sikkan
|
|
May 05, 2017, 10:28:46 AM |
|
Any problems with today payments?
not at all my transfer is inbound now
|
|
|
|
NiceHashSupport
|
|
May 05, 2017, 10:46:53 AM |
|
We have around 4 BTCs still in limbo due to some issue with BitGo, but working on it to resolve. The remaining ~595 BTCs were already paid out.
|
|
|
|
sundownz
|
|
May 05, 2017, 11:36:33 AM |
|
ETA on the Equihash server ? Seems to be down.
|
|
|
|
sundownz
|
|
May 05, 2017, 02:05:40 PM |
|
https://github.com/nicehash/NiceHashMiner/issues/693Has anyone had any luck using the Dual-Mining features with NiceHash in windows ? I am having difficult figuring out where to place the "-dual=Lbry" tag... I tried a .bat file and in the Claymore miner config file. Neither seems to work. Thanks in advance. PS : Equihash issue I posted about prior was resolved a while ago -- it's all good =)
|
|
|
|
sundownz
|
|
May 05, 2017, 02:45:33 PM |
|
https://github.com/nicehash/NiceHashMiner/issues/693Has anyone had any luck using the Dual-Mining features with NiceHash in windows ? I am having difficult figuring out where to place the "-dual=Lbry" tag... I tried a .bat file and in the Claymore miner config file. Neither seems to work. Thanks in advance. PS : Equihash issue I posted about prior was resolved a while ago -- it's all good =) Alright... so I got the dual mining working. I tried LBRY and also PASCAL but both of them slowed down my ETH mining substantially. I am trying DCR now and it doesn't show any speed penalty... but is having 100% rejection rate. Ideas on that ?
|
|
|
|
sundownz
|
|
May 05, 2017, 06:34:19 PM |
|
https://github.com/nicehash/NiceHashMiner/issues/693Has anyone had any luck using the Dual-Mining features with NiceHash in windows ? I am having difficult figuring out where to place the "-dual=Lbry" tag... I tried a .bat file and in the Claymore miner config file. Neither seems to work. Thanks in advance. PS : Equihash issue I posted about prior was resolved a while ago -- it's all good =) Alright... so I got the dual mining working. I tried LBRY and also PASCAL but both of them slowed down my ETH mining substantially. I am trying DCR now and it doesn't show any speed penalty... but is having 100% rejection rate. Ideas on that ? Got it. Just updated the Dual Miner in my Nicehash folder to 9.3 and it works fine.
|
|
|
|
Elder III
|
|
May 05, 2017, 09:04:36 PM |
|
Well.....how do you set it to threads? LOL
If you go to settings>algorithms>your CPU - on the right side there is an option for additional settings called less threads to use or something like that --- if it has an "8" there it will only use 8 of your CPUs 16 threads. Cryptonight only uses a max of 8 threads so anything less than that will actually give you negative results.
|
|
|
|
favelle75
|
|
May 05, 2017, 09:55:04 PM |
|
Any problems with today payments?
Not for me. Mine came at 3am PST
|
|
|
|
favelle75
|
|
May 05, 2017, 09:56:06 PM |
|
Well.....how do you set it to threads? LOL
If you go to settings>algorithms>your CPU - on the right side there is an option for additional settings called less threads to use or something like that --- if it has an "8" there it will only use 8 of your CPUs 16 threads. Cryptonight only uses a max of 8 threads so anything less than that will actually give you negative results. Mine was defaulted at 8. So it's not that. Any other modifications I can do?
|
|
|
|
|
sundownz
|
|
May 08, 2017, 11:45:27 AM |
|
Is it possible to use all of the command line arguments for the Claymore Dual Miner in combination with the Windows Nicehash GUI program ?
