SILENTARMY v5: Zcash miner, 115 sol/s on R9 Nano, 70 sol/s on GTX 1070

[antantti]

Remember to show some love to zawawa too.

[1714626497]

1714626497

[1714626497]

1714626497

[1714626497]

1714626497

[1714626497]

1714626497

[TIKCrazy]

If everything goes well, you guys (with AMD cards first) should be able to reap the fruits of turkey-inspired ideas soon 

but...nvidia...

[ioglnx]

A smart man always invest in 2 options if one fails:

This said I own AMD and NV rigs - I'm winning in any case :-D and if not mining I can play with G-Sync and 3D Vision V2 and enjoy

[Marvell1]

only getting 118 sols on gtx 1070s with mem oc of 300 and core clock oc of 220 any ideas ? using the latest windows binaries

gtx 970 is great 80 sols

[QuintLeo]

I'd be reasonably content to see something for LINUX that's within 5-10% of Claymore on Windows.

 I really don't understand his hatred for LINUX, I'm pretty sure he's cutting his own throat to spite his face by ignoring the probably MAJORITY OF RIGS that are set up with LINUX.

[sp_]

If everything goes well, you guys (with AMD cards first) should be able to reap the fruits of turkey-inspired ideas soon 

I see that you have submitted a new experimental kernel to github. Does it work? Any speed improvements?

[Amph]

only getting 118 sols on gtx 1070s with mem oc of 300 and core clock oc of 220 any ideas ? using the latest windows binaries

gtx 970 is great 80 sols

depend on the model try to underclock the mem, with soem model it is mroe beneficial to underclock, to 502, in my case i'm getting more hash than ocing

[osnwt]

honestly i don''t think it so much hate as it a driver issue with Linux but it might be .

It is not a driver issue, the version 1.1 worked very well with the same speed as a windows one.

He said many times that he specialises in Windows and does not like Linux (not because it's bad, but because it has own tips and tricks to be learned). But this time he hated people who said that he stole a big part of the code from another open source miner (silentarmy) because he used some part of source and did not give credits (this was explained as a mistake from his part). But since it was from "Linux people", he decided do not support it anymore and suggested to use silentarmy instead.

Another issue was that someone showed a disassembled part of his Linux miner code. While there is a lot of EXE file encryptors on Windows, it is not so popular on Linux since much software comes in sources anyway. His miner 1.1 for Linux was not protected (maybe by accident), and he disliked attempts to look into it.

[krnlx]

honestly i don''t think it so much hate as it a driver issue with Linux but it might be .

It is not a driver issue, the version 1.1 worked very well with the same speed as a windows one.

He said many times that he specialises in Windows and does not like Linux (not because it's bad, but because it has own tips and tricks to be learned). But this time he hated people who said that he stole a big part of the code from another open source miner (silentarmy) because he used some part of source and did not give credits (this was explained as a mistake from his part). But since it was from "Linux people", he decided do not support it anymore and suggested to use silentarmy instead.

Another issue was that someone showed a disassembled part of his Linux miner code. While there is a lot of EXE file encryptors on Windows, it is not so popular on Linux since much software comes in sources anyway. His miner 1.1 for Linux was not protected (maybe by accident), and he disliked attempts to look into it.

I think it is because linux miners can easy turn his fee off by setting up transparent stratum proxy, or modify packets. It is easy and trivial. He released linux miner after windows and he can see stats on his fee income. Even the fee income in USD can decrease after linux version release because total network hashrate increased. It is just unprofitable to him, and his words about hating linux people is trolling.

[laik2]

honestly i don''t think it so much hate as it a driver issue with Linux but it might be .

It is not a driver issue, the version 1.1 worked very well with the same speed as a windows one.

He said many times that he specialises in Windows and does not like Linux (not because it's bad, but because it has own tips and tricks to be learned). But this time he hated people who said that he stole a big part of the code from another open source miner (silentarmy) because he used some part of source and did not give credits (this was explained as a mistake from his part). But since it was from "Linux people", he decided do not support it anymore and suggested to use silentarmy instead.

Another issue was that someone showed a disassembled part of his Linux miner code. While there is a lot of EXE file encryptors on Windows, it is not so popular on Linux since much software comes in sources anyway. His miner 1.1 for Linux was not protected (maybe by accident), and he disliked attempts to look into it.

I think it is because linux miners can easy turn his fee off by setting up transparent stratum proxy, or modify packets. It is easy and trivial. He released linux miner after windows and he can see stats on his fee income. Even the fee income in USD can decrease after linux version release because total network hashrate increased. It is just unprofitable to him, and his words about hating linux people is trolling.

