PhoenixMiner 6.2c: fastest Ethereum/Ethash miner with lowest devfee (Win/Linux)

[Iamtutut]

I do not see the interest of passing to this minor!

1% more I see no difference in hash!

voici mes hash avec une 1080


24.8 hash !

lol

No interest ? Check the devfee. Same hashrate, lower devfee.
Still you see no interest ?

[flatounet]

i think answers will be no ,

This is not something a miner can predict. It can't distinguish between software fault (bad overclock, buggy drivers) and hardware issue (bad riser, cat unplugged the riser cable, housefire, apocalypse).
The only thing you can do is to set -rmode 2 and make reboot.bat with "shutdown /s /f" on in it.

i understand miner cant predict ,
just count retry start 3 or 5 times in a delays or without any minning ,
only desactive card , but stoping powering the card look be impossible

i dont think motherboard can stop powered a pcie slot....
and GC was powered directly from psu ...

im sorry ,just new in game
first time GC died .....

[janding]

Question to PhoenixMiner

Please give an honest answer for this question as I haven't see a post lately from you.

With all the crap about the GPU kernels going on between you and Claymore I would like to
know if your miner is going to stay in business. You and Claymore are the few that actually
know for sure if you lifted code from their miner. I don't know. I hope not.

I like the PhoenixMiner and it is faster than Claymore and currently seems stable.
But, I don't want to waste my time trying and testing it if it's going away.

If you plan to keep developing, releasing new builds, improvements and new features I will keep
using it, otherwise I need to go back to Claymore and carry on. After all, I'm mining to
make some money and wasting time is not on my schedule.

Let us all know what your plans are for the future.

Thanks

   We are absolutely committed to the development and improvement of PhoenixMiner for a long, long time! In fact, we are quite
encouraged by the overwhelming support and positive feedback here and elsewhere.   Our share of the ethash miner market is still
very small but it is rising fast and even started accelerating after the recent events.
[/quote]

Thank you for the response.
That's what I was wanting to hear.
I installed 2.7c and working great. The clock and voltage controls you added are working well also.
Also very much like the secure connection.

Keep up the good work and good luck !

[Iamtutut]

i think answers will be no ,

This is not something a miner can predict. It can't distinguish between software fault (bad overclock, buggy drivers) and hardware issue (bad riser, cat unplugged the riser cable, housefire, apocalypse).
The only thing you can do is to set -rmode 2 and make reboot.bat with "shutdown /s /f" on in it.

i understand miner cant predict ,
just count retry start 3 or 5 times in a delays or without any minning ,
only desactive card , but stoping powering the card look be impossible

i dont think motherboard can stop powered a pcie slot....
and GC was powered directly from psu ...

im sorry ,just new in game
first time GC died .....

MB can power a PCI-E up to 75W, my HD7750 is a PCI-E GPU and is powered by PCI-E only because it needs only 55W.

[xeridea]

PhoenixMiner 2.7c is officially released. In addition to the changes in 2.7a, and 2.7b, we have added support for secure stratum connections using SSL (supported by ethermine.org) to prevent the increasing IP hijacking attacks. To connect to a secured pool, use the ssl:// prefix (e.g. -pool ssl://eu1.ethermine.org:5555). We have also Added support for solo mining (HTTP GetWork protocol).

We are switching our attention to 2.8, which will include a lot of small improvements, as well as some big ones but we prefer to keep them confidential for now in order to avoid giving any ideas to the competition  We also continue working towards dual mining and Linux support as our next major milestones.

By "competition" you mean those who you steal code from?

[Iamtutut]

PhoenixMiner 2.7c is officially released. In addition to the changes in 2.7a, and 2.7b, we have added support for secure stratum connections using SSL (supported by ethermine.org) to prevent the increasing IP hijacking attacks. To connect to a secured pool, use the ssl:// prefix (e.g. -pool ssl://eu1.ethermine.org:5555). We have also Added support for solo mining (HTTP GetWork protocol).

We are switching our attention to 2.8, which will include a lot of small improvements, as well as some big ones but we prefer to keep them confidential for now in order to avoid giving any ideas to the competition   We also continue working towards dual mining and Linux support as our next major milestones.

By "competition" you mean those who you steal code from?

