Bitcoin Forum
June 18, 2021, 03:21:48 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.21.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 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 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 [91] 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 ... 457 »
  Print  
Author Topic: PhoenixMiner 5.6d: fastest Ethereum/Ethash miner with lowest devfee (Win/Linux)  (Read 663257 times)
j2james
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 80
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 15, 2018, 09:25:59 AM
 #1801

I got this problem twice; In both cases when searching for maximum stable mem freq I can push the 1070 gpus.
Currently running stable at:
  Core: -200 (minus 200)
  Mem: 765
  Power Limit: 59
  Hashing: 32.770 MH/s

Do not understand how your 1070s work on these settings. With PL 59 for my 1070 hasrate is very not stable. When I setted MC 750, after some seconds I had 719 error and reboot. CC -200 also makes hashrate unstable. Now I'm testing PL +64, CC -100, MC +670 with power 750W and avg hashrate per card 32.06 (about 192.4 per 6 cards). So all my changes of previous OC settings is changing CC from +0 to -100.
1623986508
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1623986508

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1623986508
Reply with quote  #2

1623986508
Report to moderator
1623986508
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1623986508

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1623986508
Reply with quote  #2

1623986508
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1623986508
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1623986508

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1623986508
Reply with quote  #2

1623986508
Report to moderator
1623986508
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1623986508

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1623986508
Reply with quote  #2

1623986508
Report to moderator
dohfish
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 65
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 15, 2018, 10:16:17 AM
 #1802

I got this problem twice; In both cases when searching for maximum stable mem freq I can push the 1070 gpus.
Currently running stable at:
  Core: -200 (minus 200)
  Mem: 765
  Power Limit: 59
  Hashing: 32.770 MH/s

Do not understand how your 1070s work on these settings. With PL 59 for my 1070 hasrate is very not stable. When I setted MC 750, after some seconds I had 719 error and reboot. CC -200 also makes hashrate unstable. Now I'm testing PL +64, CC -100, MC +670 with power 750W and avg hashrate per card 32.06 (about 192.4 per 6 cards). So all my changes of previous OC settings is changing CC from +0 to -100.

Not all cards are the same, overclock potential will be different between models, individual chips etc so you basically need to be lucky aswell.
crypper
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 239
Merit: 12


View Profile
May 15, 2018, 02:01:29 PM
 #1803

I've been using claymore for my RX X80s for over a year now. Decided to give phoenix a go...and I'm damn happy I did: slight improvement in hashrate at the same clocks and power and significant reduction in stale shares! I've been suffering from 5-15% stales (ethermine.org) since Byzantium fork in 2017. With phoenix I have <1% stales.
Great job, man.

Retraction of my previous statement: number of stale shares is marginally lower than claymore's. During the first few hours of running phoenix I indeed had <1% of stales; number increased with time though and as of now I'm back to 5-10% stales.
Bad job, man!
pinamalina
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 47
Merit: 1


View Profile
May 15, 2018, 05:37:29 PM
 #1804

I've been using claymore for my RX X80s for over a year now. Decided to give phoenix a go...and I'm damn happy I did: slight improvement in hashrate at the same clocks and power and significant reduction in stale shares! I've been suffering from 5-15% stales (ethermine.org) since Byzantium fork in 2017. With phoenix I have <1% stales.
Great job, man.

Retraction of my previous statement: number of stale shares is marginally lower than claymore's. During the first few hours of running phoenix I indeed had <1% of stales; number increased with time though and as of now I'm back to 5-10% stales.
Bad job, man!

