Bitcoin Forum
June 25, 2018, 01:23:36 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.16.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 [36] 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN] Bminer: a fast Equihash/Ethash/Tensority miner for CUDA GPUs (9.0.0)  (Read 43820 times)
od1n
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 25
Merit: 1


View Profile
February 06, 2018, 07:54:52 AM
 #701

Can you share your batch file for bminer on flypool? I cant get it to work on flypool for some reason. Also, what cards are you using?
Thanks for the Test-setup.  Grin


BTW: Did anyone notice, that bminer-thread in z.cash Forum was closed? --- SCAM?
https://forum.z.cash/t/new-miner-bminer-a-fast-equihash-miner-for-cuda-gpus-5-1-0/26197

Quote
ShawnModerator12d
Beware: OP has been Banned for creating multiple sock-puppet accounts to promote this miner.

I wouldn’t trust software from someone who uses deceptive techniques. Links have been removed from original post.

Sock puppet accounts are against the Code of Coduct: https://forum.z.cash/faq40

Thread is closed.
The World's Betting Exchange

Bet with play money. Win real Bitcoin. 5BTC Prize Fund for World Cup 2018.

Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1529889816
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1529889816

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1529889816
Reply with quote  #2

1529889816
Report to moderator
1529889816
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1529889816

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1529889816
Reply with quote  #2

1529889816
Report to moderator
1529889816
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1529889816

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1529889816
Reply with quote  #2

1529889816
Report to moderator
spoonminer
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 23
Merit: 0

1070 miner


View Profile
February 06, 2018, 09:32:03 AM
 #702

Can you share your batch file for bminer on flypool? I cant get it to work on flypool for some reason. Also, what cards are you using?
Thanks for the Test-setup.  Grin


BTW: Did anyone notice, that bminer-thread in z.cash Forum was closed? --- SCAM?
https://forum.z.cash/t/new-miner-bminer-a-fast-equihash-miner-for-cuda-gpus-5-1-0/26197

Quote
ShawnModerator12d
Beware: OP has been Banned for creating multiple sock-puppet accounts to promote this miner.

I wouldn’t trust software from someone who uses deceptive techniques. Links have been removed from original post.

Sock puppet accounts are against the Code of Coduct: https://forum.z.cash/faq40

Thread is closed.

Thanks for pointing that out. Too bad they closed it. Was interested in where the conversation was going at the end of the thread about how where IP's were being pointed (especially "104.31.69.221:443 - www.bminer.me (looks like telemetry from miner to author)"). Wonder if it is still the same and what happens if it is blocked.
LoraineLY
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 43
Merit: 0


View Profile
February 06, 2018, 09:43:17 AM
 #703

I have eight mining rigs. Each has 6 GPUs (1070s and 1080Tis). I usually mine on nanopool. If anyone tells me how to set up a test. I can do it as well to provide more data points. I am curious which miner is faster for me to use as well, bminer or dstm.

Should I just put 4 machines on bminer and 4 machines on dstm? I am too lazy to tune OC settings of each machine. Can I just make the test two rounds. Switch the machines of bminer and dstm in the next round?
realbminer
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 175
Merit: 16


View Profile WWW
February 06, 2018, 10:27:29 AM
 #704

@MagicSmoker

- Flypool reports 24h hashrate right there in the graph. It's the rightmost orange dot or the value reported at the top for average, e.g. https://i.gyazo.com/2026ef989969e01c7003d854512bedc5.png (the orange dot is better because you can read it with 2 decimals more or less, the value at the top only gives you a single decimal)

- Luckpool only gives you a 12h average, which is shit (and all miner stats are lost when their GUI goes down, which it does almost daily), it's the small number at the bottom of the first box: https://i.gyazo.com/611445b6a74f35539321d1adf621be35.png

To all of you: Please STOP using Luckpool. You're aware that it gives a full coin to the block finder (that "jackpot" shit they have), and reduces the payout for everyone else, right (block finder gets 1 ZEN, everyone else shares only 10 ZEN instead of 11 ZEN)? This advantages the large miners. You will lose profits with it unless you have a large hashrate larger than the majority and you mine for very long periods uninterrupted. Don't listen to the idiots who claim that everyone has the same chance to find a block and get the jackpot. That only holds if *everyone* mines an infinite amount of time. Otherwise, guess who will find more blocks per unit time, and who is more likely to leave the pool before they find a block? Anyone with some statistics background can see the scam behind this. If that bullshit were true, casinos would be going bankrupt, instead of thriving (they have more money than you).

