puch0021
Newbie
 Offline
Activity: 35
Merit: 0
|
 |
February 16, 2018, 01:21:19 AM |
|
...
In fact, every single comparison I've done between NiceHash and a multi-algo, auto-switching pool - always using NemosMiner - has ended with NiceHash winning. As a result, I've concluded that it's just not worth trying to beat NiceHash at its own game. YMMV, etc. and so on.
I have been away from NH for quite a while now (last year when I compared ZPOOL was ahead of NH for me) -- but I fired it up on two workers to size it up again. Early impression is that the profit seems quite high right now on NiceHash -- probably due to the "bull market" run we are having (e.g. people willing to pay above market for the power). Believe me, after all the trash talking I've done about NiceHash (aka NiceHack), no one was more surprised as each and every multi-algo pool I've tested over the last month has come in 2nd place, and often by a startling amount. HashRefinery and Zergpool both brought in 30% less over their 1 week test period than NH. Granted, both pools happened to get on the wrong side of some hard-forks, but since that isn't something you have to worry about with NH I can't really toss out the comparisons as invalid. Both MiningPoolHub and Zpool came in around 10% less than NH over their test periods (1 week for MPH, only 3 days for Zpool) and given the limitations of my test setup I am inclined to call these a tie, but that's rather missing the point: the whole idea behind multi-algo, auto-switching pools is to beat single-coin mining AND NiceHash over time (if you are the type that either cashes out in fiat on a regular basis or just wants to accumulate BTC without buying a shitty ASIC). And especially since NH is rather restricted in the algos it offers I am even more surprised at the poor showing of these multi-algo pools, but maybe it's not the pool's fault, maybe it's NemosMiner's, so I am contemplating trying another multi-algo miner manager next. Consider how is it possible (beyond consistent luck +/- getting the best of fluctuating exchange rates) that a pool can consistently out earn the calculated amount at whattomine when WTM considers net hash rate of the entire algorithm across all pools. Also consider that WTM and other calculators are likely ideal earnings; multi algorithm pools often use PPLNS or some PPLNS hybrid which doesn't favor algorithm switching as compared to PPS of nicehash. In other words, what you see is typically what you get with nicehash compared to the ideal earnings on WTM. If WTM has nicehash near 90% of the top algorithms it's going to be tough to beat especially if hopping from algorithm to algorithm on a multi-algo pool. For example, x17 is the top algorithm on ahash pool and the listed estimates don't even come close to nicehash's rates. I've gone back to single pool mining vs nicehash. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You can see the statistics of your reports to moderators on the "Report to moderator" pages.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
jimmykl
|
|
February 16, 2018, 01:29:26 AM |
|
...
In fact, every single comparison I've done between NiceHash and a multi-algo, auto-switching pool - always using NemosMiner - has ended with NiceHash winning. As a result, I've concluded that it's just not worth trying to beat NiceHash at its own game. YMMV, etc. and so on.