Your 5-10% stale share is arguably bad. With the PH 2.9e, migrated from Claymore 11.5 my stale share rate is slightly higher than on Claymore yet still in the range of 1-3% - varies from day to day.
Stale share is sensitive not only to the miner code but also on the quality of your network speed and latency. Shares are accepted in 40-42ms in my case. What is yours? What is your ping to your pool? Here is what I have:
C:\Program Files\NVIDIA Corporation\NVSMI>ping eu1.ethermine.org

Pinging eu1.ethermine.org [46.105.121.53] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 46.105.121.53: bytes=32 time=59ms TTL=54
Reply from 46.105.121.53: bytes=32 time=42ms TTL=54
Reply from 46.105.121.53: bytes=32 time=41ms TTL=54
Reply from 46.105.121.53: bytes=32 time=41ms TTL=54

Ping statistics for 46.105.121.53:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 41ms, Maximum = 59ms, Average = 45ms

Connect a rig to network using wired connection (avoid wireless at any cost). Make sure you are not using switches/APs that introduce unexpected latency.
crypper
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 239
Merit: 12


View Profile
May 15, 2018, 06:40:33 PM
 #1805

I've been using claymore for my RX X80s for over a year now. Decided to give phoenix a go...and I'm damn happy I did: slight improvement in hashrate at the same clocks and power and significant reduction in stale shares! I've been suffering from 5-15% stales (ethermine.org) since Byzantium fork in 2017. With phoenix I have <1% stales.
Great job, man.

Retraction of my previous statement: number of stale shares is marginally lower than claymore's. During the first few hours of running phoenix I indeed had <1% of stales; number increased with time though and as of now I'm back to 5-10% stales.
Bad job, man!

Your 5-10% stale share is arguably bad. With the PH 2.9e, migrated from Claymore 11.5 my stale share rate is slightly higher than on Claymore yet still in the range of 1-3% - varies from day to day.
Stale share is sensitive not only to the miner code but also on the quality of your network speed and latency. Shares are accepted in 40-42ms in my

could you please explain to a noob (me) the difference between network speed and network latency? Huh
pinamalina
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 47
Merit: 1


View Profile
May 15, 2018, 07:06:13 PM
 #1806

I've been using claymore for my RX X80s for over a year now. Decided to give phoenix a go...and I'm damn happy I did: slight improvement in hashrate at the same clocks and power and significant reduction in stale shares! I've been suffering from 5-15% stales (ethermine.org) since Byzantium fork in 2017. With phoenix I have <1% stales.
Great job, man.

Retraction of my previous statement: number of stale shares is marginally lower than claymore's. During the first few hours of running phoenix I indeed had <1% of stales; number increased with time though and as of now I'm back to 5-10% stales.
Bad job, man!

Your 5-10% stale share is arguably bad. With the PH 2.9e, migrated from Claymore 11.5 my stale share rate is slightly higher than on Claymore yet still in the range of 1-3% - varies from day to day.
Stale share is sensitive not only to the miner code but also on the quality of your network speed and latency. Shares are accepted in 40-42ms in my

could you please explain to a noob (me) the difference between network speed and network latency? Huh

You will get the best answer if you Google: network latency definition.
roptix
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 6
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 15, 2018, 10:27:27 PM
 #1807

Hello all - could really use some help here.

I switched from Claymore 11.6 to PhoenixMiner 2.9e due to the DAG and MSWindows 10 issues that prevent the nVidia 1060 3GB cards from working.  However for the last 3 weeks I have been getting an illegal memory error:

 GPU10 CUDART error in CudaProgram.cu:127 : an illegal memory access was encountered (77)
2018.05.15:15:13:00.328: GPU11 CUDA error in CudaProgram.cu:102 : an illegal memory access was encountered (700)

To be clear, I can no longer get the nVidia 1060 cards to work with Claymore or PhoenixMiner on ETH or PIRL....

OC'ing the cards seems to be a common cause, but I'm not OCing the cards, I can't even get to the point of doing that...


