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

[Bob-Bit]

Is it just me or does ZergPool just seem to suck? I am getting WAY less BTC payouts than I think I should be...

Maybe it depends on your equipment/algorithms, cause for me going from best to worst, Zergpool, Niceash, Ahashpool, Miningpoolhub, Zpool, Hashrefinery. Still haven't gotten around to setting up Blazepool and trying that out. Of course YMMV.

[streaml1ne]

Is it just me or does ZergPool just seem to suck? I am getting WAY less BTC payouts than I think I should be...

I stopped using them last week because the payouts started off well but then fell flat in a day or so. Not sure if it was related to their hardware issues or what. Definitely seems to be a big discrepancy between what AM thinks they should be paying per day for some of the algorithms MPH doesn't have vs what's actually paid.

[sereupin]

Is it just me or does ZergPool just seem to suck? I am getting WAY less BTC payouts than I think I should be...

I stopped using them last week because the payouts started off well but then fell flat in a day or so. Not sure if it was related to their hardware issues or what. Definitely seems to be a big discrepancy between what AM thinks they should be paying per day for some of the algorithms MPH doesn't have vs what's actually paid.

I started mininig on multipools 2 months ago. After 3 weeks I was sure that there was a deep discrepancy from what they declare to pay you and what they pay you in reality.
I am sure that it is not correct and that you lose a lot of power mining on multipool.. much better to find a profitable coin and then hold or sell it.

[streaml1ne]

Is it just me or does ZergPool just seem to suck? I am getting WAY less BTC payouts than I think I should be...

I stopped using them last week because the payouts started off well but then fell flat in a day or so. Not sure if it was related to their hardware issues or what. Definitely seems to be a big discrepancy between what AM thinks they should be paying per day for some of the algorithms MPH doesn't have vs what's actually paid.

I started mininig on multipools 2 months ago. After 3 weeks I was sure that there was a deep discrepancy from what they declare to pay you and what they pay you in reality.
I am sure that it is not correct and that you lose a lot of power mining on multipool.. much better to find a profitable coin and then hold or sell it.

I'm sure some of it is fudge factor in the math somewhere. Some of it is probably the actual time spent mining vs not. If you're switching algorithms often then that leaves alot of startup time and hashrate ramp up time that I'm sure drags down earnings alot too. I'm assuming there's also some slack from the time the new profit numbers are posted, the time it takes you to see that change, switch algos, and get accepted shares. Still it seems that some pools estimate better or control things better.

[puwaha]

Hi
I bought awesome miner for 10 miners, very great tool, eventhough i still have lot too learn to master it
I have 7 rigs, but awesome miner can only detect those running claymore, but not DTSM, even if i put the option -- telemetry 2222, is there anything else to set up so he can see them as external miner from a computer that is not mining ?

Are you using the Awesome Miner Remote Service on the rigs?  If so, you don't have to specify the telemetry option... AM will do it for you.

[CreamyG31337]

can you fix the bug where:
1) I sort the coin list by name
2) I start reading the list
3) list decides to re-sort itself by profit when I'm halfway through

It does this to me about 20 times per day and it's a bit annoying

[Storx]

Mining Dutch seems to be most profitable Pool for my Rigs (7).
However, Mining Dutch keeps failing for Not Producing any accepted shares within the config time.  I set this to 10min.

This is happeneng on all 5 workers that use the pool.

Any Suggestions ?

The only solution is to have every day test miners (with a single gpu each - you get the same results if you use 12 gpus for each) all pools with different wallets for each pool. The wallet for the pool with the best BTC payment performance will be used for the rest of the rigs.

Any other statistic that is either current, 24h estimate or 24h actual has no relevance when you compare with this method.  Pool administrators must respond in minutes to forks or issues and the pools that are failing to do this have bad BTC payments when you compare with statistics that made that pool be in the top of estimates when mining.

Pool fee has zero relevance also, because besides visible fee, there is another parameter that is called EXCHANGE_FEE and some pools have high values for it (it is 6% and 10% for others, and some might have it at 0%, you can not know, you must see real payments).

