CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded GPU kernels.

[scryptr]

ZIFTR COIN---

The "ZR5" algo seems to be creating a demand.  I noticed that the tpruvot ccminer includes this algo, but apparently sp_ 's version does not.  Am I wrong?  Could it be included in the public/private sp_ releases soon?  Even if it is a kernel copy, for further improvement at a later date.  The algo is getting some notice, and I would like to put it in my autoswitch batch file for HashPower.com       --scryptr

[1714787426]

1714787426

[1714787426]

1714787426

[1714787426]

1714787426

[1714787426]

1714787426

[1714787426]

1714787426

[scryptr]

AUTOSWITCH BATCH FILE FOR YAAMP CLONE--

Following is a copy of my autoswitching batch file for CCminer on a YAAMP Pool clone, like HashPower:


==========CUT LINE==========

:loop

C:\work\mine\spminer\ccminer.exe -r 0 -a x11  -i 20.5 -C --cpu-priority 5 -o stratum+tcp://hashpower.co:3533 -u YOUR-COIN-ADDRESS-HERE -p x11=5.5,x13=4.4,x15=3.8,quark=11.4,neoscrypt=0.35,lyra2v2=6.5,qubit=8.1  -b 0.0.0.0:4068
timeout /t 3

C:\work\mine\spminer\ccminer.exe -r 0 -a x13  -i 20.5 -C --cpu-priority 5 -o stratum+tcp://hashpower.co:3633 -u YOUR-COIN-ADDRESS-HERE -p x11=5.5,x13=4.4,x15=3.8,quark=11.4,neoscrypt=0.35,lyra2v2=6.5,qubit=8.1  -b 0.0.0.0:4068
timeout /t 3

C:\work\mine\spminer\ccminer.exe -r 0 -a x15 -i 20.5 -C --cpu-priority 5  -o stratum+tcp://hashpower.co:3733 -u YOUR-COIN-ADDRESS-HERE -p x11=5.5,x13=4.4,x15=3.8,quark=11.4,neoscrypt=0.35,lyra2v2=6.5,qubit=8.1  -b 0.0.0.0:4068
timeout /t 3

C:\work\mine\spminer\ccminer.exe -r 0 -a quark -i 23.9 -C --cpu-priority 5 -o stratum+tcp://hashpower.co:4033 -u YOUR-COIN-ADDRESS-HERE -p x11=5.5,x13=4.4,x15=3.8,quark=11.4,neoscrypt=0.35,lyra2v2=6.5,qubit=8.1  -b 0.0.0.0:4068
timeout /t 3

C:\work\mine\spminer\ccminer.exe -r 0 -a neoscrypt -i 15.5 -C --cpu-priority 5 -o stratum+tcp://hashpower.co:4233 -u YOUR-COIN-ADDRESS-HERE -p x11=5.5,x13=4.4,x15=3.8,quark=11.4,neoscrypt=0.35,lyra2v2=6.5,qubit=8.1  -b 0.0.0.0:4068
timeout /t 3

C:\work\mine\spminer\ccminer.exe -r 0 -a lyra2v2 -i 19.1 -C --cpu-priority 5 -o stratum+tcp://hashpower.co:5433 -u YOUR-COIN-ADDRESS-HERE  -p x11=5.5,x13=4.4,x15=3.8,quark=11.4,neoscrypt=0.35,lyra2v2=6.5,qubit=8.1  -b 0.0.0.0:4068
timeout /t 3

C:\work\mine\spminer\ccminer.exe -r 0 -a qubit -i 19.7  -C --cpu-priority 5 -o stratum+tcp://hashpower.co:4733 -u YOUR-COIN-ADDRESS-HERE -p x11=5.5,x13=4.4,x15=3.8,quark=11.4,neoscrypt=0.35,lyra2v2=6.5,qubit=8.1  -b 0.0.0.0:4068
timeout /t 3

goto loop

==========CUT LINE==========

Save the text above, minus the "==CUT LINE==" notations, as "switch bat", and run the batch file under Wndows.  The above hash rates are relevant for a GTX 960, but will work OK for any model nVidia card until personal hash rates are established for any CCminer build/card model combo.  The specified PATH should be modified for your personal miner's PATH environmental variable.  Also, these hash rates were attained with the  current Private Miner from sp_ (v2.7).       --scryptr

