[Awesome Miner] - Powerful Windows GUI to manage and monitor up to 200000 miners

[NotFuzzyWarm]

Continuing thoughts into what Avalon's display https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=676942.msg17968629#msg17968629 and followup https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=676942.msg18027671#msg18027671 as massively spikey 5-sec hash rates, wonder it is from how/when the 1 controller is talking to the 3x 721's chained off of the 1 USB/I2C adapter coupled with how Canaan's (legal) fork of CGminer reads that? Looking at what Canaan's GUI displays they must be smoothing out a lot of samples...

Perhaps for several sec or more there is nothing to report to AM followed by a massive data burst as the miners in unison report findings/request more work? I can easily see that the light on the adapter only flashes with a burst of activity for a couple sec maybe 5x a minute.

Thanks for all info on the Avalon hashrate you have provided. Based on your previous posts, it looks like the 5s hashrate is reported with a large variation. Awesome Miner is currently not smoothing any values - everything is displayed exactly as reported by the miner API's.

It would probably be possible to add some smoothing to the graphs in Awesome Miner, but the question is really if you want to see a pretty graph or a graph showing what's actually reported.

Not so much a pretty graph, but one that displays large variations better. Say a log-scale display option with 2 or 3 steps. I agree it is good to know/see how the Avalons are really reporting.

Why as many as 3 steps eg. 0-10, 10-100, 100-1000THs? 1 Avalon RasPi controller can run up to 20 miners. With Avalon 741's that is 150THs sustained average reported as 1 miner. God knows what the reported peaks would be....

That way AW's auto scaling doesn't result in the lower hash rate miners (s7's & 12-14THs s9's!) being swamped out. Speaking of which, today I added a741 to the chain of 3x 721's. Sustained hashrate reported by Kano is >28THs, on par with Canaan's GUI reports. However um, spikes over 100THs happen several times an hour so the s7's, R4, and yes even s9's are down in the mud...

A new bit about the Avalons/Controller: When miners are connected in a string off of 1 USB/I2C adapter, Canaan's GUI gives info about each miner in the string. AW reports them as 1 monster ASIC.

However, if I use 2 of the USB/I2C adapters and still just the 1 controller, then Awesome reports the new adapter/miners chain as a 2nd ASIC in the miner (controller). Of course as desired Awesome does still report just one miner and total specs on its output.

Point is, if I want to see how each individual miner is running then I can only run 4 physical miners per 4-port RasPi. Rather defeats the point of being able to chain 5 physical miners from each of the 4 USB ports giving 20 miners per controller.

[Zimmsquad]

I am thinking about trying out this software.

bensam1231 - you stated that you need a license per machine per algo for GPU mining. Is this true? I would love to use this program to auto switch algos based on profitability on my rigs, but requiring multiple licenses per rig due to multiple algos would not make much sense

[bensam1231]

I am thinking about trying out this software.

bensam1231 - you stated that you need a license per machine per algo for GPU mining. Is this true? I would love to use this program to auto switch algos based on profitability on my rigs, but requiring multiple licenses per rig due to multiple algos would not make much sense

Yes, definitely the biggest problem with this software right now. Each 'miner', NOT 'rig' is considered a 'instance'. So when you look at the licenses and you see four 'instances' that means 'miners'. If you want to use more then that you have to manually change each miner 'instance' profile. Really weird and heavily inflates licensing costs.

You can see it yourself in the trial version. The whole program confused the fuck out of me till I figured that out. After I did, I lost a lot of interest in this, even though it can be heavily improved it's borderline worthless for good GPU miners.

I'm sure it works great for ASICs and FPGAs though as their 'miner' is the same thing as their 'rigs'.

I discussed alternate ways to license a page back. Easiest way to do it currently is each hostname/ip is considered a 'instance'. Could be pretty easily jerry-rigged to work without much work. I'm guessing he's realized this actually makes him more money so he's not all that inclined to change it. If licensing was more expensive, I'd still be willing to pay, but not on a per 'miner' basis.

[patrike]

Yes, definitely the biggest problem with this software right now. Each 'miner', NOT 'rig' is considered a 'instance'. So when you look at the licenses and you see four 'instances' that means 'miners'. If you want to use more then that you have to manually change each miner 'instance' profile. Really weird and heavily inflates licensing costs.

You can see it yourself in the trial version. The whole program confused the fuck out of me till I figured that out. After I did, I lost a lot of interest in this, even though it can be heavily improved it's borderline worthless for good GPU miners.

I'm sure it works great for ASICs and FPGAs though as their 'miner' is the same thing as their 'rigs'.

I discussed alternate ways to license a page back. Easiest way to do it currently is each hostname/ip is considered a 'instance'. Could be pretty easily jerry-rigged to work without much work. I'm guessing he's realized this actually makes him more money so he's not all that inclined to change it. If licensing was more expensive, I'd still be willing to pay, but not on a per 'miner' basis.

