 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 »
|
|
Thanks for your advice, guys. I downloaded and am currently using something called lolminer, like the first person suggested. It works, but the hash rate is very bad. Plus, I can imagine that they are taking some of it for the developer. since it's not a free miner like ethminer used to be.
Nevertheless, I guess it doesn't matter as ETH mining will cease to exist in a couple of days, right?
|
|
|
|
Hi everyone: I should admit that I haven't been up to speed on crypto-mining lately. I built my rig a few years back and had it running and do its thing in my basement. Here's my setup: - I have 4 (genuine) GeForce GTX 1060 cards, each with 6GB of video RAM. (Bought them on newegg, so I'm assuming it's not a Chinese knockoff.) - Mobo: ASUS PRIME Z270-A LGA 1151 Intel Z270 HDMI SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.1 ATX Motherboards - Intel - CPU is: Intel(R) Core(TM) i3-6100 CPU @ 3.70GHz - RAM: 8 GB - Single DDR4 2666 MT/s (PC4-21300) SR x8 DIMM 288-Pin Memory - Drive: SSD -- 128 GB -- ADATA SU800 M.2 2280 128GB Ultimate 3D NAND - Power supply: EVGA SuperNOVA 1000 G3, 80 Plus Gold 1000W I was using the open-source ethminer to mine ETH for a couple years or so. Through the following command line: ethminer.exe -P stratum://0xmy_eth_id.my_mining_rig:x@us2.ethermine.org:14444 So a few days back I got a notification from the mining pool that it hasn't received any good hashes. I checked my mining rig, rebooted it, and it was showing the following errors upon the start of the ethminer: ethminer 0.19.0-alpha.0
Build: windows/release/msvc
No OpenCL platforms found
i 06:27:07 main Configured pool us2.ethermine.org:14444
i 06:27:07 <unknown> Selected pool us2.ethermine.org:14444
i 06:27:07 <unknown> Negotiation of EthereumStratum/2.0.0 failed. Trying another ...
i 06:27:07 <unknown> Stratum mode : EthereumStratum/1.0.0 (NiceHash)
i 06:27:07 <unknown> Established connection to us2.ethermine.org [172.65.230.90:14444]
i 06:27:07 <unknown> Spinning up miners...
cu 06:27:07 cuda-0 Using Pci Id : 01:00.0 GeForce GTX 1060 6GB (Compute 6.1) Memory : 6.00 GB
cu 06:27:07 cuda-1 Using Pci Id : 03:00.0 GeForce GTX 1060 6GB (Compute 6.1) Memory : 6.00 GB
cu 06:27:07 cuda-2 Using Pci Id : 04:00.0 GeForce GTX 1060 6GB (Compute 6.1) Memory : 6.00 GB
cu 06:27:07 cuda-3 Using Pci Id : 06:00.0 GeForce GTX 1060 6GB (Compute 6.1) Memory : 6.00 GB
i 06:27:07 <unknown> Authorized worker ___________________________
i 06:27:08 <unknown> Epoch : 516 Difficulty : 4.29 Gh
i 06:27:08 <unknown> Job: c956e546... us2.ethermine.org [172.65.230.90:14444]
i 06:27:11 <unknown> Job: 7c432b56... us2.ethermine.org [172.65.230.90:14444]
cu 06:27:11 cuda-3 Generating DAG + Light : 5.11 GB
cu 06:27:11 cuda-0 Generating DAG + Light : 5.11 GB
cu 06:27:11 cuda-3 Unexpected error CUDA error in func dev::eth::CUDAMiner::initEpoch_internal at line 123 out of memory on CUDA device 06:00.0
cu 06:27:11 cuda-3 Mining suspended ...
cu 06:27:11 cuda-2 Generating DAG + Light : 5.11 GB
cu 06:27:11 cuda-0 Unexpected error CUDA error in func dev::eth::CUDAMiner::initEpoch_internal at line 123 out of memory on CUDA device 01:00.0
cu 06:27:11 cuda-2 Unexpected error CUDA error in func dev::eth::CUDAMiner::initEpoch_internal at line 123 out of memory on CUDA device 04:00.0
cu 06:27:11 cuda-0 Mining suspended ...