Go build your own cuda miner

Awww, isn't that cute. There had to be someone who'd resort to the fabulous and very constructive argument of "do it yourself if you don't like it" ... sounds like you're either a genius who can do everything and needs nobody or are content with everything thrown at you. If you're happy paying bminer 2% despite some suspicions of fraud, good for you. Some of us aren't. Some of us care about frauds being exposed if they are indeed frauds.

Fraudulent behaviors will not get you very far and it hurts the community. That's not what I'm interested in.

I see that the relationships between miners and developers are partnerships -- the mission of the developers of bminer is to bring the best mining software to the community. The miners can benefit from a faster and more reliable miner.

There are significant amount of users that are actively using bminer and getting more payouts from the pools every single day. That's the value that bminer brings to the community and that's what I care about. If there are bugs that prevent you to get the maximal benefits from the hardware then I'm more than happy to look into it and try to fix them for you.

To the technical points, there are some confusions about the connections to api.bminer.me. I explained a few times that bminer will request runtime and licensing information from time to time. It might be a better idea to add it explicitly to the LICENSE file, I'll try to do it in the next release.

Bminer is a relatively new miner and I understand that it might not get the benefits of doubts. I can assure that there are no fraudulent behaviors in the miners, it is always difficult to claim or verify the statements given that it is close-source miners. The argument not only applies to bminer, but also any closed-source miners, including dstm, Claymore, and EWBF. If there are no mutual trusts between miners and developers then FUDs can fly around -- therefore I think it is always a good idea to test whether the miner works well for you. At the end of the day the important thing is to mine more efficiently.

I would suggest not using bminer, or any other miners if you don't trust them or you do not agree with the LICENSE file. There are slightly slower, but solid implementations for EquiHash miners available (e.g., kudos to nheq). While I'm trying hard to make the miner work well for you as many other users, at the end of the day it is always important to find the miners that work best for you and you're comfortable with (e.g., open-source miners).

When Crypto-mining Made Fast. @realbminer on TWTR
od1n
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 25
Merit: 1


View Profile
February 06, 2018, 10:35:13 AM
 #705

Okay, comparison #3 started about 20 minutes ago concurrently mining ZEC on Flypool using a fixed difficulty of 10000 (by using the switch "-p 10000").

If you like watching paint dry then you will surely love to check on the status of the miners:

dstm: https://zcash.flypool.org/miners/t1aoQJwvJqYT32xHVpYezWBxKuxPSwaJB1h
bminer: https://zcash.flypool.org/miners/t1dU7Gve41A3b4mxL7a3oVAnBLsF9kMgDgA

I created these two addresses just for this test so they are starting from 0.
dstm catches up. After beeing some steps behind its now close up.
MagicSmoker
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 210
Merit: 55


View Profile
February 06, 2018, 11:10:04 AM
 #706

What you just experienced is the "lovely" PPLNS payout scheme (each block is different in length and each miner gets different shares in) ... like I said, you really should stop looking at payouts - when doing such short term tests, and with such low hashrates.

I'm pretty sure I understand how PPLNS works: you get credited for your last n shares, where n is fixed but the time this window lasts varies depending on the average time to find a block. If a pool consistently finds a block every few minutes (less than 5, let's say) and the share difficulty is fixed, then there shouldn't be more than a +/- 0.5% difference in earnings between two separate but identical miners. If I understand this incorrectly please, please correct me because all of my tests depend on this rather than counting shares because the latter is not possible/practical at many pools and I want to use a testing methodology that is consistent whether I am evaluating Neoscrypt miners or Ethash, etc. For example, on Flypool it looks like I have to total up all the blue bars then subtract the orange bars then normalize my share difficulty to 1000 (e.g. - if I set 10000 then I need to divide the share count in the bars by 10, as I got 1/10th the shares which are 10x more valuable).

EDIT: 10k difficulty is too high for a single card ... you'd introduc more variability like this. You want frequent shares, but not too frequent. Lower diff such that the average share submission time you see reported by the miner is around 5 seconds if you have a good ping to flypool (< 50 ms) or 10 seconds if your ping to flypool is closer to 100 ms

Ping time is 16ms average, which is the best of any pool I've used. I aim for under 100ms, but I've even had decent results with Zergpool and my ping time to their server is 147ms average (I'm in Florida, they're in Latvia).

