Puffy23
Member
 Offline
Activity: 108
Merit: 11
|
 |
December 25, 2016, 03:24:20 PM |
|
No, now 430 hash for 1070...
See edits. Still isn't worth it... Further Edit: Efficiency Setup - at equal power use for comparison without power costs impacting the analysis. Edit: Edit: Card Price Hash/s Power (W) H/$1070 $400 380 100 0.95Fury $260 300 100 1.15Full Bore Setup Card Price Hash/s H/$1070 $400 430 1.075Fury $260 350 1.346The 1070 has a long way to go before it's worth a look. The entry cost of $400/card is just too steep to overcome without some serious hash. it's wrong, the 1070 do 380 at 100watt not 330 If you did a little math yourself you'd see at 380 it's still not wrong. AMD is still ahead of Nvidia in H/$ running efficiently AND running full bore. Even with the adjusted numbers the 1070 is still 20% less H/$. AMD dead?? It's still in the LEAD. Edit: AMD guys are quibbling over 0.5% using ssl and 2%-4% in pool variance. Nvidia guys are paying a 20% premium just to play the game and screaming victory. It would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic. it is because 380 sol is always better than 300 sol at the same wattage, you need 25% more uselesses components with 300 sol to have the same total hash you must remember than on large scale the less rig you haev that do the job the better even i dont have nvidia, pascal its truly win, amd fanboys need to admite that, well considering to build nvidia rig, hope vega or polaris refresh bring amd to the top again  haha old gpu will die soon the tahiti king wont pop again 380 sol is always better than 300 sol at the same wattage...?? Not when that 27% increased hash costs 54% more $$. That statement shows a complete lack of understanding ROI. Cost matters. So lets take a look at the extra components. MB: $80 RAM: $40 CPU: $40 HDD: $40 OS: $40 PSU: $160 5 USB Risers: $50 16x Shielded Riser: $50 Case and Fans: $100 Total: $600 Fury Rig: $600 + $1,560 = $2,160 1070 Rig: $600 + $2,400 = $3,000 Card Price Hash/s Power (W) H/$1070 $3,000 2,280 100 0.76Fury $2,160 1,800 100 0.83Full Bore Setup Card Price Hash/s H/$1070 $3,000 2,580 0.86Fury $2,160 2,100 0.97So as you can see, even with the cost of supporting parts included the Fury is still a better deal in H/$ running efficiently and running full bore. For those asking about the Fury power usage, this has been covered over and over again on the forum. I did the math, you can do your own reading. There are over 100 Furys running rock solid 300H/s with 100W. And as others have pointed out, the Nano is pushing 325H/s with 90W-95W. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Even in the event that an attacker gains more than 50% of the network's
computational power, only transactions sent by the attacker could be
reversed or double-spent. The network would not be destroyed.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
philipma1957
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4116
Merit: 7856
'The right to privacy matters'
|
|
December 25, 2016, 03:31:58 PM |
|
What did I do wrong ? : no of mining  ZecMiner64.exe -zpool SSL: //zec-eu1.nanopool.org:6633 -zwal t1RGQ4QhSqMMDNF8RaZRm5AHvrP7zyFZD6v.1 -zpsw r -i 8 Thanks ZecMiner64.exe -zpool SSL:(YOU HAVE SPACE HERE)//zec-eu1.nanopool.org:6633 -zwal t1RGQ4QhSqMMDNF8RaZRm5AHvrP7zyFZD6v.1 -zpsw r -i 8 so my question is why do I want SSL? HOW MUCH is fee with and with out ssl At the moment I have no SSL on my 11 miners I certainly am willing to upgrade to SSL but what do I gain? The ssl fee is 2% while the non ssl fee is 2.5%. So there is 0.05% difference. But not all pool will accept ssl. What did I do wrong ? : no of mining ZecMiner64.exe -zpool SSL: //zec-eu1.nanopool.org:6633 -zwal t1RGQ4QhSqMMDNF8RaZRm5AHvrP7zyFZD6v.1 -zpsw r -i 8 Thanks ZecMiner64.exe -zpool SSL:(YOU HAVE SPACE HERE)//zec-eu1.nanopool.org:6633 -zwal t1RGQ4QhSqMMDNF8RaZRm5AHvrP7zyFZD6v.1 -zpsw r -i 8 so my question is why do I want SSL? HOW MUCH is fee with and with out ssl At the moment I have no SSL on my 11 miners I certainly am willing to upgrade to SSL but what do I gain? -0.5% devfee in case of using Claymore's miner thanks I will test today. Merry Christmas! |