[scryptr]

ZIFTR COIN---

The "ZR5" algo seems to be creating a demand.  I noticed that the tpruvot ccminer includes this algo, but apparently sp_ 's version does not.  Am I wrong?  Could it be included in the public/private sp_ releases soon?  Even if it is a kernel copy, for further improvement at a later date.  The algo is getting some notice, and I would like to put it in my autoswitch batch file for HashPower.com       --scryptr

Where are you seeing such demand?

HASHPOWER.CO--

The HashPower.co  pool seems to be having a hiccup with the algo.       --scryptr

[chrysophylax]

Look, I'd actually like to improve Spread (as well as X11 itself) for Nvidia, but that means I have to go over 5,375 lines of AMD GCN assembly by paw (yes, I just checked) and understand it perfectly in order to not only write it in OpenCL, but then port it to CUDA. You can't imagine what a pain in the ass this is.

why not do a pledge with escrow?

eg. 5 BTC for x11

if 5BTCs are reached you start doing your magic ...

I prefer not to promise something I dont have yet - especially because people are going to ask what the hashrate is going to be, and the answer is "fuck if I know" until I've done it.

therefore escrow ...

How does this help? People don't want to donate for a technique, they want to donate for a miner that gets x amount of hashes per second.

wolf - do the job - and get paid ... thats always been the way ...

and its the safest way ...

especially if you are going to start to code again with cuda ...

you have ( at least ) my backing - and would be well paid for a big boost ...

#crysx

#crysx

LOL, you just proved my point.

you have ( at least ) my backing - and would be well paid for a big boost ...

exactly ... that was the reason i posted ...

proving the point that no escrow would be needed - and the work really should already be done and proven for it to be paid - and paid well ...

hence the pledge that djm34 is undertaking currently ...

he has already set the work into play - proven the results for neoscrypt - and is willing to release for a limited number of btc for payment ... and 2.5btc is a good sum also ...

backing the point that i agree with ... is all im doing ...

and when i stated that you have my backing ( at least ) - i meant that im probably not the only one that would back this sort of procedure ... but i cant speak on behalf of the community - im assuming that im not the only one ...

...

#crysx

technically this isn't the way I work...   (but in that case the code as been written long ago for my own sake),
usually for standard work it is 50% in advance 50% at delivery.
It is okay to ask a dev to work on something, but expecting him to work until it reach something satisfactory for you isn't
(it is for at least 30% of the reason why I didn't finish working on the monero miner... no reason that only us take all the risk and
lose all our time... even r&d get financed in real world... no matter how useful it becomes at the end of day...)

Dead on.

i understood what you meant - and obviously in many ways - was not conveying it in the right sense ...

i used to be a network infrastructure consultant and onsite engineer ( i say used to because im now 'in crypto ) ...

there were two ways i would work ... usually on a contractual level and based on the following two premises ...

1 - hourly pay - whereby i got paid an hourly rate with which i showed up ( usually on site - but occasionally logged in for remote support ) - and for the time that i spent 'doing' my job - i got paid regardless of the result ...
2 - job lot - whereby i got paid for the job with a result ... no matter how long it took or what was necessary to achieve the desired result ...

as developers - YOU have the choice ( which YOU exercise regularly ) to take on a 'job lot' with an end result - regardless of the time or effort taken ... OR - YOU decide to be paid on the hourly rate no matter what the result may be ... in the case of djm34 and his monero ...

either way - it is your ( the devs ) decision as to how things will work ... and i think its a good thing that the freedom of these decisions can be made ...

