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

[rednoW]

Found today that my rig with srbminer 1.6.7 is not working due to connection error to devfee pool. I didn't change anything in my connection properties, it is the miner or devfee server problem. Please fix ASAP!

[doktor83]

I was doing something on the server about 10 hours ago, so probably that caused the problem - fixed it now.
The miner has in-built protections, one of them is that it periodically tries to contact the srbminer.com domain, and if it fails multiple times (number of fails & retries is random on every miner run), then miner will stop.
This is somewhat against those who block everything except their pool on firewall/router/etc.

I want to apologize, in the next version i will 'soften' this and make it more user friendly.

You should have DFP online load : SUCCESS in your logs from now on.

[doktor83]

I lost 100HS on CN-Heavy algo with new version on same settings after I alter the intensity letting miner to compile cache.

Intensity 61.3 (letting 1.6.7 to compile for 61.3 )

Vega 64 SRBminer 1.6.5   CN-haven : 1630 HS

Vega 64 SRBminer 1.6.7   CN-haven : 1520 HS

Intensity 61  (not Letting 1.6.7 to compile, default setting 0 )

Vega 64 SRBminer 1.6.5   CN-haven : 1580 HS

Vega 64 SRBminer 1.6.7   CN-haven : 1545 HS


The new cache is not efficient as before.

Using 1.6.7 with the bundled binary kernels on 18.6.1 drivers by setting intensity to 0 or by hand to 61/9/2 you must get more on heavy algo than before on Vegas.
Altering the intensity won't rebuild the kernels, btw. Only by changing worksize its recreated.

[doktor83]

Hey Dok, love your miner but wanted to pass this along...

Been mining XTL with 8 card 480/580 rig using amd 18.6.1.  Tried new 1.6.7 version and was getting around 50hs less per card than on 1.6.4.  Might not sound like much, but x 8 cards adds up.  Changed back to older version...

Have you tried with the bundled binary kernel, or you let 1.6.7 miner compile the kernel, or you maybe used an older kernel from a previous miner version ?
I have a 6x580 8g rig and tested 1.6.7 before uploading it, i had the same hash as before on w10, 18.6.1.

Foing to check it out though.

[doktor83]

You are wasting your time complaining.  I complained about the same thing months ago.  The dev's conclusion was that I was blocking access to srbminer.com.  He made me feel like he thought I was trying to cheat him.  F#ck that, bullsh!t.  There is an bug in his code.  Simple as that.

He is not wasting his time, he helped me solve the issue,i probably wouldn't notice it by myself.
Nice language there, btw.

[doktor83]

Not bad bug if it is every few months no ?  

No.
How do you conclude what your statement says?
It happens multiple times a day.

Quote from: logicus on Today at 09:20:13 AM

...Problem is that I get same error 3 time today:

Well, on page 1 in big bold letters it plainly says to use amd driver 18.6.1 or 18.3.4, not 18.4.1 the poster is using!

This problem has been ongoing since well before the release of 18.6.1 or even 18.3.4 for that matter.  It has nothing to do with drivers and everything to do with dev fee switching.

Nobody complaind about this 'problem' since it was fixed few months ago. Read back i don't know, about 100 pages.
I still think some kind of firewall on antivirus blocked the miner on your rig, i never said you blocked it with intention.
Logs you sent me showed that miner couldn't connect to the srbminer domain.

edit:

My language is well justified considering your PM you sent me.  Interesting how you couldn't solve the problem when I alerted you to it months ago.  So what is the solution?

Feel free to paste here 'my language' where i probably use words like FU*K
Read back a few posts i wrote there what was the problem now, and its not the same as it was on your rig.

[doktor83]

There is no antivirus or URL blockers on my rigs.  All firewalls are given permission for srbminer for each and every new release.  That was your suggestion as to why your miner quits for some of my rigs.  It is not correct.
My language usage is my choice based on my frustration with your software, not what you said.  You don't like it?  I don't care.  And I don't think that what you were doing earlier today has anything to do with the same connection errors to srbminer.com yesterday, the day before that, etc., unless you do it everyday.  Your program is buggy when switching back to the miner from your dev fee miner.  That is easily ascertained and it is frustrating when you have over 30 rigs that just randomly quit without resuming mining.  That software decision is YOUR choice.  I prefer your software, but I have no problem telling you about it's confounding complications either.

Really don't know why are we going over this. You don't care what i say and what i think, so why would i try to help you or explain anything more to you?
Few people complained today about the same thing, no one complained about it for months (yesterday, the day before, etc.), now it's fixed, let's see if they will have problems from now on. (because you think i did nothing).

I am sorry that you have problems with SRBMiner,  if it is not working for you, there are a lot of good alternatives.
But i don't think you need to rage here and spread hate, especially when you are not right.

[doktor83]

How do you conclude that I don't care what you say and what you think?  I said I don't care if you like how I respond or not.   Obviously I care what you say and think or I wouldn't be posting here.  Plus, you are the only one who can fix your closed-source software.  I don't "think you did nothing."  I said that unless what you were doing earlier today is something that you do daily, then it isn't the problem as I experience it daily, randomly, on different rigs and sometimes never on others.