|
|
|
mettalmag
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1084
Merit: 1003
≡v≡
|
|
December 25, 2016, 03:34:46 PM |
|
What did I do wrong ? : no of mining ZecMiner64.exe -zpool SSL: //zec-eu1.nanopool.org:6633 -zwal t1RGQ4QhSqMMDNF8RaZRm5AHvrP7zyFZD6v.1 -zpsw r -i 8 Thanks ZecMiner64.exe -zpool SSL:(YOU HAVE SPACE HERE)//zec-eu1.nanopool.org:6633 -zwal t1RGQ4QhSqMMDNF8RaZRm5AHvrP7zyFZD6v.1 -zpsw r -i 8 so my question is why do I want SSL? HOW MUCH is fee with and with out ssl At the moment I have no SSL on my 11 miners I certainly am willing to upgrade to SSL but what do I gain? The ssl fee is 2% while the non ssl fee is 2.5%. So there is 0.05% difference. But not all pool will accept ssl. What did I do wrong ? : no of mining ZecMiner64.exe -zpool SSL: //zec-eu1.nanopool.org:6633 -zwal t1RGQ4QhSqMMDNF8RaZRm5AHvrP7zyFZD6v.1 -zpsw r -i 8 Thanks ZecMiner64.exe -zpool SSL:(YOU HAVE SPACE HERE)//zec-eu1.nanopool.org:6633 -zwal t1RGQ4QhSqMMDNF8RaZRm5AHvrP7zyFZD6v.1 -zpsw r -i 8 so my question is why do I want SSL? HOW MUCH is fee with and with out ssl At the moment I have no SSL on my 11 miners I certainly am willing to upgrade to SSL but what do I gain? -0.5% devfee in case of using Claymore's miner thanks I will test today. Merry Christmas! May I ask what pool are you using ? My rigs are on coinmine.pl and I'm pretty sure they are stealing shares or doind something wrong, all recommendations are targeting me to mine on dwarfpool but rig owners didn't made a decision yet |
|
|
|
|
gorserg
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 45
Merit: 0
|
|
December 25, 2016, 03:45:32 PM |
|
After automatic startup in ubuntu miners begin the arise lines. Even is not produced login. Login not available.
|
|
|
|
|
fmz89
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1766
Merit: 1002
|
|
December 25, 2016, 03:50:36 PM |
|
No, now 430 hash for 1070...
See edits. Still isn't worth it... Further Edit: Efficiency Setup - at equal power use for comparison without power costs impacting the analysis. Edit: Edit: Card Price Hash/s Power (W) H/$1070 $400 380 100 0.95Fury $260 300 100 1.15Full Bore Setup Card Price Hash/s H/$1070 $400 430 1.075Fury $260 350 1.346The 1070 has a long way to go before it's worth a look. The entry cost of $400/card is just too steep to overcome without some serious hash. it's wrong, the 1070 do 380 at 100watt not 330 If you did a little math yourself you'd see at 380 it's still not wrong. AMD is still ahead of Nvidia in H/$ running efficiently AND running full bore. Even with the adjusted numbers the 1070 is still 20% less H/$. AMD dead?? It's still in the LEAD. Edit: AMD guys are quibbling over 0.5% using ssl and 2%-4% in pool variance. Nvidia guys are paying a 20% premium just to play the game and screaming victory. It would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic. it is because 380 sol is always better than 300 sol at the same wattage, you need 25% more uselesses components with 300 sol to have the same total hash you must remember than on large scale the less rig you haev that do the job the better even i dont have nvidia, pascal its truly win, amd fanboys need to admite that, well considering to build nvidia rig, hope vega or polaris refresh bring