[POOL][Scrypt][Scrypt-N][X11] Profit switching pool - wafflepool.com

[volder]

Is there a way to manually set pool diff with Wafflepool? I have several large ASIC miners and 512 diff is WAY too low. They just spam your servers with shares.

it was possible earlier, as the password to deliver x=1024. It seems works and now.

What about higher? Like 8000 or 16000 diff? Do those work?

What difficulty would be useful?  Would be reasonably trivial to setup an extra port with very high difficulty.

Can you do two ports, one for 8k and another for 64k or so? There is wide range of new ASICs now between 10-90 MH/s and even faster ones are coming.

Why did a pool tell me to use d=512 for my 30 MH's Gridspeeds?   Are there differences between types of ASIC's? I thought 30 MH's is 30 MH's?

Yes, there is a difference.

And it is?    WTF is up with people on this forum.....

I assumed that since you have a computer, and posted this question online, that you had all the necessary tools to go find the answer. My fault, shouldn't assume. I almost didn't answer your question because your reply was quite rude. However, I'll play nice.

This example assumes you have Gridseed Blades, not Gridseed 5-Chip Miners. The 512 number you were given is too low for Gridseed blades. You want something in the 1024-2048 (maybe even 4096) range.

You have 30Mh, roughly 6 Gridseed Blades hashing at 5Mh each. My A2 has 6 internal blades hashing at 14.5Mh each. This means that each of my blades can do roughly three times the amount of work that yours can in the same amount of time.

In order to make things more efficient and stop miners from spamming the pool with shares (and requesting work too fast), you give them more work at a time to process. Faster miners can process more work than slower miners in the same period of time. This is what the difficulty setting does.

[1715347073]

1715347073

[suchmoon]

Why did a pool tell me to use d=512 for my 30 MH's Gridspeeds?   Are there differences between types of ASIC's? I thought 30 MH's is 30 MH's?

Which pool told you to do that? d=512 might be ok for 30MH/s if the miner can send and get work fast enough but generally you probably don't want difficulty that results in more than a share every few seconds. Lower diff i.e. more shares allows the pool to show a more accurate hashrate estimate, aside from that there is no real benefit. So for example 30 MH/s at 512 difficulty should generate roughly one share per second - probably ok but might be too much for slow controllers like Pi and/or slow network connections, if all that 30 MH/s is hanging on one controller. 4k difficulty would give you a share every ~10 seconds on average if I'm not messing up my math here.

In theory there is no difference which ASIC you use to generate your MH/s, however from a practical standpoint if you have a lot of small miners it makes sense to use lower difficulty - as long as the controller can keep up - this would allow you to better see how each individual miner is doing.

[JHammer]

Is there a way to manually set pool diff with Wafflepool? I have several large ASIC miners and 512 diff is WAY too low. They just spam your servers with shares.

it was possible earlier, as the password to deliver x=1024. It seems works and now.

What about higher? Like 8000 or 16000 diff? Do those work?

What difficulty would be useful?  Would be reasonably trivial to setup an extra port with very high difficulty.

Can you do two ports, one for 8k and another for 64k or so? There is wide range of new ASICs now between 10-90 MH/s and even faster ones are coming.

Why did a pool tell me to use d=512 for my 30 MH's Gridspeeds?   Are there differences between types of ASIC's? I thought 30 MH's is 30 MH's?

Yes, there is a difference.

And it is?    WTF is up with people on this forum.....

I assumed that since you have a computer, and posted this question online, that you had all the necessary tools to go find the answer. My fault, shouldn't assume. I almost didn't answer your question because your reply was quite rude. However, I'll play nice.

This example assumes you have Gridseed Blades, not Gridseed 5-Chip Miners. The 512 number you were given is too low for Gridseed blades. You want something in the 1024-2048 (maybe even 4096) range.

You have 30Mh, roughly 6 Gridseed Blades hashing at 5Mh each. My A2 has 6 internal blades hashing at 14.5Mh each. This means that each of my blades can do roughly three times the amount of work that yours can in the same amount of time.