cu 06:27:11 cuda-2 Mining suspended ...
cu 06:27:11 cuda-1 Generating DAG + Light : 5.11 GB
cu 06:27:11 cuda-1 Unexpected error CUDA error in func dev::eth::CUDAMiner::initEpoch_internal at line 123 out of memory on CUDA device 03:00.0
cu 06:27:11 cuda-1 Mining suspended ... I did some search and found out that people were suggesting to increase the size of virtual memory. So I did that as well, raised it to 50GB:  rebooted, but the miner was still showing the same error. Any idea what is going on there? |
|
|
|
Hi everyone: I haven't checked my GPU miner for a while. I had it set up via Claymore on dual mining of ETH and Sia coin. So I pulled it up today and saw this:  I tried following all their links but it's way above my pay grade. The miner was set up originally on port 7777 for Sia mining, but I changed it to 3355 like they want there. So Claymore looks like this now:  I tried running it for a few hours now, but that first screen still doesn't change, although it shows that Sia coin shares were accepted. Any idea how shall I adjust it to make it work? Thanks! PS. I don't want to lose those unpaid 92 Sia coins I have there. |
|
|
|
The thing is that Nanopool is optimized for multi GPU/CPU RIGs, that means while mining with a single GPU/CPU or low-efficient one,
you'll receive a false-positive notification each time your miner does not manage to send a valid share to the pool for 20 minutes.
If this is the case, you can simply replace your email in the miner configuration with a passphrase that will be your new password for your account settings.
I hope this helps!
Thanks. I got it now. The email was in my command line that I supplied for the miner. I wish they explained it in a more clear form on the website. |
|
|
|
Thanks. But that's what I'm getting when I click settings. Where do I delete the email?  |
|
|
|
I've recently switched my XMR (Monero) CPU miner from Claymore to XMR-stak. I've been mining with nanopool-dot-org. Since then I started receiving a lot of the following messages:  That reads: Note that I don't see any visible issues with the miner itself. I clicked on the link in that message and it simply takes me to the graph and stats for my miner. There's nowhere I can see where I can cancel those emails. Is there a way to stop these messages? |
|
|
|
XMR-stak is better than claymore, perform a test.
Actually no. Even though I agree that Claymore with his closed source obfuscated code and steep dev fee is sh*&, the results "shares-wise" I was getting from it was better. Here's the stats from nanopool. This one is before the switch when I was using Claymore:  And this is after I switched to xmr-stack:  |
|
|
|
XMR-stak is better than claymore, perform a test.
Thanks, I'll check that out. Is it this one at github? Also how's the dev fee on it vs. Claymore? |
|
|
|
|
Thanks.
It's Intel i7-4770 CPU with 8MB of cache and it was already running at -t 4 setting automatically. (At 50% CPU utilization.)
And like I said it's my old PC, so nothing else runs on it.
So, OK having added -t 6 command line now it runs at 75% CPU utilization.
I wish there was a setting to rev it up all the way to 90% or so?
|
|
|
|
I'm using the following tutorial on setting up my old PC for CPU mining of XMR (Monero) with Claymore CPU miner: https://xmr.nanopool.org/helpI'm using the following command line: C:\Users\mnrpc\Desktop\clmr\NsCpuCNMiner64.exe -o stratum+ssl://xmr-eu1.nanopool.org:14433 -u key.id.name/email -p x -pow7 1 The miner starts up and runs fine, but its CPU utilization doesn't go above 50%:  It's a designated PC that's not used for anything else. Is there a way to make it use more CPU on it? |
|
|
|
|
@not.you: that link you posted gave the exact same message like I showed above. Do you not see it? Is it just me?