amd to the top again haha old gpu will die soon the tahiti king wont pop again 380 sol is always better than 300 sol at the same wattage...?? Not when that 27% increased hash costs 54% more $$. That statement shows a complete lack of understanding ROI. Cost matters. So lets take a look at the extra components. MB: $80 RAM: $40 CPU: $40 HDD: $40 OS: $40 PSU: $160 5 USB Risers: $50 16x Shielded Riser: $50 Case and Fans: $100 Total: $600 Fury Rig: $600 + $1,560 = $2,160 1070 Rig: $600 + $2,400 = $3,000 Card Price Hash/s Power (W) H/$1070 $3,000 2,280 100 0.76Fury $2,160 1,800 100 0.83Full Bore Setup Card Price Hash/s H/$1070 $3,000 2,580 0.86Fury $2,160 2,100 0.97So as you can see, even with the cost of supporting parts included the Fury is still a better deal in H/$ running efficiently and running full bore. For those asking about the Fury power usage, this has been covered over and over again on the forum. I did the math, you can do your own reading. There are over 100 Furys running rock solid 300H/s with 100W. And as others have pointed out, the Nano is pushing 325H/s with 90W-95W. haha amd noobs, show me thats 325 sol in nano at 90watt?? show me yur wattmeter, lol |
|
|
|
ocminer
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2660
Merit: 1240
|
|
December 25, 2016, 03:56:25 PM |
|
What did I do wrong ? : no of mining ZecMiner64.exe -zpool SSL: //zec-eu1.nanopool.org:6633 -zwal t1RGQ4QhSqMMDNF8RaZRm5AHvrP7zyFZD6v.1 -zpsw r -i 8 Thanks ZecMiner64.exe -zpool SSL:(YOU HAVE SPACE HERE)//zec-eu1.nanopool.org:6633 -zwal t1RGQ4QhSqMMDNF8RaZRm5AHvrP7zyFZD6v.1 -zpsw r -i 8 so my question is why do I want SSL? HOW MUCH is fee with and with out ssl At the moment I have no SSL on my 11 miners I certainly am willing to upgrade to SSL but what do I gain? -0.5% devfee in case of using Claymore's miner There is also 0% fee during the holidays on https://zec.suprnova.cc in case you want so save some fees. SSL port is of course also available |
suprnova pools - reliable mining pools - #suprnova on freenet https://www.suprnova.cc - FOLLOW us @ Twitter ! twitter.com/SuprnovaPools |
|
|
sorry2xs
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 924
Merit: 1000
Dark Passenger Bitcoin miner 2013,Bitcoin node
|
|
December 25, 2016, 04:14:09 PM |
|
What did I do wrong ? : no of mining ZecMiner64.exe -zpool SSL: //zec-eu1.nanopool.org:6633 -zwal t1RGQ4QhSqMMDNF8RaZRm5AHvrP7zyFZD6v.1 -zpsw r -i 8 Thanks ZecMiner64.exe -zpool SSL:(YOU HAVE SPACE HERE)//zec-eu1.nanopool.org:6633 -zwal t1RGQ4QhSqMMDNF8RaZRm5AHvrP7zyFZD6v.1 -zpsw r -i 8 so my question is why do I want SSL? HOW MUCH is fee with and with out ssl At the moment I have no SSL on my 11 miners I certainly am willing to upgrade to SSL but what do I gain? -0.5% devfee in case of using Claymore's miner There is also 0% fee during the holidays on https://zec.suprnova.cc in case you want so save some fees. SSL port is of course also available would be even better if it ended 12:01 01/02/2017 |
Please tip the Node 1MPWKB23NsZsXHANnFwVAWT86mL24fqAjF; KO4UX
THAT NO GOOD DO GOODER BAT!!!
|
|
|
Puffy23
Member
Offline
Activity: 108
Merit: 11
|
|
December 25, 2016, 04:16:48 PM |
|
haha amd noobs, show me thats 325 sol in nano at 90watt?? show me yur wattmeter, lol Can't argue with the math on the Fury so you latch onto the Nano and insult. You seem to be exhibiting the 5 stages of grief. I've seen denial, bargaining, and anger. Looks like depression is next for you. How about you show us some math that demonstrates the 1070 is more profitable. If you can't math, move along. |
|
|
|
|
Amph
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3206
Merit: 1069
|
|
December 25, 2016, 04:31:31 PM |
|
No, now 430 hash for 1070...
