Bytom Mining - ASIC algorithm now cracked by GPU miners? Big profits?

[dnssandbox]

How does your miner output look like?

Mine spits out about 10 lines of No work ready -> Continuing then finally a hashrate


2018/05/23 14:41:22 3 - No work ready                                                                                                                                                                             
2018/05/23 14:41:22 5 - No work ready                                                                                                                                                                             
2018/05/23 14:41:22 4 - No work ready                                                                                                                                                                             
2018/05/23 14:41:22 1 - No work ready                                                                                                                                                                             
2018/05/23 14:41:22 8 - No work ready                                                                                                                                                                             
2018/05/23 14:41:22 7 - No work ready                                                                                                                                                                             
2018/05/23 14:41:22 10 - No work ready                                                                                                                                                                             
0-148.9 1-166.6 2-147.4 3-4.4 4-160.4 5-4.7 6-3.5 7-20.1 8-118.6 9-155.8 10-28.8 Total: 959.1 H/s  2018/05/23 14:41:22 10 - Continuing                                                                             
2018/05/23 14:41:22 0 - No work ready                                                                                                                                                                             
2018/05/23 14:41:22 0 - Continuing                                                                                                                                                                                 
0-150.4 1-166.6 2-148.8 3-4.4 4-20.0 5-4.7 6-3.5 7-20.1 8-118.6 9-155.8 10-144.9 Total: 937.9 H/s  2018/05/23 14:41:22 2 - Continuing                                                                             
2018/05/23 14:41:22 0 - No work ready                                                                                                                                                                             
2018/05/23 14:41:22 0 - Continuing                                                                                                                                                                                 
2018/05/23 14:41:22 2 - No work ready                                                                                                                                                                             
2018/05/23 14:41:22 2 - Continuing                                                                                                                                                                                 
2018/05/23 14:41:22 0 - No work ready                                                                                                                                                                             
2018/05/23 14:41:22 0 - Continuing                                                                                                                                                                                 
2018/05/23 14:41:22 0 - No work ready                                                                                                                                                                             
0-149.5 1-166.6 2-145.4 3-4.4 4-20.0 5-4.7 6-3.5 7-20.1 8-118.6 9-155.8 10-147.3 Total: 935.9 H/s  2018/05/23 14:41:22 2 - No work ready                                                                           
2018/05/23 14:41:22 2 - Continuing                                                                                                                                                                                 
2018/05/23 14:41:22 10 - No work ready                                                                                                                                                                             
0-148.0 1-166.6 2-145.6 3-4.4 4-20.0 5-4.7 6-3.5 7-20.1 8-118.6 9-155.8 10-146.6 Total: 933.8 H/s  2018/05/23 14:41:22 10 - Continuing                                                                             
2018/05/23 14:41:22 2 - No work ready                                                                                                                                                                             
2018/05/23 14:41:22 2 - Continuing                                                                                                                                                                                 
2018/05/23 14:41:22 0 - Continuing                                                                                                                                                                                 
2018/05/23 14:41:22 9 - Continuing                                                                                                                                                                                 
2018/05/23 14:41:22 9 - No work ready                                                                                                                                                                             
2018/05/23 14:41:22 2 - No work ready                                                                                                                                                                             
0-169.0 1-166.6 2-141.8 3-4.4 4-20.0 5-4.7 6-3.5 7-20.1 8-118.6 9-37.3 10-167.1 Total: 853.1 H/s  2018/05/23 14:41:22 6 - Continuing                                                                               
2018/05/23 14:41:22 10 - No work ready                                                                                                                                                                             
2018/05/23 14:41:22 10 - Continuing                                                                                                                                                                               
2018/05/23 14:41:22 6 - No work ready                                                                                                                                                                             
2018/05/23 14:41:22 3 - Continuing                                                                                                                                                                                 
2018/05/23 14:41:22 0 - No work ready                                                                                                                                                                             
2018/05/23 14:41:22 0 - Continuing                                                                                                                                                                                 
2018/05/23 14:41:23 3 - No work ready                                                                                                                                                                             
2018/05/23 14:41:23 3 - Continuing                                                                                                                                                                                 
2018/05/23 14:41:23 0 - No work ready                                                                                                                                                                             
2018/05/23 14:41:23 0 - Continuing                                                                                                                                                                                 
2018/05/23 14:41:23 3 - No work ready                                                                                                                                                                             
2018/05/23 14:41:23 3 - Continuing                                                                                                                                                                                 
2018/05/23 14:41:23 0 - No work ready                                                                                                                                                                             
2018/05/23 14:41:23 0 - Continuing                                                                                                                                                                                 
2018/05/23 14:41:23 0 - No work ready                                                                                                                                                                             
2018/05/23 14:41:23 9 - Continuing                                                                                                                                                                                 
2018/05/23 14:41:23 3 - No work ready                                                                                                                                                                             
2018/05/23 14:41:23 3 - Continuing                                                                                                                                                                                 
2018/05/23 14:41:23 3 - No work ready                                                                                                                                                                             
2018/05/23 14:41:22 5 - Continuing                                                                                                                                                                                 
2018/05/23 14:41:23 9 - No work ready                                                                                                                                                                             
2018/05/23 14:41:23 9 - Continuing                                                                                                                                                                                 
2018/05/23 14:41:23 9 - No work ready                                                                                                                                                                             
2018/05/23 14:41:23 9 - Continuing   

