Hash Auger 2.9.7.5 Mining Manager and Switcher for NVIDIA GPUs

[HashAuger]

I just started using the program, but it looks pretty good.  Are there any essential things that need to be done to maximize profit?  I've got Nichash, Blazepool, Zpool, MPH, and Ahashpools enabled.  I haven't changed any of the algorithms for any pools, should I?  Any that need to be disabled because of ASICs?  I did set a price spike limit on my cards (a mix of 1060s, 1070s and 1080s).  I do slight overclocking via Afterburner.  Is there anything else I should be looking at.

Also, it seems like all the cards, 1060s, 1070s and 1080s almost always mine the same algorithm on the same pool.  I guess this is ok, but it doesn't seem to vary much.  Also, the price estimates seems VERY high for each card.  LIke an average of $3.50 per 1080, $2.80 for a 1070 and about $1.80 for a 1060.  This doesn't seem attainable, but I'll let it run for a bit and see what I get.

Thanks.

Thanks for trying the software.

Whether or not different types of cards will run diffrrent algorithms really just depends on the price estimates for certain algorithms. If an estimated value for one algorithm/coin is significantly higher than the others, it will make up for any differences in which algorithms run best on certain types of hardware. When estimates are closer, you should notice that different algorithms will run on different types of cards. Even when the cards are mining the same algorithm, you still benefit from the error isolation and increased efficiency of running each card in its own miner process.

All the algorithms dominated by ASICs should be disabled by default, so you shouldn’t have to worry about those. But you can always disable an algorithm on a pool if you notice an issue with server performance or how the algoithm is priced. Similarly, you could disable some algorithms on some cards using the Benchmarks tab to prevent software from assugning certain algorithms to those cards regardless of the price estimates. For example, Skein is a very demanding algorithm that may not be ideal for 1060s, but its price often flucuates a bit which could cause it to temporarily be the most profitable algorithm for those cards. Some people may prefer to disable that algorithm on that type of card to focus on algorithms that run well on that card’s memory architecture.

There are some settings you can try adjusting to help maximize your earnings. Since you are using bigger pools like Blaze and MPH, you could increase the Pool Refresh Rate to 15 minutes (or longer if you prefer) to build bigger shares in those pools. Increasing  the the Min Profit Switch to 15% or more tends to work well on my rigs. For MPH and NiceHash, you can use the Pricing tab to include these pools’ additional fees in the price switching calculations. On MPH, I definitely recommend keeping the Include Auto-Switch ports setting off.

If you feel that price estimates for certain pools are too high, you could try enabling the Use Actual Prices setting on that pool’s Pricing tab. The estimates provided by some pool’s don’t always do a good job reflecting the volatilty of coin prices in their calculations. I’m glad to hear that you set a Price Spike Limit - are you using the same value for all cards or different values based on their type? I prefer very conserative limits, so I’ll set different values based on the capabilities of each type of card.

One last note, payout speed is obviously a personal preference, but you msy find having that many auto-exchange pools enabled can spread out your work pretty thinly unless you have a lot of GPUs. You may want to try mining a few days on Zpool vs AHashPool and see which one you like more instead of having both enabled in addution to the other three. But if you are patient and going for maximum earnings, there is no harm jn having that many pools enabled.

Keep me posted on your experience and please don’t hesitate with any feedback or questions.

[HashAuger]

Thanks for the information it helps a lot.

I increased the price spike from $4.00 to $5.00. I use Blaze Pool and Block Masters. It switch directly to Blaze pool and mine on x16r algorithm for the last 24hours and my income was $2.25 per card the best for the last couple of days.

I’m glad to hear that the suggestions helped. Each pool has its own advantages, so it can take some time to find the best selection of pools and settings for your specific hardware. Please don’t  hesitate if you have other questions or feedback.

[jmayniac]

Thanks for trying the software.

Whether or not different types of cards will run diffrrent algorithms really just depends on the price estimates for certain algorithms. If an estimated value for one algorithm/coin is significantly higher than the others, it will make up for any differences in which algorithms run best on certain types of hardware. When estimates are closer, you should notice that different algorithms will run on different types of cards. Even when the cards are mining the same algorithm, you still benefit from the error isolation and increased efficiency of running each card in its own miner process.