See edits. Still isn't worth it... Further Edit: Efficiency Setup - at equal power use for comparison without power costs impacting the analysis. Edit: Edit: Card Price Hash/s Power (W) H/$1070 $400 380 100 0.95Fury $260 300 100 1.15Full Bore Setup Card Price Hash/s H/$1070 $400 430 1.075Fury $260 350 1.346The 1070 has a long way to go before it's worth a look. The entry cost of $400/card is just too steep to overcome without some serious hash. it's wrong, the 1070 do 380 at 100watt not 330 If you did a little math yourself you'd see at 380 it's still not wrong. AMD is still ahead of Nvidia in H/$ running efficiently AND running full bore. Even with the adjusted numbers the 1070 is still 20% less H/$. AMD dead?? It's still in the LEAD. Edit: AMD guys are quibbling over 0.5% using ssl and 2%-4% in pool variance. Nvidia guys are paying a 20% premium just to play the game and screaming victory. It would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic. it is because 380 sol is always better than 300 sol at the same wattage, you need 25% more uselesses components with 300 sol to have the same total hash you must remember than on large scale the less rig you haev that do the job the better You are right, Amph. Also, real prices are not listed. AMD Fury is much more than a listed prices. Here is the actual price at the same shop in the EU:  On ebay there is some fury at 260 USD: http://www.ebay.com/sch/Graphics-Video-Cards/27386/i.html?_from=R40&_nkw=fury&rt=nchttp://www.ebay.com/itm/SAPPHIRE-NITRO-Radeon-R9-Fury-100379NTOC-SR-4GB-4096-Bit-HBM-TRI-X-OC-UEFI-Vi-/291648915692?hash=item43e7a148ec:g:A8QAAOSwu1VW7qbd, also on newegg: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202186btw I never bought or tried fury as I know its consume 300W so I prefer to buy 290 or 290x @ 200USD (used). So i wonder if fury consumes 100W man read the description, that gpu was tested, tested for me is equal to used, it's not brand new then, so the comparison must be done with a used 1070 a used 1070 can be found for 300-350 at worst
it's wrong, the 1070 do 380 at 100watt not 330
With what miner? with the nicehash miner |
|
|
|
|
ocminer
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2660
Merit: 1240
|
|
December 25, 2016, 04:40:33 PM |
|
What did I do wrong ? : no of mining ZecMiner64.exe -zpool SSL: //zec-eu1.nanopool.org:6633 -zwal t1RGQ4QhSqMMDNF8RaZRm5AHvrP7zyFZD6v.1 -zpsw r -i 8 Thanks ZecMiner64.exe -zpool SSL:(YOU HAVE SPACE HERE)//zec-eu1.nanopool.org:6633 -zwal t1RGQ4QhSqMMDNF8RaZRm5AHvrP7zyFZD6v.1 -zpsw r -i 8 so my question is why do I want SSL? HOW MUCH is fee with and with out ssl At the moment I have no SSL on my 11 miners I certainly am willing to upgrade to SSL but what do I gain? -0.5% devfee in case of using Claymore's miner There is also 0% fee during the holidays on https://zec.suprnova.cc in case you want so save some fees. SSL port is of course also available would be even better if it ended 12:01 01/02/2017 Don't worry, won't be the last promo  |
suprnova pools - reliable mining pools - #suprnova on freenet https://www.suprnova.cc - FOLLOW us @ Twitter ! twitter.com/SuprnovaPools |
|
|
Puffy23
Member
Offline
Activity: 108
Merit: 11
|
|
December 25, 2016, 05:07:50 PM |
|
No, now 430 hash for 1070...