I think you may have the intensity set too low.
try setting -I 6 or leave it the default of 8

[1714810044]

1714810044

[1714810044]

1714810044

[1714810044]

1714810044

[1714810044]

1714810044

[1714810044]

1714810044

[monkins1010]

I just swapped out a pentium G620 2 core on a 4 x 1060 rig i was getting a jumpy av 335h/s both cores around 95%

ive put in a i5 quad core 2400s and i get a much more stable 380h/s all 4 cores at 71%

i tried two threads but hash rate went down to 135h/s on each thread and cpu was 100% on all cores.

The -I intensity doesn't seem to be the best thing in the world, defiantly far too cpu bound for a gpu miner.  but its v1 prob so its expected.

I suggest you to try three instance of ./miner,look my reply above

Sorry I meant not 2 threads but I meant two instances. I logged into Linux as miner and ran the miner. (All cores at 70%.) Then fired up another ssh logged in as root and ran the miner. And the sum of the two hash rates was less than just 1. I don't know how yours can be so much better with similar systems?

I'm running on smos. And killed all the processes. Is the i5 2500s just not as powerful?  It has 4 real cores

I don't know the exact reason, i will leave you my setup:

System: HiveOs
Ram : 4 gb(was not enough so i created another 4 gb of swap)

To start the miner i use this script: https://pastebin.com/gR2e1bp5 (i created a file called start.sh)
Every start.sh has my wallet and the worker number, example:

bm1qnsk9rl45s4kps6mm97393gdjr5hslf4hvu9ru2.001
bm1qnsk9rl45s4kps6mm97393gdjr5hslf4hvu9ru2.002
bm1qnsk9rl45s4kps6mm97393gdjr5hslf4hvu9ru2.003

I think i could do more hash if only i had a quad core.


Oc: +150 clock

Hmm weird why at one instance I'm at 4 cores at 70%. Do you remember your cpu usage with just one instance.

Would me running 1 instance as user miner. And an other as root cause a problem? Surely it just multitasks the same.  No matter how the instances are run

[nobaj]

I am having something like this :

nobaj@slave02:~/Documents$ ./run.sh
Driver = 390 , CARD COUNT=6 , WK=slave02
nobaj@slave02:~/Documents$ panic: runtime error: invalid memory address or nil pointer dereference
[signal SIGSEGV: segmentation violation code=0x1 addr=0x8 pc=0x5cace2]

goroutine 39 [running]:
github.com/leifjacky/btmgominer/clients/stratum.(*Client).Close(0x0)
   /data/go/src/github.com/leifjacky/btmgominer/clients/stratum/stratum.go:94 +0x22
github.com/leifjacky/btmgominer/algorithms/bytom.(*StratumClient).Start(0xc420182000)
   /data/go/src/github.com/leifjacky/btmgominer/algorithms/bytom/siastratum.go:119 +0x64a
created by github.com/leifjacky/btmgominer/algorithms/bytom.(*StratumClient).Start.func1
   /data/go/src/github.com/leifjacky/btmgominer/algorithms/bytom/siastratum.go:75 +0x104




Any advice???

