Zealot/Enemy (z-enemy) NVIDIA GPU miner (ver2.6.2 - kawpow RavenCoin).

[@enemy]

Anyone know what this means?

Cuda error in func 'cuda_check_cpu_setTarget' at line 41 : unspecified launch failure.

hi,  yes .
 " This error is caused by overclocking, lower your GPU and VRAM clocks."

[1713850426]

1713850426

[1713850426]

1713850426

[1713850426]

1713850426

[1713850426]

1713850426

[1713850426]

1713850426

[1713850426]

1713850426

[roffo]

Great work as usual 

[Vokas123]

I don't want to accuse someone of cheating because i didn't conduct real tests but pool graph is showing less hashrate than the miner (phi algo).

5x1080Ti, fluctuating around 150Mhs, Zergpool, i=20 (no OC, stock settings)

https://pictr.com/images/2018/04/24/56c8de47ccf6e8215b87b07ca9d54bbf.jpg

Anyway, keep up the good work, x16r and x16s definitely the fastest out there we are waiting forward for new releases!  

[konqueror]

Phi

1080ti - 37.5mh

What powerlimit/OC?

[vipsvvvv]

for each 1080 ti mining phi i get :

ccminer - 1080 ti 35.29 MH/s

Zealot   - 1080 ti 39.60 MH/s

well this miner worth the 1% dev fee, well done

[Egger]

Mining with 1080 Ti (MSI Trio):

* LUX (phi)
37,x MH/s @OC: 80% TDP, +150 Core, +/-0 Mem - 58° C Temp

* BTX (bitcore)
34,x MH/s @OC: 80% TDP, +150 Core, +/-0 Mem - 58° C Temp

[ruplikminer]

I don't want to accuse someone of cheating because i didn't conduct real tests but pool graph is showing less hashrate than the miner (phi algo).

5x1080Ti, fluctuating around 150Mhs, Zergpool, i=20 (no OC, stock settings)



Anyway, keep up the good work, x16r and x16s definitely the fastest out there we are waiting forward for new releases!  

I am having the same problem. Locally I get "X" hashrate but at the pool I get about 10/15% less. Tested with PHI and with X16R. Tested 2 different pools. Always the same problem

[PrometherioN]

Can You Solo Mine with it? if not - will it ever be implemented?

[@enemy]

I don't want to accuse someone of cheating because i didn't conduct real tests but pool graph is showing less hashrate than the miner (phi algo).

5x1080Ti, fluctuating around 150Mhs, Zergpool, i=20 (no OC, stock settings)



Anyway, keep up the good work, x16r and x16s definitely the fastest out there we are waiting forward for new releases!  

I am having the same problem. Locally I get "X" hashrate but at the pool I get about 10/15% less. Tested with PHI and with X16R. Tested 2 different pools. Always the same problem

Was no one  bug report on phi in our test discord , but anyway we set farm 5x 1080ti  static diff  -d=0.288 (online)
https://bsod.pw/?address=LZTPCXwwuFUzLqbi2XPqfXsv9HVwDALgM4

And thanks. Checking...

[crazydane]

I'm running HIVE OS and upgraded my first 3 rigs to HIVE OS 0.5-47, which includes z-enemy 1.08.  Those rigs are no longer reachable from Awesome Miner.

My HIVE OS still starts the miner with api-bind: 0.0.0.0:4068, but there's nobody home when Awesome Miner tries to connect.

I was running ccminer-enemy 1.0.5 before under HIVE OS with no API issues.

What gives?  Does z-enemy 1.08 not support api?

[@enemy]

Yes, try --api-remote and/or --api-allow=  ( simple 0/0 )

[Vokas123]

I don't want to accuse someone of cheating because i didn't conduct real tests but pool graph is showing less hashrate than the miner (phi algo).

5x1080Ti, fluctuating around 150Mhs, Zergpool, i=20 (no OC, stock settings)

https://pictr.com/images/2018/04/24/56c8de47ccf6e8215b87b07ca9d54bbf.jpg

Anyway, keep up the good work, x16r and x16s definitely the fastest out there we are waiting forward for new releases!  

I am having the same problem. Locally I get "X" hashrate but at the pool I get about 10/15% less. Tested with PHI and with X16R. Tested 2 different pools. Always the same problem

Was no one  bug report on phi in our test discord , but anyway we set farm 5x 1080ti  static diff  -d=0.288 (online)
https://bsod.pw/?address=LZTPCXwwuFUzLqbi2XPqfXsv9HVwDALgM4

And thanks. Checking...

Are you sure about difficulty set? Mine was at 0.72 (Usually I start the miner without difficulty set, run it for a couple of hours and check the difficulty set by the pool on my wallet page. Then i write that diff in my bat file for future instances.)

[@enemy]

I’m sure about static diff . Like you see test show 175 (MH/s) on pool side, not 150. And yes, minus 3-5% is ok for any miner.  Bad ping, slate shares/ rejects.  But over 10% - something wrong can be on pool side, bad internet connection, autodiff, etc...  

[cryptodunno]

did anyone compare enemy x16r miner vs others?
I mean not just estimated amounts, but real tests and figures?
I`m still thinking to switch but a little bit worried on closed source code.

[chrysophylax]

@enemy ...

No Centos 7 x64 or Fedora 27 x64 still?

We can help compile it, or even give instructions on how to if you are unfamiliar with the OS.

The 'linux' distribution of your binary is NOT based on RHEL and therefore does not work in RHEL based OS Distributions.

Let me know mate.

#crysx

[Vokas123]

did anyone compare enemy x16r miner vs others?
I mean not just estimated amounts, but real tests and figures?
I`m still thinking to switch but a little bit worried on closed source code.

Yes, you have a separate thread for that.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3385643.0

[Regulater]

I don't want to accuse someone of cheating because i didn't conduct real tests but pool graph is showing less hashrate than the miner (phi algo).

5x1080Ti, fluctuating around 150Mhs, Zergpool, i=20 (no OC, stock settings)



Anyway, keep up the good work, x16r and x16s definitely the fastest out there we are waiting forward for new releases!  

I am having the same problem. Locally I get "X" hashrate but at the pool I get about 10/15% less. Tested with PHI and with X16R. Tested 2 different pools. Always the same problem

This is usual and occurs on these algos. The way to get close is by setting a static difficulty and slowing raising it until you get very close to console side hashrate. After tuning my static difficulty i am within 5% of console side hashrate on the 24 hours average hashrate.

[cryptodunno]

did anyone compare enemy x16r miner vs others?
I mean not just estimated amounts, but real tests and figures?
I`m still thinking to switch but a little bit worried on closed source code.

Yes, you have a separate thread for that.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3385643.0

Thanks a lot.
But does it realy makes sence with this OC settings descibed in this thread?
I thought x16r is more intensive with +core OC, but not the memory?

[crazydane]

Yes, try --api-remote and/or --api-allow=  ( simple 0/0 )

Thanks.  Adding --api-allow = 0/0 did the trick.

[iPool.pw]

Hi
I've been using your miner since v1.03. Why did you removed support for x17 algo which is available in older  versions.