|
I claim number 1 !!@$@%#^^&%&*^&(^*(*(&$%%$%#$#@
|
|
|
|
That makes me feel a lot better. I left my workers mining in hopes the shares were being counted. Glad to know all those shares will get paid! This is why I stick with this pool. Thanks eleuthria!
I'm going to have to do some work to calculate payout miners for some of that time. It won't be 100% perfect, but anybody that is a dedicated miner should come out AHEAD of their normal 24 hour earnings. I've made changes to the server logs now that we're on a stronger server [with significantly more HDD space], so if it happens again I can do a complete recalculation for the entire period with exact payment to the share. Current plan is the following, unless I can pull some extra information from the partial logs: 1) Calculate the average shares per hour submitted by each miner for the 3 hours before the problem. Multiple that hourly average by 8 (downtime was very close to 8 hours). 2) Take the shares submitted by each miner during that 8 hour time frame the previous day. Whichever number is LARGER, will be added to your earnings, at a 0% fee. you are always a professional my friend that is why i had no fear when i saw the problem. thanks! |
|
|
|
|
damn, I knew this was too good to be true. This is the reason I only deposited 5 btc
(grew to 5.3532907242433 within a couple weeks)
Luckily I have been using separate passwords on every single site since MTGox got hacked back in june.
|
|
|
|
same here, last shares reported 4 hours ago but my miners are running full pelt. My 24 hour earnings seems to be dropping and my unpaid rewards isn't going up either  I agree, experiencing the same thing. Do not worry, I am sure eleuthria will handle this problem and make sure everyone gets paid what they have coming. |
|
|
|
the stickers are nice, You sent me a bunch of the ones that have the QR code on them well I do a lot of business on ebay and I stick them on my out going packages, I figure people will get curious and check it out.  |
|
|
|
|
why would you bring up this very unfortunate situation that happened months ago? I am sorry you got labeled as a scammer but I did not scam anyone.
Within days of MTGox getting hacked over the summer so was my linux box this was way before we had encrypted wallets and I was ripped off, a lot of my own money and a lot of other peoples money
I have since made arrangements to pay this back although I did not steal anything I felt responsible for it so I wanted to make right on it
this is the reason I was not labeled a scammer
yes I changed my "nick" but my name has not changed - something I have always been very public about.
Please go troll some place else.
further more not only have I made right on that situation but I have also conducted thousands of dollars in positive transactions on this forum since then, there is not a single person on this forum or any where else that can call me a scammer.
|
|
|
|
C:\cgminer-2.2.4-win32>cgminer -ndev.
[2012-02-12 16:10:55] CL Platform 0 vendor: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
[2012-02-12 16:10:55] CL Platform 0 name: AMD Accelerated Parallel Processing
[2012-02-12 16:10:55] CL Platform 0 version: OpenCL 1.1 AMD-APP (851.4)
[2012-02-12 16:10:55] Platform 0 devices: 4
[2012-02-12 16:10:55] GPU 0 AMD Radeon HD 6900 Series hardware monitoring enable
d
[2012-02-12 16:10:55] GPU 1 AMD Radeon HD 6900 Series hardware monitoring enable
d
[2012-02-12 16:10:55] GPU 2 AMD Radeon HD 6900 Series hardware monitoring enable
d
[2012-02-12 16:10:55] GPU 3 AMD Radeon HD 6900 Series hardware monitoring enable
d
[2012-02-12 16:10:55] 4 GPU devices max detected
C:\cgminer-2.2.4-win32> |
|
|
|
Thanks for that. The question was about the poclbm kernel being default, not the SDK being default. How does poclbm perform on 2.5 sdk for you?
thats easy POCLBM IS ABSOLUTE GARBAGE ON 2.5 ! seriously, I lose 100-150 Mhash per GPU using -k poclbm with 2.5 SDk (tested with multiple 5870 and 6990) that what I was trying to say it is premature to make poclbm the default kernel because most miners are using 2.5 the only people that want 2.6 and poclbm are people who want to do mining and gaming with the same machine Woho. That's more definitive testing. Just for my comfort, can you confirm that's the latest poclbm in 2.2.4 you're talking about? Thanks! yes, I tested it on a freshly unzipped cgminer 2.2.4 |
|
|
|
Well I just made an interesting discovery. My newly modified poclbm kernel included in 2.2.4 works really well on my 6970 with sdk 2.6... I get the same hashrate with my modified poclbm kernel as I used to get with the phatk kernel on 2.4/2.5. Looks like a new default kernel may be in order.
Would others like to test this out on their various hardware?