you think its okay for someone to ask one thing - but not another? ... i oppose that in its entirety ... i KNOW that its OK to 'ask' anything you want of a dev ... but whether the dev believes its ok or not is another story altogether ... especially if the dev values his / her time and effort more than the person asking ...

i can ask if you would look at a piece of code for me - and even though its using your time and effort ( your knowledge and skills ) to look over the code - that doesnt mean i owe you money for it does it? ... ultimately its your decision HOW the deal will be set - and on what terms - and if the person offering ( or asking ) is in agreeance - then its 'ok' ... if its not in agreeance - its still 'ok' to have asked - just not agreed upon ...

so my point really is - if you need to be paid for time ( and effort ) you spend - then an hourly basis is what you should be upfront about on ANY contract you enter into ( verbal or not ) ...

i think the problem with crypto in general - especially with all the crap that is going on at the moment - is that developers ( especially highly skilled ones such as yourselves ) ARE actually being taken for granted ... this in-turn leads to mediocre offers for work and requests based on 'job lot' situations rather than hourly based contracted work ... unfortunately - thats the way its heading ... but fortunately - you have the power to turn down ANY work without making ANY commitment to ANY job offer ...

if you do however get into an agreement - then honor it as you would expect to be honored by it ... and if you cant - then other measures need to be talked about and renegotiated ...

#crysx

[kangjooe]

AUTOSWITCH BATCH FILE FOR YAAMP CLONE--

Following is a copy of my autoswitching batch file for CCminer on a YAAMP Pool clone, like HashPower:


==========CUT LINE==========

:loop

C:\work\mine\spminer\ccminer.exe -r 0 -a x11  -i 20.5 -C --cpu-priority 5 -o stratum+tcp://hashpower.co:3533 -u YOUR-COIN-ADDRESS-HERE -p x11=5.5,x13=4.4,x15=3.8,quark=11.4,neoscrypt=0.35,lyra2v2=6.5,qubit=8.1  -b 0.0.0.0:4068
timeout /t 3

C:\work\mine\spminer\ccminer.exe -r 0 -a x13  -i 20.5 -C --cpu-priority 5 -o stratum+tcp://hashpower.co:3633 -u YOUR-COIN-ADDRESS-HERE -p x11=5.5,x13=4.4,x15=3.8,quark=11.4,neoscrypt=0.35,lyra2v2=6.5,qubit=8.1  -b 0.0.0.0:4068
timeout /t 3

C:\work\mine\spminer\ccminer.exe -r 0 -a x15 -i 20.5 -C --cpu-priority 5  -o stratum+tcp://hashpower.co:3733 -u YOUR-COIN-ADDRESS-HERE -p x11=5.5,x13=4.4,x15=3.8,quark=11.4,neoscrypt=0.35,lyra2v2=6.5,qubit=8.1  -b 0.0.0.0:4068
timeout /t 3

C:\work\mine\spminer\ccminer.exe -r 0 -a quark -i 23.9 -C --cpu-priority 5 -o stratum+tcp://hashpower.co:4033 -u YOUR-COIN-ADDRESS-HERE -p x11=5.5,x13=4.4,x15=3.8,quark=11.4,neoscrypt=0.35,lyra2v2=6.5,qubit=8.1  -b 0.0.0.0:4068
timeout /t 3

C:\work\mine\spminer\ccminer.exe -r 0 -a neoscrypt -i 15.5 -C --cpu-priority 5 -o stratum+tcp://hashpower.co:4233 -u YOUR-COIN-ADDRESS-HERE -p x11=5.5,x13=4.4,x15=3.8,quark=11.4,neoscrypt=0.35,lyra2v2=6.5,qubit=8.1  -b 0.0.0.0:4068
timeout /t 3

