Claymore -nofee 1 Questions

[goobur]

So recently I've been pretty skeptical of Claymore's Dual ETH miner so I started pulling it apart a little. From what I see, it looks like -nofee 1 actually doesn't disable anything, but rather just cuts down on the reported hash rate. i.e, the hash rate reported to the user is:

Code:

reported_hashrate = calculated_hashrate;
if(nofee) {
    reported_hashrate = (calculated_hashrate *97)/100;
}

Has anyone else noticed or measured this? Also, considering the hash rate calculation doesnt factor in the devfee time to its calculation, that means devfee mining is over-reporting its hash rate.

In summary nofee 1 mode under reports the hash rate, and and nofee  more 0 over reports it, which is pretty manipulative imo.  At least thats what the code suggests like, has anyone measured the effect of nofee mode? I would guess that you'd probably get an increase in calculated hash rate on your pool stats with nofee 1.

[adaseb]

So recently I've been pretty skeptical of Claymore's miner so I started pulling it apart a little. From what I see, it looks like -nofee 1 actually doesn't disable anything, but rather just cuts down on the reported hash rate. i.e, the hash rate reported to the user is:

Code:

reported_hashrate = calculated_hashrate;
if(nofee) {
    reported_hashrate = (calculated_hashrate *97)/100;
}

Has anyone else noticed or measured this? Also, considering the hash rate calculation doesnt factor in the devfee time to its calculation, that means devfee mining is over-reporting its hash rate.

In summary nofee 1 mode under reports the hash rate, and and nofee  more 0 over reports it, which is pretty manipulative imo.  At least thats what the code suggests like, has anyone measured the effect of nofee mode? I would guess that you'd probably get an increase in calculated hash rate on your pool stats with nofee 1.

Is this ZEC or ETH miner?

How did you get a piece of his source code?

The weird thing about the "no fee 1" is that my temps are identical pretty much with or without the fee. So I don't know whether he actually disables some optimizations or he is just displaying a slightly slower speed so people don't run "no fee 1".

Its difficult to calculate this due to variance and that his speed decrease is very negligible.

[ESJai]

I don't think nofee is just lowering the reported hashrate.
That may be one of the things it does but I think there would be more if(nofee) codes somewhere else.

You can always test it yourself and see if the pool's calculated hashrate is affected or not.

Anyway, I think Claymore well deserves the devfee even though he has earned so much.  

[justchil]

That's interesting. 

I am using nofee 1 on a few rigs while mining UBQ/MUSIC etc The switching over to the ETH dag for devfee causes issues on some miners for me.  I know the reported hash is lower but I haven't tested to see if it really is lower on the pool.

[goobur]

So recently I've been pretty skeptical of Claymore's miner so I started pulling it apart a little. From what I see, it looks like -nofee 1 actually doesn't disable anything, but rather just cuts down on the reported hash rate. i.e, the hash rate reported to the user is:

Code:

reported_hashrate = calculated_hashrate;
if(nofee) {
    reported_hashrate = (calculated_hashrate *97)/100;
}

Has anyone else noticed or measured this? Also, considering the hash rate calculation doesnt factor in the devfee time to its calculation, that means devfee mining is over-reporting its hash rate.

In summary nofee 1 mode under reports the hash rate, and and nofee  more 0 over reports it, which is pretty manipulative imo.  At least thats what the code suggests like, has anyone measured the effect of nofee mode? I would guess that you'd probably get an increase in calculated hash rate on your pool stats with nofee 1.

Is this ZEC or ETH miner?

How did you get a piece of his source code?

The weird thing about the "no fee 1" is that my temps are identical pretty much with or without the fee. So I don't know whether he actually disables some optimizations or he is just displaying a slightly slower speed so people don't run "no fee 1".

Its difficult to calculate this due to variance and that his speed decrease is very negligible.

My bad, I mean the Dual ETH miner, suspect the same for the ZEC miner tho, but don't have any evidence to back it. I don't have his source code, but I did unpack and "decrypt" his binaries which allowed me to disassemble them in IDA and reconstruct some C psuedo code. I've also been looking at the OpenCl kernels, which is a bit more tricky because there's a version for when asm mode is turned on. I've mostly been looking at the generic asm mode 0 binary, which is pretty much Genoils code verbatim + another miner (often taken from a fork of sg-miner). I'm not so sure about the asm 1 versions, I'll look into those later at some point tho.

Honestly, from the past 24 hours, my number of accepted shares seems to be slightly higher than with nofee 0. I'm using dwarfpool tho, so the stats view is notably pretty shitty.