I have been away from NH for quite a while now (last year when I compared ZPOOL was ahead of NH for me) -- but I fired it up on two workers to size it up again. Early impression is that the profit seems quite high right now on NiceHash -- probably due to the "bull market" run we are having (e.g. people willing to pay above market for the power). Believe me, after all the trash talking I've done about NiceHash (aka NiceHack), no one was more surprised as each and every multi-algo pool I've tested over the last month has come in 2nd place, and often by a startling amount. HashRefinery and Zergpool both brought in 30% less over their 1 week test period than NH. Granted, both pools happened to get on the wrong side of some hard-forks, but since that isn't something you have to worry about with NH I can't really toss out the comparisons as invalid. Both MiningPoolHub and Zpool came in around 10% less than NH over their test periods (1 week for MPH, only 3 days for Zpool) and given the limitations of my test setup I am inclined to call these a tie, but that's rather missing the point: the whole idea behind multi-algo, auto-switching pools is to beat single-coin mining AND NiceHash over time (if you are the type that either cashes out in fiat on a regular basis or just wants to accumulate BTC without buying a shitty ASIC). And especially since NH is rather restricted in the algos it offers I am even more surprised at the poor showing of these multi-algo pools, but maybe it's not the pool's fault, maybe it's NemosMiner's, so I am contemplating trying another multi-algo miner manager next. Consider how is it possible (beyond consistent luck +/- getting the best of fluctuating exchange rates) that a pool can consistently out earn the calculated amount at whattomine when WTM considers net hash rate of the entire algorithm across all pools. Also consider that WTM and other calculators are likely ideal earnings; multi algorithm pools often use PPLNS or some PPLNS hybrid which doesn't favor algorithm switching as compared to PPS of nicehash. In other words, what you see is typically what you get with nicehash compared to the ideal earnings on WTM. If WTM has nicehash near 90% of the top algorithms it's going to be tough to beat especially if hopping from algorithm to algorithm on a multi-algo pool. For example, x17 is the top algorithm on ahash pool and the listed estimates don't even come close to nicehash's rates. I've gone back to single pool mining vs nicehash. Plus Nicehack can operate at a loss until they need some more funds to continue then organise a convenient wallet hack…  |
|
|
|
|
puch0021
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 35
Merit: 0
|
|
February 16, 2018, 01:32:59 AM |
|
...
In fact, every single comparison I've done between NiceHash and a multi-algo, auto-switching pool - always using NemosMiner - has ended with NiceHash winning. As a result, I've concluded that it's just not worth trying to beat NiceHash at its own game. YMMV, etc. and so on.
I have been away from NH for quite a while now (last year when I compared ZPOOL was ahead of NH for me) -- but I fired it up on two workers to size it up again. Early impression is that the profit seems quite high right now on NiceHash -- probably due to the "bull market" run we are having (e.g. people willing to pay above market for the power). Believe me, after all the trash talking I've done about NiceHash (aka NiceHack), no one was more surprised as each and every multi-algo pool I've tested over the last month has come in 2nd place, and often by a startling amount. HashRefinery and Zergpool both brought in 30% less over their 1 week test period than NH. Granted, both pools happened to get on the wrong side of some hard-forks, but since that isn't something you have to worry about with NH I can't really toss out the comparisons as invalid. Both MiningPoolHub and Zpool came in around 10% less than NH over their test periods (1 week for MPH, only 3 days for Zpool) and given the limitations of my test setup I am inclined to call these a tie, but that's rather missing the point: the whole idea behind multi-algo, auto-switching pools is to beat single-coin mining AND NiceHash over time (if you are the type that either cashes out in fiat on a regular basis or just wants to accumulate BTC without buying a shitty ASIC). And especially since NH is rather restricted in the algos it offers I am even more surprised at the poor showing of these multi-algo pools, but maybe it's not the pool's fault, maybe it's NemosMiner's, so I am contemplating trying another multi-algo miner manager next. Consider how is it possible (beyond consistent luck +/- getting the best of fluctuating exchange rates) that a pool can consistently out earn the calculated amount at whattomine when WTM considers net hash rate of the entire algorithm across all pools. Also consider that WTM and other calculators are likely ideal earnings; multi algorithm pools often use PPLNS or some PPLNS hybrid which doesn't favor algorithm switching as compared to PPS of nicehash. In other words, what you see is typically what you get with nicehash compared to the ideal earnings on WTM. If WTM has nicehash near 90% of the top algorithms it's going to be tough to beat especially if hopping from algorithm to algorithm on a multi-algo pool. For example, x17 is the top algorithm on ahash pool and the listed estimates don't even come close to nicehash's rates. I've gone back to single pool mining vs nicehash. Plus Nicehack can operate at a loss until they need some more funds to continue then organise a convenient wallet hack… Nothing stopping pool operators from doing the same thing :p |
|
|
|
|
fr4nkthetank
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2294
Merit: 1182
Now the money is free, and so the people will be
|
|
February 16, 2018, 01:55:09 AM |
|
for getting paid right away yeah well calculate the fees in there too...I found nicehash to be the least ideal solution but since they came back I have to say they are unusually profitable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
jimmykl
|
|
February 16, 2018, 03:00:35 AM |
|
...