Let's sum up. Claymore claims phoenix stole the claymore V10 (if I remember correctly) open GL kernels. Then Claymore has updated his miner to 10.3, 10.6, 11, 11.1, 11.2 (did I miss a release here ?), claiming a speed increase for each new release. Still, phoenix 2.6/2.7c seems as fast as Claymore 11.2, despite outdated kernels, because claymore claims the phoenixminer 2.6 still has Claymore V10 unmodified kernels.

I find this weird that a miner with alledged outdated kernels can be as fast as the latest Claymore. If it was just a "stolen" code with no dev, it wouldn't be as fast IMO.

[xeridea]

PhoenixMiner 2.7c is officially released. In addition to the changes in 2.7a, and 2.7b, we have added support for secure stratum connections using SSL (supported by ethermine.org) to prevent the increasing IP hijacking attacks. To connect to a secured pool, use the ssl:// prefix (e.g. -pool ssl://eu1.ethermine.org:5555). We have also Added support for solo mining (HTTP GetWork protocol).

We are switching our attention to 2.8, which will include a lot of small improvements, as well as some big ones but we prefer to keep them confidential for now in order to avoid giving any ideas to the competition   We also continue working towards dual mining and Linux support as our next major milestones.

By "competition" you mean those who you steal code from?

Let's sum up. Claymore claims phoenix stole the claymore V10 (if I remember correctly) open GL kernels. Then Claymore has updated his miner to 10.3, 10.6, 11, 11.1, 11.2 (did I miss a release here ?), claiming a speed increase for each new release. Still, phoenix 2.6/2.7c seems as fast as Claymore 11.2, despite outdated kernels, because claymore claims the phoenixminer 2.6 still has Claymore V10 unmodified kernels.

I find this weird that a miner with alledged outdated kernels can be as fast as the latest Claymore. If it was just a "stolen" code with no dev, it wouldn't be as fast IMO.

There was not speed update every release, most were feature or bug fixes. Claymore Eth speed improvements are rare, speed has barely changed in over a year, the recent -asm 2, slightly less stales, and an Nvidia speedup are all I can remember, and I have followed it closely. Most releases are features, or different dual mine coins. And displayed speed isn't necessarily effective speed.

How do you explain kernel dump confirming it?

Also, it's OpenCL, not open GL, which is a graphics library for games.

[Iamtutut]

How can you claim I would be confirming anything ??

When I talk about speed, I mean speed at the pool.

[Iamtutut]

i think answers will be no ,

This is not something a miner can predict. It can't distinguish between software fault (bad overclock, buggy drivers) and hardware issue (bad riser, cat unplugged the riser cable, housefire, apocalypse).
The only thing you can do is to set -rmode 2 and make reboot.bat with "shutdown /s /f" on in it.

i understand miner cant predict ,
just count retry start 3 or 5 times in a delays or without any minning ,
only desactive card , but stoping powering the card look be impossible

i dont think motherboard can stop powered a pcie slot....
and GC was powered directly from psu ...

im sorry ,just new in game
first time GC died .....

MB can power a PCI-E up to 75W, my HD7750 is a PCI-E GPU and is powered by PCI-E only because it needs only 55W.

You need to get on the internet and read.
Look up Mining Crypto's or GPU's on Video boards, or How to mine, or
how do video cards work when mining, or anything else that will get you somewhat educated
on what you are doing. Look up undervolting, or overclocking.
Study up on what you are attempting to do.

This area is for testing and reporting issues with a new miner.
No, how do I make a miner work.

Sorry, but you need more information before you burn up any more cards.

Did I say i was trying to mine ETH with an outdated card (I never wrote is was doing anything with it) ? Or did you confuse me with another member ?
BTW about the 75W from the MB: https://www.asus.com/support/FAQ/104406/
"4. A x16 graphics card is limited to 75 W. The 75 W maximum can be drawn via the combination of +12V and +3.3V rails, and the sum of the draw on the two rails cannot exceed 75 W."

[mayers8851]

PhoenixMiner 2.7c is officially released. In addition to the changes in 2.7a, and 2.7b, we have added support for secure stratum connections using SSL (supported by ethermine.org) to prevent the increasing IP hijacking attacks. To connect to a secured pool, use the ssl:// prefix (e.g. -pool ssl://eu1.ethermine.org:5555). We have also Added support for solo mining (HTTP GetWork protocol).

