 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »
|
I post so that people get a real opinion on it and stop downloading anything again! Because any good miner I recall it knows very well that 2 Mhs more does not change the profitability are the sharing rate and to date you are the last one  It's almost certain that the "improved" reported hashrate is not real and it's actually worse in terms of actual valid share submission rate compared to established miners, even after doing all the things the dev claims will make the reported hashrate real. This has been independently verified by various people in the thread and outside of it. That being said, I'm sure you can make a better argument than complaining that TBM's dev copied lolminer, then highlight two completely different sentences. |
|
|
|
I decremented one which I could go lower to 2100 and will be monitoring the invalid shares how they will behave,unfortunately I can only go lower to one card,need to restart PC to change settings of the other card which I am not going to do,I am happy with the stability of the miner,since I have suffered a lot from instability of all other miners the only thing I truly care is to find finally one miner that is stable and does not crash.
On both Linux and Windows you can adjust the mem clocks on all cards without rebooting, so I'm not sure what you're talking about. In either case, if you're going to blame the miner software when you're having bad overclocks and waste your own power with a suboptimal setup, nobody's going to stop you. |
|
|
|
The memory clock everyone use it to the max at 2150 and that is my number also.
That's your problem right there. 2150 is not stable on all cards, and it clearly shows that in your invalid share rate. Unless you've pushed over 50k shares or the statistical hypothesis being tested has a very large difference, the randomness intrinsic to mining makes any claims of faster or slower mining rates meaningless. |
|
|
|
Thanks for the link, had already switched away due to multiple missing features and antifeatures such as built in OC and intentionally blocking proxies, but this seals the deal. I wasn't ever able to achieve anything close to the reported hashrates either, even with the "high share difficulty and using a pool with stales" settings (around 2 rigs, each putting out around 10k shares of 8G diff on 2miners). Overall hashrates were reported 3% higher but showing as 4-5% lower than reported poolside. This by itself is not statistically significant evidence, but combined with the data above it's pretty strong proof. There is probably no evidence of outright malice, but the claim that the miner will only be able to reach its reported speed on a configuration that actively impedes statistical testing feels too convenient. To the dev, I hope you figure out the reason behind the low pool share reporting, because if not this miner will end up with phoenixminer's reputation. It's not impossible to develop a new miner with actually faster hashrates, TRM did it, but if you can't back it up with evidence then it's all for naught.
For the moment I am to excited about that 67 Mhsh seeing in the miner and I am staring at the Anydesk from almost half hour now.I don't even have a new motherboard with BAR option to give another boost otherwise I believe I would be seeing 75 Mhsh without problems here.I will update in due time to the new version,no worries about that. It has a few more stale shares than other miners but I am sure it will be fixed in other versions as I have a 100 Mbps fiber connection and with all other miners I had like 0.75% stale,now I have near 2% but I can accept this also as long as it is stable and does not crash. I took this long to write because I am way to excited seeing a miner not crashing with my Powercolor RX 6800 XT-s,every other one has crashed so far.  To be clear, these are not 2% stales, these are 2% invalid shares. Your overclock settings are way too high, they are crashing because they are unstable overclocks. Dial them down to a more sane number. My stable OC 6800(xt) show 67-68M on TBM. Also, SAM or BAR do not help hashrate. They increase the rate data can be pushed to the card, but that is not a bottleneck for mining, if it were, x1 risers would not be used. [moderator's note: consecutive posts merged] |
|
|
|
Proxy is supported in zil+etc and zil+eth miningmode. Mine at rustpool or shardpool.
I see, thanks for the reply. Would be good if you could clarify the OP that the socks5 proxy is not for the pool connection but only for dual mining. Another question, the AMD device information (clocks, mem, temps etc) seems to be absent on a mixed nv/amd rig, even though I am using 1.25. I am running AMD driver 21.8.2 (showing as driver 539303.288 on startup) and it detects the 6800 as "GPU0 gfx1030 17GB added to miner as OpenCL device" Should I be using a different config for this? |
|
|
|
|
The front page post mentions that it supports socks5 proxy, but I could not find such an option on the readme flags list on github, or in the --help option list when starting the miner.
Interestingly enough, the --proxy option does allow the miner to start normally (other options cause the miner to exit with invalid option error), but the socks proxy connection is not used when that option is applied. If using a program like proxifier to redirect the connection into a socks proxy, the miner refuses to connect. This is unlike other miners that do not natively support proxies like teamredminer. I assume this is due to some anti devfee cheating mechanism.
It would be nice if the proxy can be enabled, or if not, at least remove it from the main post.
|
|
|
|
You know you're doing the right thing when they start posting like their true age. |
|
|
|
There's 72M coins in circulation, so 0.72 LTC seems like a reasonable price for the entire market cap. I'll raise that to 2 litoshi, in case anyone wants to sell at that price  |
|
|
|
Risk Factor: Full disclosure, this is gambling. There is always a risk there. This method/script is basing its potential profits on the extremely low probability of busting. I have been running the script for 24 hours straight, and while I have been generating a profit, I know that there is a risk of busting completely. The seller has included an option to help counter this risk in his method.
Edit: added a disclaimer to the header of my post.
Any system that has a nonzero chance of busting is bound to fail sooner rather than later, resulting in you losing all your money. There is mathematically no chance of winning long term with such a system, even with zero house edge. As long as the chance of "busting" exists, it is mathematically a martingale system and any claims to the contrary (including "mitigating risks") are bullshit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martingale_(betting_system) As has already been mentioned in this thread, the only way for gambling to make money is to have positive EV, and I can't see such a method being sold for anything less than multiple BTC in value. |
|
|
|
Surprised you aren't already using the ignore function on all of them, it's much easier to find and report the untagged ones here that way. |
|
|
|
|
