sp_ (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1087
Team Black developer
|
|
October 07, 2021, 04:08:12 PM Last edit: November 08, 2021, 01:13:13 PM by mprep |
|
for me it's very important share / min !
For me the very important part is the payout per day. If changing the pool increase the profit +10% it's a nobrainer..
Are you able to provide a link on how that data is generated?
https://www.miningpoolsprofits.com/how-it-works[moderator's note: consecutive posts merged]
|
|
|
|
dle378
Copper Member
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 77
Merit: 0
|
|
October 07, 2021, 04:34:25 PM |
|
Thanks for that link. Switched to CrazyPool and changed xintensity to 256. Is that still high based on the Difficulty value of 2.00?
|
|
|
|
sukidesu
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 13
Merit: 0
|
|
October 07, 2021, 04:36:36 PM |
|
PING: 50ms DIFFICULTY: 1.00 EPOCH: 445
Too low difficulty for --xintensity 256. (default) try --xintensity 224 Just changed xintensity to 224. Should I wait a few hours for the Current/Average Hashrate to adjust properly on Ethermine? Tested 224 for 2 hours. The results actually aren't better. I'll try nanopool. But I'm surprised there's no clear answer on the best pool to use with this miner.
|
|
|
|
sp_ (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1087
Team Black developer
|
|
October 07, 2021, 04:40:00 PM |
|
Tested 224 for 2 hours.
What was the stale share rate? PPLNS pools doesn't like pool hopping 2hours isn't enough time. you need 24hours++
|
|
|
|
sukidesu
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 13
Merit: 0
|
|
October 07, 2021, 06:07:49 PM Last edit: November 08, 2021, 01:11:39 PM by mprep |
|
Thanks for that link. Switched to CrazyPool and changed xintensity to 256. Is that still high based on the Difficulty value of 2.00? Be careful. It's a low hashrate pool, which might lead to a bad streak period at first if you're looking at the generated revenue only.
ethermine, hi diff port (14444), intensity 224 : 169m [2021-10-07 20:09:42.583] ID BOARD HASHRATE/W HASHRATE AVERAGE SHARES 169m [2021-10-07 20:09:42.583] GPU0 3070 468.23 kH/W 65.08 MH/s 85.96 MH/s 139/2/4 (98.58%) 169m [2021-10-07 20:09:42.583] GPU1 3070 468.19 kH/W 65.08 MH/s 89.45 MH/s 168/13/4 (92.82%) 169m [2021-10-07 20:09:42.583] GPU2 3070 467.82 kH/W 65.03 MH/s 94.31 MH/s 155/22/2 (87.57%) 169m [2021-10-07 20:09:42.583] GPU3 3070 437.14 kH/W 65.13 MH/s 101.62 MH/s 148/3/3 (98.01%) 169m [2021-10-07 20:09:42.583] GPU4 3080 460.19 kH/W 105.38 MH/s 113.79 MH/s 222/2/3 (99.11%) 169m [2021-10-07 20:09:42.583] GPU5 3090 438.00 kH/W 130.96 MH/s 118.00 MH/s 288/3/4 (98.97%) 169m [2021-10-07 20:09:42.583] GPU6 3080 459.39 kH/W 105.20 MH/s 105.12 MH/s 215/3/3 (98.62%) 169m [2021-10-07 20:09:42.583] 3198.96 kH/W 601.87 MH/s 708.26 MH/s 1335/48/23 (96.53%)
Average effective : 545 mh/s
Be careful. It's a low hashrate pool, which might lead to a bad streak period at first if you're looking at the generated revenue only.
Sometimes in 2018 somebody financed new teams and stole code from the origial opensource developers trexminer - USA (flexpool, ethemine++) team red miner - POLAND (?) gminer - RUSSIA (2miners) lolminer - ISRAEL (?) nbminer - China cryptdregde - Australia (cruxpool) Who do you work for? please help me fill in the blanks.. Just still waiting for a single pool + single intensity value to lead to a real better efficiency. I'm not related to any project. Dunno where this conspiracy post will lead you up to. My only link to the mining world was a website, myha.sh, whose purpose was actually to provide real infos from poolside datas. Exactly what I'm trying to find out here. [moderator's note: consecutive posts merged]
|
|
|
|
sp_ (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1087
Team Black developer
|
|
October 07, 2021, 06:33:47 PM Last edit: November 08, 2021, 01:11:54 PM by mprep |
|
Average effective : 545 mh/s
yes, on the right miningpool
I'm not related to any project.
Do a test on https://woolypooly.com/
world was a website, myha.sh, whose purpose was actually to provide real infos from poolside datas.