C:\work\mine\spminer\ccminer.exe -r 0 -a lyra2v2 -i 19.1 -C --cpu-priority 5 -o stratum+tcp://hashpower.co:5433 -u YOUR-COIN-ADDRESS-HERE  -p x11=5.5,x13=4.4,x15=3.8,quark=11.4,neoscrypt=0.35,lyra2v2=6.5,qubit=8.1  -b 0.0.0.0:4068
timeout /t 3

C:\work\mine\spminer\ccminer.exe -r 0 -a qubit -i 19.7  -C --cpu-priority 5 -o stratum+tcp://hashpower.co:4733 -u YOUR-COIN-ADDRESS-HERE -p x11=5.5,x13=4.4,x15=3.8,quark=11.4,neoscrypt=0.35,lyra2v2=6.5,qubit=8.1  -b 0.0.0.0:4068
timeout /t 3

goto loop

==========CUT LINE==========

Save the text above, minus the "==CUT LINE==" notations, as "switch bat", and run the batch file under Wndows.  The above hash rates are relevant for a GTX 960, but will work OK for any model nVidia card until personal hash rates are established for any CCminer build/card model combo.  The specified PATH should be modified for your personal miner's PATH environmental variable.  Also, these hash rates were attained with the  current Private Miner from sp_ (v2.7).       --scryptr

i'm using gtx 970. what should i change? never seen that many command before. i'm usually mine in nicehash with this simple command:


ccminer.exe --algo=neoscrypt -o stratum+tcp://neoscrypt.hk.nicehash.com:3341 -u MY_WALLET -p x
pause



and also... what's this command do?

b 0.0.0.0:4068


i notice every time i start new mining the diff is high and the "accepted" is slow... after a while diff change and "accepted" is getting more frequent. any command that can be used to change the diff?

[chrysophylax]

Look, I'd actually like to improve Spread (as well as X11 itself) for Nvidia, but that means I have to go over 5,375 lines of AMD GCN assembly by paw (yes, I just checked) and understand it perfectly in order to not only write it in OpenCL, but then port it to CUDA. You can't imagine what a pain in the ass this is.

why not do a pledge with escrow?

eg. 5 BTC for x11

if 5BTCs are reached you start doing your magic ...

I prefer not to promise something I dont have yet - especially because people are going to ask what the hashrate is going to be, and the answer is "fuck if I know" until I've done it.

therefore escrow ...

How does this help? People don't want to donate for a technique, they want to donate for a miner that gets x amount of hashes per second.

wolf - do the job - and get paid ... thats always been the way ...

and its the safest way ...

especially if you are going to start to code again with cuda ...

you have ( at least ) my backing - and would be well paid for a big boost ...

#crysx

#crysx

LOL, you just proved my point.

you have ( at least ) my backing - and would be well paid for a big boost ...

exactly ... that was the reason i posted ...

proving the point that no escrow would be needed - and the work really should already be done and proven for it to be paid - and paid well ...

hence the pledge that djm34 is undertaking currently ...

he has already set the work into play - proven the results for neoscrypt - and is willing to release for a limited number of btc for payment ... and 2.5btc is a good sum also ...

backing the point that i agree with ... is all im doing ...

and when i stated that you have my backing ( at least ) - i meant that im probably not the only one that would back this sort of procedure ... but i cant speak on behalf of the community - im assuming that im not the only one ...

...

#crysx

technically this isn't the way I work...   (but in that case the code as been written long ago for my own sake),
usually for standard work it is 50% in advance 50% at delivery.
It is okay to ask a dev to work on something, but expecting him to work until it reach something satisfactory for you isn't
(it is for at least 30% of the reason why I didn't finish working on the monero miner... no reason that only us take all the risk and
lose all our time... even r&d get financed in real world... no matter how useful it becomes at the end of day...)

Dead on.

i understood what you meant - and obviously in many ways - was not conveying it in the right sense ...

i used to be a network infrastructure consultant and onsite engineer ( i say used to because im now 'in crypto ) ...

there were two ways i would work ... usually on a contractual level and based on the following two premises ...

