Claymore's CryptoNote AMD GPU Miner v11.3

[woodaxe]

Supranova doesnt accept  polo payment address with the ID  so i cannot use it
 i assume you cannot mine dirrectly to exchange

[Trimegistus]

Supranova doesnt accept  polo payment address with the ID  so i cannot use it
 i assume you cannot mine dirrectly to exchange

In suprnova you mine with a Username.Workername that are not XMR adresses nor a XMR ID

Once you have funds in your account you can transfer them to any address you like.

Anyone can use Suprnova, with SSL and reduced dev fee %

[woodaxe]

Supranova doesnt accept  polo payment address with the ID  so i cannot use it
 i assume you cannot mine dirrectly to exchange

In suprnova you mine with a Username.Workername that are not XMR adresses nor a XMR ID

Once you have funds in your account you can transfer them to any address you like.

Anyone can use Suprnova, with SSL and reduced dev fee %

So how do you move it from supranova to a polo  exchange you have to give address and id for them to accept it  and supranova says its an invalid coin address

[Trimegistus]

Supranova doesnt accept  polo payment address with the ID  so i cannot use it
 i assume you cannot mine dirrectly to exchange

In suprnova you mine with a Username.Workername that are not XMR adresses nor a XMR ID

Once you have funds in your account you can transfer them to any address you like.

Anyone can use Suprnova, with SSL and reduced dev fee %

So how do you move it from supranova to a polo  exchange you have to give address and id for them to accept it  and supranova says its an invalid coin address

My bad! Apparently suprnova will only accept wallet addresses. But I've already contacted support and I'm sure they will look into it.

[Kirck]

@claymore: Thank you for the many features and other improvements. I appreciate your work and the support you give to the hobby miners like me.

I have issues since I turned my rigs to XMR mining:

Is it a good idea to use CN miner with 16.10.3 ATI drivers or should I "downgrade" to 15.12 or an older 16.x version? I have 6*RX470 ref. 4GB Sapphire cards in my rigs, and I can't stabilize them. I tried with original/factory bios and settings, I also tried lower freq. and voltage, mem.timing mod, etc., but the OS (WIN10) always crashes.

Previously I used your awesome ZCASH miner and the rigs were rock-stable.

Hi! Try to set -a 4 parameter for your card that crashes. I`ve got RX480 4Gb that was crashing with "Thread stuck in device driver" (or something like this) error. Setting -a 4 Solved the problem.

[Trimegistus]

Supranova doesnt accept  polo payment address with the ID  so i cannot use it
 i assume you cannot mine dirrectly to exchange

In suprnova you mine with a Username.Workername that are not XMR adresses nor a XMR ID

Once you have funds in your account you can transfer them to any address you like.

Anyone can use Suprnova, with SSL and reduced dev fee %

So how do you move it from supranova to a polo  exchange you have to give address and id for them to accept it  and supranova says its an invalid coin address

My bad! Apparently suprnova will only accept wallet addresses. But I've already contacted support and I'm sure they will look into it.

Suprnova admin told me just now the pool will be suporting exchange wallet addresses tomorrow. YES! 

[maxpayne1256]

9.7 isn't working very well - i'm getting a lot of "low difficulty share"s and rejects with very high response times?
2 completely different machines: 2x 380 and 2x 470
everything is working fine with 9.6 ...