In order to measure the real performance you need the pool and the miner to talk the same language. We added the --xintensity to increase the performance poolside. Did you try --xintensity -1 ? [moderator's note: consecutive posts merged]
|
|
|
|
sukidesu
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 13
Merit: 0
|
|
October 07, 2021, 06:44:02 PM |
|
world was a website, myha.sh, whose purpose was actually to provide real infos from poolside datas.
In order to measure the real performance you need the pool and the miner to talk the same language. We added the --xintensity to increase the performance poolside. Did you try --xintensity -1 ? I did, but using -1 led to lower hashrates than the other miners to avoid the stales. Also, woolypooly has a way too low hashrate to my taste to actually move to it. Testing on nanopool for 24 hours now.
|
|
|
|
sp_ (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1087
Team Black developer
|
|
October 07, 2021, 06:57:51 PM Last edit: November 08, 2021, 01:12:10 PM by mprep |
|
Testing on nanopool for 24 hours now.
Why don't you try a 24h test on https://crazypool.org/ Compare the result in $$$ / 24hours
The team black school MC68060 (1996) @50mhz AGA chipset (1992) bitplane graphics https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPdB_zdyMbM[moderator's note: consecutive posts merged]
|
|
|
|
somaton
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 211
Merit: 6
|
|
October 07, 2021, 07:28:23 PM |
|
ok, yesterday moved one more 3060 to tbm 1.11 for test:
1302m [2021-10-07 17:02:34.046] miningpoolhub.com (ethash) PING: 385ms DIFFICULTY: 3.00 EPOCH: 445 1302m [2021-10-07 17:02:34.046] 1302m [2021-10-07 17:02:34.046] 1302m [2021-10-07 17:02:34.046] ID BOARD TYPE TEMP FAN CORE MEM WATT kW/h COST/h 1302m [2021-10-07 17:02:34.046] GPU0 3060 Cuda 51/0 90 1504 8432 113 0.11 0.01USD 1302m [2021-10-07 17:02:34.046] 113 0.11 0.01USD 1302m [2021-10-07 17:02:34.046] 1302m [2021-10-07 17:02:34.046] ID BOARD HASHRATE/W HASHRATE AVERAGE SHARES 1302m [2021-10-07 17:02:34.046] GPU0 3060 449.26 kH/W 50.77 MH/s 50.76 MH/s 332/0/0 (100.00) 1302m [2021-10-07 17:02:34.046] 449.26 kH/W 50.77 MH/s 50.76 MH/s 332/0/0 (100.00) 1302m [2021-10-07 17:02:34.046] 1302m [2021-10-07 17:02:34.046]
then
1306m [2021-10-07 17:06:38.046] miningpoolhub.com (ethash) PING: 383ms DIFFICULTY: 3.00 EPOCH: 445 1306m [2021-10-07 17:06:38.046] 1306m [2021-10-07 17:06:38.046] 1306m [2021-10-07 17:06:38.046] ID BOARD TYPE TEMP FAN CORE MEM WATT kW/h COST/h 1306m [2021-10-07 17:06:38.046] GPU0 3060 Cuda 51/0 90 1585 8432 113 0.11 0.01USD 1306m [2021-10-07 17:06:38.046] 113 0.11 0.01USD 1306m [2021-10-07 17:06:38.046] 1306m [2021-10-07 17:06:38.046] ID BOARD HASHRATE/W HASHRATE AVERAGE SHARES 1306m [2021-10-07 17:06:38.046] GPU0 3060 406.26 kH/W 45.91 MH/s 46.55 MH/s 333/0/0 (100.00) 1306m [2021-10-07 17:06:38.046] 406.26 kH/W 45.91 MH/s 46.55 MH/s 333/0/0 (100.00)
Now without toching anything this rig started to have same problem like the one with 3 cards, but that one is running fine with 1.09. So, more and more i'm sure that 1.10 and up are broken. Few hours later it is still with same slow hashrate.
1628m [2021-10-07 22:34:00.073] GPU0 3060 417.76 kH/W 46.79 MH/s 45.21 MH/s 396/0/0 (100.00)
Just moved it to 1.09, lets see.
|
|
|
|
mmaenpaa
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 20
Merit: 7
|
|
October 07, 2021, 07:37:18 PM Last edit: October 07, 2021, 07:48:07 PM by mmaenpaa |
|
TBM 1.11, Nicehash & RTX 3080
I am pretty pleased with -xxintensity 177 setting (I used 7 on version 1.05)
TBM reports average 98.44MH/s (Nicehash reports 108.88 MH/s as accepted speed? I forgot Nicehash does report average over time, just "current")
(1042/8/0), 226w
core -175MHz memory +1000MHz PL 75%
|
|
|
|
LHiRtibkc6
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 7
Merit: 1
|
|
October 07, 2021, 07:40:44 PM |
|
But I'm surprised there's no clear answer on the best pool to use with this miner.
