Bitcoin Forum
October 15, 2026, 12:49:30 PM *
News: Serious possible issue involving Ledger hardware wallets and CryptoBilis
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Pearl(PEARL) mining  (Read 1996 times)
1971ECPT
Jr. Member
*
Offline

Activity: 110
Merit: 4


View Profile
September 29, 2026, 09:34:00 PM
 #61

Could this be a copy-paste error from another user?
These are the settings from pearl.luckypool.io:
"SRBMiner-MULTI.exe --algorithm pearlhash --pool pearl-eu2.luckypool.io:3360 --wallet ADDRESS --worker rig1"
If you specify port 6118 instead of 3360, you will get a server connection error in the miner. I’ve encountered such errors myself, and they can be fixed by checking the settings.


No sir.
It was one post above mine (deleted by staff after I have reported it), from an spamm user, wich posted "as being you", with "latest version of SRBminer", wich sure was 99,9% trojan.
He posted as for .bat file, something like

SRBMiner-MULTI.exe --algorithm pearlhash --pool pearl-eu2.luckypool.io:6118 --wallet ADDRESS --worker

So fool itself as he can't write right port for luckypool, instead 336x, he wrote 6118.  Cheesy

Unfortunately I didn't reach to quote his post (first second I have reported it) and after I started to post here. Until my post was finished, his one, was deja deleted...
safar1980
Legendary
*
Offline

Activity: 2604
Merit: 2245


♻️ Automatic Exchange


View Profile
September 30, 2026, 04:11:46 PM
 #62

Could this be a copy-paste error from another user?
These are the settings from pearl.luckypool.io:
"SRBMiner-MULTI.exe --algorithm pearlhash --pool pearl-eu2.luckypool.io:3360 --wallet ADDRESS --worker rig1"
If you specify port 6118 instead of 3360, you will get a server connection error in the miner. I’ve encountered such errors myself, and they can be fixed by checking the settings.


No sir.
It was one post above mine (deleted by staff after I have reported it), from an spamm user, wich posted "as being you", with "latest version of SRBminer", wich sure was 99,9% trojan.
He posted as for .bat file, something like

SRBMiner-MULTI.exe --algorithm pearlhash --pool pearl-eu2.luckypool.io:6118 --wallet ADDRESS --worker

So fool itself as he can't write right port for luckypool, instead 336x, he wrote 6118.  Cheesy

Unfortunately I didn't reach to quote his post (first second I have reported it) and after I started to post here. Until my post was finished, his one, was deja deleted...
So, this user couldn't even copy the correct settings in the miner.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5404147
I have a thread that collects links to miner developers' topics on the forum. Miners should use the search function when downloading software.
If everything looks correct, verifying the source is also mandatory.

░░░░▄▄████████████▄
░▄████████████████▀
▄████████████████▀▄█▄
▄███████▀▀░░▄███▀▄████▄
▄██████▀░░░▄███▀░▀██████▄
██████▀░░▄████▄░░░▀██████
██████░░▀▀▀▀░▄▄▄▄░░██████
██████▄░░░▀████▀░░▄██████
▀██████▄░▄███▀░░░▄██████▀
▀████▀▄████░░▄▄███████▀
▀█▀▄████████████████▀
▄████████████████▀░
▀████████████▀▀░░░░
 
 CCECASH 
1971ECPT
Jr. Member
*
Offline

Activity: 110
Merit: 4


View Profile
September 30, 2026, 06:43:47 PM
Last edit: October 01, 2026, 08:03:08 PM by 1971ECPT
 #63

No, I think we're misunderstunding.

It was a scammer post, wich posted one link for downloading, saying there's the last version of SRBminer. In his post description, he mentioned "alot of improved hashrate" for Pearl coin, giving some fake numbers for hashrate.
Also, his link was for "direct download link" not from Github, as yours, or other trusted and respectable users from this section of forum. At the end, he posted one line text (example) for creating .bat file, for pearl coin on luckypool wich port wasn't :306x it was 6118.
Tha's why I laughed, saying he cannot even copy/paste correct address for luckypool.

