 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »
|
Hello everyone!
I am completely new to ET/ETC mining so can you please suggest me on latest mining setup based on 3-6 GPUs? Anyone?
Regards
there are literally infinite tutorials available when you search in the google for this in form of video or blog etc still i will give you a basic rundown install windows and use risers to connect multiple gpus in your mob after they are detected just install the graphics driver download the miner and execute it Thanks! However I was looking for advice on the choice of GPUs specifically.  Have read some guides(and still reading...) though. |
|
|
|
|
Hello everyone!
I am completely new to ET/ETC mining so can you please suggest me on latest mining setup based on 3-6 GPUs? Anyone?
Regards
|
|
|
|
|
Last week got scammed by this guy with username as: embroiderymate for $280. Folks please beware as he plans a perfect trap to scam you!
|
|
|
|
|
Hey guys,
Can you please suggest me some fast and reliable Virtual Credit Cards service provider, who accepts Bitcoin or Perfect Money payments? I Was planning to go for Wirex(seeing the OP), but looks like they're having issues.
So any help?
Thanks
|
|
|
|
Hey Terk, I've been mining at your pool continuously for more than 24 hours and according to my statistics given at CM it states my earning as: 0.0031, but I'm mining with 5.5mH/s miner(on an avg 5.33mH/s); so how come my earning is so low? Even if BTC/MH/Day is 0.00066, my 24 hours earning should be 0.000363(0.00351 @ 5.33mH/s). Please care to explain(already the hash-rate displayed at CM for my miner is wrong!).
Thanks
P.S. If the given statistics are true than it seems mining LTC directly is more profitable.
Mining at CM is definitely more profitable than mining straight LTC. I can't really comment on your numbers if you don't tell me your address so that I could check them. Most of the time when people have issues like this it's because they read something on their stats page wrong. Hello Terk, thanks for replying. Here's my BTC address: 1CfapZ4MW1GGCeW4U4Q6BEFUBYnR7kegB6 . Thanks Amount of your hashrate sent to CM is very inconsistent. This is your daily chart. Your earnings at CM are consistent with your hashrate multiplied by BTC/MHs/day as seen at http://www.clevermining.com/profits/30-days And this is your last 24 hours hourly chart - you've been mining for most of the day at 2.6-2.7 MH/s and jumped to 5.3-5.4 only two hours ago.  Perhaps you have two 2.7 MH/s miners and one of them is switching to some other pools every now and then? The hourly chart suggests this - this is not some random 10-30% off, it simply looks like one miner connected or two. You might be correct as I've a secondary pool configured for my miners. However it doesn't reports my miners being connected to it. Anyway, I'll reconfigure my miners(deleting secondary pool) and then update after 24 hours of running. P.S. I don't know what happened(even without reconfiguring my miners) but now my hash-rate is being displayed correctly!!  |
|
|
|
Hey Terk, I've been mining at your pool continuously for more than 24 hours and according to my statistics given at CM it states my earning as: 0.0031, but I'm mining with 5.5mH/s miner(on an avg 5.33mH/s); so how come my earning is so low? Even if BTC/MH/Day is 0.00066, my 24 hours earning should be 0.000363(0.00351 @ 5.33mH/s). Please care to explain(already the hash-rate displayed at CM for my miner is wrong!).
Thanks
P.S. If the given statistics are true than it seems mining LTC directly is more profitable.
Mining at CM is definitely more profitable than mining straight LTC. I can't really comment on your numbers if you don't tell me your address so that I could check them. Most of the time when people have issues like this it's because they read something on their stats page wrong. Hello Terk, thanks for replying. Here's my BTC address: 1CfapZ4MW1GGCeW4U4Q6BEFUBYnR7kegB6 . Thanks |
|
|
|
|
Hey Terk, I've been mining at your pool continuously for more than 24 hours and according to my statistics given at CM it states my earning as: 0.0031, but I'm mining with 5.5mH/s miner(on an avg 5.33mH/s); so how come my earning is so low? Even if BTC/MH/Day is 0.00066, my 24 hours earning should be 0.000363(0.00351 @ 5.33mH/s). Please care to explain(already the hash-rate displayed at CM for my miner is wrong!).
Thanks
P.S. If the given statistics are true than it seems mining LTC directly is more profitable.
|
|
|
|
i am not even talking about stuck... i am talking about ready to pay out above.01 that was not paid out
I understand.  Just said in general as many queries are apart from the "stuck balance" topic. |
|
|
|
|
Seems like Terk is neglecting our queries/issues(God knows why!). He came online today but look, no one got their query/issue addressed by him. Terk, what's going on dude?
|
|
|
|
I think Terk should just amend the policy and say anything below .0005BTC (just throwing a number out there) after fees will be abandoned after a month if the user does not start mining again. I can't see how it's worth the hassle for him and it would certainly cut down on posts about this.