All the algorithms dominated by ASICs should be disabled by default, so you shouldn’t have to worry about those. But you can always disable an algorithm on a pool if you notice an issue with server performance or how the algoithm is priced. Similarly, you could disable some algorithms on some cards using the Benchmarks tab to prevent software from assugning certain algorithms to those cards regardless of the price estimates. For example, Skein is a very demanding algorithm that may not be ideal for 1060s, but its price often flucuates a bit which could cause it to temporarily be the most profitable algorithm for those cards. Some people may prefer to disable that algorithm on that type of card to focus on algorithms that run well on that card’s memory architecture.

There are some settings you can try adjusting to help maximize your earnings. Since you are using bigger pools like Blaze and MPH, you could increase the Pool Refresh Rate to 15 minutes (or longer if you prefer) to build bigger shares in those pools. Increasing  the the Min Profit Switch to 15% or more tends to work well on my rigs. For MPH and NiceHash, you can use the Pricing tab to include these pools’ additional fees in the price switching calculations. On MPH, I definitely recommend keeping the Include Auto-Switch ports setting off.

If you feel that price estimates for certain pools are too high, you could try enabling the Use Actual Prices setting on that pool’s Pricing tab. The estimates provided by some pool’s don’t always do a good job reflecting the volatilty of coin prices in their calculations. I’m glad to hear that you set a Price Spike Limit - are you using the same value for all cards or different values based on their type? I prefer very conserative limits, so I’ll set different values based on the capabilities of each type of card.

One last note, payout speed is obviously a personal preference, but you msy find having that many auto-exchange pools enabled can spread out your work pretty thinly unless you have a lot of GPUs. You may want to try mining a few days on Zpool vs AHashPool and see which one you like more instead of having both enabled in addution to the other three. But if you are patient and going for maximum earnings, there is no harm jn having that many pools enabled.

Keep me posted on your experience and please don’t hesitate with any feedback or questions.

Thank you for the advice.  I have decided to disable MPH and Zpool and just go with Ahashpool, Blazepool and Blockmasters for now.  I also disabled the skein algo on my two 1060 cards.  I'll try with this config for a few days and see how it goes.  I'm still trying out different settings to see how they affect my profits.  I'm only running a 6 card rig, so it may be beneficial to just go with a couple pools, so we'll see.

[HashAuger]

Thanks for trying the software.

Whether or not different types of cards will run diffrrent algorithms really just depends on the price estimates for certain algorithms. If an estimated value for one algorithm/coin is significantly higher than the others, it will make up for any differences in which algorithms run best on certain types of hardware. When estimates are closer, you should notice that different algorithms will run on different types of cards. Even when the cards are mining the same algorithm, you still benefit from the error isolation and increased efficiency of running each card in its own miner process.

All the algorithms dominated by ASICs should be disabled by default, so you shouldn’t have to worry about those. But you can always disable an algorithm on a pool if you notice an issue with server performance or how the algoithm is priced. Similarly, you could disable some algorithms on some cards using the Benchmarks tab to prevent software from assugning certain algorithms to those cards regardless of the price estimates. For example, Skein is a very demanding algorithm that may not be ideal for 1060s, but its price often flucuates a bit which could cause it to temporarily be the most profitable algorithm for those cards. Some people may prefer to disable that algorithm on that type of card to focus on algorithms that run well on that card’s memory architecture.

There are some settings you can try adjusting to help maximize your earnings. Since you are using bigger pools like Blaze and MPH, you could increase the Pool Refresh Rate to 15 minutes (or longer if you prefer) to build bigger shares in those pools. Increasing  the the Min Profit Switch to 15% or more tends to work well on my rigs. For MPH and NiceHash, you can use the Pricing tab to include these pools’ additional fees in the price switching calculations. On MPH, I definitely recommend keeping the Include Auto-Switch ports setting off.

If you feel that price estimates for certain pools are too high, you could try enabling the Use Actual Prices setting on that pool’s Pricing tab. The estimates provided by some pool’s don’t always do a good job reflecting the volatilty of coin prices in their calculations. I’m glad to hear that you set a Price Spike Limit - are you using the same value for all cards or different values based on their type? I prefer very conserative limits, so I’ll set different values based on the capabilities of each type of card.

