and turning it down to you're level wont help that cause any if at all, to each their own I guess, I'd just rather have better hash rates, I also wouldnt rollback a driver lol for a few hashes, but from the looks of it, since the Zcash Founder is a complete and utter Moron, we'll be hunting for a new coin to mine shortly. |
|
|
|
For people with NVIDIA cards specially those with GTX 1070 Ti.
Has someone tried the new drivers 397.31 released on the 25th of april? if so any improvements compared to previous version 391.35??
I have installed 391.35 and with 70%TDP, +200 clock and +700 memory I get 3090 average hashrate with 6 GTX 1070 Ti.
Thanks everyone
yes I have, and its about the same, wasnt really that big of a downfall one the driver before that tho at least not enough to make me rollback a GPU driver, I use Kernel Mode, 91% TPD, +184/+852 on mine, i get around 538-540ish with my 1070 ti, u can take it atw up to 1000 at the TPD you're at tho lol i'd turn it up to 94-106% if i were u tho |
|
|
|
|
How about a "Shutdown script" of some sort so that if it overheats for any reason, internet lags out for any reason for failover etc.., one that we can configure to for instance, restart the miner in 5mins or 8mins once network has become reconnected and or load an app like Afterburner, the computer restart idea is actually pretty good, just put an option for ppl if they dont wanna use it then they dont add the flag for it?
|
|
|
|
|
Can you provide us with a valid download link for the miner? I'd like to see if this is better than DSTM (faster or cheaper or both) The download links have not worked in a long time.
|
|
|
|
I can't seem to figure out how to disable a gpu in DSTM. https://i.imgur.com/hfGlRKV.pngWhen I use --dev 0 2 3 in the .CFG file, the miner shows an error and wont start. I have no clue what I'm doing wrong. I assume I'm putting in the wrong place, or there's another command I'm suppose to put in there. EWBF I just remove the number in my cuda device, and others I can simply type in the number while the miner is running to turn them off individually. Any help would greatly be appreciated! Make a batch file, I use --telemetry and --dev 0 1 2 3 5, try making you're own config file a simple .bat |
|
|
|
3 EVGA 1070 FTW2
1 EVGA 1060 6gb SC
DSTM
All of my rigs are running driving version 23.23.13.9135 (3/23/18) and DSTM without any issues.
Today on my smallest rig I updated to 397.31 (4/25/18) and saw a loss of "at least" 20 sols.
My average before the update was 1811sols, but after the update I was getting 1791sols and STEADILY DROPPING.
I did a rollback and everything went back to normal.
When I did the rollback, I'm now showing 24.21.13.9731 (4/22/18), however I'm getting a warning that the new 397.31 (4/25/18) is available for download.
I'm just putting the word out to at least check one rig before updating all your rigs.
I have noticed that, I thought it was my clock settings and wasted 20mins of my life earlier lol, however im not gonna rollback my GPU drivers just to get 20ish hashes/sec, that'd be like going to linux to earn a few more hashes/sec, tons of work for not much gain and i like updates they generally fix misc. things so im sure the next update will pickup 20 hashes/sec how it has in the past, I use Geforce Experience to custom clean install drivers and am on "experimental updates" all my rigs are the same and they all did drop about 20 hashes/sec on my 1080z and 1070s, about 12ish on 1060z, about 7 on 1050 ti's, pm me with you're clock settings and ill pm with mine back  im always fiddling with clocks lol |
|
|
|
Hi all. ZM 6.0
2018-04-21 3:27:17|gpu_id 1 63 1 unspecified launch failure
2018-04-21 3:27:17|gpu 1 unresponsive - check overclocking
2018-04-21 3:27:17|cudaMemcpy 1 failed
2018-04-21 3:27:17|gpu_id 2 55 2 unspecified launch failure
2018-04-21 3:27:17|gpu 2 unresponsive - check overclocking
2018-04-21 3:27:17|gpu_id 7 52 0 unspecified launch failure
2018-04-21 3:27:17|cudaMemcpy 1 failed
2018-04-21 3:27:17|gpu 7 unresponsive - check overclocking
2018-04-21 3:27:17|cudaMemcpy 1 failed
wtf?
Could be either Memory, or cpu clock, it's one of the two...just because it says cuda couldnt copy memory, means something is overclocked to much, try dialing back TPD%, and one or both clock settings, and try Kernel mode not user. |
|
|
|
What are "ALL" you're settings for you're GPUz? what % TPD? I run 200/660/90% in AB and constant voltage, looks like u need to turn TPD % down to 80-90%, or lower you're Overclawk Settings q=]
How much power do your cards use at that settings? Going for 4 sol/watt here at 70W per card (1060 gb oc)... Hope this helps, Zardozer, sorry forgot to post these links, u can get 4sols/watt but you'll need to turn down TPD to about 78%, inrun kernel mode not user and force constant voltage in Afterburner, you can see clock settings, this is my new rig I made with some misc GPUz, I'll be buying more 1060z you get slot of bang for the buck with them, I've tried every miner with several rigs, zm miner (dstm) is by far the best/most efficient/most stable+, hope this helps q=] https://ibb.co/jTRuj7https://ibb.co/j33krn |
|
|
|
|
