### A ChainWorks Industries (CWI) Project - CWIgm | Simple Powerful Stable

[zhulick]

x6 rig still running strong... lost track of how many hours.  timer on the miner says 31+ hours connected, but that's connected, not uptime.  that number was reset when the stratum was restarted yesterday.  the rig has been on much longer than that.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CPU:0.47%          ChainWorks Industries beta - Version 0.9.8         [13:43:46]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Algo:Skunk      | Port: 2000 | NetDiff: 25775.4            | Block:      36587 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coin:signatum   | POW: 1250  | Estimated coins/day: 208.527                    |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Solved:   0 | Diff:     1.24 | Shares: 7201.34 | Rej: 0.476656% | Speed:  175.89
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.EVGA GTX 1070              : Shares: 1179.31 | Rej: 8.63 | Speed:   29.17MH/s|
1.EVGA GTX 1070              : Shares: 1216    | Rej: 6.34 | Speed:   29.25MH/s|
2.EVGA GTX 1070              : Shares: 1246.42 | Rej: 7.48 | Speed:   29.38MH/s|
3.EVGA GTX 1070              : Shares: 1133.75 | Rej: 3.06 | Speed:   28.99MH/s|
4.EVGA GTX 1070              : Shares: 1183.82 | Rej: 5.31 | Speed:   29.52MH/s|
5.EVGA GTX 1070              : Shares: 1242.04 | Rej: 3.67 | Speed:   29.58MH/s|
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.EVGA GTX 1070              : T:56C | F:59% | P:108W | I: 24.0 | Core:1911Mhz |
1.EVGA GTX 1070              : T:57C | F:60% | P:106W | I: 24.0 | Core:1910Mhz |
2.EVGA GTX 1070              : T:50C | F:50% | P:106W | I: 24.0 | Core:1915Mhz |
3.EVGA GTX 1070              : T:56C | F:59% | P:107W | I: 24.0 | Core:1892Mhz |
4.EVGA GTX 1070              : T:52C | F:53% | P:106W | I: 24.0 | Core:1926Mhz |
5.EVGA GTX 1070              : T:53C | F:55% | P:107W | I: 24.0 | Core:1928Mhz |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[13:42:49]Mean netDiff: 20588.7        | [05:43:25][GPU1]:Job not found (=stale
[13:42:50]Share: 731073ab              | )
[13:43:09]Mean netDiff: 20924          | [06:18:32][GPU5]:Invalid nonce
[13:43:14]Share: e506d387              | [06:48:45][GPU4]:Job not found (=stale
[13:43:16]Share: c5c65036              | )
[13:43:18]Share: f8a636ba              | [10:35:23][GPU0]:Invalid nonce
[13:43:28]Share: 689d1a76              | [10:42:12][GPU2]:Invalid nonce
[13:43:39]Mean netDiff: 21210.4        | [12:18:14][GPU4]:Invalid nonce
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

everything looks good

yesterday i pulled my smaller rigs (2 x1's and 1 x2 for a total of 4) out and pointed them at suprnova using the kmlx miner.  

in the last 24 hours my 4 gpu's pointed there earned me 110 and change coins.  suprnova reports 92.5 percent luck for the day.

in the same 24 hours my 6xgpu rig pointed here earned 224 and change coins.  pool reports luck of 107.5 percent.

so, i earned 110/4=27.5 coins per gpu on suprnova, and 224/6=37.3 coins per gpu here.

now, this is by faaaaar not a "scientific" test in any way.  the x6 gpu rig is inherently much more efficient then an armada of small rigs, and i would've probably done better with it per gpu on suprnova vs smaller rigs.  so again - not science here, just an observation using the equipment i happen to have on hand.

as  "unscientific" as they are, these results are encouraging.  there is a big difference percentage wise between 27.5 and 37.3.  and this is despite the fact that suprnova had almost a 14 percent advantage in luck (92.5 vs 107.5).  

my second x6gpu rig (an identical clone of the first) should be up and running by end of the week, so it would be interesting to do this again with the "twin" rigs and have all variables be equal.  but for now, especially considering that this is a beta miner running on a pool that could really use some tweaking, the results are pretty impressive

again, not a scientific test in any way, so draw your own conclusions...

[sundownz]

I am interested in trying this miner.

I currently have ~2 GH of power across 24 computers (1060s, 1070s, 1080s, and one 1080 Ti) on SIGT on the ccminer.org pool using the krnlx miner.

[cryptoinvestor_x]

Currently testing intensity 26 on 1080's and 1080ti's, seems to squeeze a bit more hash

25.5 seems optimal for 1070's, 26 causes instability

[abudfv2008]

What is a problem with setting correct difficulty to a rig?
I think the best shares ratio is 5-6 shares per minute. So 1 share each 10-12seconds. It is a sweet spot. No problems with handling it and the same time it is enough for hashrate accuracy (5minutes average should equalize fluctuations)
So what is the problem of setting diff for the miner considering how many shares where received from it for the past 1-2-5 minutes?

