Power1980A
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 5
Merit: 0
|
|
February 07, 2018, 12:41:12 AM |
|
we really need API but exacly as ccminer, when we will run 40 rigs with this miner plz copy API from ccminer git sourses
|
|
|
|
ruplikminer
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 504
Merit: 3
|
|
February 07, 2018, 08:29:06 AM |
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
jugger1028
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 213
Merit: 3
|
|
February 07, 2018, 08:13:41 PM |
|
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..
|
Check out Trezarcoin @ Trezarcoin.com, book +VIP hotel stays with -20% discounts from Expedia by using $TZC to Pay, TrezarTravels.com to learn more!
|
|
|
Voldi
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 11
Merit: 0
|
|
February 07, 2018, 09:35:28 PM |
|
https://imgur.com/a/ImRWFAnyone have same problem? Only on my 70TI rigs, 80 works perfectly
|
|
|
|
navarthelol
Member
Offline
Activity: 133
Merit: 11
|
|
February 07, 2018, 10:18:51 PM |
|
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
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 11
Merit: 0
|
|
February 08, 2018, 12:40:59 AM |
|
OK, i'm just dumb. Increased pagefile.sys to 64gb and it works.
|
|
|
|
vacarosie200
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 45
Merit: 0
|
|
February 08, 2018, 01:01:35 AM |
|
asus mining p104-4g it's not working INFO : [02:20:03] : GPU #3: Asus P104-100, flags: 0, 0, 0
|
|
|
|
Voldi
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 11
Merit: 0
|
|
February 08, 2018, 02:08:17 AM |
|
Damn, it works, but only 5-10 mins, after that i always get this error... https://imgur.com/a/5GRuN
|
|
|
|
loray23
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 21
Merit: 0
|
|
February 08, 2018, 06:14:41 AM |
|
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
Member
Offline
Activity: 154
Merit: 29
|
|
February 08, 2018, 06:52:15 AM |
|
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
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 19
Merit: 0
|
|
February 08, 2018, 09:31:18 AM |
|
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/cSv9imWhile 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
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 325
Merit: 2
|
|
February 08, 2018, 11:14:34 AM |
|
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.
|
More Epochs Mod of Claymore ETH Miner v15: Epochs 385+ works now! https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5305046
|
|
|
Mr.Spider703
Member
Offline
Activity: 392
Merit: 27
http://radio.r41.ru
|
|
February 08, 2018, 11:48:56 AM Last edit: February 08, 2018, 12:20:34 PM by 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
|
|
February 08, 2018, 06:10:05 PM |
|
neoscrypt, KlausT faster than this shit
|
|
|
|
stevascha
Member
Offline
Activity: 312
Merit: 10
|
|
February 09, 2018, 12:54:27 AM |
|
just use klaust, this ccminer only show faked hash & no more updates
|
|
|
|
malthrax
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 182
Merit: 0
|
|
February 09, 2018, 02:14:01 AM |
|
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
Member
Offline
Activity: 531
Merit: 29
|
|
February 09, 2018, 02:20:49 AM |
|
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
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 325
Merit: 2
|
|
February 09, 2018, 07:57:05 AM |
|
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.
|
More Epochs Mod of Claymore ETH Miner v15: Epochs 385+ works now! https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5305046
|
|
|
Mr.Spider703
Member
Offline
Activity: 392
Merit: 27
http://radio.r41.ru
|
|
February 09, 2018, 10:59:14 AM |
|
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
|
|
|
|
|