Bitcoin Forum
February 19, 2020, 01:54:00 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.19.0.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 [210]
  Print  
Author Topic: PhoenixMiner 4.9c: fastest Ethereum/Ethash miner with lowest devfee (Win/Linux)  (Read 219883 times)
Digital_Seytan
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 151
Merit: 0


View Profile
February 15, 2020, 02:46:08 PM
 #4181

i actually have a PM 4.9.c win10 with nvidia cards,users and dev a question, why does this software ask for more power almost every week to achieve about the same MHs speed, is this normal or everybody has these problems and can not do this automatically, i am tired of adapting it to every rig. greetings everyone eth/etc nicehash.
100% First Deposit Bonus Instant Withdrawals Best Odds 10+ Sports Since 2014 No KYC Asked Play Now
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
miralis
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2
Merit: 0


View Profile
February 15, 2020, 03:16:35 PM
 #4182

1 day running with a GTX 1080 Ti @ 21 MH/s and I have 410/0/0 shares. I use Coinbase as my wallet, but when do I receive the payout?

Pool = ssl://eu1.ethermine.org:5555

1) Your hashrate is ridiculously low. On default settings, with "ETHlargement pill", you should get around 45MH/s on ethash. Search the forum for the ETH pill.
edit: i did it for you: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3370685.0
2) The pool will send you payment after getting the treshold 0.05ETH as a default minimum. Read the pool's FAQ / info.
Semtex72
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 31
Merit: 0


View Profile
February 15, 2020, 10:28:06 PM
 #4183

Working with amd 20.2.1 drivers?
It works with latest drivers. However I get slightly lower performance with 20.1.3 and 20.2.1 compared to e.g. 19.x drivers for my RX 5700 cards. I do see others do not have this problem, so I wonder what they have done differently. 20.x drivers are also required for new RX 5600 Series.

It might be a phoenix miner issue as it looks much better in Claymore
I figured it out, Both Poenix and Claymore will not take the -mclock parameter anymore. Default clock is 1750.
Digital_Seytan
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 151
Merit: 0


View Profile
February 17, 2020, 01:35:14 PM
 #4184

dwarfpool is dead after 16 feb. but fee to dwarf. wait new version?

UPDATE! ETH pool is closing. Please switch to another pool by 23th February, 12:00 UTC. All balances will be paid out automatically.


 Huh dwarfpool is dead after 23 feb. but fee to dwarf. wait new version  Huh
br2459
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 185
Merit: 100


View Profile
February 17, 2020, 11:26:51 PM
 #4185

Hello all. So I am using some 5700's and I can hit 56MH/s (can hit 60MH/s but way more incorrect shares) with them but I still get a considerable amount of incorrect shares. Has anyone found an optimal setting for a better accepted/incorrect ratio? On Claymore I only get 52Mh/s but 0 rejected/incorrect shares. Maybe it is just pushed too far and I might be better off going back to Claymore..

What do you guys think?

Binary100100
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 108
Merit: 1


View Profile
February 18, 2020, 01:25:28 AM
 #4186

Hello all. So I am using some 5700's and I can hit 56MH/s (can hit 60MH/s but way more incorrect shares) with them but I still get a considerable amount of incorrect shares. Has anyone found an optimal setting for a better accepted/incorrect ratio? On Claymore I only get 52Mh/s but 0 rejected/incorrect shares. Maybe it is just pushed too far and I might be better off going back to Claymore..

What do you guys think?

I have three 5700XT cards. Reference model. This is what I use to get ~52MH/s @ ~83W each.
-mi 14 -wdog 1 -cclock 1175 -cvddc 715 -mclock 1800 -tstop 75 -tstart 60 -hstats 2 -tt -36 -mt 2

I don't think these will go much faster as is without rejected/incorrect shares.
joblo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1442
Merit: 1104


View Profile
February 18, 2020, 01:48:12 AM
 #4187

Hello all. So I am using some 5700's and I can hit 56MH/s (can hit 60MH/s but way more incorrect shares) with them but I still get a considerable amount of incorrect shares. Has anyone found an optimal setting for a better accepted/incorrect ratio? On Claymore I only get 52Mh/s but 0 rejected/incorrect shares. Maybe it is just pushed too far and I might be better off going back to Claymore..

What do you guys think?

Some miners on some algos start submitting bad shares with too much OC. If you OC back it off a bit.

Some share are stale because they were submitted too late. These are not completely unavoidable
and are exacerbated by high network latency. This should be the same with both miners.

Since Claymore doesn't produce bad shares it's a software bug. Mutiply the displayed hashrate by
the accepted share percentage/100 to get the effective hash rate and compare that to Claymore.

This assumes the displayed hashrate is not inflated as some have claimed. It seems unlikely an
unknown developer would appear on the scene and beat all the others in performance.

AKA JayDDee, cpuminer-opt developer. https://github.com/JayDDee/cpuminer-opt
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5226770.msg53865575#msg53865575
BTC: 12tdvfF7KmAsihBXQXynT6E6th2c2pByTT,
br2459
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 185
Merit: 100


View Profile
February 18, 2020, 04:45:28 AM
 #4188

Hello all. So I am using some 5700's and I can hit 56MH/s (can hit 60MH/s but way more incorrect shares) with them but I still get a considerable amount of incorrect shares. Has anyone found an optimal setting for a better accepted/incorrect ratio? On Claymore I only get 52Mh/s but 0 rejected/incorrect shares. Maybe it is just pushed too far and I might be better off going back to Claymore..

What do you guys think?

Thank you @Binary100100 and @joblo for your input. I was using a couple switches -openclLocalWork 128 -openclGlobalMultiplier 4096 which gave much higher speeds but led to a lot of incorrect shares. I re-adjusted a little bit ago and am only getting ~52MH/s per card @450W from the wall (3 cards). I think I might tinker a bit more to see if I can hit 53MH/s for each.

I was hoping that I can replace my 1070 rigs that have 6 X 1070's with just 3 X 5700's but it doesn't quite look like that can be the case. Maybe Phoenix will have some more optimizations up their sleeve to help achieve this!! ;-)

Binary100100
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 108
Merit: 1


View Profile
February 18, 2020, 11:00:46 AM
 #4189

Hello all. So I am using some 5700's and I can hit 56MH/s (can hit 60MH/s but way more incorrect shares) with them but I still get a considerable amount of incorrect shares. Has anyone found an optimal setting for a better accepted/incorrect ratio? On Claymore I only get 52Mh/s but 0 rejected/incorrect shares. Maybe it is just pushed too far and I might be better off going back to Claymore..

What do you guys think?

Thank you @Binary100100 and @joblo for your input. I was using a couple switches -openclLocalWork 128 -openclGlobalMultiplier 4096 which gave much higher speeds but led to a lot of incorrect shares. I re-adjusted a little bit ago and am only getting ~52MH/s per card @450W from the wall (3 cards). I think I might tinker a bit more to see if I can hit 53MH/s for each.

I was hoping that I can replace my 1070 rigs that have 6 X 1070's with just 3 X 5700's but it doesn't quite look like that can be the case. Maybe Phoenix will have some more optimizations up their sleeve to help achieve this!! ;-)

I'd hold onto those 1070's because if/when ETH/ETC goes PoS or ProgPow there really aren't many other coins that would be profitable to mine with the 5700 cards. At least the 1070's have a higher variety to mine with.
However on the other hand the 5700's are way more effecient on mining ETH/ETC.
Pages: « 1 ... 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 [210]
  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!