I very much appreciate the feedback you provide - and I'm always trying to make the product more attractive based on user feedback. I also replied earlier that the next major version will have some new concepts that will reduce the number of licenses needed in these particular GPU mining scenarions, in order to address the license issues you describe.

There is absolutely no reason at all for you to continue on these license complaints over and over again and say that I'm not inclined to change because it makes money. It's not true and it's not constructive.

Please continue to suggest features, ideas to improve and so on - but please do it in a good way. Thanks!

[bensam1231]

Yes, definitely the biggest problem with this software right now. Each 'miner', NOT 'rig' is considered a 'instance'. So when you look at the licenses and you see four 'instances' that means 'miners'. If you want to use more then that you have to manually change each miner 'instance' profile. Really weird and heavily inflates licensing costs.

You can see it yourself in the trial version. The whole program confused the fuck out of me till I figured that out. After I did, I lost a lot of interest in this, even though it can be heavily improved it's borderline worthless for good GPU miners.

I'm sure it works great for ASICs and FPGAs though as their 'miner' is the same thing as their 'rigs'.

I discussed alternate ways to license a page back. Easiest way to do it currently is each hostname/ip is considered a 'instance'. Could be pretty easily jerry-rigged to work without much work. I'm guessing he's realized this actually makes him more money so he's not all that inclined to change it. If licensing was more expensive, I'd still be willing to pay, but not on a per 'miner' basis.

I very much appreciate the feedback you provide - and I'm always trying to make the product more attractive based on user feedback. I also replied earlier that the next major version will have some new concepts that will reduce the number of licenses needed in these particular GPU mining scenarions, in order to address the license issues you describe.

There is absolutely no reason at all for you to continue on these license complaints over and over again and say that I'm not inclined to change because it makes money. It's not true and it's not constructive.

Please continue to suggest features, ideas to improve and so on - but please do it in a good way. Thanks!

Your post the other day said 'address some of what you're talking about' in response to a three page long post of ideas and suggestions, I didn't know that was specifically pertaining to licensing. Sounds good and I await these changes. I currently have the free version setup, so it would be nice to see this happen.

[FlensGold]

I just don't understand. You are spending thousands of Dollars for your hardware but you are complaining to spend just a few dollars for very good software.
I have to admit that I am only administrating 3 GPU Rigs + some Asic Miners with this software, but it saved me so much time that even a higher price would be worth it (at least for me).

I also do not understand why you need to change your mining software that often. Looking back the last months there was hardly much need to do so.
Maybe I am doing something wrong, I keep an eye on whattomine.com and for my AMD GPUs it was always daggerhashimoto (ETH/ETC) or Equihash (ZCL/ZEC), so there was no need to use X mining instances.

[NotFuzzyWarm]

I just don't understand. You are spending thousands of Dollars for your hardware but you are complaining to spend just a few dollars for very good software.

And along that line: If you are making money mining then register as a business. It not only keeps the Income Tax folks happy but more importantly -- expenses such as buying equipment, software, and yes even power to run the miners are business Tax write-offs...

[Zimmsquad]

I want to be able to switch between different miners and also add in ewbf miner for zcash. Is there a way to add in ewbf or other currently non-listed miners and have them display statistics so it can take part in the multi engine profit switching?

[bensam1231]

I just don't understand. You are spending thousands of Dollars for your hardware but you are complaining to spend just a few dollars for very good software.
I have to admit that I am only administrating 3 GPU Rigs + some Asic Miners with this software, but it saved me so much time that even a higher price would be worth it (at least for me).

I also do not understand why you need to change your mining software that often. Looking back the last months there was hardly much need to do so.
Maybe I am doing something wrong, I keep an eye on whattomine.com and for my AMD GPUs it was always daggerhashimoto (ETH/ETC) or Equihash (ZCL/ZEC), so there was no need to use X mining instances.

If you don't understand why GPU miners are using so many different miners you have no place GPU mining. Stick to your ASICs.

If you're using only one miner that definitely means you aren't getting the best speeds, mining the right coins, or really have that many rigs. By your own admittance you only have 3 rigs. You have 3 miners for each one (lets say at the most basic level, Ethereum, Equihash, and Pascal (assuming you don't dual mine or switch what you dual mine)), that means you need nine instance. You have 20 rigs, 40 rigs, that balloons quite a bit and there are decent bit more then three miners.

Yes, AMD mining right now is easier then Nvidia as far as miners go (you can mine Ethereum and not really do that bad), it doesn't work that way for Nvidia. The additional options for dual mining also increases the amount of instances you'll be using. However, that doesn't mean there aren't other options available for AMD, you just have to dig a bit for them.

It's not a 'little bit of money'. If you can't do multiplication you wont be able to figure that out.