-k poclbm
Also suggest decreasing worksize:
-k poclbm -w 64
nice Ill test it out on my various cards and let you know Thanks a lot. As I said it's only the 6970 I tested it on and I was more than surprised. Other architecture may respond differently. ok so I got upgraded to the latest CCC with sdk 2.6 on my testing Machine, its Windows 7 x64 / cgminer 2.2.4 ok so i tested the poclbm kernel as well as -w 64 on 6990 & 5870 Clocks: 6990 900/775 5870 950/180 SDK 2.5 default kernel 6990 - 405 mhash Per core 5870 - 430 Mhash SDK 2.6 -k poclbm 6690 - 380-400 Mhash Per core (noticeably more fluctuation than with 2.5 and default kernel) 5870 - 390-420 Mhash Per core (again noticeably more fluctuation in mhash) SDK 2.6 -k poclbm -w 64 6990 - Peeks at about 400 Mhash per core but usually stays below that and goes as low as 350 5870 - Same result I see 330-400+ Mhash a lot of fluctuation in mhash Not sure why this is but with the 2.5 sdk and default kernel my speeds do not fluctuate hardly at all, If I look at the console of my 6990 rig every single core is running right about 405 mhash, same with the 5870, it stays pretty stable around 430 mhash, now with the 2.6 sdk and poclbm the speed is constantly changing and only peaks where it is normally stable with 2.5 and default kernel conclusion: in my humble opinion I think it is premature to make poclbm the default kernel, this is a nice option for people who game but if your running dedicated mining rigs you cant beat the 2.5 sdk with the default kernel Thanks for that. The question was about the poclbm kernel being default, not the SDK being default. How does poclbm perform on 2.5 sdk for you? thats easy POCLBM IS ABSOLUTE GARBAGE ON 2.5 ! seriously, I lose 100-150 Mhash per GPU using -k poclbm with 2.5 SDk (tested with multiple 5870 and 6990) that what I was trying to say it is premature to make poclbm the default kernel because most miners are using 2.5 the only people that want 2.6 and poclbm are people who want to do mining and gaming with the same machine |
|
|
|
Ok, so I uninstalled AMD SDK 2.6 runtime and installed 2.5
Using 2.2.4 and latest phatk kernel (deleted previous bins) -w 256 and -w 128 are bout the same
Compared to cgminer 2.2.1 and phatk kernel from november w/ AMD SDK 2.6 its performance is on avg 1mh/s slower!
So the new kernel is poopy since it seems to suck when using SDK 2.6. Whereas the kernel from november works just fine w/ 2.6
+1 for using "poopy" when referring to an AMD SDK |
|
|
|
Well I just made an interesting discovery. My newly modified poclbm kernel included in 2.2.4 works really well on my 6970 with sdk 2.6... I get the same hashrate with my modified poclbm kernel as I used to get with the phatk kernel on 2.4/2.5. Looks like a new default kernel may be in order.
Would others like to test this out on their various hardware?
-k poclbm
Also suggest decreasing worksize:
-k poclbm -w 64
nice Ill test it out on my various cards and let you know Thanks a lot. As I said it's only the 6970 I tested it on and I was more than surprised. Other architecture may respond differently. ok so I got upgraded to the latest CCC with sdk 2.6 on my testing Machine, its Windows 7 x64 / cgminer 2.2.4 ok so i tested the poclbm kernel as well as -w 64 on 6990 & 5870 Clocks: 6990 900/775 5870 950/180 SDK 2.5 default kernel 6990 - 405 mhash Per core 5870 - 430 Mhash SDK 2.6 -k poclbm 6690 - 380-400 Mhash Per core (noticeably more fluctuation than with 2.5 and default kernel) 5870 - 390-420 Mhash Per core (again noticeably more fluctuation in mhash) SDK 2.6 -k poclbm -w 64 6990 - Peeks at about 400 Mhash per core but usually stays below that and goes as low as 350 5870 - Same result I see 330-400+ Mhash a lot of fluctuation in mhash Not sure why this is but with the 2.5 sdk and default kernel my speeds do not fluctuate hardly at all, If I look at the console of my 6990 rig every single core is running right about 405 mhash, same with the 5870, it stays pretty stable around 430 mhash, now with the 2.6 sdk and poclbm the speed is constantly changing and only peaks where it is normally stable with 2.5 and default kernel conclusion: in my humble opinion I think it is premature to make poclbm the default kernel, this is a nice option for people who game but if your running dedicated mining rigs you cant beat the 2.5 sdk with the default kernel |
|
|
|
Well I just made an interesting discovery. My newly modified poclbm kernel included in 2.2.4 works really well on my 6970 with sdk 2.6... I get the same hashrate with my modified poclbm kernel as I used to get with the phatk kernel on 2.4/2.5. Looks like a new default kernel may be in order.
Would others like to test this out on their various hardware?