In order to make things more efficient and stop miners from spamming the pool with shares (and requesting work too fast), you give them more work at a time to process. Faster miners can process more work than slower miners in the same period of time. This is what the difficulty setting does.

Thanks Volder.. Sorry I got a bit snotty..   Long day at the office.. My bad.

[JHammer]

Is there a way to manually set pool diff with Wafflepool? I have several large ASIC miners and 512 diff is WAY too low. They just spam your servers with shares.

it was possible earlier, as the password to deliver x=1024. It seems works and now.

What about higher? Like 8000 or 16000 diff? Do those work?

What difficulty would be useful?  Would be reasonably trivial to setup an extra port with very high difficulty.

Can you do two ports, one for 8k and another for 64k or so? There is wide range of new ASICs now between 10-90 MH/s and even faster ones are coming.

Why did a pool tell me to use d=512 for my 30 MH's Gridspeeds?   Are there differences between types of ASIC's? I thought 30 MH's is 30 MH's?

Yes, there is a difference.

And it is?    WTF is up with people on this forum.....

I assumed that since you have a computer, and posted this question online, that you had all the necessary tools to go find the answer. My fault, shouldn't assume. I almost didn't answer your question because your reply was quite rude. However, I'll play nice.

This example assumes you have Gridseed Blades, not Gridseed 5-Chip Miners. The 512 number you were given is too low for Gridseed blades. You want something in the 1024-2048 (maybe even 4096) range.

You have 30Mh, roughly 6 Gridseed Blades hashing at 5Mh each. My A2 has 6 internal blades hashing at 14.5Mh each. This means that each of my blades can do roughly three times the amount of work that yours can in the same amount of time.

In order to make things more efficient and stop miners from spamming the pool with shares (and requesting work too fast), you give them more work at a time to process. Faster miners can process more work than slower miners in the same period of time. This is what the difficulty setting does.

Thanks Volder.. Sorry I got a bit snotty..   Long day at the office.. My bad.

NiceHash.. Which I found odd..

I have a 20 pack of Gridspeeds and 4 blades.. 

[volder]

Thanks Volder.. Sorry I got a bit snotty..   Long day at the office.. My bad.

No worries. It's in the past. Already forgot about it.

[volder]

NiceHash.. Which I found odd..

I have a 20 pack of Gridspeeds and 4 blades.. 

256 or 512 is great for those little gridseed pods. It's a bit low for the blades. You should have them on separate controllers anyways though.

[poolwaffle]

Why did a pool tell me to use d=512 for my 30 MH's Gridspeeds?   Are there differences between types of ASIC's? I thought 30 MH's is 30 MH's?

Which pool told you to do that? d=512 might be ok for 30MH/s if the miner can send and get work fast enough but generally you probably don't want difficulty that results in more than a share every few seconds. Lower diff i.e. more shares allows the pool to show a more accurate hashrate estimate, aside from that there is no real benefit. So for example 30 MH/s at 512 difficulty should generate roughly one share per second - probably ok but might be too much for slow controllers like Pi and/or slow network connections, if all that 30 MH/s is hanging on one controller. 4k difficulty would give you a share every ~10 seconds on average if I'm not messing up my math here.

In theory there is no difference which ASIC you use to generate your MH/s, however from a practical standpoint if you have a lot of small miners it makes sense to use lower difficulty - as long as the controller can keep up - this would allow you to better see how each individual miner is doing.

Difficulty has no effect on requesting work (which isn't even a thing).  The pool pushes work to miners at the same speed regardless of miner speed (whenever there is a block change, or enough transaction changes to warrant it).  The client adjusts certain numbers client-side to keep working without constantly needing new work from the server.  The only difference a low difficulty would make is that you'd need to submit shares more often (and that is reasonably minimal from a client side at least).