@toptek12: f*^k. Do I really need to create an account just to see my XMR balance? (I have too much spam in my inbox already.)
|
|
|
|
Hmm, I'm not sure if I'm doing it right. I went to https://moneroblocks.info/ and used my public XMR address and it gave me this: Uh-oh For a moment there it seemed that you were trying to peek into this Monero address: <public address> No? Hmmm... it really looks like you were, like, trying to check out this dude's balance. Well, Monero says 'No'! |
|
|
|
|
I'm curious if there's an online resource that can tell me my XMR wallet balance by just the public key / address?
I know that I can install XMR GUI wallet for that, but it has two major drawbacks:
1) I need to actually download and install software when all I need is the balance.
2) Once installed it tries to download what appears like the entire blockchain that may take days with my connection. And I'm not talking about wasted space on the hard drive needed for that.
|
|
|
|
Hi,
Aside from that being said you can always request Nanopool team for an early one-time payout if your balance is above 0.05 XMR. Before doing that make sure your XMR mining is turned off.
Feel free to send me your Nanopool account link directly to speed up this process.
Thanks, I tried to PM you but I'm getting this: User 'Matthew_Nanopool' is a newbie, but your options are set such that you cannot receive PMs from newbies. Therefore, you cannot send PMs to newbies, either. I spent about 10 minutes now looking how to turn that option off and I can't seem to find it. Do you guys know where is it? about ETH .. ARE YOU MINING ETH WITH YOUR 1060 ON WINDOWS 10 !!!!
Yeah. What am I missing there? |
|
|
|
|
Thank you, guys!
Any specific XMR miners that you can recommend? (That you know work well and possibly have lower commission.)
|
|
|
|
Hi everyone: I haven't done any more research on this since I built this rig in June of 2017. It has 5x GeForce GTX 1060 gpus running in Windows 10. I've been using it exclusively to mine ETH + SC. Apart from that I also started mining XMR using my CPU on my main computer but that soon became too annoying to do (computer gets too slow and noisy) so I stopped after about a month. I was mining XMR via the xmr.nanopool.org pool and was able to accumulate 0.18812771 XMR. So now I want to get that XMR out of that pool. I see that they have a minimum payout of 0.3 XMR (if I'm lucky to change the setting from 1 XMR originally.) Now I stopped mining ETH on my main mining rig and tried to set up XMR mining instead so that I can bring up my XMR balance in the pool to be able to withdraw it. Unfortunately I couldn't find a straightforward XMR mining software for Nvidia GPU mining. I was able to get "xmr-stak-win64" to run on my miner that seemed to have worked for awhile. Unfortunately that miner seems to crash sporadically after about a day of running on my system. Do you know of any XMR mining software for Windows that works with nvidia GPUs? |
|
|
|
I've been trying to mine XMR on my old gaming desktop. It was going slow but steady. But then at times when I check that machine there'll be hours and hours of this: DevFee: Job timeout, disconnect, retry in 20 sec ... Here's a screenshot:  Here's the connection batch file I'm using: set GPU_MAX_ALLOC_PERCENT 100
NsGpuCNMiner.exe -o ssl://xmr-us-west1.nanopool.org:14433 -u <WALLET>.<MINER_NAME>/<EMAIL> -p z -ftime 1 -allpools 1 -a 3 I checked the internet and the following pool worked just fine: https://xmr.nanopool.org/account/<WALLET> Any idea how to fix this? |
|
|
|
I've been trying to set up Claymore for dual mining ETH and DCR (Decred.) The proposed/default pool in Claymore is https://dcr.suprnova.cc but I'm wondering if anyone can suggest a different (better) pool? Here's why I'm asking: 1. It took an inordinately long to set up suprnova pool. Why the heck do I need to log in to check my stats? Then it will kick me out in a few days so I have to re-login back. Too much pain in the ass. 2. Then this one really pissed me off. My rig broke down so I didn't mine for a few days. Then I put it back together and resumed mining. Everything was showing fine for DCR in Claymore, but when I checked the suprnova site in the web browser they evidently removed my worker! So pretty much everything I mined for a few days since I started was zeroed out! WTF! Anyway, just asking for a recommendation for a better DCR pool. PS. I'm on the West coast of US. |
|
|
|
I don't mean that a bit of coding is a lot of effort in and of itself, just using an expression - though the code isn't the only thing here, there is testing, concept, the discussion, the git repository etc. - devoted to subverting someone else instead of competing.