See edits. Still isn't worth it... Further Edit: Efficiency Setup - at equal power use for comparison without power costs impacting the analysis. Edit: Edit: Card Price Hash/s Power (W) H/$1070 $400 380 100 0.95Fury $260 300 100 1.15Full Bore Setup Card Price Hash/s H/$1070 $400 430 1.075Fury $260 350 1.346The 1070 has a long way to go before it's worth a look. The entry cost of $400/card is just too steep to overcome without some serious hash. it's wrong, the 1070 do 380 at 100watt not 330 If you did a little math yourself you'd see at 380 it's still not wrong. AMD is still ahead of Nvidia in H/$ running efficiently AND running full bore. Even with the adjusted numbers the 1070 is still 20% less H/$. AMD dead?? It's still in the LEAD. Edit: AMD guys are quibbling over 0.5% using ssl and 2%-4% in pool variance. Nvidia guys are paying a 20% premium just to play the game and screaming victory. It would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic. it is because 380 sol is always better than 300 sol at the same wattage, you need 25% more uselesses components with 300 sol to have the same total hash you must remember than on large scale the less rig you haev that do the job the better You are right, Amph. Also, real prices are not listed. AMD Fury is much more than a listed prices. Here is the actual price at the same shop in the EU: On ebay there is some fury at 260 USD: http://www.ebay.com/sch/Graphics-Video-Cards/27386/i.html?_from=R40&_nkw=fury&rt=nchttp://www.ebay.com/itm/SAPPHIRE-NITRO-Radeon-R9-Fury-100379NTOC-SR-4GB-4096-Bit-HBM-TRI-X-OC-UEFI-Vi-/291648915692?hash=item43e7a148ec:g:A8QAAOSwu1VW7qbd, also on newegg: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202186btw I never bought or tried fury as I know its consume 300W so I prefer to buy 290 or 290x @ 200USD (used). So i wonder if fury consumes 100W man read the description, that gpu was tested, tested for me is equal to used, it's not brand new then, so the comparison must be done with a used 1070 a used 1070 can be found for 300-350 at worst
it's wrong, the 1070 do 380 at 100watt not 330
With what miner? with the nicehash miner Fury is $260 retail. |
|
|
|
|
yslyung
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1500
Merit: 1002
Mine Mine Mine
|
|
December 25, 2016, 05:21:23 PM |
|
nvidia fan boys, DO NOT forget to take the Not-soNiceHash fees into account !
all other pools fees are 1% or lower
not-o-nicehash fees are 3%
so if u add claymore fees 2% is you are on SSL 2% + 3% on Not-o-nicehash = 5% !!!
on the other hand amd fanboys, 2% claymore + any other pools beside not-o-nicehash is only 1% or lower so total is 3% fees
regardless, nvidia have to pay 2% more fees than amd !
stand to be corrected that nvidia is ONLY locked to nh miner on nh pool & only able to achieve higher hashrates.
as for amd it works on all platforms or miner but gets same hashpower .
amd still ftw, for now.
|
|
|
|
|
Squall10
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 47
Merit: 0
|
|
December 25, 2016, 05:28:23 PM |
|
Nvidia miners don't use Claymore's ZCash to mine so there is no 2,5% fee added to Nicehash's fee...
|
|
|
|
|
yslyung
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1500
Merit: 1002
Mine Mine Mine
|
|
December 25, 2016, 05:37:26 PM |
|
Nvidia miners don't use Claymore's ZCash to mine so there is no 2,5% fee added to Nicehash's fee...