I hope everyone use this method because it's the best. To use it, you just have to select just one GPU, because if you use 1 gpu or 12 gpus for this test, the difference between pools is exactly the same.

With this method you do not waste your money and with 6 gpus you can test 3 pools with both current and 24h estimates.

This method is also bulletproof to  any trick pools might use like: inflating estimates, editing the code (you only have to edit one line of code and pools can steal 10% from all your income) , changing database values, and many others.

I also suggest to Patrike to implement a variation of this solution besides others he has in mind,  because pools are not fair, and real payments are the only fair part you can check and evaluate pools.

Let me know if you find better solutions.

I guess you have made your own tests. So what is the most efficient pool for you between those predefined in online services in Awesome Miner ?

The pool that has the best real BTC payments today will not be the best one tomorrow and the only solution is that everybody that invested his own money and has more than 10 or 20 gpus should have at least 3 gpus testing the pools with separate wallets all the time and simply disable pools that have the lowest profitability. You should only trust the real payment values, never the estimates. 

Not doing so you are loosing large amounts of your money that you paid to purchase the hardware and do not forget that you also pay for electricity, not the pool administrator that should only take care about having the best profitability for his pool
.

I completely agree with this step, i have a dedicated pair of rigs at home that i use to for testing purposes on a regular ongoing basis like this. This way i can assure my 120+ 1080ti's can be mining the correct path for the most money in my pocket.

Example right now i have the following test going on

Both rigs are watercooled, so GPU's see same thermal temps during mining...

Test Rig 1, I have GPU0 profit switching Nicehash, I have GPU1 profit switching Zpool, I have GPU2 profit switching Ahashpool, and GPU3 profit switching Zergpool.... Been running this rig for a few weeks nonstop and have been using this data to alter the profit factor numbers in Awesome Miner.

Test Rig 2, I have GPU0 clear so the computer can be used for normal use, GPU1 is running Awesome Miner profit switching all available algo's on Ahashpool, GPU2 is running NemoMinerv2.5 profit switching all available algo's on Ahashpool.

The interesting thing is i took the extra step and changed all the miners Awesome Miner uses to match the ones NemoMiner uses by adding them in as custom miners per algo, but the trust system the Nemo has going is somehow pulled ahead by 6.7% over a 47day period of running. This is why i currently have all of my farm still mining using NemoMiner, but i have them all turned on for API so i can track them in Awesome Miner, truly love AM over Nemo, just need some extra love to the profit switching side to be more competitive.

Good Example, i just looked over at Rig 2, AM is showing C11 as more profitable and currently mining it based on 24hr average stats, but Nemo is currently mining X17 and showing C11 down as the 15th spot on profit....

[Storx]

Patrike,

Anyway we can do some brainstorming together on a way to improve the Profit Switching mode of the software?

If i understand NemoMiner, basically its logging the 24hr est, 24hr actual, and Current est, then its doing a calculation to figure out a running offset.. then applying it to smooth out the outlier spikes in profit that result in poor actual pay.


Example:

x17:
Current: 0.01523 *which is based on current sharerate and exchange price
24hr Est: 0.01853 *which is a projection of the next 24hrs based on the current exchange rate
24hr Actual: 0.01544 *which is based on actual payouts from past 24hrs of exchanged coins

Trust:
(3/26/2018 0500EST 24hr Est:) - (3/27/2018 0500EST 24hr actual) = Trust  24hr Offset

Example:
 (0.01853)-(0.01544)=0.00309 Difference of 16.7%

So on the profit switching list,
it will compare the current price with a running offset to determine if its worth switching to, because if the current est... greater than the 16.7% current offset, than its more likely it will actually payout more.

Then the next day lets say the new next 24hr trust offset is 17.0%, it does an averaging
16.7 and 17.0 for an average running offset of 16.85% and so far as time of the software collects data.

One thing i noticed on nemo's is if the offset places the coin below the 24hr actual, it defaults to 24hr actual price on the list for profit switching.