We are switching our attention to 2.8, which will include a lot of small improvements, as well as some big ones but we prefer to keep them confidential for now in order to avoid giving any ideas to the competition   We also continue working towards dual mining and Linux support as our next major milestones.

By "competition" you mean those who you steal code from?

Let's sum up. Claymore claims phoenix stole the claymore V10 (if I remember correctly) open GL kernels. Then Claymore has updated his miner to 10.3, 10.6, 11, 11.1, 11.2 (did I miss a release here ?), claiming a speed increase for each new release. Still, phoenix 2.6/2.7c seems as fast as Claymore 11.2, despite outdated kernels, because claymore claims the phoenixminer 2.6 still has Claymore V10 unmodified kernels.

I find this weird that a miner with alledged outdated kernels can be as fast as the latest Claymore. If it was just a "stolen" code with no dev, it wouldn't be as fast IMO.

Let's sum up: you did not even read what Claymore claims, because I don't see even a single line about any speed increase in his History.txt since v10.1. The only claim there is a speed increase in 11.2 that was released a day ago. Yeah, his miner has History.txt file with all changes, don't be lazy and read it if you want to sum up anything. By the way I can sum up too: I see this miner is just a clone of Claymore miner with same options and API, nothing new. Is it faster on pool? Tested for a day and saw exactly same speed compared to v11.0. Can I believe the most known dev here when he claims that this miner uses his kernels? Why not? Don't tell me that he lies because he is afraid of this clone

[Vahid.Mousavi]

hi
i'm getting "CUDART error in CudaProgram.cu:172 : unspecified launch failure" every 10 or 15 minutes.
what could be possible reasons and how to solve it?

[infectedmushi]

By "competition" you mean those who you steal code from?

that's plain rude.

[mayers8851]

Let me sum it up.
You tested for a day ? Wow, that a lot of testing. Why not 5 minutes, you would have saved time and gotten about the same results.
The PhoenixMiner is faster. I know. I've proved it many many times comparing to Claytmore. I've tested for over a month running both miners. I know, you don't.

I don't know anything about who's Kernels belong to who and I seriously doubt you do either.

You're taking the statement from someone and believing it becuase you want to believe it. Until somepone post actual proof that we all can see and understand I'll reserve judgement on either statment.

For now, Phoenix even without all the bell's that are coming is my miner of choice between the two at this time. I don't need or even
plan to do dual mining, or solo mining. So, even though Claymore has those at present, I don't need or want them. So why sholuld I use
a slower miner and pay more for it.

I have many rigs so a day is enough to see real miner speed. Use this miner if you think that it is faster, but it is not, it is the same, it can be faster only if you use default or wrong settings in Claymore miner, or if you are stupid enough to use some public tool to cut his fee and the miner detected it. For kernels, right, for now we must believe either Claymore or Phoenix. Based on their status I believe Claymore.

[janding]

Let me sum it up.
You tested for a day ? Wow, that a lot of testing. Why not 5 minutes, you would have saved time and gotten about the same results.
The PhoenixMiner is faster. I know. I've proved it many many times comparing to Claytmore. I've tested for over a month running both miners. I know, you don't.

I don't know anything about who's Kernels belong to who and I seriously doubt you do either.

You're taking the statement from someone and believing it becuase you want to believe it. Until somepone post actual proof that we all can see and understand I'll reserve judgement on either statment.

For now, Phoenix even without all the bell's that are coming is my miner of choice between the two at this time. I don't need or even
plan to do dual mining, or solo mining. So, even though Claymore has those at present, I don't need or want them. So why sholuld I use
a slower miner and pay more for it.

I have many rigs so a day is enough to see real miner speed. Use this miner if you think that it is faster, but it is not, it is the same, it can be faster only if you use default or wrong settings in Claymore miner, or if you are stupid enough to use some public tool to cut his fee and the miner detected it. For kernels, right, for now we must believe either Claymore or Phoenix. Based on their status I believe Claymore.