Alternatively, do a once-a-month payment run which clears out any small balances, for users who haven't mined in the last X days. +1 Totally agreed with your suggestion, murraypaul. This way it'll be good, easy and beneficial for all of us. |
|
|
|
0.00088230BTC is hardly worth it after the wallet/exchange fees. You're going to be left with like .00058 that's worth a whopping 36 cents or so. This is really crying over spilled milk.
I'm NOT talking about the current balance. I had a balance approx. of 0.00088230BTC left with CM for more than a month, and was not paid! Any answer to that? Smiley I think whatever balance is left should be paid(manually, if it doesn't meets the set threshold) to a miner in full(especially if the miner quits at your pool & asks for it{continuously!}), isn't it? I've seen some cases like this at CM. I didn't ask for it as it didn't matter to me much.P.S. As the "stuck balance" topic is again discussed, I said what I experienced. Smiley |
|
|
|
Hey, I think pool doesn't pays stuck balances. I had something like 0.00088230 BTC left over for a month here but I never got paid. P.S. I've started mining at CM again though. Threshold for weekly payment is at 0.001 BTC. Your balance was slightly below which is why you did not got paid. I assume that a lower threshold would be inefficient since transaction fee would "eat" most of the stuck balances. I'm NOT talking about the current balance. I had a balance approx. of 0.00088230BTC left with CM for more than a month, and was not paid! Any answer to that? I think whatever balance is left should be paid(manually, if it doesn't meets the set threshold) to a miner in full(especially if the miner quits at your pool & asks for it{continuously!}), isn't it? I've seen some cases like this at CM. I didn't ask for it as it didn't matter to me much. P.S. As the "stuck balance" topic is again discussed, I said what I experienced. |
|
|
|
Hey, I think pool doesn't pays stuck balances. I had something like 0.00088230 BTC left over for a month here but I never got paid. P.S. I've started mining at CM again though. |
|
|
|
CM is paying alright know, or there are payout issues?  Thanks P.S. Just switched my 5.5mH/s G-Blade to CM. |
|
|
|
I'm glad to hear you were able to find a working solution for your hardware. To answer your question, using BFGMiner (with or without MultiMiner) I get 2.84 Mh/s per board with 0% HW errors on one and 2% on another. The effective hashrate is about the same (2.79 Mh/s & 2.86 Mh/s).
I'm still not quite sure from your posts what issues you had with BFGMiner. Your last post indicated you were getting the same performance I am reporting, but then you struck through the text.
The problem I encountered was - when I posted my first response, I was getting 2.85mH/s with 2-3 HW's - I left the blades to work whole night - but next day when I saw BFGM(I ran the manual miner through MM) was mining at 3.xxmH/s and there were like 50-70 HW's per blade(and they kept increasing). So I had no other option than to quit. Of course MM has nothing to do with this, but there was no other option available in MM to replace BFGM(I have been using MM since I got my first 280x and it works like a charm for me). Anyway, thanks and I hope you get an alternative in MM for these blades if possible. Make sure are looking at the HW %, not the number / count. Most of these numbers are not directly comparable between CGMiner and BFGMiner. It's comparing apples and oranges. Thanks, I'll make a note of it. Moreover I'm trying to learn and then start using SeedManager as it's more stable and stronger performance-wise. |
|
|
|
Thanks for your reply, Nwoolls(you don't reply to pm's  ). I wanted to know MM displays which speed at the "bottom right" of the page? Five second hash-rate, all time average or the current hash-rate? Thanks Current hash rate is shown in the bottom-right. Questions asked in public benefit other users. Thanks! Alright, thanks! Mind telling the HW's you get when the clock speed of your device is 835? I'm getting 2.85mH/s with like 2-3 HW's when I set the clock speed to 835.