In fact, every single comparison I've done between NiceHash and a multi-algo, auto-switching pool - always using NemosMiner - has ended with NiceHash winning. As a result, I've concluded that it's just not worth trying to beat NiceHash at its own game. YMMV, etc. and so on.
I have been away from NH for quite a while now (last year when I compared ZPOOL was ahead of NH for me) -- but I fired it up on two workers to size it up again. Early impression is that the profit seems quite high right now on NiceHash -- probably due to the "bull market" run we are having (e.g. people willing to pay above market for the power). Believe me, after all the trash talking I've done about NiceHash (aka NiceHack), no one was more surprised as each and every multi-algo pool I've tested over the last month has come in 2nd place, and often by a startling amount. HashRefinery and Zergpool both brought in 30% less over their 1 week test period than NH. Granted, both pools happened to get on the wrong side of some hard-forks, but since that isn't something you have to worry about with NH I can't really toss out the comparisons as invalid. Both MiningPoolHub and Zpool came in around 10% less than NH over their test periods (1 week for MPH, only 3 days for Zpool) and given the limitations of my test setup I am inclined to call these a tie, but that's rather missing the point: the whole idea behind multi-algo, auto-switching pools is to beat single-coin mining AND NiceHash over time (if you are the type that either cashes out in fiat on a regular basis or just wants to accumulate BTC without buying a shitty ASIC). And especially since NH is rather restricted in the algos it offers I am even more surprised at the poor showing of these multi-algo pools, but maybe it's not the pool's fault, maybe it's NemosMiner's, so I am contemplating trying another multi-algo miner manager next. Consider how is it possible (beyond consistent luck +/- getting the best of fluctuating exchange rates) that a pool can consistently out earn the calculated amount at whattomine when WTM considers net hash rate of the entire algorithm across all pools. Also consider that WTM and other calculators are likely ideal earnings; multi algorithm pools often use PPLNS or some PPLNS hybrid which doesn't favor algorithm switching as compared to PPS of nicehash. In other words, what you see is typically what you get with nicehash compared to the ideal earnings on WTM. If WTM has nicehash near 90% of the top algorithms it's going to be tough to beat especially if hopping from algorithm to algorithm on a multi-algo pool. For example, x17 is the top algorithm on ahash pool and the listed estimates don't even come close to nicehash's rates. I've gone back to single pool mining vs nicehash. Plus Nicehack can operate at a loss until they need some more funds to continue then organise a convenient wallet hack… Nothing stopping pool operators from doing the same thing :p Damn, who can you trust?!  |
|
|
|
|
romajc
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 40
Merit: 0
|
|
February 16, 2018, 12:39:28 PM |
|
Can someone help me out with the monitor function?
If I have a 7 card rig, I should set GTR 40 to someting like GTR 14.3 (100% / 7).
Then move that 7 card file into the main folder. And run it along side the startpool.bat?
|
|
|
|
|
micha_b
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 21
Merit: 0
|
|
February 16, 2018, 06:11:33 PM |
|
NemosMiner-v2.4.2
Added simple algo switching log in csv. switching.log file found in Logs folder. Can be easily imported in excel as csv file. include wallet so donation rounds can be clearly identified as well
Best Regards
Nemo
Could you please log the estimated payments as well? Would help to check effectivity of miner switching. |
|
|
|
|
|
MrPlus
|
|
February 16, 2018, 08:04:04 PM |
|
Important for ashapoolplus users
No impact on other pools
There are troubles on the server side. You guys are too many and we’re not scaling.
I’m working on getting calculations integrated to the miner to avoid this issue. Currently under test.
Should be available tomorrow or next day.
