hsrminer - Nvidia mining software for various algos by palgin&alexkap

[Power1980A]

we really need API but exacly as ccminer, when we will run 40 rigs with this miner
plz copy API from ccminer git sourses

[1714185046]

1714185046

[1714185046]

1714185046

[1714185046]

1714185046

[1714185046]

1714185046

[ruplikminer]

we really need API but exacly as ccminer, when we will run 40 rigs with this miner
plz copy API from ccminer git sourses

I second this

[cyberdeath]

There is a bug in shr miner.
It does not support multi gpu mining, when gpu's more than 15
Example: i've choosen to mine with device number 10 but miner understood 10 as devic enumber 0
https://s9.postimg.org/l2ncemztr/10-0.png
https://s9.postimg.org/l2ncemztr/10-0.png

[jugger1028]

for two days testing the miner with GTX 1070
i found its giving fake hashrate number
i get 1300 for neoscrypt with my GTX 1070
CCminer Klaust  1250
but still the profit from nicehash if i use ccminer higher then hsrminer
i test one card for one hour with both software and the winner is ccminer Klaust
three hour also ccminer
two card for one hour and three hours also ccminer better
anyone agree with me ?
come on its close source software

Again, you can't compare miners by comparing coins mined because the difficulty can be set at 20 for one hour while using one miner and set to 2000 while using the other. Comparing miners by coins mined at different times is useless..

[Voldi]

https://imgur.com/a/ImRWF
Anyone have same problem? Only on my 70TI rigs, 80 works perfectly

[navarthelol]

Anyone have same problem? Only on my 70TI rigs, 80 works perfectly

I believe it could be that you do not have enough memory from RAM+PageFile >= Total RAM of all your GPUs.

[Voldi]

OK, i'm just dumb. Increased pagefile.sys to 64gb and it works.

[vacarosie200]

asus mining p104-4g it's not working
 INFO : [02:20:03] : GPU #3: Asus P104-100, flags: 0, 0, 0

[Voldi]

Damn, it works, but only 5-10 mins, after that i always get this error...
https://imgur.com/a/5GRuN

[loray23]

we really need API but exacly as ccminer, when we will run 40 rigs with this miner
plz copy API from ccminer git sourses

if he uses open source parts from ccminer in his closed software he must open his code, too.
Not only binary, then he must give the source for all.
just my two cents...

[al1n]

we really need API but exacly as ccminer, when we will run 40 rigs with this miner
plz copy API from ccminer git sourses

if he uses open source parts from ccminer in his closed software he must open his code, too.
Not only binary, then he must give the source for all.
just my two cents...

Strong word "must". No, he/they don't "must" do anything. There is no obligation.
Ah, should they do it? Sure. But it is entirely their choice.
I'm just happy that it works and I have more miners to choose from.
Of course there are bugs, what software doesn't have bugs after all?
I'm sure they will fix them as much as possible and as soon as they can.
Can you do it better? Then why didn't you do it until now, make a better alternative?

[zorday]

So, I did the test I mentioned earlier in the thread.

I created a QBIC wallet and picked up two different send addresses. I picked QBIC as it would generate a fair number of blocks per hour based on the history for that coin.

I have two 1080Ti cards of the same brand/spec (Gigabyte). They are exactly the same.
Both are overclocked with the same settings: +100/+400 80%

I created two batch files one using hsr_miner and one of the addresses, and one using CC-miner-Klaust and the other address. Both were directed at the same port in BSOD pool.

I started both batch jobs at the same time and let it run for 80 minutes roughly then paused for the night and carried on for another 120 minutes this morning.
Both miners behaved well although KlausT had two rejections (99.22% efficiency). There was one pool disconnect (that I noticed) but both miners experienced this and it was only during 10 seconds

The reported hash rates from each miner were :

KlausT :       1480 kH/s
hsrminer:     1790 kH/s


During these periods 58 QBIC blocks were found, and the results in earned coins were:

KlausT:       0.07451398  QBIC
hsrminer:     0.07188344 QBIC


One interesting fact is that the pool for some reason reported a somewhat higher hashrate from hsrminer during the tests, but the results were more or less at par.
I pulled out my google docs skills (quite limited ) and created the graph below.
The red line is KlausT and the blue line is hsrminer.

https://ibb.co/cSv9im

While luck certainly is a factor in these matters it seems as if the promised edge just isn't there, but perhaps a longer test is needed.
Feel free to post any objections to this test and how it can be improved.