One last note, payout speed is obviously a personal preference, but you msy find having that many auto-exchange pools enabled can spread out your work pretty thinly unless you have a lot of GPUs. You may want to try mining a few days on Zpool vs AHashPool and see which one you like more instead of having both enabled in addution to the other three. But if you are patient and going for maximum earnings, there is no harm jn having that many pools enabled.

Keep me posted on your experience and please don’t hesitate with any feedback or questions.

Thank you for the advice.  I have decided to disable MPH and Zpool and just go with Ahashpool, Blazepool and Blockmasters for now.  I also disabled the skein algo on my two 1060 cards.  I'll try with this config for a few days and see how it goes.  I'm still trying out different settings to see how they affect my profits.  I'm only running a 6 card rig, so it may be beneficial to just go with a couple pools, so we'll see.

With six cards, you will definitely see faster payouts by limiting the enabled pools to just a few.  However, you might want to reconsider disabling MPH if only to keep Equihash open as an option. ZCash has been rising in value lately and the pools you currently have enabled don't yet offer it; equihash also tends to run well on the type of memory in 1060s/1070s. For BlockMasters, I personally prefer using the MC Parameter over the auto-switch ports because the pricing reflects individual coins rather than averages for all the coins using each algorithm port.  If you're interested, you can adjust those settings on the pool's Pricing tab.  With that particular pool, I also find the Actual Prices rather than the estimates to be a bit more accurate.

Unfortunately it can take a bit of trial and error to find the optimal settings for the specific collection of GPUs you are using, but the results are often better than trying to apply a one-size fits all strategy.  I'd appreciate it if you could keep me updated on your results; that type of feedback can help me optimize the software for various pools.

[jmayniac]

With six cards, you will definitely see faster payouts by limiting the enabled pools to just a few.  However, you might want to reconsider disabling MPH if only to keep Equihash open as an option. ZCash has been rising in value lately and the pools you currently have enabled don't yet offer it; equihash also tends to run well on the type of memory in 1060s/1070s. For BlockMasters, I personally prefer using the MC Parameter over the auto-switch ports because the pricing reflects individual coins rather than averages for all the coins using each algorithm port.  If you're interested, you can adjust those settings on the pool's Pricing tab.  With that particular pool, I also find the Actual Prices rather than the estimates to be a bit more accurate.

Unfortunately it can take a bit of trial and error to find the optimal settings for the specific collection of GPUs you are using, but the results are often better than trying to apply a one-size fits all strategy.  I'd appreciate it if you could keep me updated on your results; that type of feedback can help me optimize the software for various pools.

Yeah, I have a feeling I'm going to be enabling and disabling pools often to find the right combination.  I have had luck in the past with Ahashpool and Blazepool (I experience with other multi-pool and multi-algorithm miners).  I've also used Zpool extensively in the past because of the wide variety of coins it supports.

One thing I think that could be worked on in your program is more options for mining and profit display.  Maybe have a "summary" look, so I can see what pools are currently being used and what algos?  I'd also like to see Current and 24 hour profit as well as 7-day maybe.  I realize this information is available, but I need to actively search for the data to see what pools and then calculate manually what my profit is 24 hours.  Also, I need to connect to my rig to see this data, maybe some type of API or a clean html mining info page would be beneficial.

[HashAuger]

Yeah, I have a feeling I'm going to be enabling and disabling pools often to find the right combination.  I have had luck in the past with Ahashpool and Blazepool (I experience with other multi-pool and multi-algorithm miners).  I've also used Zpool extensively in the past because of the wide variety of coins it supports.

One thing I think that could be worked on in your program is more options for mining and profit display.  Maybe have a "summary" look, so I can see what pools are currently being used and what algos?  I'd also like to see Current and 24 hour profit as well as 7-day maybe.  I realize this information is available, but I need to actively search for the data to see what pools and then calculate manually what my profit is 24 hours.  Also, I need to connect to my rig to see this data, maybe some type of API or a clean html mining info page would be beneficial.