1 - hourly pay - whereby i got paid an hourly rate with which i showed up ( usually on site - but occasionally logged in for remote support ) - and for the time that i spent 'doing' my job - i got paid regardless of the result ...
2 - job lot - whereby i got paid for the job with a result ... no matter how long it took or what was necessary to achieve the desired result ...

as developers - YOU have the choice ( which YOU exercise regularly ) to take on a 'job lot' with an end result - regardless of the time or effort taken ... OR - YOU decide to be paid on the hourly rate no matter what the result may be ... in the case of djm34 and his monero ...

either way - it is your ( the devs ) decision as to how things will work ... and i think its a good thing that the freedom of these decisions can be made ...

you think its okay for someone to ask one thing - but not another? ... i oppose that in its entirety ... i KNOW that its OK to 'ask' anything you want of a dev ... but whether the dev believes its ok or not is another story altogether ... especially if the dev values his / her time and effort more than the person asking ...

i can ask if you would look at a piece of code for me - and even though its using your time and effort ( your knowledge and skills ) to look over the code - that doesnt mean i owe you money for it does it? ... ultimately its your decision HOW the deal will be set - and on what terms - and if the person offering ( or asking ) is in agreeance - then its 'ok' ... if its not in agreeance - its still 'ok' to have asked - just not agreed upon ...

so my point really is - if you need to be paid for time ( and effort ) you spend - then an hourly basis is what you should be upfront about on ANY contract you enter into ( verbal or not ) ...

i think the problem with crypto in general - especially with all the crap that is going on at the moment - is that developers ( especially highly skilled ones such as yourselves ) ARE actually being taken for granted ... this in-turn leads to mediocre offers for work and requests based on 'job lot' situations rather than hourly based contracted work ... unfortunately - thats the way its heading ... but fortunately - you have the power to turn down ANY work without making ANY commitment to ANY job offer ...

if you do however get into an agreement - then honor it as you would expect to be honored by it ... and if you cant - then other measures need to be talked about and renegotiated ...

#crysx

Right - my point was, were I to make such a proposal, I would expect VERY few donations toward it.

agreed ...

and unfortunately - we ( devs / community ) have yet to devise such a method of fair trade with regards to this ...

ive tried to get a mining system with which miners can donate hashrate - but it seems that it is so small on a hashrate basis ( if any hashrate donated at all ) that its almost negligible ...

i have another idea that may bring in donations - but that too is a community based donation effort ... and so is reliant on the donations that the community needs to offer ... and as of late - only a handful have donated or offered ...

im stumped for the time being ... we will work it out ...

#crysx

[chrysophylax]

Look, I'd actually like to improve Spread (as well as X11 itself) for Nvidia, but that means I have to go over 5,375 lines of AMD GCN assembly by paw (yes, I just checked) and understand it perfectly in order to not only write it in OpenCL, but then port it to CUDA. You can't imagine what a pain in the ass this is.

why not do a pledge with escrow?

eg. 5 BTC for x11

if 5BTCs are reached you start doing your magic ...

I prefer not to promise something I dont have yet - especially because people are going to ask what the hashrate is going to be, and the answer is "fuck if I know" until I've done it.

therefore escrow ...

How does this help? People don't want to donate for a technique, they want to donate for a miner that gets x amount of hashes per second.

wolf - do the job - and get paid ... thats always been the way ...

and its the safest way ...

especially if you are going to start to code again with cuda ...

you have ( at least ) my backing - and would be well paid for a big boost ...

#crysx

#crysx

LOL, you just proved my point.

you have ( at least ) my backing - and would be well paid for a big boost ...

exactly ... that was the reason i posted ...

proving the point that no escrow would be needed - and the work really should already be done and proven for it to be paid - and paid well ...

hence the pledge that djm34 is undertaking currently ...

he has already set the work into play - proven the results for neoscrypt - and is willing to release for a limited number of btc for payment ... and 2.5btc is a good sum also ...

backing the point that i agree with ... is all im doing ...

and when i stated that you have my backing ( at least ) - i meant that im probably not the only one that would back this sort of procedure ... but i cant speak on behalf of the community - im assuming that im not the only one ...