That said, we definitely can add a port with high difficulty (or maybe re-add user-specified difficulty in the server)

[suchmoon]

Why did a pool tell me to use d=512 for my 30 MH's Gridspeeds?   Are there differences between types of ASIC's? I thought 30 MH's is 30 MH's?

Which pool told you to do that? d=512 might be ok for 30MH/s if the miner can send and get work fast enough but generally you probably don't want difficulty that results in more than a share every few seconds. Lower diff i.e. more shares allows the pool to show a more accurate hashrate estimate, aside from that there is no real benefit. So for example 30 MH/s at 512 difficulty should generate roughly one share per second - probably ok but might be too much for slow controllers like Pi and/or slow network connections, if all that 30 MH/s is hanging on one controller. 4k difficulty would give you a share every ~10 seconds on average if I'm not messing up my math here.

In theory there is no difference which ASIC you use to generate your MH/s, however from a practical standpoint if you have a lot of small miners it makes sense to use lower difficulty - as long as the controller can keep up - this would allow you to better see how each individual miner is doing.

Difficulty has no effect on requesting work (which isn't even a thing).  The pool pushes work to miners at the same speed regardless of miner speed (whenever there is a block change, or enough transaction changes to warrant it).  The client adjusts certain numbers client-side to keep working without constantly needing new work from the server.  The only difference a low difficulty would make is that you'd need to submit shares more often (and that is reasonably minimal from a client side at least).

That said, we definitely can add a port with high difficulty (or maybe re-add user-specified difficulty in the server)

Ok, that explains it, but there is definitely a noticeable slowdown on underpowered controllers when difficulty is too low. Could be that it's not so much controller-to-pool but controller-to-miner communication.

[JHammer]

So is it normal for 1 BTC per MHS's per day to drop so much when prices rise???  I guess despite the drop we still making about the same since the price is up?   No one asking or worried about it but me so I guess so.

Or is this the new normal due to all the ASIC's coming on-line?

[ingrown]

So is it normal for 1 BTC per MHS's per day to drop so much when prices rise???  I guess despite the drop we still making about the same since the price is up?   No one asking or worried about it but me so I guess so.

Or is this the new normal due to all the ASIC's coming on-line?

I imagine the BTC/1MH drop is solely due to the fact that the value of BTC is rising but the value of the altcoins hasn't risen.  You're right, we should be making about the same assuming you cash out your BTC immediately.  The altcoin market may adjust, but I have no idea if or when that would happen.

[JHammer]

So is it normal for 1 BTC per MHS's per day to drop so much when prices rise???  I guess despite the drop we still making about the same since the price is up?   No one asking or worried about it but me so I guess so.

Or is this the new normal due to all the ASIC's coming on-line?

I imagine the BTC/1MH drop is solely due to the fact that the value of BTC is rising but the value of the altcoins hasn't risen.  You're right, we should be making about the same assuming you cash out your BTC immediately.  The altcoin market may adjust, but I have no idea if or when that would happen.

Interesting to try and figure it out.. SO MANY different factors play into this its kind s of mind boggling to me..

[poolwaffle]

So is it normal for 1 BTC per MHS's per day to drop so much when prices rise???  I guess despite the drop we still making about the same since the price is up?   No one asking or worried about it but me so I guess so.

Or is this the new normal due to all the ASIC's coming on-line?

I imagine the BTC/1MH drop is solely due to the fact that the value of BTC is rising but the value of the altcoins hasn't risen.  You're right, we should be making about the same assuming you cash out your BTC immediately.  The altcoin market may adjust, but I have no idea if or when that would happen.

Interesting to try and figure it out.. SO MANY different factors play into this its kind s of mind boggling to me..

Like you said, there are a ton of factors.  BTC rising, and scrypt markets not rising as well obviously affects, in fact, LTC/doge have taken a decent hit in the last few days (even outside of the BTC rise), which hurts as well.  There's also more and more ASICs coming online, and while that doesn't change prices much (should raise them slightly), it does mean less bang (BTC) per MHs, as the amount of LTC/coins mined during the day stays the same, but is divided among a larger MHs group.