[gregory021998]

I just swapped out a pentium G620 2 core on a 4 x 1060 rig i was getting a jumpy av 335h/s both cores around 95%

ive put in a i5 quad core 2400s and i get a much more stable 380h/s all 4 cores at 71%

i tried two threads but hash rate went down to 135h/s on each thread and cpu was 100% on all cores.

The -I intensity doesn't seem to be the best thing in the world, defiantly far too cpu bound for a gpu miner.  but its v1 prob so its expected.

I suggest you to try three instance of ./miner,look my reply above

Sorry I meant not 2 threads but I meant two instances. I logged into Linux as miner and ran the miner. (All cores at 70%.) Then fired up another ssh logged in as root and ran the miner. And the sum of the two hash rates was less than just 1. I don't know how yours can be so much better with similar systems?

I'm running on smos. And killed all the processes. Is the i5 2500s just not as powerful?  It has 4 real cores

I don't know the exact reason, i will leave you my setup:

System: HiveOs
Ram : 4 gb(was not enough so i created another 4 gb of swap)

To start the miner i use this script: https://pastebin.com/gR2e1bp5 (i created a file called start.sh)
Every start.sh has my wallet and the worker number, example:

bm1qnsk9rl45s4kps6mm97393gdjr5hslf4hvu9ru2.001
bm1qnsk9rl45s4kps6mm97393gdjr5hslf4hvu9ru2.002
bm1qnsk9rl45s4kps6mm97393gdjr5hslf4hvu9ru2.003

I think i could do more hash if only i had a quad core.


Oc: +150 clock

Hmm weird why at one instance I'm at 4 cores at 70%. Do you remember your cpu usage with just one instance.

Would me running 1 instance as user miner. And an other as root cause a problem? Surely it just multitasks the same.  No matter how the instances are run

I was getting 120% cpu with one process (200% limit because cpu is dual core),  with three process i'm getting 70% - 70% - 60& (again, 200% limit), so i was planning to get a quad core (i3 or i5) to give each process the max requested (120% in my case).

EDIT: i tried with 6 core cpu and was using the same 100% of cores, so i think it's a combined cpu-gpu

[gregory021998]

Have my 1070s running at 150 h/s per card at 60w.
I assume this can be optimize, but the hasrate is jumping up and down.

But i have noticed also Hasrate isnt stable on my B3 miner , maybe this is something to do with algo.

Did you try to open 3 instance of miner?

[nobaj]

I am getting on my rig, 400 to 700 h/s but the pool is telling me that I just have 77 h/s

Any advice? 

[yrk1957]

I am getting on my rig, 400 to 700 h/s but the pool is telling me that I just have 77 h/s

Any advice? 

You need to check over a long period like 4-5 hrs at least to get a realistic view at the pool.

[nobaj]

I am getting on my rig, 400 to 700 h/s but the pool is telling me that I just have 77 h/s

Any advice? 

You need to check over a long period like 4-5 hrs at least to get a realistic view at the pool.

I leave it since 4 am (now I am at 12 pm ) all that time I had 77h/s and I only got like 1.3 btm

[yrk1957]

I am getting on my rig, 400 to 700 h/s but the pool is telling me that I just have 77 h/s

Any advice? 

You need to check over a long period like 4-5 hrs at least to get a realistic view at the pool.

I leave it since 4 am (now I am at 12 pm ) all that time I had 77h/s and I only got like 1.3 btm

Did you use default intensity? Multiple miners?

[nobaj]

I am getting on my rig, 400 to 700 h/s but the pool is telling me that I just have 77 h/s

Any advice? 

You need to check over a long period like 4-5 hrs at least to get a realistic view at the pool.

I leave it since 4 am (now I am at 12 pm ) all that time I had 77h/s and I only got like 1.3 btm

Did you use default intensity? Multiple miners?

Default intensity (I think it is I tried with multiple miners for half an hour but the hashrate was just splitting between the 3 instances, so I leave it with only one instance.