Difficulty of 10k is just about right for 550 Sols/s if one is not conducting a mining test, but I agree it should be lower. The thing is, I found a post on the Zcash forum by someone who was having trouble setting difficulty on Flypool, saying that it kept resetting to 8k no matter what, and someone else replied that this was because the minimum had been increased to 8k even though the website still says it is 2k. See here: https://forum.z.cash/t/zcash-flypool-difficulty/14147/8. Since I can't change Flypool's rules and I can't buy more GPUs even if I were willing to sell my non-existent first born child this appears to be the best I can do right now.
MagicSmoker
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 210
Merit: 55


View Profile
February 06, 2018, 11:18:05 AM
 #707

Just a thought... What if one card performs better than the other? (Silicon lottery). Will you interchange miners for those cards on your next experiment?

I did do that when I ran a Neoscrypt miner test because one of the miners can't tolerate nearly as much overclocking, but for this test what I did was run one of the miners on both machines for a few minutes then tweak the MSI AB settings so that reported hashrate was the same for that miner regardless of which machine it ran on.

*If* we can all agree on a *practical* test methodology here (ie - one that doesn't involve me buying lots more GPUs at 2x MSRP) and the difference in earnings/shares/whatever is less than 1% after 24 hours then for the next iteration I will flip the machines the miners are running on at the 12 hour mark so that any remaining difference in GPU speed will get cancelled out.

But like I said, we need to be realistic about test conditions here. I don't have a mining farm, but I do have a willingness to test in as scientific a manner as possible and that seems to be strangely absent here.
MagicSmoker
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 210
Merit: 55


View Profile
February 06, 2018, 11:19:48 AM
 #708

Okay, comparison #3 started about 20 minutes ago concurrently mining ZEC on Flypool using a fixed difficulty of 10000 (by using the switch "-p 10000").

If you like watching paint dry then you will surely love to check on the status of the miners:

dstm: https://zcash.flypool.org/miners/t1aoQJwvJqYT32xHVpYezWBxKuxPSwaJB1h
bminer: https://zcash.flypool.org/miners/t1dU7Gve41A3b4mxL7a3oVAnBLsF9kMgDgA

I created these two addresses just for this test so they are starting from 0.
dstm catches up. After beeing some steps behind its now close up.

Yes, I've noticed that too each time I've done this test. Bminer starts off strong but then settles down after a few hours, while dstm seems to take a few hours to ramp up to speed.
Elisaly
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 17
Merit: 0


View Profile
February 06, 2018, 11:37:22 AM
 #709

after all this posts

i think it fair to say that Bminer is n't the prefer one to mining Equihash VS DSTM

Right?
Andrey09
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 104
Merit: 0


View Profile WWW
February 06, 2018, 01:57:22 PM
 #710

dstm 0.5.8:    https://zcash.flypool.org/miners/t1aoQJwvJqYT32xHVpYezWBxKuxPSwaJB1h
bminer 5.3.0:  https://zcash.flypool.org/miners/t1dU7Gve41A3b4mxL7a3oVAnBLsF9kMgDgA


0.00540 ZEC DSTM vs 0.00543 ZEC Bminer

Total immanature+balance

Bminer a bit better on 0.55% Wink))

What cards are used for compare? (x1 1070) vs (x1 1070) ? what average speed im miner windows?

Fork from enthusiasts, for the community.
★ ANON Website - www.anonymousbitcoin.io
★ ANON Telegram - t.me/anonymousbitcoin
xyburcoin
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 184
Merit: 100


View Profile
February 06, 2018, 02:06:27 PM
 #711

after all this posts

i think it fair to say that Bminer is n't the prefer one to mining Equihash VS DSTM

Right?

After weeks of switching mining software. I now prefer Bminer.

LoraineLY
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 43
Merit: 0


View Profile
February 06, 2018, 02:09:37 PM
 #712

dstm: https://zcash.flypool.org/miners/t1aoQJwvJqYT32xHVpYezWBxKuxPSwaJB1h
bminer: https://zcash.flypool.org/miners/t1dU7Gve41A3b4mxL7a3oVAnBLsF9kMgDgA


0.00540 ZEC DSTM vs 0.00543 ZEC Bminer

Total immanature+balance

Bminer a bit better on 0.55% Wink))

What cards are used for compare? (x1 1070) vs (x1 1070) ?

