[NemosMiner] multi algo profit switching NVIDIA/CPU miner

[millsys]

AHashPoolPlus vs BlazePool Test using 72 GPU FARM (36 GPUs per Pool)

Six Rigs (Miner1-6)  : 6 x 1070ti (85%, +100 Core, +500 Mem)
Six Rigs (Miner7-12): 6 x 1070ti (85%, +100 Core, +500 Mem)

Time Period 2/12 7:30am to 2/14 7:30am
Allowed Pools to Settle after stopping miners
Algorithm: phi,skein,x17,Nist5,neoscrypt,blake2s
ActiveMinerGainPct 5
Interval 60


AHashPoolPlus generated : 0.021524928 ($198.78 USD)
BlazePool generated        : 0.016864128 ($155.74 USD)

Sorry Blazepool you lost this round.  

are u getting almost 10 $ per day per 1070 ti?

No about $18.50/rig/day so a little over $3/1070ti/day

[passteque]

 Trying ahashpoolplus vs blazepool using 2* 3 1070 ti and algo phi nist5 neoscrypt.

[millsys]

Trying ahashpoolplus vs blazepool using 2* 3 1070 ti and algo phi nist5 neoscrypt.

You are missing some very profitable algos on that list.....  x17 is rocking it right now.  blake2s and skein should be added as well

[starrbuck]

It makes more sense to add them all and let the app determine the most profitable.

[MagicSmoker]

You can't shoot yourself in the foot for picking the top 6 algos and mining those exclusively.  Make sure to use the new ahashpoolplus, its a better way to mine

If I knew what the top 6 algos were at any given moment I wouldn't need NemosMiner?!? I could just make the usual rolling list of ccminer, etc., command line entries in a batch file and loop through them every 60s (or whatever)!

I may well give ahashpool a shot (using the plus version of the batch file) but as of now I don't really have enough hashpower to make me comfortable trying out a pool with a 0.01 BTC minimum payout. I did take note of your test results, but I'd like to see how ahashpool compares with NiceHash, because so far every single one of these multi-algo pools has lost out to the 800lb gorilla.

[sundownz]

NemosMiner-v2.4.2
ahashpoolplus

Added ahashpoolplus as a pool. Simply use -PoolName ahashpoolplus in start.bat Uses calculations based on 24hractual and currentestimate ahashpool prices to get more realistic estimate. Includes some trust index based on past 1hr currentestimate variation from 24hr. This shows less switching than following Current Estimate and more switching that following the 24hr Actual. AND is NOT sensible to spikes. Better profitability on our rigs. Test and share the results on yours. Only for ahashpool. Working on expanding the feature to other pools.

Any ETA on having this for ZPOOL ?

I've been using it on Zpool the last few days with no issue. In fact, I was doing a comparison between NemosMiner/Zpool vs. NiceHash (spoiler - NiceHash won; see this post here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1751272.msg30341376#msg30341376).

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).

[nickvasel]

If I want to use a certain miner in NM, is all I have to do is delete/hide the miners I don't want to use that are in the miner folder?
EDIT: The reason I ask is I have 1 rig 6x 1070 and I only mine eqihash,Lyra2RE2,ethash and Lyra2z, and want to use 1 miner. does this make sense? thanks

[millsys]

If I want to use a certain miner in NM, is all I have to do is delete/hide the miners I don't want to use that are in the miner folder?

yes, same with pools, I delete all the pools I don't use so the system isn't grabbing stats for pools I don't need.  I delete the PalginHSR because it never seems to work properly on any of the 24 rigs I manage and edit the Klaust to enable neoscrypt.

[nickvasel]

If I want to use a certain miner in NM, is all I have to do is delete/hide the miners I don't want to use that are in the miner folder?

yes, same with pools, I delete all the pools I don't use so the system isn't grabbing stats for pools I don't need.  I delete the PalginHSR because it never seems to work properly on any of the 24 rigs I manage and edit the Klaust to enable neoscrypt.

So your deleting the bat files to delete the pools or is there some where else.
EDIT: Delete from the pool folder, Got it...
2ndEDIT: neoscrypt, should I ?

[fireanimal]

Claymore tries to use all gpu's not that ones specified in the .bat file.  Is this normal behavior.  Thanks

Forgot to add.  Blazepool 24hr does not seem accurate at all.  Stuck mining Blake2s for 2+ hrs, switched to non 24hr script and blake2s was one of the least profitable coins

[MagicSmoker]

...
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.

[strowheim]

I installed 2.4.2 on 2 rigs and one of them is rebooting repeatedly now every few hours, and the other is fine. Very odd behavior.. Had to revert back to 2.3.. Anyone else have this issue?

No errors in the event viewer, nothing in whocrashed (no minidumps or bluescreens), and log files are not helpful.

The rig was super stable with 2.3.1...

[millsys]

I installed 2.4.2 on 2 rigs and one of them is rebooting repeatedly now every few hours, and the other is fine. Very odd behavior.. Had to revert back to 2.3.. Anyone else have this issue?

No errors in the event viewer, nothing in whocrashed (no minidumps or bluescreens), and log files are not helpful.

The rig was super stable with 2.3.1...

Palgin with neoscrypt probably.. disable palgin miner ps1 (delete file) and edit klaust miner file to uncomment neoscrypt

[dragonmike]

Nemo, can you please type up a quick changelog on the first page when you release an update? It's impossible to track or know the differences otherwise. What have you changed/improved between v2.4.1 and v2.4.2?