Next time when I'll discover a scammer, I will quote'em!
JeromeTash
Legendary
*
Offline

Activity: 3038
Merit: 1602


Heisenberg


View Profile
October 01, 2026, 02:32:05 PM
 #64

Next time whan I discover scammer, I will quote'em!
I am assuming you meant this guy - Mason22 Who made a post that I won't quote here but will just share the archive link - https://bitlist.co/post/67181175

When use see such posts, please do not fully quote them or else you will be helping the malicious actor to spread his malware.

When I look at the post, it was indeed highly suspicious for malicious intent.

He has obviously been permanently banned for posting malware.

safar1980
Legendary
*
Offline

Activity: 2604
Merit: 2245


♻️ Automatic Exchange


View Profile
October 01, 2026, 04:24:16 PM
 #65

I think it's okay to quote such messages, but please remove the link to the malicious software. I haven't heard anything about the p-mine miner, it's better to use well-known miners for this coin you can find links to them on the forum. All miners resemble viruses, antivirus scans won't help.

░░░░▄▄████████████▄
░▄████████████████▀
▄████████████████▀▄█▄
▄███████▀▀░░▄███▀▄████▄
▄██████▀░░░▄███▀░▀██████▄
██████▀░░▄████▄░░░▀██████
██████░░▀▀▀▀░▄▄▄▄░░██████
██████▄░░░▀████▀░░▄██████
▀██████▄░▄███▀░░░▄██████▀
▀████▀▄████░░▄▄███████▀
▀█▀▄████████████████▀
▄████████████████▀░
▀████████████▀▀░░░░
 
 CCECASH 
1971ECPT
Jr. Member
*
Offline

Activity: 110
Merit: 4


View Profile
October 01, 2026, 07:55:55 PM
 #66

Next time whan I discover scammer, I will quote'em!
I am assuming you meant this guy - Mason22 Who made a post that I won't quote here but will just share the archive link - https://bitlist.co/post/67181175

When use see such posts, please do not fully quote them or else you will be helping the malicious actor to spread his malware.

When I look at the post, it was indeed highly suspicious for malicious intent.

He has obviously been permanently banned for posting malware.

Absolute, sir! I will quote only message without addresses or links for download, we are a serious community here, to help each other!

And yes, that's the post I'm talking about, of Mason22!
safar1980
Legendary
*
Offline

Activity: 2604
Merit: 2245


♻️ Automatic Exchange


View Profile
October 05, 2026, 08:38:25 PM
 #67


https://pool.kryptex.com/prl/miner/stats/prl1p6a2ngxah9r3wekvaduet7nugx26xpslf0y0qmv6nxgeqe39497cqtyd3qq

What kind of ASIC makes about $27,000 a day?  Workers  -  1 Online)
One possible hashrate would be 20,120 GeForce RTX 5070ti graphics cards, and each rig would need to be named "worker." I don't understand how he monitors his rigs with 1 worker.



░░░░▄▄████████████▄
░▄████████████████▀
▄████████████████▀▄█▄
▄███████▀▀░░▄███▀▄████▄
▄██████▀░░░▄███▀░▀██████▄
██████▀░░▄████▄░░░▀██████
██████░░▀▀▀▀░▄▄▄▄░░██████
██████▄░░░▀████▀░░▄██████
▀██████▄░▄███▀░░░▄██████▀
▀████▀▄████░░▄▄███████▀
▀█▀▄████████████████▀
▄████████████████▀░
▀████████████▀▀░░░░
 