Code:

15:01:15:083 db8 GPU 1: HashCnt = 1024, time = 1831 ms, hashrate = 559 h/s
15:01:15:099 db8 Round
15:01:16:647 23bc GPU 0: HashCnt = 1024, time = 1887 ms, hashrate = 542 h/s
15:01:16:647 23bc Round
15:01:16:787 2b20 got 78 bytes
15:01:16:787 2b20 buf: {"id":4,"jsonrpc":"2.0","error":{"code":-1,"message":"Low difficulty share"}}

15:01:16:787 2b20 parse packet: 76
15:01:16:787 2b20 Share rejected (2047 ms)!
15:01:16:787 2b20 {"id":4,"jsonrpc":"2.0","error":{"code":-1,"message":"Lowdifficultyshare"}}
15:01:16:787 2b20 new buf size: 0
15:01:16:881 2b20 got 78 bytes
15:01:16:881 2b20 buf: {"id":4,"jsonrpc":"2.0","error":{"code":-1,"message":"Low difficulty share"}}

15:01:16:881 2b20 parse packet: 76
15:01:16:881 2b20 Share rejected (2141 ms)!
15:01:16:881 2b20 {"id":4,"jsonrpc":"2.0","error":{"code":-1,"message":"Lowdifficultyshare"}}

Code:

01:45:23:961 6b14 GPU 0: HashCnt = 1024, time = 1849 ms, hashrate = 553 h/s
01:45:23:987 6b14 Round
01:45:24:143 16a4 GPU 1: HashCnt = 864, time = 1615 ms, hashrate = 534 h/s
01:45:24:165 16a4 Round
01:45:25:806 6144 GPU 1: HashCnt = 864, time = 1617 ms, hashrate = 534 h/s
01:45:25:823 6144 Round
01:45:25:875 4104 GPU 0: HashCnt = 1024, time = 1860 ms, hashrate = 550 h/s
01:45:25:894 4104 Round
01:45:26:593 417c got 78 bytes
01:45:26:601 417c buf: {"id":4,"jsonrpc":"2.0","error":{"code":-1,"message":"Low difficulty share"}}

01:45:26:609 417c parse packet: 76
01:45:26:618 417c Share rejected (4102 ms)!
01:45:26:628 417c {"id":4,"jsonrpc":"2.0","error":{"code":-1,"message":"Lowdifficultyshare"}}
01:45:26:638 417c new buf size: 0
01:45:26:906 417c got 78 bytes
01:45:26:930 417c buf: {"id":4,"jsonrpc":"2.0","error":{"code":-1,"message":"Low difficulty share"}}

01:45:26:938 417c parse packet: 76
01:45:26:948 417c Share rejected (4430 ms)!
01:45:26:959 417c {"id":4,"jsonrpc":"2.0","error":{"code":-1,"message":"Lowdifficultyshare"}}
01:45:26:968 417c new buf size: 0
01:45:27:694 16a4 GPU 1: HashCnt = 864, time = 1842 ms, hashrate = 469 h/s
01:45:27:713 16a4 Round
01:45:27:844 6b14 GPU 0: HashCnt = 1024, time = 1922 ms, hashrate = 532 h/s
01:45:27:863 6b14 Dev round
01:45:29:363 6144 GPU 1: HashCnt = 864, time = 1625 ms, hashrate = 531 h/s
01:45:29:380 6144 Round
01:45:29:736 4104 GPU 0: HashCnt = 1024, time = 1845 ms, hashrate = 555 h/s
01:45:29:757 4104 Round
01:45:31:021 16a4 GPU 1: HashCnt = 864, time = 1615 ms, hashrate = 534 h/s

[markus124]

9.7 isn't working very well - i'm getting a lot of "low difficulty share"s and rejects with very high response times?
2 completely different machines: 2x 380 and 2x 470
everything is working fine with 9.6 ...

Code:

15:01:15:083 db8 GPU 1: HashCnt = 1024, time = 1831 ms, hashrate = 559 h/s
15:01:15:099 db8 Round
15:01:16:647 23bc GPU 0: HashCnt = 1024, time = 1887 ms, hashrate = 542 h/s
15:01:16:647 23bc Round
15:01:16:787 2b20 got 78 bytes
15:01:16:787 2b20 buf: {"id":4,"jsonrpc":"2.0","error":{"code":-1,"message":"Low difficulty share"}}