Rig:

ASRosk HTC110 Mobo
3 AMD 570 gpus
8 nVidia 1060 3 GB GPUs
8 GB RAM
250 GB HD

nvidia driver 376.09 (I've tried 397.64, 397.31 and 388.59)
Virtual Memory - minimum set to 60,000, max set to 160,000.
Set to mine PIRL

2018.05.15:15:12:51.882: main Phoenix Miner 2.9e Windows/msvc - Release
2018.05.15:15:12:51.882: main Cmd line: -pool stratum+tcp://us-west.pirlpool.eu:8002 -wal 0xac1CbCB36704BD0BE0A773cDAFE98c72a70707e2 -pass x -worker CocoSpency -eres 0 -lidag 2
2018.05.15:15:12:56.054: main Available GPUs for mining:
2018.05.15:15:12:56.056: main GPU1: Radeon RX 570 Series (pcie 1), OpenCL 2.0, 4 GB VRAM, 32 CUs
2018.05.15:15:12:56.056: main GPU2: GeForce GTX 1060 3GB (pcie 2), CUDA cap. 6.1, 3 GB VRAM, 9 CUs
2018.05.15:15:12:56.056: main GPU3: GeForce GTX 1060 3GB (pcie 3), CUDA cap. 6.1, 3 GB VRAM, 9 CUs
2018.05.15:15:12:56.056: main GPU4: GeForce GTX 1060 3GB (pcie 4), CUDA cap. 6.1, 3 GB VRAM, 9 CUs
2018.05.15:15:12:56.056: main GPU5: GeForce GTX 1060 3GB (pcie 5), CUDA cap. 6.1, 3 GB VRAM, 9 CUs
2018.05.15:15:12:56.056: main GPU6: Radeon RX 570 Series (pcie Cool, OpenCL 2.0, 4 GB VRAM, 32 CUs
2018.05.15:15:12:56.056: main GPU7: GeForce GTX 1060 3GB (pcie 9), CUDA cap. 6.1, 3 GB VRAM, 9 CUs
2018.05.15:15:12:56.056: main GPU8: Radeon RX 570 Series (pcie 11), OpenCL 2.0, 4 GB VRAM, 32 CUs
2018.05.15:15:12:56.056: main GPU9: GeForce GTX 1060 3GB (pcie 12), CUDA cap. 6.1, 3 GB VRAM, 9 CUs
2018.05.15:15:12:56.056: main GPU10: GeForce GTX 1060 3GB (pcie 13), CUDA cap. 6.1, 3 GB VRAM, 9 CUs
2018.05.15:15:12:56.056: main GPU11: GeForce GTX 1060 3GB (pcie 14), CUDA cap. 6.1, 3 GB VRAM, 9 CUs
....
2018.05.15:15:12:57.540: eths Eth: Received: {"id":5,"jsonrpc":"2.0","result":["0xba59fa1663dc115be208375f438f043e803c155ca857d96f214b11bf619d853f","0xd6a8400b7f4cc5e082e8239662ed0ee7162892f74016107a7586195f4d591efb","0x0225c17d04dad2965cc5a02a23e254c0c3f75d9178046aeb27ce1ca574"]}
2018.05.15:15:12:57.541: eths Eth: New job #ba59fa16 from us-west.pirlpool.eu:8002; diff: 2000MH
2018.05.15:15:12:57.542: GPU2 GPU2: Starting up... (0)
2018.05.15:15:12:57.542: GPU2 Eth: Generating light cache for epoch #46
2018.05.15:15:12:57.544: GPU3 GPU3: Starting up... (0)
2018.05.15:15:12:57.546: GPU4 GPU4: Starting up... (0)
2018.05.15:15:12:57.548: GPU5 GPU5: Starting up... (0)
2018.05.15:15:12:57.550: GPU7 GPU7: Starting up... (0)