[Wexnident]

So recently I've been pretty skeptical of Claymore's miner so I started pulling it apart a little. From what I see, it looks like -nofee 1 actually doesn't disable anything, but rather just cuts down on the reported hash rate. i.e, the hash rate reported to the user is:

Code:

reported_hashrate = calculated_hashrate;
if(nofee) {
    reported_hashrate = (calculated_hashrate *97)/100;
}

Has anyone else noticed or measured this? Also, considering the hash rate calculation doesnt factor in the devfee time to its calculation, that means devfee mining is over-reporting its hash rate.

In summary nofee 1 mode under reports the hash rate, and and nofee  more 0 over reports it, which is pretty manipulative imo.  At least thats what the code suggests like, has anyone measured the effect of nofee mode? I would guess that you'd probably get an increase in calculated hash rate on your pool stats with nofee 1.

Is this ZEC or ETH miner?

How did you get a piece of his source code?

The weird thing about the "no fee 1" is that my temps are identical pretty much with or without the fee. So I don't know whether he actually disables some optimizations or he is just displaying a slightly slower speed so people don't run "no fee 1".

Its difficult to calculate this due to variance and that his speed decrease is very negligible.

My bad, I mean the Dual ETH miner, suspect the same for the ZEC miner tho, but don't have any evidence to back it. I don't have his source code, but I did unpack and "decrypt" his binaries which allowed me to disassemble them in IDA and reconstruct some C psuedo code. I've also been looking at the OpenCl kernels, which is a bit more tricky because there's a version for when asm mode is turned on. I've mostly been looking at the generic asm mode 0 binary, which is pretty much Genoils code verbatim + another miner (often taken from a fork of sg-miner). I'm not so sure about the asm 1 versions, I'll look into those later at some point tho.

Honestly, from the past 24 hours, my number of accepted shares seems to be slightly higher than with nofee 0. I'm using dwarfpool tho, so the stats view is notably pretty shitty.

the statis in the https://ethermine.org is quite stable. They give you one day statis.

[goobur]

the statis in the https://ethermine.org is quite stable. They give you one day statis.

I'm stubborn and don't really want to switch pools rn, but I will after my next payout.

However my daily earning has increased on Dwarfpool since I switched the developer fee off (funny enough by about 2-3%) which, to me, is almost enough evidence to support my claim. I'd need a longer run of time to be more confident about those results tho.

[adaseb]

the statis in the https://ethermine.org is quite stable. They give you one day statis.

I'm stubborn and don't really want to switch pools rn, but I will after my next payout.

However my daily earning has increased on Dwarfpool since I switched the developer fee off (funny enough by about 2-3%) which, to me, is almost enough evidence to support my claim. I'd need a longer run of time to be more confident about those results tho.

I checked my logs and everything and "nofee 1" actually produces less shares than devmining enabled.  So its actually is hashing slower.

This was for ZEC 12.5

[goobur]

I checked my logs and everything and "nofee 1" actually produces less shares than devmining enabled.  So its actually is hashing slower.

This was for ZEC 12.5

Cool, thanks for letting me know. What card(s) are you using?

I've only looked at the 9.8 Dual Eth miner so I have no reason to believe that the ZEC miner has the same behaviour. I'll probably tear into the ZEC miner binary at some point too.

[adaseb]

I checked my logs and everything and "nofee 1" actually produces less shares than devmining enabled.  So its actually is hashing slower.

This was for ZEC 12.5

Cool, thanks for letting me know. What card(s) are you using?

I've only looked at the 9.8 Dual Eth miner so I have no reason to believe that the ZEC miner has the same behaviour. I'll probably tear into the ZEC miner binary at some point too.

ZEC 12.5 with old GPUs like 7970/280x

[goobur]

I checked my logs and everything and "nofee 1" actually produces less shares than devmining enabled.  So its actually is hashing slower.

This was for ZEC 12.5

Cool, thanks for letting me know. What card(s) are you using?

I've only looked at the 9.8 Dual Eth miner so I have no reason to believe that the ZEC miner has the same behaviour. I'll probably tear into the ZEC miner binary at some point too.

ZEC 12.5 with old GPUs like 7970/280x

Thanks, that'll be useful information to have when I disassemble the ZEC miner.

[nicklittle430]

Hey, any progress on the zcash teardown... For the record I'm going to do a nofee 1 test over the next day or so and see if my pool hashrate is lower. Currently at ~4.8 ksol @ the pool and 4.9 ksol @ the console with dev fee.  

*Update: average hashrate went tldown on the pool to 4.65 ksol, and reported hashrate was 4.68 ksol.... So yes nofee 1 on claymore zcash miner does reduce the hashrate.