-k poclbm
Also suggest decreasing worksize:
-k poclbm -w 64
ckvolias: this kernel does not work well at all in 2.4/2.5 so (IMO) I think it may be premature to make it the default kernel as most people are not mining with 2.6 i will install 2.6 on my test machine with and see if the Cypress chips 58xx like this kernel at all |
|
|
|
Something is horribly wrong with cgminer 2.2.4 for me. It seems the newest kernel for phatk sucks monkey balls on my 5970. on cgminer 2.2.1 and kernel from last year (not sure which one) it was 359mh/s @ 805mhz / 109mhz
With the new phatk kernel as of this year, it gets around 300mh/s !!
any idea why?
Im running 11.12 drivers and 2.6sdk I believe.
Its on vista 32 ultimate.
Any idea?!
So, Ive stuck w/ cgminer 2.2.1 cuz it uses last years phatk kernel.
Repeat after me; it is not the kernel, it's the SDK. Yeah. People just wanna get it working as fast as possible without even trying to understand what goes on behind the scenes. Not good. my 5970 gives me up to 380+ mhash per core using CCC 11.9 with the stock sdk 2.5xx it comes with (and CGMINER 2.2.4), try that just make sure you remove the other one completely you can do this in windows by Express uninstall ALL amd software, then download driver sweeper or something similar, boot into safe mode (hold f8 at boot) and run driver sweeper in safe mode, (make sure to remove all registry entries) and physically delete the AMD/ATI directories then reboot, just make sure you delete your .bin files from cgminer directory first or alternatively just remove cgminer completely and then unzip a fresh copy back onto the hard drive this will give you optimal speeds with 5970 |
|
|
|
|
eleuthria:
As a long time BTCGuild miner I just want to chime in and let you know that I really appreciate the upgrade and want to thank you for providing what I consider to be the best mining pool available. Its really nice now that BTCGuild measures my speed very close to what it actually is.
(BTCGuild UserID# 111 )
|
|
|
|
just wanted to say both the PSUS I purchased arrived in a timely manner and work great. its always a pleasure my friend E. P. truly is KING !  |
|
|
|
|
also want to say this seller is very honest, the shipment was extremely fast in fact I was not even tracking it because I did not think it could get here this early.
Thanks for a pleasant experience will do business with again anytime.
|
|
|
|
|
I have actually replaced the fan on three reference cards so far
the first one I ever replaced I purchased the fan from ebay, it was for a reference 5970, the part number matched exactly the dead fan, the repair went perfectly, applied new thermalpaste put it back together without a hitch the card is now running better than ever
the other two were reference 5870s a 1gb and a 2gb model , I replaced the fans , but the shrouds wont fit and allow the fans to spin, I am fortunate enough to have a very good cooling situation and I can run these cards with no shrouds with the fans spinning at 50% and they stay in the 50s and 60s
I have not had time to rethink this process hands on and figure out what I did wrong but I cant imagine what it is
all I can think is the fan is just very slightly too tall, like the fan sits up off its base too much or something of that nature
|
|
|
|
|
why is it exactly 127.5 c every time?
also I have seen reports from others that have seen this 127.5 interesting enough the other one that reported it here had almost an identical setup
garbage data it may be but there has to be some significance to that exact number appearing it must mean something...
|
|
|
|
|
well for one thing I am actually using only 3 extenders the other two cards are directly on the motherboard
it is a power load issue obviously its just a question of what component is failing
I am convinced now it is one or more of the PCIe extenders
I swapped out the motherboard with a brand new motherboard (I use msi 890fxa gd70 on all five rigs) and also swapped cards around with other rigs to see if it was the cards , the only things that stayed the same are CPU, and PCIe extender cables
last night I inspected the extender cables and they are in very poor shape, I re-soldered some of the connections that have come lose and it allowed me to get the rig back up, one of the pci extender cables is beyond total repair (its amazing to me the thing works at all considering there are at least 5 leads that are un connected where the ribbon cable meets the pcie slot) so on that extender cable I replaced the 5870 with a 5830 so there would be less power draw. This allowed me to get the rig back up until I get the new extender cables, its obvious to me that these things are hand soldered by Chinese graduate students, and they do not last forever.
One mystery still eludes me, what is the significance of this magic 127.5 C ?
|
|
|
|
|
actually the PSUS i use have no problem with 5 x 5870s like I said I have four other identical rigs that have been running for months with no problem
plus I tested the power theory just to see what would happen already, Ive got a monster corsair AX1200 and the same problem happen
at this point I am convinced its the PCIe connector(s)
I took them out last night and looked at there are multiple problems on these things
I ordered some new extenders and I will update thread if I am able to fully clock these after I replace the extenders
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