2018.05.15:15:12:57.552: GPU9 GPU9: Starting up... (0)
2018.05.15:15:12:57.554: GPU10 GPU10: Starting up... (0)
2018.05.15:15:12:57.556: GPU11 GPU11: Starting up... (0)
2018.05.15:15:12:57.558: GPU1 GPU1: Starting up... (0)
2018.05.15:15:12:57.560: GPU6 GPU6: Starting up... (0)
2018.05.15:15:12:57.562: GPU8 GPU8: Starting up... (0)
2018.05.15:15:12:59.482: GPU4 GPU4: Allocating DAG for epoch #46 (1.36) GB
2018.05.15:15:12:59.608: GPU4 GPU4: Allocating light cache buffer (21.7) MB; good for epoch up to #46
2018.05.15:15:12:59.652: GPU2 GPU2: Allocating DAG for epoch #46 (1.36) GB
2018.05.15:15:12:59.716: GPU2 GPU2: Allocating light cache buffer (21.7) MB; good for epoch up to #46
2018.05.15:15:12:59.874: GPU9 GPU9: Allocating DAG for epoch #46 (1.36) GB
2018.05.15:15:12:59.894: GPU10 GPU10: Allocating DAG for epoch #46 (1.36) GB
2018.05.15:15:12:59.949: GPU2 GPU2: Generating DAG for epoch #46
2018.05.15:15:12:59.958: GPU10 GPU10: Allocating light cache buffer (21.7) MB; good for epoch up to #46
2018.05.15:15:12:59.959: GPU9 GPU9: Allocating light cache buffer (21.7) MB; good for epoch up to #46
2018.05.15:15:13:00.111: GPU11 GPU11: Allocating DAG for epoch #46 (1.36) GB
2018.05.15:15:13:00.113: GPU4 GPU4: Generating DAG for epoch #46
2018.05.15:15:13:00.130: GPU7 GPU7: Allocating DAG for epoch #46 (1.36) GB
2018.05.15:15:13:00.158: GPU11 GPU11: Allocating light cache buffer (21.7) MB; good for epoch up to #46
2018.05.15:15:13:00.226: GPU10 GPU10: Generating DAG for epoch #46
2018.05.15:15:13:00.276: GPU9 GPU9: Generating DAG for epoch #46
2018.05.15:15:13:00.285: GPU7 GPU7: Allocating light cache buffer (21.7) MB; good for epoch up to #46
2018.05.15:15:13:00.328: GPU10 CUDART error in CudaProgram.cu:127 : an illegal memory access was encountered (77)
2018.05.15:15:13:00.328: GPU11 CUDA error in CudaProgram.cu:102 : an illegal memory access was encountered (700)
2018.05.15:15:13:00.329: GPU10 GPU10 initMiner error: an illegal memory access was encountered
2018.05.15:15:13:00.329: GPU11 GPU11 initMiner error: an illegal memory access was encountered
2018.05.15:15:13:00.332: GPU7 CUDA error in CudaProgram.cu:102 : an illegal memory access was encountered (700)
2018.05.15:15:13:00.332: GPU7 GPU7 initMiner error: an illegal memory access was encountered
2018.05.15:15:13:00.347: GPU2 CUDART error in CudaProgram.cu:127 : an illegal memory access was encountered (77)