[monkins1010]

I just swapped out a pentium G620 2 core on a 4 x 1060 rig i was getting a jumpy av 335h/s both cores around 95%

ive put in a i5 quad core 2400s and i get a much more stable 380h/s all 4 cores at 71%

i tried two threads but hash rate went down to 135h/s on each thread and cpu was 100% on all cores.

The -I intensity doesn't seem to be the best thing in the world, defiantly far too cpu bound for a gpu miner.  but its v1 prob so its expected.

I suggest you to try three instance of ./miner,look my reply above

Sorry I meant not 2 threads but I meant two instances. I logged into Linux as miner and ran the miner. (All cores at 70%.) Then fired up another ssh logged in as root and ran the miner. And the sum of the two hash rates was less than just 1. I don't know how yours can be so much better with similar systems?

I'm running on smos. And killed all the processes. Is the i5 2500s just not as powerful?  It has 4 real cores

I don't know the exact reason, i will leave you my setup:

System: HiveOs
Ram : 4 gb(was not enough so i created another 4 gb of swap)

To start the miner i use this script: https://pastebin.com/gR2e1bp5 (i created a file called start.sh)
Every start.sh has my wallet and the worker number, example:

bm1qnsk9rl45s4kps6mm97393gdjr5hslf4hvu9ru2.001
bm1qnsk9rl45s4kps6mm97393gdjr5hslf4hvu9ru2.002
bm1qnsk9rl45s4kps6mm97393gdjr5hslf4hvu9ru2.003

I think i could do more hash if only i had a quad core.


Oc: +150 clock

Hmm weird why at one instance I'm at 4 cores at 70%. Do you remember your cpu usage with just one instance.

Would me running 1 instance as user miner. And an other as root cause a problem? Surely it just multitasks the same.  No matter how the instances are run

I was getting 120% cpu with one process (200% limit because cpu is dual core),  with three process i'm getting 70% - 70% - 60& (again, 200% limit), so i was planning to get a quad core (i3 or i5) to give each process the max requested (120% in my case).

EDIT: i tried with 6 core cpu and was using the same 100% of cores, so i think it's a combined cpu-gpu

Sorry to labour the point but I was at 70%-70%-70%-70% on one instance with 4 x1060 rock steady 380h/s
Adding an extra Instance yielded 100% across 4 cores and 135h/s on each core. Thus a drop in gross hash

[gregory021998]

I just swapped out a pentium G620 2 core on a 4 x 1060 rig i was getting a jumpy av 335h/s both cores around 95%

ive put in a i5 quad core 2400s and i get a much more stable 380h/s all 4 cores at 71%

i tried two threads but hash rate went down to 135h/s on each thread and cpu was 100% on all cores.

The -I intensity doesn't seem to be the best thing in the world, defiantly far too cpu bound for a gpu miner.  but its v1 prob so its expected.

I suggest you to try three instance of ./miner,look my reply above

Sorry I meant not 2 threads but I meant two instances. I logged into Linux as miner and ran the miner. (All cores at 70%.) Then fired up another ssh logged in as root and ran the miner. And the sum of the two hash rates was less than just 1. I don't know how yours can be so much better with similar systems?

I'm running on smos. And killed all the processes. Is the i5 2500s just not as powerful?  It has 4 real cores

I don't know the exact reason, i will leave you my setup:

System: HiveOs
Ram : 4 gb(was not enough so i created another 4 gb of swap)

To start the miner i use this script: https://pastebin.com/gR2e1bp5 (i created a file called start.sh)
Every start.sh has my wallet and the worker number, example:

bm1qnsk9rl45s4kps6mm97393gdjr5hslf4hvu9ru2.001
bm1qnsk9rl45s4kps6mm97393gdjr5hslf4hvu9ru2.002
bm1qnsk9rl45s4kps6mm97393gdjr5hslf4hvu9ru2.003

I think i could do more hash if only i had a quad core.


Oc: +150 clock

Hmm weird why at one instance I'm at 4 cores at 70%. Do you remember your cpu usage with just one instance.

Would me running 1 instance as user miner. And an other as root cause a problem? Surely it just multitasks the same.  No matter how the instances are run

I was getting 120% cpu with one process (200% limit because cpu is dual core),  with three process i'm getting 70% - 70% - 60& (again, 200% limit), so i was planning to get a quad core (i3 or i5) to give each process the max requested (120% in my case).