The part I really cannot understand is that why flypool shows better hashrate for dstm but less payout?

Anyway, it seems to me that the difference is really within the margin of error. So it does not matter which one we use then?
MagicSmoker
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 210
Merit: 55


View Profile
February 06, 2018, 02:10:22 PM
 #713

dstm 0.5.8:    https://zcash.flypool.org/miners/t1aoQJwvJqYT32xHVpYezWBxKuxPSwaJB1h
bminer 5.3.0:  https://zcash.flypool.org/miners/t1dU7Gve41A3b4mxL7a3oVAnBLsF9kMgDgA


0.00540 ZEC DSTM vs 0.00543 ZEC Bminer

Total immanature+balance

Bminer a bit better on 0.55% Wink))

What cards are used for compare? (x1 1070) vs (x1 1070) ?

Both cards are plain GTX 1080 (not Ti) that I tuned with MSI AB so that bminer has the same hashrate on either card (or, conversely, that dstm has the same hashrate on either card).

MagicSmoker
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 210
Merit: 55


View Profile
February 06, 2018, 02:12:14 PM
 #714

The part I really cannot understand is that why flypool shows better hashrate for dstm but less payout?

Anyway, it seems to me that the difference is really within the margin of error. So it does not matter which one we use then?

This may be due to variations in luck on per-share basis, as @cryptoyes has been harping on (and which I simply can't do anything about given my present circumstances).

But yes, the variation seems to be quite small at this point. Still about 5 hours to go, though.

cryptoyes
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 171
Merit: 10


View Profile
February 06, 2018, 02:44:30 PM
 #715

I keep saying "stop looking at payouts" but nobody listens ... oh well. I also said that such a petty hashrate will probably never give you reliable results ... oh well.

The two miners show 504 H/s and 529 H/s respectively so far in favor of DSTM, and while 25 H/s represents 5% of 500 H/s, in absolute terms this is totally within margin of error due to pool variations, share luck, PPLNS, choice of seeds for nonces that each miner makes, etc.

Also, the high jumps in hashrate in the graphs on suggest you're using a difficulty that is a bit too high and that your share submit time is not 5-10 seconds on average (see my previous post where I described this). I don't think you adjusted difficulty so that share submit time is 5-10 seconds.

There was a reason why I said I'd like to finalize my proxy software and release it. This week I'm too busy though.

Out of curiosity, what does DSTM and bminer report as average rates? I bet bminer says about 5% higher, right?

EDIT: someone said they have larger rigs they would be willing to use to test this. Please see my previous post: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2519271.msg29688244#msg29688244 where I describe a methodology. Use Flypool. Use "10000" as your password when connecting to Flypool, which is the fixed difficulty you want, then adjust it after 5 minutes (and repeat) so that you get 5-10 seconds share submit time. Once you get that, let it run for 24h and read off the average hashrate of each miner from Flypool. Make sure the rigs are indeed identical, i.e. bminer/dstm reports the same hashrate on tboth. See my post for details.
LoraineLY
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 43
Merit: 0


View Profile
February 06, 2018, 03:16:11 PM
 #716


EDIT: someone said they have larger rigs they would be willing to use to test this. Please see my previous post: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2519271.msg29688244#msg29688244 where I describe a methodology. Use Flypool. Use "10000" as your password when connecting to Flypool, which is the fixed difficulty you want, then adjust it after 5 minutes (and repeat) so that you get 5-10 seconds share submit time. Once you get that, let it run for 24h and read off the average hashrate of each miner from Flypool. Make sure the rigs are indeed identical, i.e. bminer/dstm reports the same hashrate on tboth. See my post for details.


I have eight rigs with a total of 48 GPUs. Could I do the test on nanopool? My connections to flypool really sucks with infrequent but annoying package drops.

At the end of the day, I do not care the hash rate reported by miners. I am not accusing bminer numbers being fraudulent, but there is simply no way for us to know how miners report hash rates. The developer of bminer confirmed that the hash rate of bminer contains everything the hardware computed (accepted, rejected, and devfee). Other miners may count hash rate differently.