It will require more testing as TBM matures I think. I have not seen an effective hashrate increase with TBM on flexpool yet even with the lower fee, for example. I understand the point that pools which pay for stale shares will give you a higher hashrate with the miner. But we have to consider the hashrate gain versus each pool's payout holistically. What is squeezing that extra hashrate poolside with stales at the expense of (withdrawal fees, pool not paying out other parts of the total reward, etc)?
|
|
|
|
sp_ (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1087
Team Black developer
|
|
October 07, 2021, 08:55:11 PM Last edit: November 08, 2021, 01:12:25 PM by mprep |
|
What is squeezing that extra hashrate poolside with stales at the expense of (withdrawal fees, pool not paying out other parts of the total reward, etc)?
Basicly you are claiming that this page isn't working... https://www.miningpoolsprofits.com/how-it-works
Dunno where this conspiracy post will lead you up to.
[moderator's note: consecutive posts merged]
|
|
|
|
LHiRtibkc6
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 7
Merit: 1
|
|
October 08, 2021, 01:14:59 AM |
|
What is squeezing that extra hashrate poolside with stales at the expense of (withdrawal fees, pool not paying out other parts of the total reward, etc)?
Basicly you are claiming that this page isn't working... https://www.miningpoolsprofits.com/how-it-worksI'm saying there is more to the picture than just the data on that page and it makes sense to analyze everything about pool+mining software+tune stability before moving. Higher highrate with stales on a pool is good and well, but if it's not leading to more crypto in the wallet at the end of the day it's just mind games. We've seen pools be deceptive with miner rewards. I don't blindly trust that pools compensating stale shares on the surface are not pulling from somewhere else. So yes, I want more data to prove the % gain in hashrate by switching pools for TBM (with more stales) translates to more actual rewards/payout. Keep making TBM the best you can and presenting the data as it evolves.
|
|
|
|
sukidesu
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 13
Merit: 0
|
|
October 08, 2021, 07:30:42 AM |
|
What is squeezing that extra hashrate poolside with stales at the expense of (withdrawal fees, pool not paying out other parts of the total reward, etc)?
Basicly you are claiming that this page isn't working... https://www.miningpoolsprofits.com/how-it-worksI'm saying there is more to the picture than just the data on that page and it makes sense to analyze everything about pool+mining software+tune stability before moving. Higher highrate with stales on a pool is good and well, but if it's not leading to more crypto in the wallet at the end of the day it's just mind games. We've seen pools be deceptive with miner rewards. I don't blindly trust that pools compensating stale shares on the surface are not pulling from somewhere else. So yes, I want more data to prove the % gain in hashrate by switching pools for TBM (with more stales) translates to more actual rewards/payout. Keep making TBM the best you can and presenting the data as it evolves. Exactly. I got 580 mh/s average (poolside) on nanopool after 12 hours, which is nice since my reported hashrate is usually 575 mh/s with the other miners. But I got 0.0047 eth out of it, when I get 0.0055 eth from flexpool. A better poolside hashrate doesn't always mean a better revenue.
|
|
|
|
sp_ (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1087
Team Black developer
|
|
October 08, 2021, 12:10:16 PM |
|
Try miningpoolhub.com I always get good returns there. 100 000 accepted shares 0 rejected. 1335/48/23 (96.53%)
Problems with some of your cards? To high clocks perhaps? Look for cpu validation errors in the logfile.
|
|
|
|
|
dle378
Copper Member
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 77
Merit: 0
|
|
October 08, 2021, 01:53:43 PM |
|
Try miningpoolhub.com I always get good returns there. 100 000 accepted shares 0 rejected. 1335/48/23 (96.53%)
Problems with some of your cards? To high clocks perhaps? Look for cpu validation errors in the logfile. Are you using xintensity 224 or 256 while mining from miningpoolhub?
|
|
|
|
sp_ (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1087
Team Black developer
|
|
October 08, 2021, 02:13:33 PM |
|
used 256, testing 224 now.(default in v1.12) Looking good.
|
|
|
|
abanamat
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 274
Merit: 1
|
|
October 08, 2021, 02:24:29 PM |
|
Hello ppl. Maybe somebody tested different --xintensity for Binance pool, which is better?
|
|
|
|
sp_ (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1087
Team Black developer
|
|
October 08, 2021, 04:12:59 PM |
|
Different cards need different tuning
A user reported good results on the AMD RX 5500 with --xintensity 24
|
|
|
|
|