Would welcome any thoughts, I can't seem to find any solutions online.

Russell
lesjokolat
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 115
Merit: 3


View Profile
May 15, 2018, 11:39:46 PM
 #1808

Hello all - could really use some help here.

I switched from Claymore 11.6 to PhoenixMiner 2.9e due to the DAG and MSWindows 10 issues that prevent the nVidia 1060 3GB cards from working.  However for the last 3 weeks I have been getting an illegal memory error:

 GPU10 CUDART error in CudaProgram.cu:127 : an illegal memory access was encountered (77)
2018.05.15:15:13:00.328: GPU11 CUDA error in CudaProgram.cu:102 : an illegal memory access was encountered (700)

To be clear, I can no longer get the nVidia 1060 cards to work with Claymore or PhoenixMiner on ETH or PIRL....

OC'ing the cards seems to be a common cause, but I'm not OCing the cards, I can't even get to the point of doing that...

Would welcome any thoughts, I can't seem to find any solutions online.

Russell

do you have at least 19 gig virtual memory on your system, might be a reason if its too little.
roptix
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 6
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 16, 2018, 02:36:17 AM
 #1809

Hello all - could really use some help here.

I switched from Claymore 11.6 to PhoenixMiner 2.9e due to the DAG and MSWindows 10 issues that prevent the nVidia 1060 3GB cards from working.  However for the last 3 weeks I have been getting an illegal memory error:

 GPU10 CUDART error in CudaProgram.cu:127 : an illegal memory access was encountered (77)
2018.05.15:15:13:00.328: GPU11 CUDA error in CudaProgram.cu:102 : an illegal memory access was encountered (700)

To be clear, I can no longer get the nVidia 1060 cards to work with Claymore or PhoenixMiner on ETH or PIRL....

OC'ing the cards seems to be a common cause, but I'm not OCing the cards, I can't even get to the point of doing that...

Would welcome any thoughts, I can't seem to find any solutions online.

Russell

do you have at least 19 gig virtual memory on your system, might be a reason if its too little.

I've actually set Virtual Memory as:  - minimum set to 60,000, max set to 160,000

And I'm fine not mining ETH, I can't mine PIRL either right now, which is the real conundrum as it's DAG should easily be supported by the 3GB cards.
singlass
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 63
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 16, 2018, 04:59:35 AM
 #1810

the legendary AMD 15.12 driver triggers the debuging error,make some sort of exception / fix in your next release
b3ny97
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 21
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 16, 2018, 05:53:04 AM
 #1811

I got this problems, what's the cause?

2018.05.16:13:33:53.550: main Eth speed: 333.457 MH/s, shares: 27/0/0, time: 0:03
2018.05.16:13:33:53.550: main GPUs: 1: 29.921 MH/s (5) 2: 31.603 MH/s (2) 3: 29.485 MH/s (3) 4: 29.812 MH/s (0) 5: 31.637 MH/s (4) 6: 29.763 MH/s (2) 7: 29.825 MH/s (0) 8: 29.976 MH/s (3) 9: 29.846 MH/s (0) 10: 29.941 MH/s (7) 11: 31.648 MH/s (1)
2018.05.16:13:33:53.967: GPU2 CUDA error in CudaProgram.cu:264 : unknown error (999)
2018.05.16:13:33:53.967: GPU5 CUDA error in CudaProgram.cu:264 : unknown error (999)
2018.05.16:13:33:53.967: GPU2 GPU2 search error: unknown error
2018.05.16:13:33:53.967: GPU5 GPU5 search error: unknown error
2018.05.16:13:33:53.967: GPU1 CUDA error in CudaProgram.cu:264 : unknown error (999)
2018.05.16:13:33:53.967: GPU1 GPU1 search error: unknown error
2018.05.16:13:33:53.967: GPU4 CUDA error in CudaProgram.cu:264 : unknown error (999)
2018.05.16:13:33:53.967: GPU4 GPU4 search error: unknown error
2018.05.16:13:33:53.967: GPU11 CUDA error in CudaProgram.cu:264 : unknown error (999)
2018.05.16:13:33:53.967: GPU11 GPU11 search error: unknown error
2018.05.16:13:33:53.987: GPU7 CUDA error in CudaProgram.cu:264 : unknown error (999)
2018.05.16:13:33:53.987: GPU7 GPU7 search error: unknown error
2018.05.16:13:33:54.003: GPU10 CUDA error in CudaProgram.cu:264 : unknown error (999)
2018.05.16:13:33:54.003: GPU10 GPU10 search error: unknown error
2018.05.16:13:33:54.003: GPU8 CUDA error in CudaProgram.cu:264 : unknown error (999)
2018.05.16:13:33:54.003: GPU8 GPU8 search error: unknown error
2018.05.16:13:33:54.003: GPU3 CUDA error in CudaProgram.cu:264 : unknown error (999)
2018.05.16:13:33:54.003: GPU3 GPU3 search error: unknown error
2018.05.16:13:33:54.004: GPU9 CUDA error in CudaProgram.cu:264 : unknown error (999)
2018.05.16:13:33:54.004: GPU9 GPU9 search error: unknown error
2018.05.16:13:33:54.004: GPU6 CUDA error in CudaProgram.cu:264 : unknown error (999)
2018.05.16:13:33:54.004: GPU6 GPU6 search error: unknown error
2018.05.16:13:33:54.766: wdog Thread(s) not responding. Restarting.
crypper
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 239
Merit: 12