[JHammer]

So is it normal for 1 BTC per MHS's per day to drop so much when prices rise???  I guess despite the drop we still making about the same since the price is up?   No one asking or worried about it but me so I guess so.

Or is this the new normal due to all the ASIC's coming on-line?

I imagine the BTC/1MH drop is solely due to the fact that the value of BTC is rising but the value of the altcoins hasn't risen.  You're right, we should be making about the same assuming you cash out your BTC immediately.  The altcoin market may adjust, but I have no idea if or when that would happen.

Interesting to try and figure it out.. SO MANY different factors play into this its kind s of mind boggling to me..

Like you said, there are a ton of factors.  BTC rising, and scrypt markets not rising as well obviously affects, in fact, LTC/doge have taken a decent hit in the last few days (even outside of the BTC rise), which hurts as well.  There's also more and more ASICs coming online, and while that doesn't change prices much (should raise them slightly), it does mean less bang (BTC) per MHs, as the amount of LTC/coins mined during the day stays the same, but is divided among a larger MHs group.

Thanks PW..   Makes sense.. Just trying to wrap my brain around how all this works..

[aagert]

poolwaffle,
Please. Make. X11. Port. On. Your. Pool.
!!!
That's where most of GPUs are moving now. And the only normal multipool (as far as I know) for X11 now is TradeMyBit, which I DON'T like, personally.

[gaalx]

poolwaffle,
Please. Make. X11. Port. On. Your. Pool.
!!!
That's where most of GPUs are moving now. And the only normal multipool (as far as I know) for X11 now is TradeMyBit, which I DON'T like, personally.

after reading of new messages and itself I wanted similar to offer. The script all further and further falls in profitability. make at least one American server under X11.

[poolwaffle]

poolwaffle,
Please. Make. X11. Port. On. Your. Pool.
!!!
That's where most of GPUs are moving now. And the only normal multipool (as far as I know) for X11 now is TradeMyBit, which I DON'T like, personally.

after reading of new messages and itself I wanted similar to offer. The script all further and further falls in profitability. make at least one American server under X11.

As I've said before.  Adding the server is no problem (already done, with private ports for personal testing).  The problem is if you want to get paid, which is what I'm very actively working on

[phzi]

As I've said before.  Adding the server is no problem (already done, with private ports for personal testing).  The problem is if you want to get paid, which is what I'm very actively working on

Heh... and we do all like getting paid.

[poolwaffle]

As I've said before.  Adding the server is no problem (already done, with private ports for personal testing).  The problem is if you want to get paid, which is what I'm very actively working on

Heh... and we do all like getting paid.

Stratum endpoints now suppport "d=XXX" as your password for setting difficulty.  It won't take effect immediately (you'll see 512 difficulty show up to start), but will reset on the first block change (new block, or coin switch), normally only a few seconds.

Supports difficulty >= 256, in powers of two.  aka, can set your password to: "d=256", "d=512", "d=1024", all the way up to "d=32768"

[gaalx]

poolwaffle,
Please. Make. X11. Port. On. Your. Pool.
!!!
That's where most of GPUs are moving now. And the only normal multipool (as far as I know) for X11 now is TradeMyBit, which I DON'T like, personally.

after reading of new messages and itself I wanted similar to offer. The script all further and further falls in profitability. make at least one American server under X11.

As I've said before.  Adding the server is no problem (already done, with private ports for personal testing).  The problem is if you want to get paid, which is what I'm very actively working on

I didn't understand all sense of the message. There is an assumption what to get we will be able, but thus there will be problems with payment? I agree at the initial stage to the similar.

[poolwaffle]

I didn't understand all sense of the message. There is an assumption what to get we will be able, but thus there will be problems with payment? I agree at the initial stage to the similar.

Just pretend I said "We're working on it".