I understand the convenience of showing a summary of work and earning.  It is already on my list of features to add to the software in the near future. Unfortunately, I cannot yet provide an estimate as to which version it will be included in, but I am working on it. Remote monitoring is another feature I would like to add, but it will take longer to implement.

[HashAuger]

In the profitability section can you put cpu and each gpu in separate tabs or really just have a way to filter based on which gpu or cpu we might want to see?

I'll look into adding some filtering options to the Profitability grid in a future release.  Thanks for your feedback.

In 1.9, there is now the option to filter the Profitability grid by device, algorithm and/or pool. Just select the appropriate criteria and press the filter button.  Once a filter has been applied, you can use the Clear button to restore all the grid contents.  This filtering only affects what is displayed and does not alter the behavior of the algorithm switching functionality.

[jmayniac]

A few things I have noticed.

1. In a short 12 hours (I know not a lot of time), I have made only about 0.0002 BTC.  This is really low.  At this rate, on my rig, I may hit 0.0006 BTC a day, which is about half what I was making just mining Ravencoin by itself.

2. Sometimes cards will just stop mining.  The mining process for that card is gone, there is nothing in the logs, but HashAuger still thinks the card is mining.  If i restart HashAuger things work again. I've never experienced this before, even happens with no-overclock at all.

3. Equihash is supposed to be the best algorithm for my rig according to whattomine.com, but it is very far down the list of profitable algorithms, that it isn't even worth having miningpoohub.com on my pool list at all.  This seems very contradictory to everything I've read from other people.

I still haven't found what pools and alogorithm combinations are the best for my rig and I don't know that I ever will, there is just too many combinations that I could test this for months and still not hit every combination.  For now, I have zergpool and blazepool enabled and it's just a wild guess.  I can see how all the options are overwhelming for people.

[HashAuger]

A few things I have noticed.

1. In a short 12 hours (I know not a lot of time), I have made only about 0.0002 BTC.  This is really low.  At this rate, on my rig, I may hit 0.0006 BTC a day, which is about half what I was making just mining Ravencoin by itself.


2. Sometimes cards will just stop mining.  The mining process for that card is gone, there is nothing in the logs, but HashAuger still thinks the card is mining.  If i restart HashAuger things work again. I've never experienced this before, even happens with no-overclock at all.

3. Equihash is supposed to be the best algorithm for my rig according to whattomine.com, but it is very far down the list of profitable algorithms, that it isn't even worth having miningpoohub.com on my pool list at all.  This seems very contradictory to everything I've read from other people.

I still haven't found what pools and alogorithm combinations are the best for my rig and I don't know that I ever will, there is just too many combinations that I could test this for months and still not hit every combination.  For now, I have zergpool and blazepool enabled and it's just a wild guess.  I can see how all the options are overwhelming for people.

Those earnings are low and I can understand your disappointment.  But those estimates are not what I see on my test machines and what other users are reporting. I purposely spread my mining work thin across more pools than I would normally recommend to increase my test coverage. Yet, I'm still making the minimum payouts on BlazePool every few days plus weekly payouts from a couple other pools and steady earnings on MiningPoolHub. And I'm talking about a setup with fewer than 10 GPUs total and not all of those are mining all the time because they are in my development machine.

Considering that Zergpool and Blazepool are similarly sized pools, you may want to choose one or the other and then add a smaller pool such as HashRefinery or Blockmasters.  I am working on some enhancements to help mine larger shares in new coins on the bigger pools since it is possible to switch too frequently on the really popular ports of these bigger pools.

I've only seen the issue of the software getting detached from a mining process once and that was when Windows Update took control of my desktop to notify of the latest Creator's Update.  If it is happening multiple times, please let me know which mining software and algorithms are being used so I can look into it further.

As for Equihash, I have seen the estimates increase on both MiningPoolHub and NiceHash recently.  I don't know which calculator you used on WhatToMine, but the one that doesn't include pool factors often skews results because it doesn't take into the account the advantages of mining more difficult coins on a pool.  But Equihash was just a suggestion based on the type of memory in your 1070s.

I understand it can be overwhelming to try to find the most profitable pool and their optimal settings along with the most stable miners for certain types of cards. However, the alternative of trying to dictate a single solution for all users can also cause its share of problems. I try to provide flexibility so users can make adjustments that fit their rigs and mining strategy.