Basically, the trust offset in nemo miner is just saying hey, this is the expected amount of drop in value on this algo after all the peeps switch over to catch the spikes in high current payout and its actually exchanged for payout to peeps. The part i dont know how it does it is how it is taking into account current prices to this trust offset to mix those values into the calculations, thus why i suggest some brainstorming by the masses to figure out a good way of doing this.

[xTommYx]

Does anyone else have had trouble purchasing?
I upgraded my license from professional to premium.
It took the money but the order didn't went through.

The support is very slow as well.
Can someone here help?

[Storx]

Does anyone else have had trouble purchasing?
I upgraded my license from premium to professional.
It took the money but order didn't went through.

The support is very slow as well.
Can someone here help?

You cant expect it to be instant service bud, its basically a 1 man show running this software development in his spare time, if i recall this is just a hobby and not his actual main source of income. So you have to give him time to respond and allow him to sleep as well.

[xTommYx]

Does anyone else have had trouble purchasing?
I upgraded my license from premium to professional.
It took the money but order didn't went through.

The support is very slow as well.
Can someone here help?

You cant expect it to be instant service bud, its basically a 1 man show running this software development in his spare time, if i recall this is just a hobby and not his actual main source of income. So you have to give him time to respond and allow him to sleep as well.

I see, i thought it was a huge company lol.
Actually my first order of buying the professional version was instant. But now the cloud service or the upgrade, it never goes through but deducts the payment :/

[patrike]

Patrike,

Can you update the WTM coin symbols in the next release, there are a number that are there currently that don't have a symbol in AM - thanks for all the hardwork, it's really a pleasure to use.

Thanks for your feedback. I've added more coin symbols in v4.6.2 that soon will be made available.

[patrike]

I've got a new rig and for some reason I'm not able to benchmark anything with Excavator (the new version). I keep getting the error:

Thanks for reporting this issue. A correction will soon be made available.

[patrike]

can you fix the bug where:
1) I sort the coin list by name
2) I start reading the list
3) list decides to re-sort itself by profit when I'm halfway through

It does this to me about 20 times per day and it's a bit annoying

This will be corrected in v4.6.2.

[patrike]

Does anyone else have had trouble purchasing?
I upgraded my license from premium to professional.
It took the money but order didn't went through.

The support is very slow as well.
Can someone here help?

You cant expect it to be instant service bud, its basically a 1 man show running this software development in his spare time, if i recall this is just a hobby and not his actual main source of income. So you have to give him time to respond and allow him to sleep as well.

I see, i thought it was a huge company lol.
Actually my first order of buying the professional version was instant. But now the cloud service or the upgrade, it never goes through but deducts the payment :/

Hi,

I've not received any e-mail about this. Any issues about licenses or payments are always given highest priority. Did you send the question to the Fastspring payment processor maybe - they can take up to one business day to respond. Please contact me so we can resolve this.

[patrike]

Patrike,

Anyway we can do some brainstorming together on a way to improve the Profit Switching mode of the software?

If i understand NemoMiner, basically its logging the 24hr est, 24hr actual, and Current est, then its doing a calculation to figure out a running offset.. then applying it to smooth out the outlier spikes in profit that result in poor actual pay.


Example:

x17:
Current: 0.01523 *which is based on current sharerate and exchange price
24hr Est: 0.01853 *which is a projection of the next 24hrs based on the current exchange rate
24hr Actual: 0.01544 *which is based on actual payouts from past 24hrs of exchanged coins

Trust:
(3/26/2018 0500EST 24hr Est:) - (3/27/2018 0500EST 24hr actual) = Trust  24hr Offset

Example:
 (0.01853)-(0.01544)=0.00309 Difference of 16.7%

So on the profit switching list,
it will compare the current price with a running offset to determine if its worth switching to, because if the current est... greater than the 16.7% current offset, than its more likely it will actually payout more.

Then the next day lets say the new next 24hr trust offset is 17.0%, it does an averaging
16.7 and 17.0 for an average running offset of 16.85% and so far as time of the software collects data.