...

#crysx

technically this isn't the way I work...   (but in that case the code as been written long ago for my own sake),
usually for standard work it is 50% in advance 50% at delivery.
It is okay to ask a dev to work on something, but expecting him to work until it reach something satisfactory for you isn't
(it is for at least 30% of the reason why I didn't finish working on the monero miner... no reason that only us take all the risk and
lose all our time... even r&d get financed in real world... no matter how useful it becomes at the end of day...)

Dead on.

i understood what you meant - and obviously in many ways - was not conveying it in the right sense ...

i used to be a network infrastructure consultant and onsite engineer ( i say used to because im now 'in crypto ) ...

there were two ways i would work ... usually on a contractual level and based on the following two premises ...

1 - hourly pay - whereby i got paid an hourly rate with which i showed up ( usually on site - but occasionally logged in for remote support ) - and for the time that i spent 'doing' my job - i got paid regardless of the result ...
2 - job lot - whereby i got paid for the job with a result ... no matter how long it took or what was necessary to achieve the desired result ...

as developers - YOU have the choice ( which YOU exercise regularly ) to take on a 'job lot' with an end result - regardless of the time or effort taken ... OR - YOU decide to be paid on the hourly rate no matter what the result may be ... in the case of djm34 and his monero ...

either way - it is your ( the devs ) decision as to how things will work ... and i think its a good thing that the freedom of these decisions can be made ...

you think its okay for someone to ask one thing - but not another? ... i oppose that in its entirety ... i KNOW that its OK to 'ask' anything you want of a dev ... but whether the dev believes its ok or not is another story altogether ... especially if the dev values his / her time and effort more than the person asking ...

i can ask if you would look at a piece of code for me - and even though its using your time and effort ( your knowledge and skills ) to look over the code - that doesnt mean i owe you money for it does it? ... ultimately its your decision HOW the deal will be set - and on what terms - and if the person offering ( or asking ) is in agreeance - then its 'ok' ... if its not in agreeance - its still 'ok' to have asked - just not agreed upon ...

so my point really is - if you need to be paid for time ( and effort ) you spend - then an hourly basis is what you should be upfront about on ANY contract you enter into ( verbal or not ) ...

i think the problem with crypto in general - especially with all the crap that is going on at the moment - is that developers ( especially highly skilled ones such as yourselves ) ARE actually being taken for granted ... this in-turn leads to mediocre offers for work and requests based on 'job lot' situations rather than hourly based contracted work ... unfortunately - thats the way its heading ... but fortunately - you have the power to turn down ANY work without making ANY commitment to ANY job offer ...

if you do however get into an agreement - then honor it as you would expect to be honored by it ... and if you cant - then other measures need to be talked about and renegotiated ...

#crysx

Right - my point was, were I to make such a proposal, I would expect VERY few donations toward it.

agreed ...

and unfortunately - we ( devs / community ) have yet to devise such a method of fair trade with regards to this ...

ive tried to get a mining system with which miners can donate hashrate - but it seems that it is so small on a hashrate basis ( if any hashrate donated at all ) that its almost negligible ...

i have another idea that may bring in donations - but that too is a community based donation effort ... and so is reliant on the donations that the community needs to offer ... and as of late - only a handful have donated or offered ...

im stumped for the time being ... we will work it out ...

#crysx

Perhaps offer private use of it to the donators for a period of time? See how they like having to care about the issue of "that one asshole" who publishes - early, in this case.

possibly ...

but then again ... not all servers are secure and - not all deal makers are honorable ...