[jmayniac]

I've only seen the issue of the software getting detached from a mining process once and that was when Windows Update took control of my desktop to notify of the latest Creator's Update.  If it is happening multiple times, please let me know which mining software and algorithms are being used so I can look into it further.

I had it happen on both my 1070 cards with Neoscrypt-hsr very often, so I disabled that algorithm.  I just had it happen on both on my 1060s and 1070s with ccminer-phi mining Lyra2v2.

As for the configuration, I have a standard 6 card righ with 2x 1060s, 2x 1070s and 2x 1080s.  It's just difficult to get a handle on what to enable and what not to as there is a A LOT of conflicting information out there.  It doesn't help that my cards don't like to be overclocked at all, so I am mostly stock settings.  Maybe some tips on on using the program would be good.  Such as the information you gave me before.  Right now, I'm not seeing any difference at all in what pools I select, they all are about the same.  To get any meaningful data though, I would have to run this for a week, but I am a small miner and the prices and difficulties change daily, so that isn't really an option.  What works this week will change completely by next week.  I understand what the program is doing, but it's just difficult for a small miner like myself to find the right combination of pools and algos as it is all a moving target.  Some better reporting would help though.

[HashAuger]

I've only seen the issue of the software getting detached from a mining process once and that was when Windows Update took control of my desktop to notify of the latest Creator's Update.  If it is happening multiple times, please let me know which mining software and algorithms are being used so I can look into it further.

I had it happen on both my 1070 cards with Neoscrypt-hsr very often, so I disabled that algorithm.  I just had it happen on both on my 1060s and 1070s with ccminer-phi mining Lyra2v2.

As for the configuration, I have a standard 6 card righ with 2x 1060s, 2x 1070s and 2x 1080s.  It's just difficult to get a handle on what to enable and what not to as there is a A LOT of conflicting information out there.  It doesn't help that my cards don't like to be overclocked at all, so I am mostly stock settings.  Maybe some tips on on using the program would be good.  Such as the information you gave me before.  Right now, I'm not seeing any difference at all in what pools I select, they all are about the same.  To get any meaningful data though, I would have to run this for a week, but I am a small miner and the prices and difficulties change daily, so that isn't really an option.  What works this week will change completely by next week.  I understand what the program is doing, but it's just difficult for a small miner like myself to find the right combination of pools and algos as it is all a moving target.  Some better reporting would help though.

Thanks for the info. Just to clarify the issue with the miner processes: the software still shows a miner panel as being active for a card even though the underlying process has exited. Are there any crashes reported for those cards in the error logs/Output panel or does this occur when the software is switching algorithms?  Does the software start another process for the affected cards (so multiple panels are visible for the same card) or is it just that one panel for each card?

Have you tried using a different miner for Neoscrypt. You could manually change the preferred miner to the second fastest miner instead of disabling the algorithm all together. Similarly, you may want to change the preferred miner for lyra2v2 to Nanashi or something newer due to the age of ccminer-phi.  Enough people have had problems with the older variants of ccminer that I am leaning towards disabling them by default
in a future release.

I understand your frustration abut the configuration issues. As a developer it can be a challenge to accomodate different types of users - especially in an area such as this that is so dependent on third-party tools and services. You might want try using just one pool to start out with to determine which algorithms work best on your cards and then maybe enable another pool or two after a couple of days. This will allow you to build bigger shares in new coins even though you will still be switching algorithms based on estimated earnings.  Based on feedback from this thread and elsewhere, a lot of new users prefer Blaze, but I still think smaller pools can offer comparable returns for people who don’t mind slower payouts. However, it can take a while to evaluate their performance due to the slower rate at which they mine new coins.

[jmayniac]

Thanks for the info. Just to clarify the issue with the miner processes: the software still shows a miner panel as being active for a card even though the underlying process has exited. Are there any crashes reported for those cards in the error logs/Output panel or does this occur when the software is switching algorithms?  Does the software start another process for the affected cards (so multiple panels are visible for the same card) or is it just that one panel for each card?