Please switch back to ahashpool24hr in the meantime
MrPlus
|
|
|
|
millsys
Member
Offline
Activity: 112
Merit: 10
|
|
February 16, 2018, 08:13:36 PM
Last edit: February 16, 2018, 08:28:14 PM by millsys |
|
Important for ashapoolplus users
No impact on other pools
There are troubles on the server side. You guys are too many and we’re not scaling.
I’m working on getting calculations integrated to the miner to avoid this issue. Currently under test.
Should be available tomorrow or next day.
Please switch back to ahashpool24hr in the meantime
MrPlus
How about switching miners to 60-120 second intervals? That should reduce load 50-75% |
FARM #1 : 60 GPUs spread across 6 rigs (1080ti/1080/1070ti/1070)
FARM #2 : 72 GPUs spread across 12 rigs (1070ti x 6)
FARM #3 : 16 GPUs spread across 4 rigs (1080ti x 4)
AntMiner S9 13.5TH / AntMiner L3+ x 2
|
|
|
starrbuck
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 48
Merit: 0
|
|
February 16, 2018, 08:51:24 PM |
|
Important for ashapoolplus users
No impact on other pools
There are troubles on the server side. You guys are too many and we’re not scaling.
I’m working on getting calculations integrated to the miner to avoid this issue. Currently under test.
Should be available tomorrow or next day.
Please switch back to ahashpool24hr in the meantime
MrPlus
How about switching miners to 60-120 second intervals? That should reduce load 50-75% I already changed mine to 60 seconds. Thirty seconds is insane! |
|
|
|
|
millsys
Member
Offline
Activity: 112
Merit: 10
|
|
February 16, 2018, 08:57:01 PM |
|
Important for ashapoolplus users
No impact on other pools
There are troubles on the server side. You guys are too many and we’re not scaling.
I’m working on getting calculations integrated to the miner to avoid this issue. Currently under test.
Should be available tomorrow or next day.
Please switch back to ahashpool24hr in the meantime
MrPlus
How about switching miners to 60-120 second intervals? That should reduce load 50-75% I already changed mine to 60 seconds. Thirty seconds is insane! Yea coins don't trend that quickly, even 120 seconds isn't out of the question to query pool data |
FARM #1 : 60 GPUs spread across 6 rigs (1080ti/1080/1070ti/1070)
FARM #2 : 72 GPUs spread across 12 rigs (1070ti x 6)
FARM #3 : 16 GPUs spread across 4 rigs (1080ti x 4)
AntMiner S9 13.5TH / AntMiner L3+ x 2
|
|
|
|
MagicSmoker
|
|
February 16, 2018, 08:57:47 PM |
|
Important for ashapoolplus users
No impact on other pools
There are troubles on the server side. You guys are too many and we’re not scaling.
I’m working on getting calculations integrated to the miner to avoid this issue. Currently under test.
Should be available tomorrow or next day.
Please switch back to ahashpool24hr in the meantime
MrPlus
How about switching miners to 60-120 second intervals? That should reduce load 50-75% I already changed mine to 60 seconds. Thirty seconds is insane! Also, it appears that *every* pool (specified by scripts in the pools directory) is polled at every interval; why not just poll the pool that is specified in the batch file? |
|
|
|
|
millsys
Member
Offline
Activity: 112
Merit: 10
|
|
February 16, 2018, 09:08:57 PM |
|
Important for ashapoolplus users
No impact on other pools
There are troubles on the server side. You guys are too many and we’re not scaling.
I’m working on getting calculations integrated to the miner to avoid this issue. Currently under test.
Should be available tomorrow or next day.