Whenever I change variables in the Miner Option Package file it doesn't seem to do anything.
|
|
|
|
|
sundownz
|
|
May 09, 2017, 12:06:37 AM |
|
Okay so it is working -- mostly. 2 out of 3 of the GPUs in my system follow the extra variables -- one of them does not. I have 2x RX480 plugged into the motherboard and 1x RX580 on riser. One RX480 and the RX580 both follow my command line arguments -- one RX480 does not. Ideas ?
|
|
|
|
sundownz
|
|
May 09, 2017, 12:23:51 AM |
|
Okay so it is working -- mostly. 2 out of 3 of the GPUs in my system follow the extra variables -- one of them does not. I have 2x RX480 plugged into the motherboard and 1x RX580 on riser. One RX480 and the RX580 both follow my command line arguments -- one RX480 does not. Ideas ? Solved... Crossfire was enabled. Disabled that and all 3 follow commands now.
|
|
|
|
NiceHashSupport
|
|
May 09, 2017, 02:26:39 PM |
|
In NiceHash Miner enable NVIDIA set p0 state. Then use some third party application for overclocking such as MSI Afterburner and adjust your memory clock.
Low memory clock when running CUDA applications (P2 state) is default design by NVIDIA.
|
|
|
|
NiceHashSupport
|
|
May 09, 2017, 02:44:39 PM |
|
In NiceHash Miner enable NVIDIA set p0 state. Then use some third party application for overclocking such as MSI Afterburner and adjust your memory clock.
Low memory clock when running CUDA applications (P2 state) is default design by NVIDIA.
Now my nvidia gfx card disappeared. Restart your PC. Looks like your driver crashed.
|
|
|
|
Carioca
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 16
Merit: 0
|
|
May 09, 2017, 05:20:59 PM |
|
Hi
I just discover nicehash and since my computer is not a good one to mine i would like to know how the buying hash power works and how can i calculate how profitable it is? Anyone know of a good tutorial for that?
Thanks
|
|
|
|
silentrunner
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 52
Merit: 0
|
|
May 09, 2017, 06:34:55 PM |
|
I have a an issue that is not being resolved by nicehash support via email. After 3 back and forth exchanges they simply do not answer my questions and just send back generic replies. It is very frustrating. Issue - Fees on Dead OrdersI have been using the Nicehash API to build an application to buy and manage orders for ZEC and ZCL. When the price dips it will cancel an order and create a new order at a lower price based on market conditions. Due to a typo in the pool url the order could not connect and resulted in a dead order. Each dead order created this way had a 3% fee subtracted from it. Why? The order could not connect to a pool. No mining was done. The only fee for creating an order is supposed to be .0001. I have 35 dead orders like this and do not understand why I would pay for mining that did not take place. Below is a list of all the dead orders where a 3% fee was deducted. Order | Started | Type | Action | BTC | Unspent BTC | Spent BTC | Completed | #2702342 | 5/8/2017 15:49 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.01 | 0.009603 | 0.000397 | 0.00% | #2685204 | 5/5/2017 23:24 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.01 | 0.009603 | 0.000397 | 0.00% | #2682684 | 5/5/2017 14:24 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.01 | 0.009603 | 0.000397 | 0.00% | #2682410 | 5/5/2017 13:34 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.01 | 0.009603 | 0.000397 | 0.00% | #2682387 | 5/5/2017 13:28 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.01 | 0.009603 | 0.000397 | 0.00% | #2682357 | 5/5/2017 13:22 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.01 | 0.009603 | 0.000397 | 0.00% | #2682336 | 5/5/2017 13:17 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.01 | 0.009603 | 0.000397 | 0.00% | #2681033 | 5/5/2017 9:24 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.04 | 0.038703 | 0.001297 | 0.00% | #2681030 | 5/5/2017 9:23 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.04 | 0.038703 | 0.001297 | 0.00% | #2681027 | 5/5/2017 9:23 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.04 | 0.038703 | 0.001297 | 0.00% | #2681022 | 5/5/2017 9:22 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.04 | 0.038703 | 0.001297 | 0.00% | #2681014 | 5/5/2017 9:22 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.04 | 0.038703 | 0.001297 | 0.00% | #2681004 | 5/5/2017 9:21 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.04 | 0.038703 | 0.001297 | 0.00% | #2680998 | 5/5/2017 9:21 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.04 | 0.038703 | 0.001297 | 0.00% | #2680993 | 5/5/2017 9:20 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.04 | 0.038703 | 0.001297 | 0.00% | #2680988 | 5/5/2017 9:20 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.04 | 0.038703 | 0.001297 | 0.00% | #2680984 | 5/5/2017 9:19 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.04 | 0.038703 | 0.001297 | 0.00% | #2680981 | 5/5/2017 9:19 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.04 | 0.038703 | 0.001297 | 0.00% | #2680976 | 5/5/2017 9:18 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.04 | 0.038703 | 0.001297 | 0.00% | #2680973 | 5/5/2017 9:18 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.04 | 0.038703 | 0.001297 | 0.00% | #2680969 | 5/5/2017 9:17 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.04 | 0.038703 | 0.001297 | 0.00% | #2680964 | 5/5/2017 9:17 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.04 | 0.038703 | 0.001297 | 0.00% | #2680958 | 5/5/2017 9:16 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.04 | 0.038703 | 0.001297 | 0.00% | #2680955 | 5/5/2017 9:16 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.04 | 0.038703 | 0.001297 | 0.00% | #2680952 | 5/5/2017 9:15 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.04 | 0.038703 | 0.001297 | 0.00% | #2680950 | 5/5/2017 9:15 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.04 | 0.038703 | 0.001297 | 0.00% | #2680946 | 5/5/2017 9:14 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.04 | 0.038703 | 0.001297 | 0.00% | #2680943 | 5/5/2017 9:14 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.04 | 0.038703 | 0.001297 | 0.00% | #2680942 | 5/5/2017 9:13 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.04 | 0.038703 | 0.001297 | 0.00% | #2680938 | 5/5/2017 9:13 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.04 | 0.038703 | 0.001297 | 0.00% | #2680934 | 5/5/2017 9:12 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.04 | 0.038703 | 0.001297 | 0.00% | #2679557 | 5/5/2017 4:01 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.04 | 0.038703 | 0.001297 | 0.00% | #2679435 | 5/5/2017 3:31 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.04 | 0.038703 | 0.001297 | 0.00% | #2679345 | 5/5/2017 3:13 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.04 | 0.038703 | 0.001297 | 0.00% | #2677613 | 5/4/2017 21:35 | Standard | Cancelled on request | 0.04 | 0.038703 | 0.001297 | 0.00% | The total fees deducted on the dead orders are 0.039095 BTC. This should be .0035 resulting in an overcharge of .035595 BTC
|
|
|
|
djeZo
|
|
May 09, 2017, 06:53:53 PM |
|
Check your wallet; I will just show you for one order (#2679345) I randomly picked from the list you provided: 2017-05-05 12:31:46 Partial refund fee #2679345 0.00119700 2017-05-05 12:31:46 Refund order #2679345 0.03870300 2017-05-05 12:13:08 Fee order #2679345 -0.00129700 2017-05-05 12:13:08 Payment order #2679345 -0.03870300
If you add up these values shown, you will see that the actual fee you paid was only 0.0001 which equals to static 0.0001 non refundable fee for placing an order.
|
|
|
|
silentrunner
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 52
Merit: 0
|
|
May 09, 2017, 08:35:46 PM |
|
Check your wallet; I will just show you for one order (#2679345) I randomly picked from the list you provided: 2017-05-05 12:31:46 Partial refund fee #2679345 0.00119700 2017-05-05 12:31:46 Refund order #2679345 0.03870300 2017-05-05 12:13:08 Fee order #2679345 -0.00129700 2017-05-05 12:13:08 Payment order #2679345 -0.03870300
If you add up these values shown, you will see that the actual fee you paid was only 0.0001 which equals to static 0.0001 non refundable fee for placing an order. I checked my wallet and found the refunds for all the orders as you described. Thank you for pointing that out. It is very confusing to see an incomplete order history on the order page or on the order itself. Why does a user have to go hunting for the information? NICEHASH > here are suggested web site tweaks:- Add two columns to the 'List of my past orders' page. One for Refunds. One for Net Cost. It is very confusing not to see the whole picture
- Add the same Refunds and Net Cost to the closed Order
- Add a method to download the past orders to csv
- On the Transactions tab of the Wallet page: split the Comments to Order# and Action
- Add a method to download the Transactions to csv so we can analyze our sort and analyze by order
- Add a method to the API to get past orders
- Add a method to the API to get the same information that is on the Wallet tabs: Transactions, Deposits, and Withdrawls
I think the front end changes would help users understand the order life cycle and being able to download data would certainly help if the IRS determines that every transaction needs to be tracked. The API additions would allow recent history to be shown and graphed. Would anyone else like to see these suggestions implemented?
|
|
|
|
|