Have you tried using a different miner for Neoscrypt. You could manually change the preferred miner to the second fastest miner instead of disabling the algorithm all together. Similarly, you may want to change the preferred miner for lyra2v2 to Nanashi or something newer due to the age of ccminer-phi.  Enough people have had problems with the older variants of ccminer that I am leaning towards disabling them by default
in a future release.

I understand your frustration abut the configuration issues. As a developer it can be a challenge to accomodate different types of users - especially in an area such as this that is so dependent on third-party tools and services. You might want try using just one pool to start out with to determine which algorithms work best on your cards and then maybe enable another pool or two after a couple of days. This will allow you to build bigger shares in new coins even though you will still be switching algorithms based on estimated earnings.  Based on feedback from this thread and elsewhere, a lot of new users prefer Blaze, but I still think smaller pools can offer comparable returns for people who don’t mind slower payouts. However, it can take a while to evaluate their performance due to the slower rate at which they mine new coins.

The software still shows a miner panel, but it says something like can't get hashrate and "Accepted 0 of 0 results".  No crashes being reported, the output just stops being updated.  It usually happens on a algorithm switch.  The software doesn't start another process.

I hadn't tried a different miner, but I switched them on both Neoscrypt and Lyra2v2.

As of right now, I'm going to try MPH for Equihash (is there any way to just select Equihash?), Blockmasters for specific coins/auto switch, and Blazepool for everything else.  I'll run this for a week or so and see how it goes.  I've got my price spike set at $5.50 for 1080, $4.50 for 1070s and $3.50 for 1060s.  I have a good little list of some alt-coins that I HODL, so right now, I'm just interested in Bitcoin so I can save that for other alt-coins that I may become interested in.  Wish me luck!

[HashAuger]

The software still shows a miner panel, but it says something like can't get hashrate and "Accepted 0 of 0 results".  No crashes being reported, the output just stops being updated.  It usually happens on a algorithm switch.  The software doesn't start another process.

I hadn't tried a different miner, but I switched them on both Neoscrypt and Lyra2v2.

As of right now, I'm going to try MPH for Equihash (is there any way to just select Equihash?), Blockmasters for specific coins/auto switch, and Blazepool for everything else.  I'll run this for a week or so and see how it goes.  I've got my price spike set at $5.50 for 1080, $4.50 for 1070s and $3.50 for 1060s.  I have a good little list of some alt-coins that I HODL, so right now, I'm just interested in Bitcoin so I can save that for other alt-coins that I may become interested in.  Wish me luck!

One of misunderstanding about the software that I am still trying to find an effective way of conveying is that neither Klaust nor Ethminer provide a way of parsing their screen output due to how they are programmed.  They are still mining in the background, but the software displays a message in the mining panel that says hash rates are unavailable. You can verify this because in those cases the mining windows are minimized to the task bar versus being redirected to the Miners tab.

As for mining panels that show 0 of 0 results for several minutes, there could be some different causes.  Sometimes the pool changes difficulty too frequently, preventing the miner from finding a block. The one thing I noticed about the Neoscrypt miner is that it can be slow to find a block even on a 1080 on some bigger pools such as Blaze.  Other times there could be an issue with the miner process throwing an uncommon error the software doesn't recognize yet.  When this type of situation occurs, I'd appreciate if you could copy the current miner output (either from the panel or a log file if you have them enabled) for that GPU so I can identify the specific situation and hopefully make some adjustments in the code to better handle it in the future.

In theory, you should be able to use the Algorithms tab on the pool to disable algorithms for a specific pool. Unfortunately, that filtering does not appear to be working correctly for MiningPoolHub in 1.9.  I will include a fix for that in 1.9.1, which should be released in a couple of days. 

Thanks again for your feedback and good luck with the new pool selection. Let me know if you have any other questions or concerns. 

[jmayniac]

The software still shows a miner panel, but it says something like can't get hashrate and "Accepted 0 of 0 results".  No crashes being reported, the output just stops being updated.  It usually happens on a algorithm switch.  The software doesn't start another process.

It seems as though it is confined to the Zergpool Pool at this time.  I let it run overnight with Zergpool disabled and didn't have any issues.  I enabled Zergpool this morning and right away I had a couple GPUs switch to Zergpool after a few minutes they switched to a different algorithm on Zergpool and stopped mining.  I disabled Zergpool again, and all is working fine.  So, it seems Zergpool isn't working too well for me.