[EVERYUSERNAMEISTAKEN]

Nemo, can you please type up a quick changelog on the first page when you release an update? It's impossible to track or know the differences otherwise. What have you changed/improved between v2.4.1 and v2.4.2?

? Not sure where you've been looking.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1777336.msg30312532#msg30312532

https://github.com/nemosminer/NemosMiner-v2.4.2/releases

[MagicSmoker]

Nemo, can you please type up a quick changelog on the first page when you release an update? It's impossible to track or know the differences otherwise. What have you changed/improved between v2.4.1 and v2.4.2?

? Not sure where you've been looking.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1777336.msg30312532#msg30312532

https://github.com/nemosminer/NemosMiner-v2.4.2/releases

Well, I'm still waiting for an explanation of what, precisely, this collection of half-assed scripts does, so it's no surprise the first post wasn't updated with a changelog.

And btw, pointing someone to post #3421 and asking rhetorically, "not sure where you've been looking" is kind of a dick move. While we can all fantasize about every one reading 3000+ post threads before asking a question, that's just flatly unrealistic, so let's not pretend otherwise, mmm?

[EVERYUSERNAMEISTAKEN]

Well, I'm still waiting for an explanation of what, precisely, this collection of half-assed scripts does, so it's no surprise the first post wasn't updated with a changelog.

Don't you think this is more demeaning and more of a dick move than my snarky statement?

And btw, pointing someone to post #3421 and asking rhetorically, "not sure where you've been looking" is kind of a dick move. While we can all fantasize about every one reading 3000+ post threads before asking a question, that's just flatly unrealistic, so let's not pretend otherwise, mmm?

I don't expect anyone or everyone to read all 3000+ posts, but if there's recent buzz about a new patch, you'd think the changelog is nearby. In addition, almost any competent dev has the changelog on their Github, it's standard practice.

[nickvasel]

If I want to use a certain miner in NM, is all I have to do is delete/hide the miners I don't want to use that are in the miner folder?

yes, same with pools, I delete all the pools I don't use so the system isn't grabbing stats for pools I don't need.  I delete the PalginHSR because it never seems to work properly on any of the 24 rigs I manage and edit the Klaust to enable neoscrypt.

So your deleting the bat files to delete the pools or is there some where else.
EDIT: Delete from the pool folder, Got it...
2ndEDIT: neoscrypt, should I ?

Could use a little help... just switched to 2.4.2 I have 5 gigabyte 1070 G1's and a gigabyte 1070TI. Any suggestions on what miners to use. I'm on Mining pool Hub.
clocks are 85% 100/400 holding steady no crashes(yet)...
With V2.4.1 I was getting:
DSTM=Equihash 2.82 kh/s <----crashed a lot on overclocking
ccminertpruvotx64=Lyra2z 10.48 mh/s
EthashClaymore=ethash 150.50mh/s
ccminerpolytimos=Lyra2RE2 241.61 mh/s
V2.4.2
ccminertpruvox64=equihash 2.24 kh/s
ccminertpruvox64=Lyra2z 9.84 mh/s
ccminertpruvox64=skein 2.30 gh/s
ccminertpruvox64Lyra2RE2= 226.69 mh/s
ccminerKlaust=neroscrypt= 6.71 mh/s

[MagicSmoker]

Well, I'm still waiting for an explanation of what, precisely, this collection of half-assed scripts does, so it's no surprise the first post wasn't updated with a changelog.

Don't you think this is more demeaning and more of a dick move than my snarky statement?

Maybe, but considering that an errant powershell script can literally destroy a Windows installation, not really.

Look at the substance of what I wrote: there is not even a basic description of what NemosMiner does in the first post. It is *assumed* by the OP that everyone knows what a multi-pool miner does. Well, maybe that is true at the so-called "30,000 foot level", but I still want to know the details like, where is the data from API polling stored, where/how is that data manipulated, how are errors handled like, say, a benchmark failing (one of my test rigs was basically idled for 8+ hours because "timetravel" failed... that's dumb no matter how you slice it), how are miners configured, hell, what does every switch in the pool batch files do!?, etc... None of that is explained either in the first post or on the "github" - more on that below.

And btw, pointing someone to post #3421 and asking rhetorically, "not sure where you've been looking" is kind of a dick move. While we can all fantasize about every one reading 3000+ post threads before asking a question, that's just flatly unrealistic, so let's not pretend otherwise, mmm?

I don't expect anyone or everyone to read all 3000+ posts, but if there's recent buzz about a new patch, you'd think the changelog is nearby. In addition, almost any competent dev has the changelog on their Github, it's standard practice.

It's not that I am unsympathetic to your position - indeed, I always read the first 2-3 and last 2-3 pages of a thread before asking a (potentially stupid) question - but after *decades* of using forums (starting with BBSes, USENET, etc...) I have a fairly keen sense of how things ought to proceed in matters like this, and the first post is by far the best place to put updates. Github is a relatively new creation, and besides, few ever bother to write a decent readme.md file for their git repository, anyway. See, for example, the SGMiner-GM github with a readme.md that is 4+ years old. Seriously?

[sundownz]

...
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.

I suppose as educated miners we have to keep all our options open. I am doing a 24-Hour test with four machines on NH to see how it comes out for me.

I certainly won't store any coins with NH but I may try their service again -- also the NEMO front-end for NH is nice as well... not so bloated like the NH software.