SRBMiner Cryptonight AMD GPU Miner V1.9.3 - native algo switching

[jsphshi]

Hello
I have a few rigs & have tried SRB miner for a few days now ,the hashrate is high compared to XMR-STAK & xmring .The only problem is that on the pool side its showing a reduced hashrate of 10-15% .What till be the reason for this ?.
I have used the same port as XMR stak
Thanks

[1579774995]

1579774995

[1579774995]

1579774995

[1579774995]

1579774995

[1579774995]

1579774995

[1579774995]

1579774995

[doktor83]

Hello
I have a few rigs & have tried SRB miner for a few days now ,the hashrate is high compared to XMR-STAK & xmring .The only problem is that on the pool side its showing a reduced hashrate of 10-15% .What till be the reason for this ?.
I have used the same port as XMR stak
Thanks

You probably got a lot stale shares, download latest 1.6.4 v and use --sendallstales parameter in bat, it will probably increase your effective hashrate

[duyquang06]

Hello
I have a few rigs & have tried SRB miner for a few days now ,the hashrate is high compared to XMR-STAK & xmring .The only problem is that on the pool side its showing a reduced hashrate of 10-15% .What till be the reason for this ?.
I have used the same port as XMR stak
Thanks

You probably got a lot stale shares, download latest 1.6.4 v and use --sendallstales parameter in bat, it will probably increase your effective hashrate

Doc, is there any quick way to know pool support your --sendallstales command. (U tell in previous post that some pool don't support and may lose hashrate/share, right?, correct me if i wrong).

I will test new ver.
 

[ChillyRide]

Need some confirmation guys. New AMD drivers 18.7.1. With those one and SBR 1.6.4 I cant see any shaere found for hours with normalV7 algo. On haven works tho. On 18.3.4 and SBR 1.6.4 normalV& works ok. Anyone have problems with no share found and normalV& algo on newest drivers? Im on Vega64. Seems to be no card reboot needed like before.

[doktor83]

Hello
I have a few rigs & have tried SRB miner for a few days now ,the hashrate is high compared to XMR-STAK & xmring .The only problem is that on the pool side its showing a reduced hashrate of 10-15% .What till be the reason for this ?.
I have used the same port as XMR stak
Thanks

You probably got a lot stale shares, download latest 1.6.4 v and use --sendallstales parameter in bat, it will probably increase your effective hashrate

Doc, is there any quick way to know pool support your --sendallstales command. (U tell in previous post that some pool don't support and may lose hashrate/share, right?, correct me if i wrong).

I will test new ver.
 

If the pool pays for stale shares then you will benefit from using --sendallstales, if it's not accepting stales you will get that stale share rejected. So there is nothing for you to loose.
What can happen is if you are mining on low difficulty and you find a lot of shares / minute, and your pool does not accept stale shares, and a job switch occurs and miner sends all those shares from the previous job, and the pool rejects them, and because you had a lot of rejects in short time, it can ban you for a time. This is the worse that can happen, but on pools that have vardiff set OK, and you find approx 6-10 shares / minute you can only win with this option turned on.

[ripcurrent]

Anyone Using the miner on a RX580 4gb on the bittubev2. I cant seem to get the miner to run on it. I tried all different Intensity settings.

[zeef]

Hello
I have a few rigs & have tried SRB miner for a few days now ,the hashrate is high compared to XMR-STAK & xmring .The only problem is that on the pool side its showing a reduced hashrate of 10-15% .What till be the reason for this ?.
I have used the same port as XMR stak
Thanks

You probably got a lot stale shares, download latest 1.6.4 v and use --sendallstales parameter in bat, it will probably increase your effective hashrate

Doc, is there any quick way to know pool support your --sendallstales command. (U tell in previous post that some pool don't support and may lose hashrate/share, right?, correct me if i wrong).

I will test new ver.
 

Thanks

If the pool pays for stale shares then you will benefit from using --sendallstales, if it's not accepting stales you will get that stale share rejected. So there is nothing for you to loose.
What can happen is if you are mining on low difficulty and you find a lot of shares / minute, and your pool does not accept stale shares, and a job switch occurs and miner sends all those shares from the previous job, and the pool rejects them, and because you had a lot of rejects in short time, it can ban you for a time. This is the worse that can happen, but on pools that have vardiff set OK, and you find approx 6-10 shares / minute you can only win with this option turned on.

Hi doktor,

We can see the stale shares in statistics pressing s in your miner right?

[UnclWish]

I use 1.6.4 with --sendallstales option since 1.6.4 was released with nicehash heavy algo. No one stale share for all this time. It's normal? Recieved speed on nicehash less than speed in miner about 10-11%. It's abnormal I think. I look at period close to 24 hours.

Another one question: installing new drivers needs to rebuild srb kernel files?

[doktor83]

I use 1.6.4 with --sendallstales option since 1.6.4 was released with nicehash heavy algo. No one stale share for all this time. It's normal? Recieved speed on nicehash less than speed in miner about 10-11%. It's abnormal I think. I look at period close to 24 hours.

Another one question: installing new drivers needs to rebuild srb kernel files?

You can use nicehash+heavy way before 1.6.4, i don't know where do you get this info from. Stale shares are not sent when using nicehash cause nicehash rejects ALL stale shares, so no point in sending them. 10-11% is much i agree.

Don't have to rebuild kernels after changing drivers, miner will work, but i would suggest you to rebuild them to be sure you are totally compatible with the drivers.