After failing to get my g-blades properly work with BFGM ad MM( due to no proper support and lack of interest from me{after 30+ tries also it didn't work for me, and moreover I think like this I'll destroy my equipment!}), I've decided to quit these two applications and hold hands of CGM 3.7.2(jmordica fork) - which has successfully worked for me, up to my expectations! Now I get around 5.7mH/s(2.85mH/s per blade) on my g-blade, with hardly 1-2 HW's. Thanks to all those who gave a hand of help. I'm glad to hear you were able to find a working solution for your hardware. To answer your question, using BFGMiner (with or without MultiMiner) I get 2.84 Mh/s per board with 0% HW errors on one and 2% on another. The effective hashrate is about the same (2.79 Mh/s & 2.86 Mh/s). I'm still not quite sure from your posts what issues you had with BFGMiner. Your last post indicated you were getting the same performance I am reporting, but then you struck through the text. The problem I encountered was - when I posted my first response, I was getting 2.85mH/s with 2-3 HW's - I left the blades to work whole night - but next day when I saw BFGM(I ran the manual miner through MM) was mining at 3.xxmH/s and there were like 50-70 HW's per blade(and they kept increasing). So I had no other option than to quit. Of course MM has nothing to do with this, but there was no other option available in MM to replace BFGM(I have been using MM since I got my first 280x and it works like a charm for me). Anyway, thanks and I hope you get an alternative in MM for these blades if possible. |
|
|
|
Latest software update on my G-Blade and 5 chip dual miners using Starminer software. Has been running over 26 hours rock solid with a simple conf file edit called out in Ticket#7 using the WebUI tool provided. Below is a JPG showing stats. GSD 0 and 1 are the G-Blade, GSD 2 is a 5 chip dual miner. Kudos to the Starminer team, nice software package and design and thanks to 24Kilo ,X-Hash bd and Powersup for thir comments.
Glad to see you have everything running. I have my 2 units from X-Hash up and running with starminer. It is a great piece of software. plus the GUI is the same as my GPU rigs running PIMP. on the topic of X-Hash, I have found there service to be fantastic. I have been involved in purchasing ASIC hardware for some time now and X-Hash will now be in my top 2 suppliers next to Bitmain. Hi,
Can you please tell me how to get the G-Blade recognized by the SeedManager? My system has recognized the device, but not the miner. Been trying to make it work since almost 3 hours but unfortunately it doesn't works. 
Thank youSorted out my problem by myself! New(& final) pictures will be posted soon.  Thank you |
|
|
|
Hi, Can you please let me know the command line(exact one) to pass in cgminer batch file to run it with your fork in? I tried but my g-blade is either not running or when it runs, it's on default config. i.e. freq to be 888 with other similar parameters. Thanks P.S. Please help, as I've gone crazy trying to run my g-blade with bfgminer but got a lot(!) of errors and no acceptable hash-rate(2-5.1mh/s at max.). |
|
|
|
Thanks for your reply, Nwoolls(you don't reply to pm's ). I wanted to know MM displays which speed at the "bottom right" of the page? Five second hash-rate, all time average or the current hash-rate? Thanks Current hash rate is shown in the bottom-right. Questions asked in public benefit other users. Thanks! Alright, thanks! Mind telling the HW's you get when the clock speed of your device is 835? I'm getting 2.85mH/s with like 2-3 HW's when I set the clock speed to 835.
Thank youAfter failing to get my g-blades properly work with BFGM ad MM( due to no proper support and lack of interest from me{after 30+ tries also it didn't work for me, and moreover I think like this I'll destroy my equipment!}), I've decided to quit these two applications and hold hands of CGM 3.7.2(jmordica fork) - which has successfully worked for me, up to my expectations! Now I get around 5.7mH/s(2.85mH/s per blade) on my g-blade, with hardly 1-2 HW's. Thanks to all those who gave a hand of help. Thank you |
|
|
|
There is a strange problem I've encountered with my G-Blade(using with BFGM 4.3.0 through MultiMiner)  , when I use MulltiMiner, I get hashrate displayed as 5.45mH/s in MM window(at bottom right), but when I manually launch the miner in MM I'm getting hashrate around 4.88-5.1mH/s(rarely!)! Moreover, when I launch the BFGM through a .bat file with the exact same set of commands, I'm hardly able to get 2.5-3.8mH/s!! So which one is displaying the correct local hashrate? I'm totally confused!  MM, the manual miner launched in MM or the miner that's independently launched?? Please help. Thanks P.S. My miners clock value is set to 800. I'm trying to achieve the best possible hashrate through these blades. Any proper help/suggestion is very much appreciated. Thank you. I'm not sure why you are seeing varying hash-rates unless you have arguments specified for MultiMiner that you aren't specifying in a batch file. As far clock speed, I would set it to at least 835. I get about 2.86 Mh/s for each of the 2 boards / devices found in a G-Blade. Thanks for your reply, Nwoolls(you don't reply to pm's ). I wanted to know MM displays which speed at the "bottom right" of the page? Five second hash-rate, all time average or the current hash-rate? Thanks |
|
|
|
|