View Profile
May 16, 2018, 08:07:22 AM
 #1812

I've been using claymore for my RX X80s for over a year now. Decided to give phoenix a go...and I'm damn happy I did: slight improvement in hashrate at the same clocks and power and significant reduction in stale shares! I've been suffering from 5-15% stales (ethermine.org) since Byzantium fork in 2017. With phoenix I have <1% stales.
Great job, man.

Retraction of my previous statement: number of stale shares is marginally lower than claymore's. During the first few hours of running phoenix I indeed had <1% of stales; number increased with time though and as of now I'm back to 5-10% stales.
Bad job, man!

Your 5-10% stale share is arguably bad. With the PH 2.9e, migrated from Claymore 11.5 my stale share rate is slightly higher than on Claymore yet still in the range of 1-3% - varies from day to day.
Stale share is sensitive not only to the miner code but also on the quality of your network speed and latency. Shares are accepted in 40-42ms in my

could you please explain to a noob (me) the difference between network speed and network latency? Huh

You will get the best answer if you Google: network latency definition.

Yeah... no, thanks, I will probably not google, but you should. It's always good to understand what you are talking about (even on the internet).
cryptodunno
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 308
Merit: 10


View Profile
May 16, 2018, 11:24:31 AM
 #1813

after a few weeks tests i really like phoenixminer, stale shares are much less comparing the others.
IT would be great to see linux version in nearest future

Erpelusas
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 11
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 16, 2018, 01:01:24 PM
 #1814

Will phoenix miner be implemented in hive os?
En@Ble
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 10
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 16, 2018, 02:11:28 PM
 #1815

Dev when will new coins appear? such as Egem,Clo ? Huh
DireWolfM14
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1134
Merit: 2283


Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!


View Profile
May 16, 2018, 02:37:14 PM
 #1816

I would love me some nice juicy and fat linux version Cheesy
    Yes, but hopefully not that fat Smiley There is some progress on this but no ETA yet, sorry.


Yes, please keep it lean.  Wink  I love windows, shameless about it, too.  But for a "process pc" nothing beats a minimalist linux build.

esunga903
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 17, 2018, 01:12:56 AM
 #1817

Hi phoenix, I have tried your miner and it is very good except for the one that I can't set a single GPU to 50% usage so I can still used it for editing and gaming. At claymore i can do that, any help would be greatly appreciated.
janding
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 140
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 17, 2018, 01:34:34 AM
 #1818

Hi phoenix, I have tried your miner and it is very good except for the one that I can't set a single GPU to 50% usage so I can still used it for editing and gaming. At claymore i can do that, any help would be greatly appreciated.

Hilarious  Cheesy
gambera
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 18
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 17, 2018, 02:15:04 AM
 #1819

Quote

Hilarious  Cheesy


Isn't it?  Cheesy


My recommendation to that user would be, do your editing and gaming and then dedicate the card just for mining. 
Metroid
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1582
Merit: 326


Xtreme Monster


View Profile
May 17, 2018, 02:17:19 AM
 #1820

so how can we make the fans here to work the same as claymore? any ideas? if i set -tt 60 and -fanmax 90 in claymore, as long the temperature is higher than -tt 60, the -fanmax 90 will always be at 90%, if temperature is 50c then the fan in claymore is around 0% and jumps to 50% and then 0% again, so how this miner can work the same?

BTC Address: 1DH4ok85VdFAe47fSVXNVctxkFhUv4ujbR
Pages: « 1 ... 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 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 [91] 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 ... 457 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!