For me bminer shows roughly 3.5%-4% higher than dstm on my 1070. But if I take out the 2% devfee + whatever rejected rate I get, the difference between two is very close. My hypothesis is that dstm only counts accepted shares?

I will do a larger scale experiment with my eight rigs in nanopool to see which one works better for me. Trying to figure out which one is faster is so hard, especially when the difference is probably within 1% or 2%.
cryptoyes
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 171
Merit: 10


View Profile
February 06, 2018, 03:23:04 PM
 #717

Right. Point of procedure for anyone who has some more potent hashrate.

1. 2 rigs. Have 2 identical rigs that can do 3-5 kH/s each or so ... the more the better, but too much would entail variability between cards and higher likelihood of crashes. I wouldn't use more than 10 kH/s on this. EDIT: it looks like a 3kh/s rig should be able to get a 5 second share submission time on Flypool (see below).

2. Throttling. make sure the rigs don't throttle. This is very important. Either increase fans speed, or make the room cooler, or decrease TDP. dstm and bminer may also stress the cards differently, though I doubt it (if yes, then sure, I'd prefer the miner that stresses the gpu less but gets me the same hashrate).

Watch the temperature and stay below 60C if you can. NVIDIA gpus start throttling when the temperature is greater than 60C (trust me). Decrease TDP if the reported temperature is >59C. This is only for testing (you can increase your TDP back up after you're done). Memory and GPU overclock do not affect temperatures almost at all. TDP is virtually the only factor.

2a. Stability and comparability. Decrease gpu and memory MHz overclocking, and also TDP to make sure the rigs are stable (this is only a test and you want it to be reliable) and adjust gpu/mem/tdp on each rig such that dstm reports the same hashrate on both. That is, launch dstm and let it run for 5 minutes. It should report the same average hashrate on both rigs. In dstm, it's the right hand value on the totals line (not the left hand value that jumps around all the time). You really must ensure this, otherwise any results would be skewed ...

3. Difficulty. Start with difficulty DIF=10000. Choose a pool that allows you to set the difficulty, like Flypool (Nanopool does not! They fix the difficulty and you can't set it). Choose the pool server closest to you. Flypool allows you to choose between 4 locations (eu1, us1, cn1, asia1) and is a very reliable pool.

3a. now take one of the rigs and connect to flypool using bminer (not dstm) using
Code:
-uri stratum://<your_zcash_wallet_address>.diftest:<DIF>@eu1-zcash.flypool.org:3333 -gpucheck 30
, where DIF is the difficulty you set. This sets a fixed difficulty of DIF. Let it run for 5 minutes. bminer will report the number of accepted shares and number of rejected shares. Add the two values to get a total "N". Then compute the total number of seconds "SEC" for the mining session by subtracting the first timestamp reported by bminer from the last timestamp reported by bminer. Compute T=SEC/N (average share submission rate).

The goal is to get a 5-10 second share rate, i.e. 1 share submitted every 5-10 seconds. Lower is better as it means the hashrate at the pool will be more stable, but you don't want it too low because then ping times and other factors begin to matter. I would aim for 5 seconds if you have a good ping (<50ms), and up to 10 seconds if you have a bad ping. You can adjust the share time via the difficulty. If you see bminer submitting shares visibly faster than once every 5 seconds, then you need to increase difficulty. Specifically:

3b. If after 5 minutes T < 5, increase difficulty to DIF=20000 and go to step 3a. If T is a lot smaller than 5, then increase difficulty by more than double.

3c. If after 5 minutes T > 10, decrease difficulty to DIF=5000 and go to step 3a.

3d. If after 5 minutes 5 < T < 10, then you're good to go and can start the 24h test.

4. 24h test I would create new zcash wallet addresses for the final test, rather than use the same. Then you can share them with us without us seeing your past income and transactions. Then fire up both rigs at the same time, one with dstm, one with bminer, like so:
Code:
./bminer -uri stratum://<zcash_BMINER_wallet_address>.bminer:<DIF>@eu1-zcash.flypool.org:3333 -logfile bminer.log
Code:
./zm --server eu1-zcash.flypool.org --port 3333 --user <zcash_DSTM_wallet_address>.dstm --pass <DIF> --time --logfile dstm.log

5. Finish. After 24h, stop. Upload bminer.log and dstm.log separately on pastebin.com. I'd be interested to check them out.