[forato]

Can you please add support to ETH+PASC on miner properties?

http://prntscr.com/ehv01t

[patrike]

I want to be able to switch between different miners and also add in ewbf miner for zcash. Is there a way to add in ewbf or other currently non-listed miners and have them display statistics so it can take part in the multi engine profit switching?

Hi,
The EWBF miner doesn't provide any API for Awesome Miner to use, so it will not be supported.

[patrike]

Can you please add support to ETH+PASC on miner properties?

http://prntscr.com/ehv01t

Claymore's Ethereum + Pascal miner is supported in the latest development version of Awesome Miner.
To get access to development versions, go to the Options dialog and enable "Check for development versions". Then you can go to the Menu and select "Check for updates".

[boki019]

Can you please add support to ETH+PASC on miner properties?

http://prntscr.com/ehv01t

Claymore's Ethereum + Pascal miner is supported in the latest development version of Awesome Miner.
To get access to development versions, go to the Options dialog and enable "Check for development versions". Then you can go to the Menu and select "Check for updates".

Niceeeeee
works just fine
Thanks a lot

[forato]

Can you please add support to ETH+PASC on miner properties?

http://prntscr.com/ehv01t

Claymore's Ethereum + Pascal miner is supported in the latest development version of Awesome Miner.
To get access to development versions, go to the Options dialog and enable "Check for development versions". Then you can go to the Menu and select "Check for updates".

Niceeeeee
works just fine
Thanks a lot

Tks  a lot!!!

[patrike]

I have one problem.
I have paid version of AM, but i always have problem with update.
Miner alsways show me when new update is availiable, and if u do upgrade AM download new files, install them and restart AM.
After restart i still have old version of AM and i get again msg about update to new version. I can reperat this 100 times and is still same.
In past i had always download new version from your website and install new version, then was OK. But lately you dont updata new versions on website,
so i cant update. Now im running v 2.3 and AM show me there is update 2.31, but is not on your website.
You have any clue why my AM dont update automaticly?
Thx for suggestions

Hi,
The update 2.3.1 was a development version, and those are not listed on the web site. I will post the 2.4 in a few minutes, and this version is a public release that also can be downloaded from the web site.
Maybe you could send me the Awesome Miner log file, that's availble via Tools->Log File. Please also let me know the exact time you tried the upgrade.

[patrike]

Awesome Miner Version 2.4 is available for download

A summary of the new features:
- Claymore's Ethereum Miner 8.0 with dual mining support for Pascal
- Managed Template feature allows definition of mining settings that can be applied to one or many Managed Miners
- Coin visibility settings moved to the Coin page
- Miner API connection timeout configurable
- Claymore's Zcash Miner 12.3

[patrike]

Sounds good and I await these changes. I currently have the free version setup, so it would be nice to see this happen.

Awesome Miner 2.4 has a concept of Managed Template that will address your main concern about licenses.

In Options dialog, Managed Template section, you can define template configurations. You can for example have one template for Claymore's Ethereum + Pascal mining, and another one for Claymore's Zcash. In the main window of Awesome Miner you will find a "Template" button in the toolbar, where you can switch template for the selected Managed Miners.

This should allow you to only use a single Managed Miner per computer, but still have a way to switch configuration settings for one, many or all miners in a single operation.

Please give the new feature a try - Thanks!

[philipma1957]

was looking at this.

So I have antminers s9 --- r4        location 1

I have avalon 721                        location 2


I have  some sidehack usb sticks    location 3
and gpus for alt coins


lets say I get a professional edition  pay 50 bucks   for 10 instances  my gear has 3 separate ips in three different homes/businesses.

will the license allow multiple ips?

paying a fee is okay just want to be sure I can use the same license at different ips

[Moonrackers]

I havent tried the API access for S9. I gave it a try on one miner to test it and now the miner is showing Disconnected in the program. The miner is working good on the pool. Updated to 2.4

I tried different combinaisons of rules, it always says OK in the list but I can't get the miner reconnected to the program.

W:192.168.2.160
W:192.168.2.160,W:127.0.0.1
W:127.0.0.1/32
w:192.168.2.160
etc

What I'm doing wrong?

[toptek]

I might be doing some thing wrong unless 2.4 broke something using it remotely it updated remotely to 2.4 with no issue but it won't run on any Rigs remotely all it says is starting in blue letters and sets there, if I look at the remote rig with Remote Desktop Connection nothing is hashing, so i tested it more, i deleted all the Awesome miner folder's on the all the remote rigs then uninstalled/reinstalled it on each remote rig manually then reinstalled AM on the main Rig/PC at 2.4 with all new settings and pools it still won't work remotely with 2.4, so i have a copy of 2.3 saved and that works on the remote rig/pc ...with 2.4 on the main Rig/pc.