Bitcoin Forum
November 09, 2024, 09:12:22 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 28.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: 2.2% regected shares high ?  (Read 1147 times)
mute20 (OP)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 265
Merit: 250


21


View Profile
August 18, 2011, 06:11:14 PM
 #1

So I am using 1.61 phoenix with phatk 4% increase powercolor 6850. Does this seem high?
echo2
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 97
Merit: 10



View Profile
August 18, 2011, 08:53:58 PM
 #2

well it does seem a little high because i get around 1% rejection rate on my 5830 with cgminer
but 1-3% is normal

donate to1ATLB2mX8Yybu1nAmvKTNEdJxvm61zjTYs
 *Image Removed*
DrHaribo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2730
Merit: 1034


Needs more jiggawatts


View Profile WWW
August 19, 2011, 05:06:56 PM
 #3

I would say over 1% is high

▶▶▶ bitminter.com 2011-2020 ▶▶▶ pool.xbtodigital.io 2023-
teukon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246
Merit: 1011



View Profile
August 19, 2011, 05:20:55 PM
 #4

I think it depends a lot on the server.  I think 1-1.5% is typical but you'd have to check with your specific pool.  That said I would personally consider anything over 1% too high.  I'm using phoenix and phatk 2.2 on two 5850s and they currently read:

[355.12 Mhash/sec] [5143 Accepted] [5 Rejected] [RPC (+LP)]
[377.12 Mhash/sec] [5411 Accepted] [8 Rejected] [RPC (+LP)]

so about 0.12% rejects.

Kernel versions can affect rejects and aggression makes a small difference too but the server was the key thing for me.  I mine with simplecoin.us which has just rolled out a serious new dedicated server (pool.simplecoin.us).  Big pools use several servers so perhaps try switching between them.

Also, I don't believe phoenix discerns between shares rejected because they are old and ones rejected because they are invalid.  If your rejected shares are clustered around/after new work units are pushed then try different pools/servers; if they are scattered at random then try lowering your cards core or RAM clocks and/or trying different kernels (there's plenty of variation between all of Diapolo's and Phateus' phatk versions).
Trini8ed
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 375
Merit: 250


<3 Bitcoins


View Profile
August 20, 2011, 10:17:27 AM
 #5

You should be fine I think its more a streak of bad luck in my opinion.

Everyone Loves Donations: 1PEVhtmnBqiN8rYXLHhtUWAB6q9X63Zm9D
Steam Profile: http://steamcommunity.com/id/Trini8ed
jrtubs
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 45
Merit: 0



View Profile
August 20, 2011, 03:50:09 PM
 #6

that seems very high i have never had more then .20%, make sure you're in a pool with long pooling.
teukon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246
Merit: 1011



View Profile
August 20, 2011, 05:32:13 PM
 #7

I have no idea whether or not it makes a difference but you could try forwarding the appropriate port in your router.
mute20 (OP)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 265
Merit: 250


21


View Profile
August 21, 2011, 01:51:40 PM
 #8

I dropped the core clock on my card by 8 mhz. Seemed to do the trick down to 0.3%
echo2
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 97
Merit: 10



View Profile
August 21, 2011, 07:42:20 PM
 #9

you should try diffrent miners and run for a day to see which one haz the lowest rejection rate

donate to1ATLB2mX8Yybu1nAmvKTNEdJxvm61zjTYs
 *Image Removed*
mute20 (OP)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 265
Merit: 250


21


View Profile
August 22, 2011, 02:21:27 PM
 #10

So after running at 8 mhz less I have found that overclock caused the 4x+ increase in rejected shares. It is easily losing some hashing speed for a lower rejected rate.
echo2
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 97
Merit: 10



View Profile
August 22, 2011, 11:44:23 PM
 #11

join this pool https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=33586.0;topicseen
accepts rejected shares

donate to1ATLB2mX8Yybu1nAmvKTNEdJxvm61zjTYs
 *Image Removed*
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!