 CCECASH 
pepsykolya
Newbie
*
Offline

Activity: 7
Merit: 0


View Profile
October 14, 2026, 10:43:29 AM
 #68

FreeForGemPearl — Pearl (PRL) miner with a feature nobody else has: --auto-uv
When you overclock a GPU, the real limit is invisible by ordinary means:
❌ No rejected/invalid shares — the pool accepts everything
❌ No Xid errors in dmesg
❌ No artifacts, no crashes
But right at the edge, the card starts producing silent wrong results: one matrix op in thousands computes differently. The pool won't flag it as a reject — the share just vanishes. You think you're mining at 100% while silently losing valid shares.
--auto-uv fixes this: the miner walks up the V/F offset in 15 MHz steps and verifies every step bit-exactly — the same work is re-run on the GPU and compared against the CPU result. If a single bit differs, the step is rejected and it steps back 15 MHz.
Real example on an RTX 3070:
+240 ok → +255 ok → +270 FAILED (transcript words diverge on rerun 480) → back to +240
Result: 98.4 → 86.5 W at the same 70 TH/s. You'd never find this by hand — the card never "complained".
State is saved per GPU (UUID + driver + kernel), re-checked every 6 h, auto step-back on reject bursts. On a 4070 Ti there is not a single bit error up to the +300 cap across 1500–2500 MHz — huge headroom you didn't know you had.
Measured on live rigs (LuckyPool):
8× RTX 3070 (lock 1650/810):
— miner-reported: 589.4 TH/s @ ~914 W, 0 rejected
— pool averages (dashboard): 723 / 623 / 630 TH/s over 1h/6h/24h
RTX 4070 Ti (lock 2100, auto-uv +300): 94.8 TH/s @ ~135 W (0.70 TH/W)
1× RTX 3070 (lock 1560 + auto-uv): 70.2 TH/s, 86.5 W after undervolt
⚠️ For 40xx: the kernel is tuned for sm86 — peak at 1900–2100 MHz; above that hashrate degrades (51 TH/s at 2300). Best 4070 Ti efficiency: 1900 MHz → 86 TH/s @ 118 W (0.73 TH/W).
1% dev fee. Windows / Linux / HiveOS. Ready-made start files for LuckyPool and Kryptex, gzip-compressed proofs (~90× less traffic per share), NOCK merge mining on LuckyPool (pays NOCK for the same work).
Not supported: pearlhash.xyz — that pool uses a proprietary binary protocol, not JSON stratum (support planned).
Releases: https://github.com/pepsykolya/FreeForGemPear/releases
tbearhere
Legendary
*
Offline

Activity: 3402
Merit: 1003



View Profile
October 14, 2026, 11:22:25 AM
 #69


https://pool.kryptex.com/prl/miner/stats/prl1p6a2ngxah9r3wekvaduet7nugx26xpslf0y0qmv6nxgeqe39497cqtyd3qq

What kind of ASIC makes about $27,000 a day?  Workers  -  1 Online)
One possible hashrate would be 20,120 GeForce RTX 5070ti graphics cards, and each rig would need to be named "worker." I don't understand how he monitors his rigs with 1 worker.




I think it is 20,120 graphic cards mining with each one named worker.  Smiley
Zuikkis
Newbie
*
Offline

Activity: 59
Merit: 0


View Profile
October 14, 2026, 11:24:38 AM
 #70

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/pw/AP1GczNM3dsTB257-Oey6pTm-eXL5bwUBSBjBotOUaLVlYFCcmkZUbPIIKbqpK2IJCVh3XWWdG2YzdijVxPZKfRrzsNJK_J2L0-n-jTH3JUNutf7VIDm8KH5wteol_RQms5El2NpBz7xttvAu8aIeyPhOIisyw=w1836-h571-s-no?authuser=0

A quick hint for RTX50 miners.. These cards can't be undervolted with powerlimit because the minimum power limit is so high (150W for RTX5060ti, 175W for RTX5070)..

For some reason undervolting works if you specify locked core clock AND core clock offset at the same time. No need to set power limit at all.

2700MHz locked clock with +499MHz offset results in 2700MHz real clock, but apparently the power draw is calculated for 2201MHz clock.. So 2201+499=2700.

A RTX5060ti with 2400/+499 results in over 1TH/W efficiency. This 2700/+499 is a good compromise, 95TH/100W.

RTX5070 behaves similarly, and I assume other 50's are the same.

Edit: oh the screenshot is with latest srbminer.
1971ECPT
Jr. Member
*
Offline

Activity: 110
Merit: 4


View Profile
October 14, 2026, 08:51:05 PM
Last edit: October 14, 2026, 09:10:12 PM by 1971ECPT
 #71

The best that I can obtain, see details on printscreen.
I can squeeze couple TH more for each card but at threshold of stability, so I prefear couple TH less and 100% stable.

For more TH (but more W consumption too, around 20-30W plus each card), I can use SRB Miner 3.7.1, where 5070Ti does 201TH at 266W and 4070Ti does 166TH at 263W.