15:01:16:787 2b20 parse packet: 76
15:01:16:787 2b20 Share rejected (2047 ms)!
15:01:16:787 2b20 {"id":4,"jsonrpc":"2.0","error":{"code":-1,"message":"Lowdifficultyshare"}}
15:01:16:787 2b20 new buf size: 0
15:01:16:881 2b20 got 78 bytes
15:01:16:881 2b20 buf: {"id":4,"jsonrpc":"2.0","error":{"code":-1,"message":"Low difficulty share"}}

15:01:16:881 2b20 parse packet: 76
15:01:16:881 2b20 Share rejected (2141 ms)!
15:01:16:881 2b20 {"id":4,"jsonrpc":"2.0","error":{"code":-1,"message":"Lowdifficultyshare"}}

Code:

01:45:23:961 6b14 GPU 0: HashCnt = 1024, time = 1849 ms, hashrate = 553 h/s
01:45:23:987 6b14 Round
01:45:24:143 16a4 GPU 1: HashCnt = 864, time = 1615 ms, hashrate = 534 h/s
01:45:24:165 16a4 Round
01:45:25:806 6144 GPU 1: HashCnt = 864, time = 1617 ms, hashrate = 534 h/s
01:45:25:823 6144 Round
01:45:25:875 4104 GPU 0: HashCnt = 1024, time = 1860 ms, hashrate = 550 h/s
01:45:25:894 4104 Round
01:45:26:593 417c got 78 bytes
01:45:26:601 417c buf: {"id":4,"jsonrpc":"2.0","error":{"code":-1,"message":"Low difficulty share"}}

01:45:26:609 417c parse packet: 76
01:45:26:618 417c Share rejected (4102 ms)!
01:45:26:628 417c {"id":4,"jsonrpc":"2.0","error":{"code":-1,"message":"Lowdifficultyshare"}}
01:45:26:638 417c new buf size: 0
01:45:26:906 417c got 78 bytes
01:45:26:930 417c buf: {"id":4,"jsonrpc":"2.0","error":{"code":-1,"message":"Low difficulty share"}}

01:45:26:938 417c parse packet: 76
01:45:26:948 417c Share rejected (4430 ms)!
01:45:26:959 417c {"id":4,"jsonrpc":"2.0","error":{"code":-1,"message":"Lowdifficultyshare"}}
01:45:26:968 417c new buf size: 0
01:45:27:694 16a4 GPU 1: HashCnt = 864, time = 1842 ms, hashrate = 469 h/s
01:45:27:713 16a4 Round
01:45:27:844 6b14 GPU 0: HashCnt = 1024, time = 1922 ms, hashrate = 532 h/s
01:45:27:863 6b14 Dev round
01:45:29:363 6144 GPU 1: HashCnt = 864, time = 1625 ms, hashrate = 531 h/s
01:45:29:380 6144 Round
01:45:29:736 4104 GPU 0: HashCnt = 1024, time = 1845 ms, hashrate = 555 h/s
01:45:29:757 4104 Round
01:45:31:021 16a4 GPU 1: HashCnt = 864, time = 1615 ms, hashrate = 534 h/s

Yeah alot of us have that problem with the lowdifficultyshare. It gets fixed for me after 15 min when the miner reconnect with the pool (dwarfpool). Not sure if a pool issue or a miner issue. Dwarf is doing some changes with their site, maybe their ports too.

[maxpayne1256]

Yeah alot of us have that problem with the lowdifficultyshare. It gets fixed for me after 15 min when the miner reconnect with the pool (dwarfpool). Not sure if a pool issue or a miner issue. Dwarf is doing some changes with their site, maybe their ports too.

okay, I'm seeing some of these lowdifficultyshares also with 9.6, but with 9.7 there are a lot more - can you confirm that 9.6 is doing it's work better?

[cryptonitro]

9.7 isn't working very well - i'm getting a lot of "low difficulty share"s and rejects with very high response times?
2 completely different machines: 2x 380 and 2x 470
everything is working fine with 9.6 ...