This is trivial...it doesn't matter the miner itself. You can mine under windows but proxy server may be linux/bsd/mac etc. ..the rest is the same as your post.
P.S. As I said before, if you want faster development -> donate to devs. I was forced to switch to windows and CM because profit is the main reason we mine at all.I am pretty fond of open source projects and usually support them but time is as I said earlier critical factor.

[osnwt]

This is trivial...it doesn't matter the miner itself. You can mine under windows but proxy server may be linux/bsd/mac etc. ..the rest is the same as your post.

Agreed with you. Actually, the miner contains some countermeasures against this kind of attack. But anyway, it does not matter what OS someone uses, if one wants to cut the fee, he will do that.

[laik2]

This is trivial...it doesn't matter the miner itself. You can mine under windows but proxy server may be linux/bsd/mac etc. ..the rest is the same as your post.

Agreed with you. Actually, the miner contains some countermeasures against this kind of attack. But anyway, it does not matter what OS someone uses, if one wants to cut the fee, he will do that.

I don't mind the fee, but the only way you should put a fee is for a stable and reliable product. CM miner is quite unstable for paid solution...

[ghostfaceuk]

Just tried optiminer for the first time sense it's in windows form now, it didn't come close to claymore or was about 30 solo slower then Claymore. and there paying 15 % for that lol . SA all most matches optiminer version and it's free . SO I'll wait for the rewrite of SA under windows, i got a feeling it's going to out do Claymore or stand with it .  i read some place Claymore's next version will be even faster.



Mybad it's the Pool I'm using if  I use Fly pool with optiminer version it is all most as fast as claymore, sense i like using antminers zcash pool because it is a PPS payout . I'll stick with things the way they are sense claymore and SA both let me use stratum+tcp:// with no deceases in speed or let me use stratum+tcp://  in the address that seems to actually matter pool wise and claymore or SA don't need to use the CPU it seems optiminer is using .



IF you think about it SA is better it's supports both NV and AMD.

CM and optiminer only support AMD .

CM 8.0 just came out and it still only supports AMD .

Claymore has openly stated he is concentrating on AMD over everything else.

[krnlx]

This is trivial...it doesn't matter the miner itself. You can mine under windows but proxy server may be linux/bsd/mac etc. ..the rest is the same as your post.

Agreed with you. Actually, the miner contains some countermeasures against this kind of attack. But anyway, it does not matter what OS someone uses, if one wants to cut the fee, he will do that.

There are no countermeasures when proxy is really transparent ( not /etc/hosts record)..
Claymore's auditory is windows home users with 1-6 cards, they will not bother about crappy 2%, but if you have 1000+ cards, 2%=20 cards, more then 3 full rigs, and you start thinking about it.
And for all: claymore=bad, but many people don't understand it, they press F5, waiting new version, but total net hashrate grows up, and profit from a card becomes lower, because of higher and higher wattage.
So large farmers hate Claymore, and he knows it, and they will do all to cut off fee and disassemble his miner.

[xeridea]

This is trivial...it doesn't matter the miner itself. You can mine under windows but proxy server may be linux/bsd/mac etc. ..the rest is the same as your post.

Agreed with you. Actually, the miner contains some countermeasures against this kind of attack. But anyway, it does not matter what OS someone uses, if one wants to cut the fee, he will do that.

I don't mind the fee, but the only way you should put a fee is for a stable and reliable product. CM miner is quite unstable for paid solution...

Umm, I have never ever had a crash using CM dual miner, or zcash miner that wasn't due to me experimenting with heavy undervolting. Many cards I run 100+ mv undervolt, 100% stable.  I have 26 cards, AMD and Nvidia.  For months, they run solid.  Remote monitor is extremely useful.  From what I hear, optiminer is unstable, and when I ran SA temporarily, I had some crashes.  The reason there is such a big CM following is due to quality, stability, and many many features of miners.

Most don't mind a small fee, since you get great miners.  The fee is 2.5% now, because no one else is even close in speed.  He says he will lower fee to like 1% like he does with other miners as soon as some other miner has similar speed.  Initial Zcash miners were all slow, and/or highly unstable, now there is more stability and speed, but still big difference.  At 1%, many people still use CM due to the many features of miner, remote monitor, and continued support and new features.

[laik2]

This is trivial...it doesn't matter the miner itself. You can mine under windows but proxy server may be linux/bsd/mac etc. ..the rest is the same as your post.

Agreed with you. Actually, the miner contains some countermeasures against this kind of attack. But anyway, it does not matter what OS someone uses, if one wants to cut the fee, he will do that.