6. If you're worried about losing profits because you don't want to mine Zec or because you decreased your overclock for 24h then you probably shouldn't run this test (you also maybe, just maybe,  shouldn't really be mining in the first place).

Have fun.

p.s. If you want to use only a subset of cards from each rig, e.g. only cards 0,1,2,3, then add "--dev 0 1 2 3" for dstm, and "-devices 0,1,2,3" for bminer.
MagicSmoker
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 210
Merit: 55


View Profile
February 06, 2018, 03:34:56 PM
 #718

I keep saying "stop looking at payouts" but nobody listens ... oh well. I also said that such a petty hashrate will probably never give you reliable results ... oh well.

It's not that I don't agree with you - you explained yourself very well - it's that I simply can't do anything about the low hashrate. Sorry, unless more 1080's magically appear at Newegg for longer than 10 seconds and don't cost 2x MSRP I'm not going to be getting any more any time soon. I do have a 6x GTX 1060 rig, but even if I could assign 3 cards to each miner (don't think bminer lets you do this) that would get to ~900 sols/s hashrate for each, so not even twice as much.

So I realize my test is not *perfect* but as the old saying goes, don't let perfect be the enemy of the good.

As for counting shares vs. payout, please tell me how to extract that data from Flypool as I am not familiar with it and so far it looks like I have to add up all of the bars on the graph. That's a bit of a pain, really.

Also, the high jumps in hashrate in the graphs on suggest you're using a difficulty that is a bit too high and that your share submit time is not 5-10 seconds on average (see my previous post where I described this). I don't think you adjusted difficulty so that share submit time is 5-10 seconds.

Correct, average time per share is around 45 seconds. But just like I can't buy any more 1080s right now, Flypool really does seem to have 8000 as a lower limit on difficulty; I already tried setting it to 2000 and the share rate barely changed.

Out of curiosity, what does DSTM and bminer report as average rates? I bet bminer says about 5% higher, right?

Bminer is consistently reporting 550 Sols/s while dstm is a little less consistently reporting 530 Sols/s (that is to say, dstm's hashrate bounces around a lot more than bminer's).
MagicSmoker
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 210
Merit: 55


View Profile
February 06, 2018, 03:39:40 PM
 #719

6. If you're worried about losing profits because you don't want to mine Zec or because you decreased your overclock for 24h then you probably shouldn't run this test (you also maybe, just maybe,  shouldn't really be mining in the first place).

Now that was uncalled for. I wasn't worried about losing profits from mining ZEC, rather, I think it is inferior to ZEN. Why mine a coin I don't think is the best in its class (equihash anonymous payments)?

Really, let's try to keep the snark out of the discussion.
cryptoyes
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 171
Merit: 10


View Profile
February 06, 2018, 03:45:15 PM
 #720

I posted a detailed methodology above.

Perfect vs good is not the issue here. The issue is that you may be reporting skewed numbers which people would believe and choose the wrong miner as a consequence (you may also be unfair to one of the miners).

Yes, you can assign subsets of GPUs to miners. See the p.s. in my post above.

Flypool displays the accepted shares under the hashrate graph (the bars). You can hover your mouse over each and you'd see the exact number. That's going to be misleading though as each share has different difficulty. It's bloody HASHRATE at the pool that i kept saying matters for this test (even though payout is what you care about). Well, effective hashrate, i.e. after discarding invalid/stale shares.

It seems bminer gives more invalid/stale shares than other miners. Counting the ones you got so far (orange bars in FLypool), i see 96 invalid shares (normalized) for bminer, and 16 for dstm.

You are looking at the wrong number in dstm ... dstm does a full average on the right hand side, which stabilizes over time (doesn't jump around).

Quote
Why mine a coin I don't think is the best in its class
That's precisely why I wrote point 6 ... but it wasn't addressed to you (you already proved that you cared about testing and already invested time in it). If that's the only bit in my methodology post that you had comments on, then it's probably far better written than I thought Smiley and it would be a shame if it was buried in a flurry of replies.

p.s. Incidentally, ZEC has been more profitable to mine than all other equihash coins lately (it's one of the very few coins that had an uptrend during the ongoing onslaught of cryptos, check it out).
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 [36] 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!