Code:

15:01:15:083 db8 GPU 1: HashCnt = 1024, time = 1831 ms, hashrate = 559 h/s
15:01:15:099 db8 Round
15:01:16:647 23bc GPU 0: HashCnt = 1024, time = 1887 ms, hashrate = 542 h/s
15:01:16:647 23bc Round
15:01:16:787 2b20 got 78 bytes
15:01:16:787 2b20 buf: {"id":4,"jsonrpc":"2.0","error":{"code":-1,"message":"Low difficulty share"}}

15:01:16:787 2b20 parse packet: 76
15:01:16:787 2b20 Share rejected (2047 ms)!
15:01:16:787 2b20 {"id":4,"jsonrpc":"2.0","error":{"code":-1,"message":"Lowdifficultyshare"}}
15:01:16:787 2b20 new buf size: 0
15:01:16:881 2b20 got 78 bytes
15:01:16:881 2b20 buf: {"id":4,"jsonrpc":"2.0","error":{"code":-1,"message":"Low difficulty share"}}

15:01:16:881 2b20 parse packet: 76
15:01:16:881 2b20 Share rejected (2141 ms)!
15:01:16:881 2b20 {"id":4,"jsonrpc":"2.0","error":{"code":-1,"message":"Lowdifficultyshare"}}

Code:

01:45:23:961 6b14 GPU 0: HashCnt = 1024, time = 1849 ms, hashrate = 553 h/s
01:45:23:987 6b14 Round
01:45:24:143 16a4 GPU 1: HashCnt = 864, time = 1615 ms, hashrate = 534 h/s
01:45:24:165 16a4 Round
01:45:25:806 6144 GPU 1: HashCnt = 864, time = 1617 ms, hashrate = 534 h/s
01:45:25:823 6144 Round
01:45:25:875 4104 GPU 0: HashCnt = 1024, time = 1860 ms, hashrate = 550 h/s
01:45:25:894 4104 Round
01:45:26:593 417c got 78 bytes
01:45:26:601 417c buf: {"id":4,"jsonrpc":"2.0","error":{"code":-1,"message":"Low difficulty share"}}

01:45:26:609 417c parse packet: 76
01:45:26:618 417c Share rejected (4102 ms)!
01:45:26:628 417c {"id":4,"jsonrpc":"2.0","error":{"code":-1,"message":"Lowdifficultyshare"}}
01:45:26:638 417c new buf size: 0
01:45:26:906 417c got 78 bytes
01:45:26:930 417c buf: {"id":4,"jsonrpc":"2.0","error":{"code":-1,"message":"Low difficulty share"}}

01:45:26:938 417c parse packet: 76
01:45:26:948 417c Share rejected (4430 ms)!
01:45:26:959 417c {"id":4,"jsonrpc":"2.0","error":{"code":-1,"message":"Lowdifficultyshare"}}
01:45:26:968 417c new buf size: 0
01:45:27:694 16a4 GPU 1: HashCnt = 864, time = 1842 ms, hashrate = 469 h/s
01:45:27:713 16a4 Round
01:45:27:844 6b14 GPU 0: HashCnt = 1024, time = 1922 ms, hashrate = 532 h/s
01:45:27:863 6b14 Dev round
01:45:29:363 6144 GPU 1: HashCnt = 864, time = 1625 ms, hashrate = 531 h/s
01:45:29:380 6144 Round
01:45:29:736 4104 GPU 0: HashCnt = 1024, time = 1845 ms, hashrate = 555 h/s
01:45:29:757 4104 Round
01:45:31:021 16a4 GPU 1: HashCnt = 864, time = 1615 ms, hashrate = 534 h/s

you are wrong it s the same problem with 9.6 on drawfpool , it s not a claymore problem , not to him to fix that, it s a drawfpool problem , they lost 450 miners since yesterday , just change pool time , instead they fix that !