[HashAuger]

It seems as though it is confined to the Zergpool Pool at this time.  I let it run overnight with Zergpool disabled and didn't have any issues.  I enabled Zergpool this morning and right away I had a couple GPUs switch to Zergpool after a few minutes they switched to a different algorithm on Zergpool and stopped mining.  I disabled Zergpool again, and all is working fine.  So, it seems Zergpool isn't working too well for me.

I will test that pool as soon as I can to see if I can reproduce the issue. Aside from communication errors, I am not sure what the issue might be as the only difference to the software is the pool’s stratum server url. I am currently testing a fix for disabling specific algorithms on MiningPoolHub. If any adjustments are needed for Zergpool, I’ll include them with that fix in 1.9.1

[HashAuger]

It seems as though it is confined to the Zergpool Pool at this time.  I let it run overnight with Zergpool disabled and didn't have any issues.  I enabled Zergpool this morning and right away I had a couple GPUs switch to Zergpool after a few minutes they switched to a different algorithm on Zergpool and stopped mining.  I disabled Zergpool again, and all is working fine.  So, it seems Zergpool isn't working too well for me.

I will test that pool as soon as I can to see if I can reproduce the issue. Aside from communication errors, I am not sure what the issue might be as the only difference to the software is the pool’s stratum server url. I am currently testing a fix for disabling specific algorithms on MiningPoolHub. If any adjustments are needed for Zergpool, I’ll include them with that fix in 1.9.1

To follow-up, I switched more of my rigs to mine on Zergpool earlier today, both with the auto-switch ports as well as individual coins using the MC parameter.  I haven't run into any errors mining so far, so you may want to try mining on that pool again to see if you connect this time. The attack on Verge last night caused a lot of issues with a lot of pools, so they have had some issues on the their end.  If you see the issue again, please try copy and paste the exact error message so I can better troubleshoot the issue.

Version 1.9.1 fixes the issue with not being able to disable specific algorithms on MiningPoolHub.  After you upgrade, you should be able to disable everything but Equihash on that pool if that is still your intent.

[HashAuger]

Z-Enemy released a service update to their miner after I released Hash Auger 1.9.1 yesterday.  I will be including this newest version of Z-Enemy in Hash Auger 1.9.2. However, I can confirm that this latest release of Z-Enemy is compatible with the current version of Hash Auger. Any users who would like to take advantage of Z-Enemy's Phi performance improvements can replace the contents of their Z-Enemy-110 folder with the files from the service release.  Users may also want to follow Z-Enemy's advice and increase the intensity of Phi for that miner to 21 using the Benchmarks tab in Hash Auger.  

[jmayniac]

To follow-up, I switched more of my rigs to mine on Zergpool earlier today, both with the auto-switch ports as well as individual coins using the MC parameter.  I haven't run into any errors mining so far, so you may want to try mining on that pool again to see if you connect this time. The attack on Verge last night caused a lot of issues with a lot of pools, so they have had some issues on the their end.  If you see the issue again, please try copy and paste the exact error message so I can better troubleshoot the issue.

Version 1.9.1 fixes the issue with not being able to disable specific algorithms on MiningPoolHub.  After you upgrade, you should be able to disable everything but Equihash on that pool if that is still your intent.

Seems like the problem with Zergpool is fixed, but I have something seriously wrong with my setup.  On my rig, I can usually make about $10 a day mining just Ravencoin, but with HashAuger, I'm making about $3 day.  I have no idea what it could be.  I have Blazepool and Zergpool enabled (made $1.50 over night, approx. 12 hours) and all algorithms working.  I have price spike limits set at about 2 times average price range for each card, minimum price switch at 15% and pool refresh at 15 minutes.  It really is confusing as to why my earnings are so low.   I know BTC is down a bit, but it shouldn't affect me that much.  Do you have any ideas?

