[ANN] profit switching auto-exchanging pool - www.middlecoin.com

[Panteraswift]

I have yet to see two absolutely identical mining rigs. The manufacturing variances between examples of individual components make it nearly imposible. They may be very close, but not quite identical.

Very close is easy, I'm just still setting up the majority of them. Very close should work for comparison testing.

Granted. I usually see a difference of around 1 to 5 % difference between otherwise identical rigs. I try to take the differences into account when comparison testing so the results make sense.

On the two rigs that are being used for this test (running over 2 hours now) the average hashrate is exactly the same, down to the third decimal place.

I usually try to match not only hashrate but also Work Utility. In my opinión, WU its the real indicator of the performance of the rig. I have seen the exact same hashrate at two different GPU speeds, yet the utility was quite different between the two.

[HumbleMiner]

So, help me understand what happens with "inactive" accounts. I've decided to switch from one wallet to another on 01/08, got last payment to my old wallet on that date and now it shows 0.00598752 balance. If I understand it correctly today is the day this account was supposed to get paid the remainder of the balance (7 days not being paid + today is Wednesday), right? The daily payout went through for all accounts with > 0.01 balance, but I haven't received mine. Am I missing something obvious? I know, it's about $5, but still ...

The chart (http://www.middlecoin.com/reports/1vgf8yeEpr3BtqiFzjMRjaD1eS8DD6Vsj.html) doesn't reflect the latest balance, but the list does.

Any ideas?

[gtraah]

Hey guys, I am at work and dont have access to my rig and I have looked atht states and mt hashrate has dropped 300-500 KHS is something going on?  Has ther servers shutdown , up and down etc etcf???

[willittobe]

I have yet to see two absolutely identical mining rigs. The manufacturing variances between examples of individual components make it nearly imposible. They may be very close, but not quite identical.

Very close is easy, I'm just still setting up the majority of them. Very close should work for comparison testing.

Granted. I usually see a difference of around 1 to 5 % difference between otherwise identical rigs. I try to take the differences into account when comparison testing so the results make sense.

On the two rigs that are being used for this test (running over 2 hours now) the average hashrate is exactly the same, down to the third decimal place.

I usually try to match not only hashrate but also Work Utility. In my opinión, WU its the real indicator of the performance of the rig. I have seen the exact same hashrate at two different GPU speeds, yet the utility was quite different between the two.

Good point.

WU variance between the two as of right now stands at 1.35%

[dgross0818]

I'm very curious as to what you discover :]

As long as your WU numbers are fairly close (within a percent or two) then it shouldn't make a big difference.

In the two "test" subjects from the other page, the payout discrepancy was much greater than a percent or two.

[willittobe]

I'm very curious as to what you discover :]

As long as your WU numbers are fairly close (within a percent or two) then it shouldn't make a big difference.

In the two "test" subjects from the other page, the payout discrepancy was much greater than a percent or two.

Yep, should be interesting.

The payout discrepancy for Bob and Frank was certainly noticeable.

But of course what really motivates me is my own poor results... we shall see. I'll certainly share the findings.

[Ioqua]

Great payouts the last couple of days but it looks to be sliding today.

Which are the beta servers people are talking about, I must have missed that page?

[ButterBread]

A little something I made for TamperMonkey (Greasemonkey for Chrome)

Thank you very much!

Would you be willing to put it up somewhere so we can use the automatic update url for the script, just in case you ever update it?

[zoonosis]

someone asked for the new cgminer from veox so i got looking and he just made a new one called sgminer i compiled it for the person asking for it and figure i will post it for you guys sence this is the pool i mine on and been helping when somthing needs to be compiled.

https://litecointalk.org/index.php?topic=13190.15
http://bal3wolf.centelia.net/MINING/sgminer%204.0.zip

I downloaded your sgminer zip file but chrome blocked it.
Said it was malicious 

[aclass]

I'm very curious as to what you discover :]

As long as your WU numbers are fairly close (within a percent or two) then it shouldn't make a big difference.

In the two "test" subjects from the other page, the payout discrepancy was much greater than a percent or two.

Yep, should be interesting.

The payout discrepancy for Bob and Frank was certainly noticeable.

But of course what really motivates me is my own poor results... we shall see. I'll certainly share the findings.

At least for the first day or so you can post results more often... we are all very interested to see them

[drakoin]

A little something I made for TamperMonkey (Greasemonkey for Chrome) that hides everybody elses' info after the page loads...I also had it replace the footer with the server update time converted to your system's timezone.

beautiful. thank you very much. I sent you a small small tip for that. Really useful script.

Is there a chance to hide everything before the whole page is loaded?


--- --- ----------
Are you interested in lowering your power consumption?
.

[RickJamesBTC]

I'm very curious as to what you discover :]

As long as your WU numbers are fairly close (within a percent or two) then it shouldn't make a big difference.

In the two "test" subjects from the other page, the payout discrepancy was much greater than a percent or two.

Yep, should be interesting.

The payout discrepancy for Bob and Frank was certainly noticeable.