One thing i noticed on nemo's is if the offset places the coin below the 24hr actual, it defaults to 24hr actual price on the list for profit switching.

Basically, the trust offset in nemo miner is just saying hey, this is the expected amount of drop in value on this algo after all the peeps switch over to catch the spikes in high current payout and its actually exchanged for payout to peeps. The part i dont know how it does it is how it is taking into account current prices to this trust offset to mix those values into the calculations, thus why i suggest some brainstorming by the masses to figure out a good way of doing this.

Thanks for your feedback. I'm very much open for a discussion on this topic.

Awesome Miner already have access to these numbers, so making some adjustments to the profit switcher should be possible. Please give me a little more time to investigate before I get back with a longer response.

What I had in mind since before was that the Awesome Miner cloud could help out here to build this statistics trend, so you don't have to run Awesome Miner for a longer period of time to build the trust-level. It could be provided for you.

[patrike]

This is a minor update.

Awesome Miner version 4.6.2

- Added more images for popular coins
- Improved sorting and scrolling during updates of the Coins and Online Services lists.
- XMRig miner 2.5.2
- CpuMiner-Opt 3.8.4.1
- Correction to benchmarking of Excavator miner

[DKu]

Patrike,

Can you check out the code in Awesome Miner for a bug.

Some new users have joined zpool, used a bitcoin wallet (BTC), but in the wallet (stats page) at zpool it's set as BCH.

Awesome Miner is not doing anything for this scenario and simply assuming that zpool will go for BTC if nothing is specified explicitly. Awesome Miner do not specify payout coin at all, so this must be investigated from a zpool point of view.

The zpool instructions have always been a bit unclear on this.

-o stratum+tcp://<algo>.mine.zpool.ca:<PORT> -u <WALLET_ADDRESS> [-p c=<SYMBOL>,<OPTIONS>]
<WALLET_ADDRESS> must be a valid address. Incorrect addresses will result in forfit of earning.
You can also use any valid wallet address from any of the coins we mine. This feature has had minimal testing so use at your own risk

Awesome Miner is setting the Bitcoin wallet address the user specified. I interpret that you can specify any coin for payout, but that specifying like that is "at your own risk". For that reason, Awesome Miner is not specifying this "c=" parameter. In the past zpool always went for Bitcoin payouts in that scenario.

You can still configure Awesome Miner to add this parameter if you want (via Options dialog, Online Services, modify the zpool entries and add command line "-p c=ABC" or similar).

Further reading on zpool instructions:

c=<SYMBOL> doesn't always work

This is yet another reason why Awesome Miner isn't trying to set this parameter at all.

Can you please make this option more visible or even required? 99% of the time having the proper c=BTC set (or whatever symbol is for the wallet their using) will choose BTC. As it is now.... it's 50/50 with nothing set.

Could anyone explain to me how to setup awesome miner with Zpool? I've tried to check Select BTC Payout option in Profit Switching, add c=BTC parameter in the password filed in Online Services fo Zpool (all algos), add c=BTC to command-line and to the Zpool template. Pool also show me right version of my miner and Extra c=BTC is correct. But payouts only in SYS coins. Of course I added BTC wallet address to the Zpool filed and the address is correct. What I'm doing wrong? How to make awesomeminer to work with Zpool correctly?

Anybody here

[patrike]

Patrike,

Can you check out the code in Awesome Miner for a bug.

Some new users have joined zpool, used a bitcoin wallet (BTC), but in the wallet (stats page) at zpool it's set as BCH.

Awesome Miner is not doing anything for this scenario and simply assuming that zpool will go for BTC if nothing is specified explicitly. Awesome Miner do not specify payout coin at all, so this must be investigated from a zpool point of view.

The zpool instructions have always been a bit unclear on this.