EDIT: i tried with 6 core cpu and was using the same 100% of cores, so i think it's a combined cpu-gpu

Sorry to labour the point but I was at 70%-70%-70%-70% on one instance with 4 x1060 rock steady 380h/s
Adding an extra Instance yielded 100% across 4 cores and 135h/s on each core. Thus a drop in gross hash

My fault, this time i was talking about cpu. 70% was referred to the cpu. Btw i ordered an i5 and should be delivered next week.. i will update my results

Regarding you, i think your main reason why the first instance lose power is due cpu. Which cpu are you using? and or curiosity, how much ram?

[rifqirdh]

Hi there, is there a miner software for windows users?

[monkins1010]

I just swapped out a pentium G620 2 core on a 4 x 1060 rig i was getting a jumpy av 335h/s both cores around 95%

ive put in a i5 quad core 2400s and i get a much more stable 380h/s all 4 cores at 71%

i tried two threads but hash rate went down to 135h/s on each thread and cpu was 100% on all cores.

The -I intensity doesn't seem to be the best thing in the world, defiantly far too cpu bound for a gpu miner.  but its v1 prob so its expected.

I suggest you to try three instance of ./miner,look my reply above

Sorry I meant not 2 threads but I meant two instances. I logged into Linux as miner and ran the miner. (All cores at 70%.) Then fired up another ssh logged in as root and ran the miner. And the sum of the two hash rates was less than just 1. I don't know how yours can be so much better with similar systems?

I'm running on smos. And killed all the processes. Is the i5 2500s just not as powerful?  It has 4 real cores

I don't know the exact reason, i will leave you my setup:

System: HiveOs
Ram : 4 gb(was not enough so i created another 4 gb of swap)

To start the miner i use this script: https://pastebin.com/gR2e1bp5 (i created a file called start.sh)
Every start.sh has my wallet and the worker number, example:

bm1qnsk9rl45s4kps6mm97393gdjr5hslf4hvu9ru2.001
bm1qnsk9rl45s4kps6mm97393gdjr5hslf4hvu9ru2.002
bm1qnsk9rl45s4kps6mm97393gdjr5hslf4hvu9ru2.003

I think i could do more hash if only i had a quad core.


Oc: +150 clock

Hmm weird why at one instance I'm at 4 cores at 70%. Do you remember your cpu usage with just one instance.

Would me running 1 instance as user miner. And an other as root cause a problem? Surely it just multitasks the same.  No matter how the instances are run

I was getting 120% cpu with one process (200% limit because cpu is dual core),  with three process i'm getting 70% - 70% - 60& (again, 200% limit), so i was planning to get a quad core (i3 or i5) to give each process the max requested (120% in my case).

EDIT: i tried with 6 core cpu and was using the same 100% of cores, so i think it's a combined cpu-gpu

Sorry to labour the point but I was at 70%-70%-70%-70% on one instance with 4 x1060 rock steady 380h/s
Adding an extra Instance yielded 100% across 4 cores and 135h/s on each core. Thus a drop in gross hash

My fault, this time i was talking about cpu. 70% was referred to the cpu. Btw i ordered an i5 and should be delivered next week.. i will update my results

Regarding you, i think your main reason why the first instance lose power is due cpu. Which cpu are you using? and or curiosity, how much ram?

Lol I meant on my i5 I got  4 x 70% cpu usage on its 4 cpu cores with 1 instance of the miner. When i went to 2 instances total cpu usage went to 4 x100%. I.e full cpu maxed out on two instances with no increase in hash.

4gb syatem ram. Simple  miner on usb.  I have an i7 I could pop in and try

[gregory021998]

I just swapped out a pentium G620 2 core on a 4 x 1060 rig i was getting a jumpy av 335h/s both cores around 95%

ive put in a i5 quad core 2400s and i get a much more stable 380h/s all 4 cores at 71%

i tried two threads but hash rate went down to 135h/s on each thread and cpu was 100% on all cores.