I'm sorry but there is a VITAL piece of information you are missing. QBIC is completely unreliable source to try to benchmark against because it is always under nicehash attacks. Hashrates can go from 1ghs on a pool to 20/30 even 160 I have seen.

But why is that a parameter? If I am running both miners towards the same pool at the same time they should have the same basic preconditions right?
Aren't more or less all neoscrypt coins mined by Nicehash?

[Just_a_miner]

we really need API but exacly as ccminer, when we will run 40 rigs with this miner
plz copy API from ccminer git sourses

I second this

Check my fork, guys. New version is just out, API improved, palgin's bug with -d option fixed and more.

[Mr.Spider703]

we really need API but exacly as ccminer, when we will run 40 rigs with this miner
plz copy API from ccminer git sourses

I second this

Check my fork, guys. New version is just out, API improved, palgin's bug with -d option fixed and more.

yes, your miner is fast, but excavator is faster on neoscript
your - 3.13 Mh
excavator - 3.3 Mh
tested on 3*1060 and 1*1080
simple version

[unstreet]

neoscrypt, KlausT faster than this shit 

[stevascha]

just use klaust, this ccminer only show faked hash & no more updates

[malthrax]

just use klaust, this ccminer only show faked hash & no more updates

klaust runs like shit on my gear, and has the same quantity of "faked hash" or w/e it is you're on about.

[yrk1957]

we really need API but exacly as ccminer, when we will run 40 rigs with this miner
plz copy API from ccminer git sourses

I second this

Check my fork, guys. New version is just out, API improved, palgin's bug with -d option fixed and more.

yes, your miner is fast, but excavator is faster on neoscript
your - 3.13 Mh
excavator - 3.3 Mh
tested on 3*1060 and 1*1080
simple version

^^^ Excavator beats both hsr as well the fork.

[Just_a_miner]

yes, your miner is fast, but excavator is faster on neoscript
your - 3.13 Mh
excavator - 3.3 Mh
tested on 3*1060 and 1*1080
simple version

we are starting to compare apples to oranges here, but anyway I never was able to get higher hashrate on neoscrypt with Excavator. I gave it try again today, default settings benchmark from NiceHash miner 2.0.1.10 for single MSI GTX Gaming X 1070 pl90%/+100core/+400mem - result is 1241 kh/s. If I manually run Excavator from cuda91 folder - it gives more, about 1276 kh/s. But it is still way behind Nsrminer_neoscrypt_fork (even normal priority version) - 1322 kh/s.

You can see full hashrate compare of ccminer klaust, excavator and hsrminer_neoscrypt_fork at the 1st msg in my topic under Hashrate compare tag.

[Mr.Spider703]

yes, your miner is fast, but excavator is faster on neoscript
your - 3.13 Mh
excavator - 3.3 Mh
tested on 3*1060 and 1*1080
simple version

we are starting to compare apples to oranges here, but anyway I never was able to get higher hashrate on neoscrypt with Excavator. I gave it try again today, default settings benchmark from NiceHash miner 2.0.1.10 for single MSI GTX Gaming X 1070 pl90%/+100core/+400mem - result is 1241 kh/s. If I manually run Excavator from cuda91 folder - it gives more, about 1276 kh/s. But it is still way behind Nsrminer_neoscrypt_fork (even normal priority version) - 1322 kh/s.

You can see full hashrate compare of ccminer klaust, excavator and hsrminer_neoscrypt_fork at the 1st msg in my topic under Hashrate compare tag.

exavator Version 1.4.3 alpha NVIDIA this version faster than yours, and this is the truth