[HashAuger]

Seems like the problem with Zergpool is fixed, but I have something seriously wrong with my setup.  On my rig, I can usually make about $10 a day mining just Ravencoin, but with HashAuger, I'm making about $3 day.  I have no idea what it could be.  I have Blazepool and Zergpool enabled (made $1.50 over night, approx. 12 hours) and all algorithms working.  I have price spike limits set at about 2 times average price range for each card, minimum price switch at 15% and pool refresh at 15 minutes.  It really is confusing as to why my earnings are so low.   I know BTC is down a bit, but it shouldn't affect me that much.  Do you have any ideas?

Obviously that is a disappointing result.  Despite the drop in the value of BTC and the hit on earnings caused by the Verge attack, you should be earning more than that.  Some people have questioned the timeliness of the estimates provided by Zergpool (both on this thread and on the pool's thread), so you may want to Use Actual Prices Instead of Estimates for that pool.  Personally, I prefer using the MC Parameter rather than Auto-Switch ports on Zergpool (and BlockMasters) because the estimates are based on each coin's value and not the average for the entire port.

Also, since BlazePool and Zergpool are similarly sized, most users tend to use one or the other. What can happen is that since both pools are popular, many miners will chase the most profitable coin on each pool. When you have both pools enabled, more often than not you will be switching between the ports that have the most miners - which means higher difficulty and lower shares in rewards.  If you stick to either BlazePool or Zergpool and then add a smaller pool such as AHashPool, BlockMasters, HashRefinery or StarPool, you are better positioned to build bigger stakes in coins whose values are rising rather than smaller shares in coins whose values have peaked.

I'm always looking at ways to help users improve their earnings. The latest release, 1.9.2 includes a new pool option to build bigger shares in coins that I would recommend using for either BlazePool or Zergpool.  The situation is that some of the more popular algorithms (Neoscrypt, x16, Phi for example) on these pools have so many miners that if you just mine these ports when the prices are high, you usually end up with a really small share in the next block reward - fractions of a percent. While still profitable, you could be earning a little more by investing some more mining time in these coins.  This new feature tells the software to delay switching work based on price when it estimates that your current stake in the next block for the current algorithm is very low.   It can definitely help your earnings on bigger pools even if you may switch work a little less frequently.

[jmayniac]

Obviously that is a disappointing result.  Despite the drop in the value of BTC and the hit on earnings caused by the Verge attack, you should be earning more than that.  Some people have questioned the timeliness of the estimates provided by Zergpool (both on this thread and on the pool's thread), so you may want to Use Actual Prices Instead of Estimates for that pool.  Personally, I prefer using the MC Parameter rather than Auto-Switch ports on Zergpool (and BlockMasters) because the estimates are based on each coin's value and not the average for the entire port.

Yeah, I was using Zergpool's MC Parameter, but that's seem to matter too much.  I think I'll just switch back to Blazepool and see how that goes.

Also, since BlazePool and Zergpool are similarly sized, most users tend to use one or the other. What can happen is that since both pools are popular, many miners will chase the most profitable coin on each pool. When you have both pools enabled, more often than not you will be switching between the ports that have the most miners - which means higher difficulty and lower shares in rewards.  If you stick to either BlazePool or Zergpool and then add a smaller pool such as AHashPool, BlockMasters, HashRefinery or StarPool, you are better positioned to build bigger stakes in coins whose values are rising rather than smaller shares in coins whose values have peaked.

I did have Blazepool and Ahashpool enabled for a day and saw similar low profits.  I've used Hashrefinery in the past, and I may switch to that as Ahashpool is actually almost as big as Blazepool at this point.  If your theory about having a bigger and smaller pool is correct, then I will switch to something with less than 1000 miners, such as Hashrefinery.

I'm always looking at ways to help users improve their earnings. The latest release, 1.9.2 includes a new pool option to build bigger shares in coins that I would recommend using for either BlazePool or Zergpool.  The situation is that some of the more popular algorithms (Neoscrypt, x16, Phi for example) on these pools have so many miners that if you just mine these ports when the prices are high, you usually end up with a really small share in the next block reward - fractions of a percent. While still profitable, you could be earning a little more by investing some more mining time in these coins.  This new feature tells the software to delay switching work based on price when it estimates that your current stake in the next block for the current algorithm is very low.   It can definitely help your earnings on bigger pools even if you may switch work a little less frequently.

Interesting.  I've enabled this on Blazepool and will see if it makes a difference.