Please switch back to ahashpool24hr in the meantime
MrPlus
How about switching miners to 60-120 second intervals? That should reduce load 50-75% I already changed mine to 60 seconds. Thirty seconds is insane! Also, it appears that *every* pool (specified by scripts in the pools directory) is polled at every interval; why not just poll the pool that is specified in the batch file? Easy fix, delete pool files you don't use from POOL folder... That is what I do |
FARM #1 : 60 GPUs spread across 6 rigs (1080ti/1080/1070ti/1070)
FARM #2 : 72 GPUs spread across 12 rigs (1070ti x 6)
FARM #3 : 16 GPUs spread across 4 rigs (1080ti x 4)
AntMiner S9 13.5TH / AntMiner L3+ x 2
|
|
|
|
MagicSmoker
|
|
February 16, 2018, 11:24:23 PM |
|
Also, it appears that *every* pool (specified by scripts in the pools directory) is polled at every interval; why not just poll the pool that is specified in the batch file?
Easy fix, delete pool files you don't use from POOL folder... That is what I do Huh, that seemed drastic, but it worked! |
|
|
|
|
MinerMinor
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 20
Merit: 0
|
|
February 17, 2018, 02:37:06 AM |
|
Can someone please elaborate how to enable the MiningPoolHubStats for AHashPool? Support was just added as confirmed by nemo, but I don't see how to get the API key?
|
|
|
|
|
amitim
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 59
Merit: 0
|
|
February 17, 2018, 06:39:21 AM |
|
Hi.
Only for me coin SHIELD (XSH) nails the mining?
The last few days the rig falls off because of this coin
PS. ahashpool, NM 2.4.1, tried 2.4.2 - same problem
|
|
|
|
|
|
MrPlus
|
|
February 17, 2018, 08:35:02 AM |
|
Important for ashapoolplus users
No impact on other pools
There are troubles on the server side. You guys are too many and we’re not scaling.
I’m working on getting calculations integrated to the miner to avoid this issue. Currently under test.
Should be available tomorrow or next day.
Please switch back to ahashpool24hr in the meantime
MrPlus
The ahshpoolplus service will stop today. >>> your miners will show errors connecting to pool we couldn't scale with too many miners polling the service every minute. Please switch back to ahashpool24hr if not done already. Replacement solution for the Plus logic should be available soon. MrPlus |
|
|
|
jcabello7
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 13
Merit: 0
|
|
February 17, 2018, 10:28:16 AM |
|
Could we help you?
|
|
|
|
|
millsys
Member
Offline
Activity: 112
Merit: 10
|
|
February 17, 2018, 12:13:06 PM |
|
NemosMiner 2.4.2 goes down when Coinbase API is down.... Logic to use arbitrary BTC value or 'previous value' would help
Loading BTC rate from 'api.coinbase.com'..
Loading pool stats..
Error contacting pool, retrying..
Loading BTC rate from 'api.coinbase.com'..
Loading pool stats..
Error contacting pool, retrying..
Loading BTC rate from 'api.coinbase.com'..
Loading pool stats..
Error contacting pool, retrying..
Loading BTC rate from 'api.coinbase.com'..
Loading pool stats..
Error contacting pool, retrying..
Loading BTC rate from 'api.coinbase.com'..
Loading pool stats..
Error contacting pool, retrying..
Loading BTC rate from 'api.coinbase.com'..
Loading pool stats..
Error contacting pool, retrying..
Loading BTC rate from 'api.coinbase.com'..
Loading pool stats..
Error contacting pool, retrying..
Loading BTC rate from 'api.coinbase.com'..
Loading pool stats..
Error contacting pool, retrying..
|
FARM #1 : 60 GPUs spread across 6 rigs (1080ti/1080/1070ti/1070)
FARM #2 : 72 GPUs spread across 12 rigs (1070ti x 6)
FARM #3 : 16 GPUs spread across 4 rigs (1080ti x 4)
AntMiner S9 13.5TH / AntMiner L3+ x 2
|
|
|
|
MagicSmoker
|
|
February 17, 2018, 12:22:52 PM |
|
NemosMiner 2.4.2 goes down when Coinbase API is down.... Logic to use arbitrary BTC value or 'previous value' would help
...
Yikes! That's not good. An easy-to-implement 3rd fallback option would be to mine the first algo in the list specified in the start[pool] batch file. |
|
|
|
|
|