Red is RTX5070Ti, yellow is RTX4070Ti

SRB Miner 3.7.5, Windows 10, Nvidia driver 616.64, MSI Afterburner 4.66, with custom fan curve and freq+vcore from "curve adjustment" for each card, stored in profile 1 for Pearl coin and profile 5 for Keryx coin.


https://i.postimg.cc/2yrwp7j4/4-Cards.jpg



Opinions?
Zuikkis
Newbie
*
Offline

Activity: 59
Merit: 0


View Profile
Today at 06:43:43 AM
 #72

Just got a few 5070ti's here as well. At 180TH/s they reach over 1.0 efficiency, using only 175W power.

Now running about 190TH/s using 195W power.. This is quite good. This is with locked 2750MHz core +499MHz offset.

I'm running HiveOS (linux) which doesn't have the frequency+vcore curve adjustment. But this +499 core clock offset trick seems to do the same thing perhaps. Then you only adjust the locked core clock to find a sweet spot.

Edit: Why are you running such high memclock? Recent srbminer works fine with memory clock locked to 810MHz. This will lower the watts.
pepsykolya
Newbie
*
Offline

Activity: 7
Merit: 0


View Profile
Today at 08:53:24 AM
 #73

FreeForGemPearl — Pearl (PRL) miner with a feature nobody else has: --auto-uv
When you overclock a GPU, the real limit is invisible by ordinary means:
❌ No rejected/invalid shares — the pool accepts everything
❌ No Xid errors in dmesg
❌ No artifacts, no crashes
But right at the edge, the card starts producing silent wrong results: one matrix op in thousands computes differently. The pool won't flag it as a reject — the share just vanishes. You think you're mining at 100% while silently losing valid shares.
--auto-uv fixes this: the miner walks up the V/F offset in 15 MHz steps and verifies every step bit-exactly — the same work is re-run on the GPU and compared against the CPU result. If a single bit differs, the step is rejected and it steps back 15 MHz.
Real example on an RTX 3070:
+240 ok → +255 ok → +270 FAILED (transcript words diverge on rerun 480) → back to +240
Result: 98.4 → 86.5 W at the same 70 TH/s. You'd never find this by hand — the card never "complained".
State is saved per GPU (UUID + driver + kernel), re-checked every 6 h, auto step-back on reject bursts. On a 4070 Ti there is not a single bit error up to the +300 cap across 1500–2500 MHz — huge headroom you didn't know you had.
Measured on live rigs (LuckyPool):
8× RTX 3070 (lock 1650/810):
— miner-reported: 589.4 TH/s @ ~914 W, 0 rejected
— pool averages (dashboard): 723 / 623 / 630 TH/s over 1h/6h/24h
RTX 4070 Ti (lock 2100, auto-uv +300): 94.8 TH/s @ ~135 W (0.70 TH/W)
1× RTX 3070 (lock 1560 + auto-uv): 70.2 TH/s, 86.5 W after undervolt
⚠️ For 40xx: the kernel is tuned for sm86 — peak at 1900–2100 MHz; above that hashrate degrades (51 TH/s at 2300). Best 4070 Ti efficiency: 1900 MHz → 86 TH/s @ 118 W (0.73 TH/W).
1% dev fee. Windows / Linux / HiveOS. Ready-made start files for LuckyPool and Kryptex, gzip-compressed proofs (~90× less traffic per share), NOCK merge mining on LuckyPool (pays NOCK for the same work).
Not supported: pearlhash.xyz — that pool uses a proprietary binary protocol, not JSON stratum (support planned).
Releases: https://github.com/pepsykolya/FreeForGemPear/releases

What's new in 1.4.8
Three new options for the optional --auto-uv undervolt tuner:

--uv-min N: the offset the tuner starts from and never goes below. Default: the offset already set in HiveOS / the driver, or 120 if none. (Before, tuning always started at the card's current offset.)
--uv-step N: MHz per tuning step (default 15).
--uv-keep-last: after a failed step, keep the last good step instead of the default (last good step minus one step of margin).
These only affect --auto-uv; mining and the kernel are unchanged (v1pb-k8192, label 3616f6e6). Validated on an RTX 3070: --uv-min 150 started the search at +150 and stepped up by 15 MHz, restoring the card's own offset on exit.
Since 1.4.7
Per-device m on mixed-SM rigs. Until now a rig with different GPU models used one m (the default 47104) on every card, so cards that are not 46-SM carried a partial-wave "tail". Now each GPU uses the m matched to its own SM count (m = 128 * SM * r): the miner builds one job per SM group and each card mines its own. Measured gains from the right m (same kernel, same power): RTX 3070 (46 SM) stays at 47104; RTX 4070 Laptop (36 SM) uses 36864, about +4-8%; other non-46-SM Ampere/Ada cards (3060 Ti, 3070 Ti, 3080, 3090, 4070 Ti) likewise pick their own m. Validated live on a mixed 3070 + 4070 Ti rig: banner m per device [47104, 61440], both cards mine at their own m, the pool accepts shares, 0 rejected. On a homogeneous rig (e.g. all 3070) nothing changes: one shared job as before. FFGP_M still overrides with one m on every device.
Kernel unchanged (v1pb-k8192, label 3616f6e6).
Since 1.4.6
Larger default m: +0.38% hashrate at the same power. The default number of A-rows per attempt, m, is raised from 23552 to 47104. This amortizes the per-attempt prologue/epilogue over more row-blocks, with the same kernel. Measured on an RTX 3070 (1560/810 MHz, 135 W): kernel bench 70.30 → 70.57 TMAC/s (reproducible); self-test PASSED; a LuckyPool run accepted 8/8 shares, 0 rejected, ~70.57 TH/s. Cost: slightly more host RAM (m*k bytes of a_base per job) and a marginally larger Merkle tree per proof.
FFGP_M overrides m (a multiple of 128, in 1024..1048576). On a homogeneous rig the miner auto-picks m from the GPUs' SM count (m = 128 * SM * r): an RTX 3070 (46 SM) resolves to exactly 47104; mixed-SM rigs and any FFGP_M keep 47104. The +0.38% is measured on 46-SM (3070) cards; other SM counts use the same formula and every value is self-test-validated bit-exactly.
Kernel unchanged from 1.3.0–1.4.5 (v1pb-k8192, label 3616f6e6).
--auto-uv: saved undervolt results (uv.json) now record the m they were found at and are reused only when driver + kernel + m all match; changing m re-runs the undervolt check.
https://github.com/pepsykolya/FreeForGemPear/releases/tag/v1.4.8
1971ECPT
Jr. Member
*
Offline

Activity: 110
Merit: 4


View Profile
Today at 10:38:21 AM
 #74

Just got a few 5070ti's here as well. At 180TH/s they reach over 1.0 efficiency, using only 175W power.

Now running about 190TH/s using 195W power.. This is quite good. This is with locked 2750MHz core +499MHz offset.

I'm running HiveOS (linux) which doesn't have the frequency+vcore curve adjustment. But this +499 core clock offset trick seems to do the same thing perhaps. Then you only adjust the locked core clock to find a sweet spot.

Edit: Why are you running such high memclock? Recent srbminer works fine with memory clock locked to 810MHz. This will lower the watts.

I'm on windows, I always use MSI Afterburner.

On my printscreen above, memory clock is "stock" for Pearl, I tried to lower to -510MHz as Afterburner allows, the same results (hashrate and consumption).
I'm not familiar with M-clock and C-clock on "miner comands" to adjust .bat file.
Tried some time ago and no success, since then I'm familiar with Afterburner.

If you can help me a little to edit my .bat file with M-clock and C-clock as you used, I'll much appreciate.

So, here's my bat file"




"SRBMiner-MULTI.exe --disable-gpu-amd --disable-gpu-intel --algorithm-gpu pearlhash --pool stratum+tcp://pearl-pl.luckypool.io:3361 --wallet xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.RigP
RL
"

For individual settings card (if are differences between 4070Ti and 5070Ti), I have 4 GPU on that rig: GPU#0 RTX4070Ti, GPU#1 RTX5070Ti, GPU#2 RTX5070Ti, GPU#3 RTX4070Ti

Thank you!





Pages: « 1 2 3 [4]  All
  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!