My bad... yeah no 2.5% claymore fees for n miner but still 3% from NH. I'll let the mathematicians do the work. still amd is best bang for buck imo. |
|
|
|
|
|
Qazo
|
|
December 25, 2016, 06:02:37 PM |
|
i'm not nvidia fanboy, but your mathematic is - wrong? claymore with SSL 2% + pool 1% = 3% nicehash = 3% dude, it's same value  |
|
|
|
|
chup
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 736
Merit: 262
Me, Myself & I
|
 |
December 25, 2016, 06:49:53 PM |
|
As in any discipline, TIMING is EVERYTHING. AMD was at least DOUBLE speed and efficiency when ZEC profitability was 5-10 times higher than ZEC profitability period when NVIDIA is 30% faster/more efficient. Feel free to INTEGRATE this into conclusion what is better for You.  |
|
|
|
|
dragonchopper9
|
|
December 25, 2016, 07:03:32 PM |
|
What did I do wrong ? : no of mining ZecMiner64.exe -zpool SSL: //zec-eu1.nanopool.org:6633 -zwal t1RGQ4QhSqMMDNF8RaZRm5AHvrP7zyFZD6v.1 -zpsw r -i 8 Thanks ZecMiner64.exe -zpool SSL:(YOU HAVE SPACE HERE)//zec-eu1.nanopool.org:6633 -zwal t1RGQ4QhSqMMDNF8RaZRm5AHvrP7zyFZD6v.1 -zpsw r -i 8 so my question is why do I want SSL? HOW MUCH is fee with and with out ssl At the moment I have no SSL on my 11 miners I certainly am willing to upgrade to SSL but what do I gain? -0.5% devfee in case of using Claymore's miner There is also 0% fee during the holidays on https://zec.suprnova.cc in case you want so save some fees. SSL port is of course also available would be even better if it ended 12:01 01/02/2017 Don't worry, won't be the last promo ocminer, Thank you for your Christmas and New Year gift  |
|
|
|
HashZilla
Member
Offline
Activity: 89
Merit: 10
|
|
December 25, 2016, 07:25:21 PM |
|
Just noticed Claymore has a sense of humor: When setting AMD_OCL_BUILD_OPTIONS_APPEND Setting AMD_OCL_BUILD_OPTIONS gets: However after a quick hex edit of the amd opencl shared library export AMD_OCL_RALPH_OPTIONS_APPEND=-save-temps
Works just great. :-) Yeah - I've unpacked the real miner binary (zecminer64 is only 66k, this is because it loads Data3.bin, decodes it, and then runs it.) From there you end up with a binary that looks to have been packed by a modified version of UPX - unpacking what it drops looks like an ELF loaded at 0x80000 - it patches several jumps in it to make it work, because it looks like it expects to be loaded at 0x40000. THAT looks like it drops ld.so and the real miner ELF into memory. Yo dawg, I herd you like executing, so I put an ELF64 in your ELF64 so you can execute while you execute. I think now one of my points about Linux release is clear - other devs want to see how my miner works and do reverse engineering as soon as they can. It's much easier to do it in Linux. My License.txt prohibits such things clearly, so you violate the license. Remember I violated MIT license in past and was blamed that I steal other's work. Now I see same thing from you. Have fun... Actually, it would have been easier to reconstruct the actual miner binary on Windows. There's nice tools to do this for the PE32+ (PE 64-bit) format, but jack shit for ELF64. My owner and I recovered the binary in its original, unpacked form, btw - not much in the way of anti-debugging once you get to there. Some obfuscation, but not much. Checkmate - that was a fun workout; time to figure out something else to do. Stop worrying about your devfee, it's not about removing it or altering it. It was just fun to do. You have an owner? Does he let you out much? We can't own wolves here in Canada, I wish we could. |
|
|
|
|
yslyung
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1500
Merit: 1002
Mine Mine Mine
|
|
December 25, 2016, 07:56:00 PM |
|
i'm not nvidia fanboy, but your mathematic is - wrong? claymore with SSL 2% + pool 1% = 3% nicehash = 3% dude, it's same value my bad again, but sometimes some other pools other than NH have 0% fee & mph is 0.9% so still lesser than NH in terms of fees. WTM says ETH is more profitable than ZEC for time being, oh btw what does a 1070 does on ETH ? 470 4gb i call it the best bang for buck does around 28 mh/s ++ ish on a light mem mod + OC. well, still more profitable than NH if it's 1 to 1 (based on same hashrate for the algo being mined) be it ZEC or ETH in terms of payout most of the time. well back on topic, hope next version will be able to be less jumpy on the power spikes which "should" make the miner to be more stable. we shall see. prolly lower fees too. all we can do is hope. |
|
|
|
|
fredeq
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1537
Merit: 1005
|
|
December 25, 2016, 08:13:00 PM
Last edit: December 25, 2016, 09:56:15 PM by fredeq |
|
it's wrong, the 1070 do 380 at 100watt not 330
With what miner? with the nicehash miner Hmm is this with some hardcore OC? I am getting 330 at 65% TDP - 120W and it still drops if I move to 60% or lower. Edit: I see that 1.7.3.11 has been released. Will check it out. Indeed getting 380 now. |
|
|
|
|