Spread hate?  I don't hate anyone.  I am frustrated with your software.  This isn't raging.

Guess i misunderstood it then, sorry. English is not my native language
I had to patch the web server (apache), so it is not something i do every day, more like never until now.

You say on some of your rigs you never had this problem. Don't you think you would, if this really is a bug as you say?
What i can think of is that maybe the dns service you use doesn't like cloudflare ?

[livada]

1.8.8.2 driver

all card use GPU and MEM 900mv
3/vega56(64bios)+1vega64LE - All samsung mem.

all work -v7 and heavy/tube haven
must disable/enable and first start with 60int 1 min and start again with 56 int.

i try v7- stelite - tube- loki - haven - fast(msr)- aloy and arto

all give better HR

TUBE
https://image.prntscr.com/image/Jp-k48THT9yIn7yFKRhgTg.jpg
Heavy-LOKI
https://image.prntscr.com/image/bOaOOgeiSc6jxyvPQo8Ajg.jpg
FAST-MSR
https://image.prntscr.com/image/Ib70HEHXSLm23-6hMBuGcw.jpg
V7-graft and STL Arto give a little less
https://image.prntscr.com/image/U4hCUapySoC5sb7e9V4o4w.jpg
Alooy give 4300Hr

You tried v.1.6.4 that compiles .srb files on 18.8.2 ?
Or used .srb files compiled on older drivers on 18.8.2 ?

srbmienr not work with new driver and old .srb file.(some algo block miner - other not share with pool)
i del cache folder and 1.6.4 compile new .srb file with 18.8.2 driver.

Other rig with  nitro vega card(hynix) not work with heavy-tube algo. why? i dont now. i use identical  miner-driver and try all but haven-tube-heavy not up HBC mem.

[OlegZ]

I have one problem with miner. I am using latest version 1.6.7 with and 18.4.1.Mining rig is 4 x Vega 56 (flashed with Vega 64 bios).

Problem is that I get same error 3 time today:
Could not contact htt://srbminer.com for a long time!

http://mail.dir.bg/~proba0/problem_conection.jpg

I had the same issue today.
version 1.6.6

[Diuscom]

RX 470 4 Gb on heavy only 750-800 h/s?

[OlegZ]

version 1.6.6

https://s15.postimg.cc/5z6pefkjv/err.jpg

on version 1.6.5 there are no problems

[doktor83]

on version 1.6.5 there are no problems

Neither on 1.6.6. This was just yesterday.

[SpceGhst]

Hey Dok, love your miner but wanted to pass this along...

Been mining XTL with 8 card 480/580 rig using amd 18.6.1.  Tried new 1.6.7 version and was getting around 50hs less per card than on 1.6.4.  Might not sound like much, but x 8 cards adds up.  Changed back to older version...

Have you tried with the bundled binary kernel, or you let 1.6.7 miner compile the kernel, or you maybe used an older kernel from a previous miner version ?
I have a 6x580 8g rig and tested 1.6.7 before uploading it, i had the same hash as before on w10, 18.6.1.

Foing to check it out though.

I’m assuming it was bundled kernel because on first run, all miner said was loading kernel... didn’t get a compiling kernel message.  SRB 1.6.7 was installed in a completely separate folder than 1.6.4.

[doktor83]

Hey Dok, love your miner but wanted to pass this along...

Been mining XTL with 8 card 480/580 rig using amd 18.6.1.  Tried new 1.6.7 version and was getting around 50hs less per card than on 1.6.4.  Might not sound like much, but x 8 cards adds up.  Changed back to older version...

Have you tried with the bundled binary kernel, or you let 1.6.7 miner compile the kernel, or you maybe used an older kernel from a previous miner version ?
I have a 6x580 8g rig and tested 1.6.7 before uploading it, i had the same hash as before on w10, 18.6.1.

Foing to check it out though.

I’m assuming it was bundled kernel because on first run, all miner said was loading kernel... didn’t get a compiling kernel message.  SRB 1.6.7 was installed in a completely separate folder than 1.6.4.

Did you use the same settings in 1.6.7 as in 1.6.4? Same intensity, worksize ?

[SpceGhst]

Hey Dok, love your miner but wanted to pass this along...

Been mining XTL with 8 card 480/580 rig using amd 18.6.1.  Tried new 1.6.7 version and was getting around 50hs less per card than on 1.6.4.  Might not sound like much, but x 8 cards adds up.  Changed back to older version...

Have you tried with the bundled binary kernel, or you let 1.6.7 miner compile the kernel, or you maybe used an older kernel from a previous miner version ?
I have a 6x580 8g rig and tested 1.6.7 before uploading it, i had the same hash as before on w10, 18.6.1.

Foing to check it out though.

I’m assuming it was bundled kernel because on first run, all miner said was loading kernel... didn’t get a compiling kernel message.  SRB 1.6.7 was installed in a completely separate folder than 1.6.4.

Did you use the same settings in 1.6.7 as in 1.6.4? Same intensity, worksize ?