In case there are too many miners you always can lower it by including miners quantity in the formula somehow

P.S. I see that you are working on it. And now it is 0.97 even for 6*1080. But again all rigs got this diff. No more no less

[ekiller]

Should I use  --lodiff   for  6x    GTX  1070   ?

[Brucelats]

Should I use  --lodiff   for  6x    GTX  1070   ?

I think so, not using --lodiff can be for bigger farms. Altough i am dumb haha and have no clue how this difficulty works etc xD. But i have rigs with 7x gtx 1070 and i use --lodiff.


Also i am not sure what intensity does. I mean using i=22 give me more coins per day then i=25 on my Zotac AMP! Extreme Gtx 1070 x7 Rig. Shouldnt i=25 give best results?

[Leass]

Results from my 24h with 2x 1080ti MSI Gaming X


Really enjoy using CWIgm, looking forward to future development and adding more algos (Personally betting for timetravel ^^)
Thanks for great work!

[guzi4guzi]

very stable work with -i 23   3 x MSI GTX 1060 6 GB . Tested with intensity 24 and 25 but working unstable, many reject

https://i.imgur.com/a/DesqV

[abudfv2008]

Also i am not sure what intensity does. I mean using i=22 give me more coins per day then i=25 on my Zotac AMP! Extreme Gtx 1070 x7 Rig. Shouldnt i=25 give best results?

Intensity is like using more RAM by app. If you have enough you will be able to run with this intensity. BUT when it is close to your limit - then you have stability issues, and slower hashrate - consider it to be like swapping to HDD.
It's not correct, but i think easier to understand the idea.

[restless]

Is there a way to see all current/default parameters?

Request for feature:
- key for graceful exit of the program

So far very smooth operation on 3x1060, intensity 24, power limit 90, core +100, mem -200, trying -400 atm.
Power usage ~ 100W

I use AB (4.4.beta15 i think) for overclocking and power limit. The strange part is that different cards differently do the power limit:
` of these almost strictly never goes above power limit, the other one is "bouncing" between 80 and 100% (limit 90), third is verystrictly following the limit - going 86-91...

How to reach 80w usage? making power limit even lower?
@100W, speeds are 20.2MH for 6gb, 18-18.2 for 3GB cards

And the interface is nice looking

[igotek]

I want to be a beta tester. I have 4 NVIDIA rigs.

[ZUBR64]

Tribus
GTX 970 - 26 MGH
GTX 1060 3gb - 34 MGH
GTX 1070 - 54 MGH
GTX 1080 - 71 MGH
GTX 1080 ti - 97 MGH

some problem
1- lines broken after some time or window resize
2- sometime "job not found"
3- bad working with 2 active miner.
4- waiting more algoritms

[Boriss]

                     _________          __  ________
                     \_   ___ \__  _  _|__|/  _____/  _____
                   / /    \  \/\ \/ \/ /  /   \  ___ /     \
          _________\ \     \____\     /|  \    \_\  \  Y Y  \  __________
                      \______  / \/\_/ |__|\______  /__|_|  / /
                             \/                   \/      \/ /
                        VC++ 2013 and CUDA 8.0 x64 384.94
CPU:0.42%          ChainWorks Industries beta - Version 0.9.8         [10:32:52]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Algo:Skunk      | Port: 2000 | NetDiff: 15564.2            | Block:      37425 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coin:signatum   | POW: 1250  | Estimated coins/day: 141.194                    |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Solved:   0 | Diff:     0.28 | Shares: 11.2    | Rej: 0.621118% | Speed:  102.77
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.MSI GTX 1080               : Shares: 4.83    | Rej: 0    | Speed:   33.33MH/s|
1.MSI GTX 1080               : Shares: 4.13    | Rej: 0.07 | Speed:   34.40MH/s|
2.MSI GTX 1080               : Shares: 2.24    | Rej: 0    | Speed:   34.75MH/s|
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.MSI GTX 1080               : T:57C | F:57% | P:114W | I: 24.0 | Core:1632Mhz |
1.MSI GTX 1080               : T:54C | F:55% | P:114W | I: 24.0 | Core:1670Mhz |
2.MSI GTX 1080               : T:55C | F:55% | P:113W | I: 24.0 | Core:1682Mhz |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PowerLimit 55, Core and Mem +150

[asdtrader]