[doktor83]

Hi doktor,

We can see the stale shares in statistics pressing s in your miner right?

yes,
Accepted(Stale)/Total shares: 42(1)/42 (100.0%)

[zeef]

Hi doktor,

We can see the stale shares in statistics pressing s in your miner right?

yes,
Accepted(Stale)/Total shares: 42(1)/42 (100.0%)

Thanks

[UnclWish]

I use 1.6.4 with --sendallstales option since 1.6.4 was released with nicehash heavy algo. No one stale share for all this time. It's normal? Recieved speed on nicehash less than speed in miner about 10-11%. It's abnormal I think. I look at period close to 24 hours.

Another one question: installing new drivers needs to rebuild srb kernel files?

You can use nicehash+heavy way before 1.6.4, i don't know where do you get this info from. Stale shares are not sent when using nicehash cause nicehash rejects ALL stale shares, so no point in sending them. 10-11% is much i agree.

Don't have to rebuild kernels after changing drivers, miner will work, but i would suggest you to rebuild them to be sure you are totally compatible with the drivers.

Ok, thanks. I got it.

1.6.4. builds other heavy srb kernels. It have size about 2Mb as for cn-v7. And speed is some lower. If use srb builded 1.6.3 speed good, and size of srb kernel about 4Mb.

[doktor83]

Ok, thanks. I got it.

1.6.4. builds other heavy srb kernels. It have size about 2Mb as for cn-v7. And speed is some lower. If use srb builded 1.6.3 speed good, and size of srb kernel about 4Mb.

i did not touch cl kernels from 1.6.3 to 1.6.4, so probably you built on one driver , now with another, and maybe the compiler unrolls differently, that would explain the increased size.

[livada]

1.6.2 BC driver vs 1.64 with 18.3.4 driver
HEAVY and TUBE algo

GPU 0-1-4 = vega 56(64bios)samsung (56/8/2)setup
gpu 2 = vega 64 Liquid (60/8/2)setup
With BC driver 1.6.4 have more error
With 18.3.4 gpu go more overclock:)
1.6.4 have more HR
18.3.4 driver not need disable/enable vega , and not need start with 60int first.
but if use v7 algo and back to heavy  HBC memory not work.(need restart)

1.6.2 BC driver- this is maximal setup wtihout error
https://image.prntscr.com/image/14SysMMOQOS7zviWPlF-Yg.jpg

1.6.4. 18.43.4 driver without error
https://image.prntscr.com/image/A3SjEnciQ4C0yPzjnPuWPQ.jpg

we continue the test

This is NITRO+ vega 56 (hynix) stock bios. 1.8.34 driver not need enable/diable and not need first start with 60 int.

setup: 56/8/2.
With BC driver and 1.6.2  6*vega56 have 9000HR on heavya/tubethis is MAX setup without error.
https://image.prntscr.com/image/OZprQNZnRZeaKANVQADGkw.jpg
With 1.8.34 and 1.6.2 6*vega56 have 8250HR on heavya/tube
https://image.prntscr.com/image/nD9l8_AMTeqwAO1PQlHFGA.jpg
With 1.8.34 and 1.6.4 6*vega56 have 9150HR on heavya/tube
https://image.prntscr.com/image/Q0uhuB_qR5iIgC1oZW2v_Q.jpg
With 1.8.34 and 1.6.4 6*vega56 have 9230HR on heavya/tube MAX setup without error
https://image.prntscr.com/image/_5i2Iwj5SxmhLrd4gsN3fQ.jpg

and i try castXMR 1.2.5 with 1.8.34 driver. Setup is identical . i try int 7-8-9-19 but 8 is best for nitro vega 64.
https://image.prntscr.com/image/BTdIslYRQwqhOQVFwf9mwQ.jpg

[livada]

Hi doktor,

We can see the stale shares in statistics pressing s in your miner right?

yes,
Accepted(Stale)/Total shares: 42(1)/42 (100.0%)

yes. cryptoknight.cc accept stale shares

https://image.prntscr.com/image/eXbF2LQYQ3izJv78mZsUgw.jpg

[Art Gar]

DAMN
saw the post of new version..downloaded from first page = version 1.6.3 = to fast action from me
not it works...THX

You probably downloaded in those few minutes between when i uploaded it and updated the post here

What is Latency in json? Is it ping?

[UnclWish]

Ok, thanks. I got it.

1.6.4. builds other heavy srb kernels. It have size about 2Mb as for cn-v7. And speed is some lower. If use srb builded 1.6.3 speed good, and size of srb kernel about 4Mb.

i did not touch cl kernels from 1.6.3 to 1.6.4, so probably you built on one driver , now with another, and maybe the compiler unrolls differently, that would explain the increased size.

Size decreases. On 1.6.4 kernels builded with 18.7.1 are buggy. Speed is low, many compute errors. Now use 1.6.4 with srb kernels builded by 1.6.3 on 18.6 drivers...

[chris718]

can SRBMiner support HYCON? a modified V7 algo, https://github.com/Team-Hycon,thanks!

plz support HYCON mining,THX!

[Sharpeich]

can SRBMiner support HYCON? a modified V7 algo, https://github.com/Team-Hycon,thanks!

plz support HYCON mining,THX!

where did you see a word about minerable HYCON ?

[doktor83]

Ok, thanks. I got it.

1.6.4. builds other heavy srb kernels. It have size about 2Mb as for cn-v7. And speed is some lower. If use srb builded 1.6.3 speed good, and size of srb kernel about 4Mb.

i did not touch cl kernels from 1.6.3 to 1.6.4, so probably you built on one driver , now with another, and maybe the compiler unrolls differently, that would explain the increased size.

Size decreases. On 1.6.4 kernels builded with 18.7.1 are buggy. Speed is low, many compute errors. Now use 1.6.4 with srb kernels builded by 1.6.3 on 18.6 drivers...

If you take 1.6.4 and install 18.6.1 and let the miner build the binaries it would work good. The problem here is the 18.7.1 drivers.