I guess that's the greatness of having a choice. We prefer different things and have different ideas.
We are free to choose. I will continue to test both miners, why not, I'm paying for either, if and when one is better than the other for my
needs I will use it. Currently for me it is Phoenix. I like being able to compare them and decide. I don't have a stake in either so the best miner wins
my vote. Happy Mining 

[nqmauser]

It is simply impossible for two individuals doing programming to come up with the same acronyms for their user-exposed commands. Given that there's claims being made by claymore that his last non-protected compiled kernel has been ripped by this guy, and given the too-many 1:1 matching flags, specifically the ones related to kernel configurable options, I 100% believe what Claymore is saying and that this guys has ripped the kernel, which therefore has made him have to re-used the same flags, because he only has the decompiled assembler code of the kernel, which cannot be written back to its originating user-space language easily.

So a kind non-disrespectful (not) fuck you pajeet to you Phoenix.

[lbr]

Let me sum it up.
You tested for a day ? Wow, that a lot of testing. Why not 5 minutes, you would have saved time and gotten about the same results.
The PhoenixMiner is faster. I know. I've proved it many many times comparing to Claytmore. I've tested for over a month running both miners. I know, you don't.

I don't know anything about who's Kernels belong to who and I seriously doubt you do either.

But I do, I've dumped both kernels and they are virtually the same. Like almost the same. Almost - some labels named differently for example, but when you disassemble, labels always look funky.

Also I did test Phoenix vs Claymore for more than a day ; ) Two days actually ; ) But on 10x 6xGPU rigs. Same hashrate.

But fee on Phoenix is lower.. so it's actually no brainer which miner to use ; )
Except I can't use Phoenix, cause temp stop option is not present.

[janding]

Let me sum it up.
You tested for a day ? Wow, that a lot of testing. Why not 5 minutes, you would have saved time and gotten about the same results.
The PhoenixMiner is faster. I know. I've proved it many many times comparing to Claytmore. I've tested for over a month running both miners. I know, you don't.

I don't know anything about who's Kernels belong to who and I seriously doubt you do either.

But I do, I've dumped both kernels and they are virtually the same. Like almost the same. Almost - some labels named differently for example, but when you disassemble, labels always look funky.

Also I did test Phoenix vs Claymore for more than a day ; ) Two days actually ; ) But on 10x 6xGPU rigs. Same hashrate.

But fee on Phoenix is lower.. so it's actually no brainer which miner to use ; )
Except I can't use Phoenix, cause temp stop option is not present.

OK.
I should have never posted any of my comments whatsoever about the kernel debacle.
I know nothing about it.
It is also none of my business and I'm not vested in any miner.
The outcome will work itself out. I am NOT on any one side.

I just happen to like the PhoenixMiner. It suits my needs.
For some reason "On My rigs" Phoenix is faster. ( not a lot ) but still faster.
And less expensive.
As always, individual results may vary.

Yes, I would like the temp stop/start option also. It's a real nice feature.
I hope Phoenix adds that one soon.

[lbr]

For some reason "On My rigs" Phoenix is faster. ( not a lot ) but still faster.

Btw, what's ur rigs?
I tested on mostly 1060 3GB with only two RX Polaris based.
Mostly AM3 based, so very very weak CPU.

[lbr]

OK.
I should have never posted any of my comments whatsoever about the kernel debacle.
I know nothing about it.

As for the kernels..

I can give a flying fuck who stole from whom. And I myself will use the most profitable miner.
As soon as temp stop appears.. well..
Not to mention that Claymore nVidia hashing speed is basically the same as open-source ethminer.
And at one point it was even lower. When some dude boosted 1060 open source, but it took Claymore some time to implement(copy open-source kernel) boost into his miner.

But, with all that said, I rly don't like ppl stealing. And profiting from it.
So the only thing I can do is write to this thread ; )

[janding]

For some reason "On My rigs" Phoenix is faster. ( not a lot ) but still faster.

Btw, what's ur rigs?
I tested on mostly 1060 3GB with only two RX Polaris based.
Mostly AM3 based, so very very weak CPU.

I have 6 RX-580's. 4 have 8gb mem and 2 have 4gb mem.

4 run between 30 and 31 mh/s
2 run between 29 and 30 mh/s

They 2 Gigabyte, 2 ASUS, 1 PowerColor, 1 Sapphire PULSE

Memory varies between Samsung and Hynix