I'm sure you are correct too that the income likely wont be severely affected. It's just principle for me, if I don't like the terms the proper action would be to use something else. In my experience, though limited, the speed increase in the software is about 2-3x what the fees for using it are. Still a net win for me.
As for forced fees, open source, etc. that reasonable, but anyone can make that choice when developing the software and when deciding what to use. If we don't like the software being proprietary or the implementation we can use something else.
Anyway, I'm rambling. I only wanted to through in my two cents on the subject. I wouldn't even care to try stopping anyone either way but I think it would be much better to compete with different ideas and such than to intentionally subvert something one doesn't like.
DogeEconomist, you're ragging on the only guy in this whole thread who posted his code and is upfront about it. The a*s w*pe that started this thread and made the original NoDevFee executable is hiding what he is doing. Like I said before, I reverse engineered it and it sends dev fee to your wallet 9 out of 10 times. And the 10th time it secretly sends it into his wallet: 0x783231dEBa1FaFd90b4F146fDB21a374C29737fF. That's an example of behavior that is not OK with me! I agree with most of what you said though, except couple of points: 1) First and foremost -- be upfront! Don't try to hide anything. I don't know who wrote that Claymore miner but it is heavily obfuscated to the point that every, and I mean, every antivirus flags it as malware. I can't even download it to my Win10 machine. Can all those AVs be flagging it as false positives? maybe. But who knows. We don't know for sure. 2) There's a good indication that the author of the Claymore miner artificially inflates the hashrates it reports. Since there's no source code and he obfuscated the living crap out of that executable, there's no way to check if he's telling the truth. Sure, he did some work to develop it, but doing such a skeezy move as inflating the reported numbers is not OK! Also use some logic. If something is obfuscated, the computer will have to de-obfuscate it to run it and thus "waste" time. How would that be "faster" then? 3) Sure, I totally agree that one needs to be compensated for their work. But to what degree? Have you seen the balance on the claymore dude's ETH account lately. It's over a million US smackaroos. So did he make all that $$ by an honest coding work or by padding his hashrates and thus beating the open source (honest) competition that way. The only positive thing about Claymore miner is that it supports dual mining, which to the best of my knowledge none of the open source miners do. (I might be wrong though.) So that's my take on it. |
|
|
|
@demion90: Yes, loading DLLs dynamically won't show in Dependency Walker. In that case you'll need some other tool. There's a plenty to choose from. For instance, Sysinternals ProcMon will probably do. It won't show which APIs are used from those DLLs though. For that you'll need to trace it with a debugger and look for LoadLibrary calls. I do have an old AMD card. What seems to be lacking is time. But I'll try to look into it as soon as I dig through my work project first. @stash2coin: What do you mean by "ms implementation of socket TLS"  Most all Windows DLLs are MS implementation of something. It all basically boils down to one DLL calling some other DLL internally. In the lower user-mode level any network-based API will eventually call to raw socket DLL (or ws2_32.dll.) In case of those screenshots that you posted (which don't really show much -- you need to see the hierarchy of those DLL calls, in other words, which DLL calls which and also which APIs in each DLL) it shows that in the lower level it does use raw sockets and the following for TLS/SSL stuff: advapi32.dll, wintrust.dll, crypt32.dll. yesterday found an example code in C++ how to use it, its pretty straight forward didn't saved the link. You realize that your web browser has the "history" button, right? @Cyper_BLC: Yes, it would be nice to start a new thread for this. Also if you do, please post a link here so we can follow. I'll let @demion90 do it. |
|
|
|
|