I don't mind the fee, but the only way you should put a fee is for a stable and reliable product. CM miner is quite unstable for paid solution...

Umm, I have never ever had a crash using CM dual miner, or zcash miner that wasn't due to me experimenting with heavy undervolting. Many cards I run 100+ mv undervolt, 100% stable.  I have 26 cards, AMD and Nvidia.  For months, they run solid.  Remote monitor is extremely useful.  From what I hear, optiminer is unstable, and when I ran SA temporarily, I had some crashes.  The reason there is such a big CM following is due to quality, stability, and many many features of miners.

Most don't mind a small fee, since you get great miners.  The fee is 2.5% now, because no one else is even close in speed.  He says he will lower fee to like 1% like he does with other miners as soon as some other miner has similar speed.  Initial Zcash miners were all slow, and/or highly unstable, now there is more stability and speed, but still big difference.  At 1%, many people still use CM due to the many features of miner, remote monitor, and continued support and new features.

I'm not talking about crashes . If miner crashes is not unstable it's unusable. I am talking about hash stability, stable power usage, minimal CPU/MEM usage. Have u seen your hardware resources when mining with CM?

[xeridea]

This is trivial...it doesn't matter the miner itself. You can mine under windows but proxy server may be linux/bsd/mac etc. ..the rest is the same as your post.

Agreed with you. Actually, the miner contains some countermeasures against this kind of attack. But anyway, it does not matter what OS someone uses, if one wants to cut the fee, he will do that.

I don't mind the fee, but the only way you should put a fee is for a stable and reliable product. CM miner is quite unstable for paid solution...

Umm, I have never ever had a crash using CM dual miner, or zcash miner that wasn't due to me experimenting with heavy undervolting. Many cards I run 100+ mv undervolt, 100% stable.  I have 26 cards, AMD and Nvidia.  For months, they run solid.  Remote monitor is extremely useful.  From what I hear, optiminer is unstable, and when I ran SA temporarily, I had some crashes.  The reason there is such a big CM following is due to quality, stability, and many many features of miners.

Most don't mind a small fee, since you get great miners.  The fee is 2.5% now, because no one else is even close in speed.  He says he will lower fee to like 1% like he does with other miners as soon as some other miner has similar speed.  Initial Zcash miners were all slow, and/or highly unstable, now there is more stability and speed, but still big difference.  At 1%, many people still use CM due to the many features of miner, remote monitor, and continued support and new features.

I'm not talking about crashes . If miner crashes is not unstable it's unusable. I am talking about hash stability, stable power usage, minimal CPU/MEM usage. Have u seen your hardware resources when mining with CM?

Up till about version 5 or 6, hashrate would vary +-10%, now it varies little, maybe +-2%.  Some versions around like 2-5 IIRC had higher CPU requirement, then it was resolved, and uses little CPU (~12% of a Celeron for 6 470s).  GPU/Mem controller usage in GPU-Z varies a lot, but hashrate stays pretty much the same.  Power usage generally went up with versions, but versions like 6-8 its about the same.  Power for 6x 470 is ~860-880w at wall, not much variance, ~182 Sol/s.

[zawawa]

The murderous 8 hour Black Friday shopping is finally over... It's time for coding!

[Amph]

Just tried optiminer for the first time sense it's in windows form now, it didn't come close to claymore or was about 30 solo slower then Claymore. and there paying 15 % for that lol . SA all most matches optiminer version and it's free . SO I'll wait for the rewrite of SA under windows, i got a feeling it's going to out do Claymore or stand with it .  i read some place Claymore's next version will be even faster.



Mybad it's the Pool I'm using if  I use Fly pool with optiminer version it is all most as fast as claymore, sense i like using antminers zcash pool because it is a PPS payout . I'll stick with things the way they are sense claymore and SA both let me use stratum+tcp:// with no deceases in speed or let me use stratum+tcp://  in the address that seems to actually matter pool wise and claymore or SA don't need to use the CPU it seems optiminer is using .



IF you think about it SA is better it's supports both NV and AMD.

CM and optiminer only support AMD .

CM 8.0 just came out and it still only supports AMD .

Claymore has openly stated he is concentrating on AMD over everything else.

i doubt at this point, he can manage to squeeze even more hash from amd, he is already there at the maximum, any additional hash would be negligeable

not to mention it would mean nothing because everyone would have a better speed

[laik2]

The murderous 8 hour Black Friday shopping is finally over... It's time for coding!

Great! I switched to windows so I guess I can provide tests if necessary.