[doktor83]

i can confirm this, since i changed to miningpoolhub no more problems with version 9.7!

[zoggie]

Yeah alot of us have that problem with the lowdifficultyshare. It gets fixed for me after 15 min when the miner reconnect with the pool (dwarfpool). Not sure if a pool issue or a miner issue. Dwarf is doing some changes with their site, maybe their ports too.

okay, I'm seeing some of these lowdifficultyshares also with 9.6, but with 9.7 there are a lot more - can you confirm that 9.6 is doing it's work better?

I reverted to 9.5 and for the past week all rigs have been rock solid. 9.6 and 9.7 with monitoring fail with latest cards. (tested on 30 plus RX470 and RX480 cards)

Edit. I should have mentioned, 9.6 and 9.7 and fairly solid on NON modified bios cards. 9.5 is the most stable for bios modded cards.

[tkredmond]

Supranova doesnt accept  polo payment address with the ID  so i cannot use it
 i assume you cannot mine dirrectly to exchange

In suprnova you mine with a Username.Workername that are not XMR adresses nor a XMR ID

Once you have funds in your account you can transfer them to any address you like.

Anyone can use Suprnova, with SSL and reduced dev fee %

So how do you move it from supranova to a polo  exchange you have to give address and id for them to accept it  and supranova says its an invalid coin address

My bad! Apparently suprnova will only accept wallet addresses. But I've already contacted support and I'm sure they will look into it.

Suprnova admin told me just now the pool will be suporting exchange wallet addresses tomorrow. YES! 

You can download the new GUI wallet for Windows from https://getmonero.org/2016/12/22/monero-core-gui-beta-released.html
Let it sync and use integrated address )in receive menu). No need to wait for 1 XMR to send to exchange. Straight to your wallet.

[enrique3uro]

At this point Dwarfpool no problem.

W 7/64
R9 380 stock 526 H / s
V9.7
16.11.3

[kaese2002]

Supranova doesnt accept  polo payment address with the ID  so i cannot use it
 i assume you cannot mine dirrectly to exchange

http://www2.pic-upload.de/img/32445534/Unbenannt.png

[GabryRox]

Hi Claymore, thanks for this first update to XMR GPU miner. Since this update obviously focused solely on bringing functionality inline with your other miners, is it safe to say that your next step on this miner will be to try to increase speed for recent GPUs like rx 470/480s?  Hopefully, now that you released v10 of the ZEC miner, you will come back to this one to help those of us with 470/480s 

[coinscrow]

Hi Claymore, thanks for this first update to XMR GPU miner. Since this update obviously focused solely on bringing functionality inline with your other miners, is it safe to say that your next step on this miner will be to try to increase speed for recent GPUs like rx 470/480s?  Hopefully, now that you released v10 of the ZEC miner, you will come back to this one to help those of us with 470/480s 

Yes! We hope more support on rx 470/480 

[ocminer]

Supranova doesnt accept  polo payment address with the ID  so i cannot use it
 i assume you cannot mine dirrectly to exchange

I've just finished integrating the "Integrated payment IDs" (long addresses with Payment address + ID merged together as used by Kraken) and next step are now the separate Payment IDs.

Soon ! (tm)

[woodaxe]

Supranova doesnt accept  polo payment address with the ID  so i cannot use it
 i assume you cannot mine dirrectly to exchange

I've just finished integrating the "Integrated payment IDs" (long addresses with Payment address + ID merged together as used by Kraken) and next step are now the separate Payment IDs.

Soon ! (tm)

 Can you shout when its ready  ive got the polo address with the payment id  waiting to move to you

[Trimegistus]

I've just finished integrating the "Integrated payment IDs" (long addresses with Payment address + ID merged together as used by Kraken) and next step are now the separate Payment IDs.

Soon ! (tm)

Kraken address added to my account! 

Thanks!