The -I intensity doesn't seem to be the best thing in the world, defiantly far too cpu bound for a gpu miner.  but its v1 prob so its expected.

I suggest you to try three instance of ./miner,look my reply above

Sorry I meant not 2 threads but I meant two instances. I logged into Linux as miner and ran the miner. (All cores at 70%.) Then fired up another ssh logged in as root and ran the miner. And the sum of the two hash rates was less than just 1. I don't know how yours can be so much better with similar systems?

I'm running on smos. And killed all the processes. Is the i5 2500s just not as powerful?  It has 4 real cores

I don't know the exact reason, i will leave you my setup:

System: HiveOs
Ram : 4 gb(was not enough so i created another 4 gb of swap)

To start the miner i use this script: https://pastebin.com/gR2e1bp5 (i created a file called start.sh)
Every start.sh has my wallet and the worker number, example:

bm1qnsk9rl45s4kps6mm97393gdjr5hslf4hvu9ru2.001
bm1qnsk9rl45s4kps6mm97393gdjr5hslf4hvu9ru2.002
bm1qnsk9rl45s4kps6mm97393gdjr5hslf4hvu9ru2.003

I think i could do more hash if only i had a quad core.


Oc: +150 clock

Hmm weird why at one instance I'm at 4 cores at 70%. Do you remember your cpu usage with just one instance.

Would me running 1 instance as user miner. And an other as root cause a problem? Surely it just multitasks the same.  No matter how the instances are run

I was getting 120% cpu with one process (200% limit because cpu is dual core),  with three process i'm getting 70% - 70% - 60& (again, 200% limit), so i was planning to get a quad core (i3 or i5) to give each process the max requested (120% in my case).

EDIT: i tried with 6 core cpu and was using the same 100% of cores, so i think it's a combined cpu-gpu

Sorry to labour the point but I was at 70%-70%-70%-70% on one instance with 4 x1060 rock steady 380h/s
Adding an extra Instance yielded 100% across 4 cores and 135h/s on each core. Thus a drop in gross hash

My fault, this time i was talking about cpu. 70% was referred to the cpu. Btw i ordered an i5 and should be delivered next week.. i will update my results

Regarding you, i think your main reason why the first instance lose power is due cpu. Which cpu are you using? and or curiosity, how much ram?

Lol I meant on my i5 I got  4 x 70% cpu usage on its 4 cpu cores with 1 instance of the miner. When i went to 2 instances total cpu usage went to 4 x100%. I.e full cpu maxed out on two instances with no increase in hash.

4gb syatem ram. Simple  miner on usb.  I have an i7 I could pop in and try

Well, consider that 4 gb of ram is not enough to make multi instances (3) to work properly (swap is not helping so much)... My suggestion is: try putting 8 gb of ram, hiveos and the i7 you mentioned above, after that open three instances

[VoskCoin]

I am getting on my rig, 400 to 700 h/s but the pool is telling me that I just have 77 h/s

Any advice? 

You need to check over a long period like 4-5 hrs at least to get a realistic view at the pool.

I leave it since 4 am (now I am at 12 pm ) all that time I had 77h/s and I only got like 1.3 btm

that is realistic earnings for that amount of hash -- you can compare w/ stock antminer b3 here - https://goo.gl/v86eKG

[monkins1010]

Latest mining stats summary

Antminer b3

https://ibb.co/nayeFo

GTX 1060 rig x4. At 250w with i5 quad

https://ibb.co/hwwwT8

Considering the pc rig takes less juice I would say they are pretty close in total hash rate per watt.

[gregory021998]

Latest mining stats summary

Antminer b3

https://ibb.co/nayeFo

GTX 1060 rig x4. At 250w with i5 quad

https://ibb.co/hwwwT8

Considering the pc rig takes less juice I would say they are pretty close in total hash rate per watt.

Well, regarding the 4 x 1060 the hash seems pretty low to me.
If you want pm me , i would like to run some test , we can chat on telegram...
Are you using more than 4 gb of ram? with an i5 it's impossible to do an avg of 400 h/s, you should be at least to 600-700 h/s

[chandeepa32]

very insightful! read this thread all the way

[chrysophylax]

very insightful! read this thread all the way

I will be reading it shortly also ...

#crysx