                     _________          __  ________
                     \_   ___ \__  _  _|__|/  _____/  _____
                   / /    \  \/\ \/ \/ /  /   \  ___ /     \
          _________\ \     \____\     /|  \    \_\  \  Y Y  \  __________
                      \______  / \/\_/ |__|\______  /__|_|  / /
                             \/                   \/      \/ /
                        VC++ 2013 and CUDA 8.0 x64 378.78
CPU:   0%          ChainWorks Industries beta - Version 0.9.8         [11:49:31]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Algo:Skunk      | Port: 2000 | NetDiff: 16477.2            | Block:      37555 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coin:signatum   | POW: 1250  | Estimated coins/day: 458.918                    |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Solved:   0 | Diff:     0.97 | Shares: 3494.99 | Rej: 0.331943% | Speed:  308.06
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.GeForce GTX 1080 Ti        : Shares: 566.06  | Rej: 0.97 | Speed:   49.57MH/s|
1.GeForce GTX 1080 Ti        : Shares: 566.81  | Rej: 2.91 | Speed:   49.75MH/s|
2.ASUS GTX 1080 Ti           : Shares: 608.45  | Rej: 2.91 | Speed:   52.22MH/s|
3.GeForce GTX 1080 Ti        : Shares: 551.3   | Rej: 1.94 | Speed:   49.69MH/s|
4.EVGA GTX 1080 Ti           : Shares: 593.36  | Rej: 1.94 | Speed:   53.37MH/s|
5.EVGA GTX 1080 Ti           : Shares: 609.01  | Rej: 0.97 | Speed:   52.97MH/s|
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.GeForce GTX 1080 Ti        : T:62C | F:90% | P:204W | I: 24.0 | Core:1736Mhz |
1.GeForce GTX 1080 Ti        : T:64C | F:94% | P:205W | I: 24.0 | Core:1743Mhz |
2.ASUS GTX 1080 Ti           : T:60C | F:86% | P:223W | I: 24.0 | Core:1857Mhz |
3.GeForce GTX 1080 Ti        : T:64C | F:96% | P:210W | I: 24.0 | Core:1741Mhz |
4.EVGA GTX 1080 Ti           : T:61C | F:89% | P:240W | I: 24.0 | Core:1890Mhz |
5.EVGA GTX 1080 Ti           : T:64C | F:96% | P:235W | I: 24.0 | Core:1868Mhz |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[11:47:53]Share: 2573e037              | [10:15:24][GPU3]:Job not found (=stale
[11:48:14]Mean netDiff: 16878.4        | )
[11:48:17]Share: 2029b133              | [10:18:31][GPU4]:Job not found (=stale
[11:48:18]Mean netDiff: 16879.5        | )
[11:48:44]Share: 08e9a7fe              | [11:00:25][GPU2]:Invalid nonce
[11:49:14]Share: cdf9dba7              | [11:12:03][GPU2]:Invalid nonce
[11:49:28]Share: b3d683e1              | [11:19:23][GPU4]:Job not found (=stale
[11:49:30]Share: 4ef3c864              | )
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scan time: 30s | DCs: 0 | User:asdtrader | Conn:0d 13:40:20 | Latency:43ms

[Leass]

Does solved in GUI means that my rig solved a block? (if so, did it generated last share that confirms block or it generated valid diff share that confirms block?)

[morcus]

Hello,

I am not able to use the --lodiff option.
When the option is enabled, I am not able to connect to the stratum server as shown on the following picture:
https://image.prntscr.com/image/e_FqjE1xRGCA_1z2Wd_YgA.png

When the option is disabled, the miner is working just fine:
https://image.prntscr.com/image/NJpBks29SBKBznSljxUCsA.png

I also tried to mine on CWI pool using ccminer instead of cwi miner:
- lodiff port 2000 can't connect
- hidiff port 6000 work perfectly fine

Do you know what can block me using the lodiff port?

[sparker327]

besides trying to get better hashrates, I also work to get my power output as low as I can without sacrificing those rates. I just received access this morning and am working on optomizing this, for those who are interested. I see most miners just crank up power as high as they can and get to work. I've crank mine up as well but it seems as though this particular miner runs a bit hotter than some other ones, even though I do this on all the miners I have used.

I know some of you arent interested in the power output but for those who are I'm hoping this assist in your testing.

the system Im testing on uses one card. I have another with mulitple cards but I like testing and optimizing on the one card before applying those to mulitple cards (seems to work well for me)

Nvidia Geforce GTX1070, 8GB, samsung memory
Nvidia driver ver 384.76
Video BIOS ver 86.04.50.00.23
CUDA Driver ver 9.0.103
WIN 10, 64bit Build 15063
Intel Core i5-7400 @ 3.00 GHz
8GB DDR4 2400mhz

The screen shot shows getting around 28 MH/s with power at 70% (102 watts). I try to get between 92-97 watts without sacrificing hash rates but depending on miner takes some time to tweak. When I can get power down more with the same or better rates I'll post but this is just my first tweak. I know it shows low shares but I let it run for 30 minutes after taking that shot and the hash rate is still the same, between 27.8 - 28.2.

[Real_Unhooked]

Hello,

I am not able to use the --lodiff option.
When the option is enabled, I am not able to connect to the stratum server as shown on the following picture:


When the option is disabled, the miner is working just fine:


I also tried to mine on CWI pool using ccminer instead of cwi miner:
- lodiff port 2000 can't connect
- hidiff port 6000 work perfectly fine

Do you know what can block me using the lodiff port?

I am running 4 x 1070s and I don't use any flags. It does mine on 6000 do takes longer to submit a share but the share has more value compared to ones you would submit using a lo diff port.

[pikatju]

Any chance that the pool can send an email notification if a worker goes offline?

[uhro]

I just got in an the rates are really good... couple requests/questions I have would be:
1. Some kind of exit from the miner, pressing x in the top right of the window seems to be my only option
2. Are we going to be able to point this miner at other pools eventually?
3. What kind of time frame do you have on adding algos like, equihash, lbry, lyra2Rev2, etc...?