-o stratum+tcp://<algo>.mine.zpool.ca:<PORT> -u <WALLET_ADDRESS> [-p c=<SYMBOL>,<OPTIONS>]
<WALLET_ADDRESS> must be a valid address. Incorrect addresses will result in forfit of earning.
You can also use any valid wallet address from any of the coins we mine. This feature has had minimal testing so use at your own risk

Awesome Miner is setting the Bitcoin wallet address the user specified. I interpret that you can specify any coin for payout, but that specifying like that is "at your own risk". For that reason, Awesome Miner is not specifying this "c=" parameter. In the past zpool always went for Bitcoin payouts in that scenario.

You can still configure Awesome Miner to add this parameter if you want (via Options dialog, Online Services, modify the zpool entries and add command line "-p c=ABC" or similar).

Further reading on zpool instructions:

c=<SYMBOL> doesn't always work

This is yet another reason why Awesome Miner isn't trying to set this parameter at all.

Can you please make this option more visible or even required? 99% of the time having the proper c=BTC set (or whatever symbol is for the wallet their using) will choose BTC. As it is now.... it's 50/50 with nothing set.

Could anyone explain to me how to setup awesome miner with Zpool? I've tried to check Select BTC Payout option in Profit Switching, add c=BTC parameter in the password filed in Online Services fo Zpool (all algos), add c=BTC to command-line and to the Zpool template. Pool also show me right version of my miner and Extra c=BTC is correct. But payouts only in SYS coins. Of course I added BTC wallet address to the Zpool filed and the address is correct. What I'm doing wrong? How to make awesomeminer to work with Zpool correctly?

Anybody here

It's correct to enable "Select BTC payout" in the Options dialog, Profit switching section.

Please use the Diagnostics button in the toolbar to see if "c=BTC" is passed to the mining software when started by Awesome Miner. If passed correctly, the problem is at zpool. If not passed correctly, please share the complete diagnostics output with me and I will investigate.

[moppidoo]

Patrike,

Can you check out the code in Awesome Miner for a bug.

Some new users have joined zpool, used a bitcoin wallet (BTC), but in the wallet (stats page) at zpool it's set as BCH.

Awesome Miner is not doing anything for this scenario and simply assuming that zpool will go for BTC if nothing is specified explicitly. Awesome Miner do not specify payout coin at all, so this must be investigated from a zpool point of view.

The zpool instructions have always been a bit unclear on this.

-o stratum+tcp://<algo>.mine.zpool.ca:<PORT> -u <WALLET_ADDRESS> [-p c=<SYMBOL>,<OPTIONS>]
<WALLET_ADDRESS> must be a valid address. Incorrect addresses will result in forfit of earning.
You can also use any valid wallet address from any of the coins we mine. This feature has had minimal testing so use at your own risk

Awesome Miner is setting the Bitcoin wallet address the user specified. I interpret that you can specify any coin for payout, but that specifying like that is "at your own risk". For that reason, Awesome Miner is not specifying this "c=" parameter. In the past zpool always went for Bitcoin payouts in that scenario.

You can still configure Awesome Miner to add this parameter if you want (via Options dialog, Online Services, modify the zpool entries and add command line "-p c=ABC" or similar).

Further reading on zpool instructions:

c=<SYMBOL> doesn't always work

This is yet another reason why Awesome Miner isn't trying to set this parameter at all.

Can you please make this option more visible or even required? 99% of the time having the proper c=BTC set (or whatever symbol is for the wallet their using) will choose BTC. As it is now.... it's 50/50 with nothing set.

Could anyone explain to me how to setup awesome miner with Zpool? I've tried to check Select BTC Payout option in Profit Switching, add c=BTC parameter in the password filed in Online Services fo Zpool (all algos), add c=BTC to command-line and to the Zpool template. Pool also show me right version of my miner and Extra c=BTC is correct. But payouts only in SYS coins. Of course I added BTC wallet address to the Zpool filed and the address is correct. What I'm doing wrong? How to make awesomeminer to work with Zpool correctly?

Anybody here

Also if your wallet on zpool is already identified as non BTC even if it is a valid BTC address,  you'd best to go to zPool thread and post a correction request there,  crackfoo is usually quite prompt with that sort of requests... kinda happens quite often (see for yourself in the pools thread)