Same card settings but not sure in miner as I’ve always used auto intensity 0 and never messed with worksize.

[doktor83]

Hey Dok, love your miner but wanted to pass this along...

Been mining XTL with 8 card 480/580 rig using amd 18.6.1.  Tried new 1.6.7 version and was getting around 50hs less per card than on 1.6.4.  Might not sound like much, but x 8 cards adds up.  Changed back to older version...

Have you tried with the bundled binary kernel, or you let 1.6.7 miner compile the kernel, or you maybe used an older kernel from a previous miner version ?
I have a 6x580 8g rig and tested 1.6.7 before uploading it, i had the same hash as before on w10, 18.6.1.

Foing to check it out though.

I’m assuming it was bundled kernel because on first run, all miner said was loading kernel... didn’t get a compiling kernel message.  SRB 1.6.7 was installed in a completely separate folder than 1.6.4.

Did you use the same settings in 1.6.7 as in 1.6.4? Same intensity, worksize ?

Same card settings but not sure in miner as I’ve always used auto intensity 0 and never messed with worksize.

It may be that the auto setting in 1.6.7 gave a lower value for intensity as in 1.6.4. It would be really good if you could test both miners with same intensity, for example 55 (580 can handle higher intensity, but for this test 55 should be ok).
And if still 1.6.4 wins by 50hs/card then i must re-work stuff, but if hash is same in both versions, then i don't have to chase ghosts

[SpceGhst]

Hey Dok, love your miner but wanted to pass this along...

Been mining XTL with 8 card 480/580 rig using amd 18.6.1.  Tried new 1.6.7 version and was getting around 50hs less per card than on 1.6.4.  Might not sound like much, but x 8 cards adds up.  Changed back to older version...

Have you tried with the bundled binary kernel, or you let 1.6.7 miner compile the kernel, or you maybe used an older kernel from a previous miner version ?
I have a 6x580 8g rig and tested 1.6.7 before uploading it, i had the same hash as before on w10, 18.6.1.

Foing to check it out though.

I’m assuming it was bundled kernel because on first run, all miner said was loading kernel... didn’t get a compiling kernel message.  SRB 1.6.7 was installed in a completely separate folder than 1.6.4.

Did you use the same settings in 1.6.7 as in 1.6.4? Same intensity, worksize ?

Same card settings but not sure in miner as I’ve always used auto intensity 0 and never messed with worksize.

It may be that the auto setting in 1.6.7 gave a lower value for intensity as in 1.6.4. It would be really good if you could test both miners with same intensity, for example 55 (580 can handle higher intensity, but for this test 55 should be ok).
And if still 1.6.4 wins by 50hs/card then i must re-work stuff, but if hash is same in both versions, then i don't have to chase ghosts

I believe you are correct and it is a “me” problem and not a “you” problem... 😁
Auto intensity for 1.6.4 is 57 and 1.6.7 is 55, but a weird thing happened.  I was running .4 and immediately after quitting and starting .7, without a reboot, they have the almost the same hashrate.

Thanks for your support and work you do!

[doktor83]

Hey Dok, love your miner but wanted to pass this along...

Been mining XTL with 8 card 480/580 rig using amd 18.6.1.  Tried new 1.6.7 version and was getting around 50hs less per card than on 1.6.4.  Might not sound like much, but x 8 cards adds up.  Changed back to older version...

Have you tried with the bundled binary kernel, or you let 1.6.7 miner compile the kernel, or you maybe used an older kernel from a previous miner version ?
I have a 6x580 8g rig and tested 1.6.7 before uploading it, i had the same hash as before on w10, 18.6.1.

Foing to check it out though.

I’m assuming it was bundled kernel because on first run, all miner said was loading kernel... didn’t get a compiling kernel message.  SRB 1.6.7 was installed in a completely separate folder than 1.6.4.

Did you use the same settings in 1.6.7 as in 1.6.4? Same intensity, worksize ?

Same card settings but not sure in miner as I’ve always used auto intensity 0 and never messed with worksize.

It may be that the auto setting in 1.6.7 gave a lower value for intensity as in 1.6.4. It would be really good if you could test both miners with same intensity, for example 55 (580 can handle higher intensity, but for this test 55 should be ok).
And if still 1.6.4 wins by 50hs/card then i must re-work stuff, but if hash is same in both versions, then i don't have to chase ghosts

I believe you are correct and it is a “me” problem and not a “you” problem... 😁
Auto intensity for 1.6.4 is 57 and 1.6.7 is 55, but a weird thing happened.  I was running .4 and immediately after quitting and starting .7, without a reboot, they have the almost the same hashrate.

Thanks for your support and work you do!

Nah im not sure its a "you" thing, i am trying to optimize for every card and sometimes an optim good for one card is not so good for another . Could you please test the same intensities as i wrote before?

[SpceGhst]

Nah im not sure its a "you" thing, i am trying to optimize for every card and sometimes an optim good for one card is not so good for another . Could you please test the same intensities as i wrote before?

Sorry I forgot to add... yes, I tested both versions at 55 and hash is roughly the same.