But of course what really motivates me is my own poor results... we shall see. I'll certainly share the findings.

At least for the first day or so you can post results more often... we are all very interested to see them

Don't post specific results, don't want to corrupt the test with the possibility of the pool op giving them special treatment.    tin foil hats!

[Oden]

Hey all. I've been on this pool a long time, haven't compared numbers in quite a while.

However the recent "let's talk about payout" caught my interest, as people reporting .01/mh or even .015/mh are way outperforming me. Like, up to 2x, that is considerable and a little worrying. I'm averaging something like 0.0075/mh.

So I poked around a little.

Here's two different users, for example:

This guy, let's call him Bob, has a steady 19 mh/s or so, and has been around since Dec 16th-
http://www.middlecoin.com/reports/1ACruk5rrJmGTkP7UyyoqGDLNZTHzkqviY.html

And this dude, Let's call him Frank, has slightly less, maybe 18 average, and just started mining on the 7th-
http://www.middlecoin.com/reports/1FxziX77LiZLZxhdXMWREMQVMyjbDmCubw.html

So these are roughly comparable hashrates, with comparable reject ratios, but Frank (the newer, slower miner) is absolutely trouncing Bob on the payouts.

WTF is going on here?
(And yes, I know all the usual explanations, but I don't think any of them actually apply to this specific example)

Hello there.
Let me put down my thoughts on this but first I need to address that I am very new on this "mining" scene.

All of you, measure your hashrate as one unit and then you start calculations and compare graphs.
I think this is completely wrong. Each card has a x hashrate. Middlecoin has a fixed vardiff at 512.
This mean that a low hashrate card will be very difficult to have shares against a fast card.
So, having this in mind, consider that Bob has some rigs with many low hashrate cards while Frank has less and faster cards.
On some coins Frank will have share faster than Bob before the coin switch.
Another example is that for 3-5min Bob lose connectivity or has more rejects than Frank but in this time-frame we mine the most uber profitable coin ever.
Frank will have more shares than Bob even on 3 hours average graphs gives the same hashpower.

My conclusion, with so many vars you cant handle/investigate/guess why Frank earns more than Bob or the opposite.

I hope I am not wrong. Thanks.

[Caze]

Hello there.
Let me put down my thoughts on this but first I need to address that I am very new on this "mining" scene.

All of you, measure your hashrate as one unit and then you start calculations and compare graphs.
I think this is completely wrong. Each card has a x hashrate. Middlecoin has a fixed vardiff at 512.
This mean that a low hashrate card will be very difficult to have shares against a fast card.
So, having this in mind, consider that Bob has some rigs with many low hashrate cards while Franks has less and faster cards.
On some coins Frank will have share faster than Bob before the coin switch.
Another example is that for 3-5min Bob lose connectivity or has more rejects than Frank but in this time-frame we mine the most uber profitable coin ever.
Frank will have more shares than Bob even on 3 hours average graphs looks the same hashpower.

My conclusion, with so many vars you cant handle/investigate/guess why Frank earns more than Bob or the opposite.

I hope I am not wrong. Thanks.

Sad to say but you are wrong. The hashrate displayed on the pool is calculated from the amount of shares accepted so if the pool shows a similar hashrate between two people, it means they have submitted about the same amount of shares. Hence, they are submitting shares at about the same rate.

What comes to the uber profitable coin it could certainly be true if we only looked at a very small time frame but we are infact comparing several days. There is no uber coin in existence that could create a 10-30% difference in 3 to 5 minutes, not even if there were several of these situations as Bob still has a higher overall hashrate.

[bigblind]

I'd say the rejects on middlecoin are very serverrelated. Except for the bigger holes that are in there.

I mean look at my graph for the past week, looks like picasso tried to paint new art while he was drunk.




Rejects are from day to day very very different for me..

I'm running 2x R9 290 atm. on ~830 Kh/s each.

[Oden]

Sad to say but you are wrong. The hashrate displayed on the pool is calculated from the amount of shares accepted so if the pool shows a similar hashrate between two people, it means they have submitted about the same amount of shares. Hence, they are submitting shares at about the same rate.

What comes to the uber profitable coin it could certainly be true if we only looked at a very small time frame but we are infact comparing several days. There is no uber coin in existence that could create a 10-30% difference in 3 to 5 minutes, not even if there were several of these situations as Bob still has a higher overall hashrate.

Oh thanks for the clarification.

[Ioqua]

Looks like the bubble burst today

[ButterBread]

Looks like the bubble burst today

Turns out it was a boil, not a pimple.

[okimzti]

I'd say the rejects on middlecoin are very serverrelated. Except for the bigger holes that are in there.

I mean look at my graph for the past week, looks like picasso tried to paint new art while he was drunk.

Rejects are from day to day very very different for me..

I'm running 2x R9 290 atm. on ~830 Kh/s each.

what server you using?  I use EU.middlecoin.com:3333 and have had no issues (I am U.S. based)

[webbson]

Seems like everything flatlined again.