#crysx

[sp_]

Private kernal for sale. 0.1BTC

Release 2 sp-mod private (750ti) (faster than release 78)

x11: +2.4%
x13: +5.4%
x15: +4.5%
lyra2v2: +6.45%
quark: +3.2%
qubit: +2.3%

[grendel25]

SP-mod private version 2 is soon ready. Here are som stats:

(faster than version private 1)

qubit:

gtx 970: +2.2%   12070 / 11810 (+260khash) +4.7% 12370 / 11810
gtx 960: +2.6%  7900 / 7730 (+170khash)
gtx 750ti:+2.5%   4860 / 4740 (+120khash)

x11

750ti: 3090/3045  +1.42% (+55KHASH)
970: 8130/7950  +2.22% (+180KHASH)
960: 5170/5119  +1%    (+51KHASH)


x13

750ti: 2426/2400 +1.08% (+26KHASH)
970: 6550/6400 +2.3%  (+150KHASH)
960: 4096/4080 +0.4% (+16KHASH)

x15

750ti: 2084/2060 +1.17% (+24KHASH)
970: 5645/5520 +2.22% (+75KHASH)
960: 3540 /3525 +0.42% (+15KHASH)

lyra2v2
750ti: 4630/4610 +0.43% (+20khash)
960,970 slower than private #1

I have sendt release 2 to the supporters..

If you want to support my code, please donate 0.1BTC to recieve the private mod.

release 1 sp-mod private (bether than release 78):

X11 is up 30khash (750ti) (+1%)
x13 is up 100khash(750ti) (+4.3%)
x15 is up 66Khash(750ti) (+3.3%)
quark is up 200khash(750ti) (+3.2%)
lyra2v2 is up 250khash(750ti)(+6%)

release 2 sp-mod private (bether than sp-mod private 1):

x11: +1.42% (+55KHASH(750ti))
x13: +1.08% (+26KHASH(750ti))
x15: +1.17% (+24KHASH(750ti))
lyra2v2: +0.43% (+20khash(750ti))
qubit:+2.5%  (+120khash(750ti))

I supported with a donation but did not receive release 2.

-grendel25

[sp_]

I supported with a donation but did not receive release 2.
-grendel25

Pm sendt.

[pallas]

ZIFTR COIN---

The "ZR5" algo seems to be creating a demand.  I noticed that the tpruvot ccminer includes this algo, but apparently sp_ 's version does not.  Am I wrong?  Could it be included in the public/private sp_ releases soon?  Even if it is a kernel copy, for further improvement at a later date.  The algo is getting some notice, and I would like to put it in my autoswitch batch file for HashPower.com       --scryptr

Where are you seeing such demand?

HASHPOWER.CO--

The HashPower.co  pool seems to be having a hiccup with the algo.       --scryptr

I tried mining on it when it started but no blocks found.

[chrysophylax]

ZIFTR COIN---

The "ZR5" algo seems to be creating a demand.  I noticed that the tpruvot ccminer includes this algo, but apparently sp_ 's version does not.  Am I wrong?  Could it be included in the public/private sp_ releases soon?  Even if it is a kernel copy, for further improvement at a later date.  The algo is getting some notice, and I would like to put it in my autoswitch batch file for HashPower.com       --scryptr

Where are you seeing such demand?

HASHPOWER.CO--

The HashPower.co  pool seems to be having a hiccup with the algo.       --scryptr

I tried mining on it when it started but no blocks found.

I put Freya on it. I predict a block shortly.

EDIT: Or not.

Code:

[03:41:18] Failed to connect to stratum on hashpower.co:4833                    
[03:41:18] setup_stratum_socket() on Hashpower.co Ziftr Pool failed                    
[03:41:18] Initiating stratum failed on Hashpower.co Ziftr Pool  

is that the algo or the stratum throwing those errors? ...

#crysx

[pallas]

ZIFTR COIN---

The "ZR5" algo seems to be creating a demand.  I noticed that the tpruvot ccminer includes this algo, but apparently sp_ 's version does not.  Am I wrong?  Could it be included in the public/private sp_ releases soon?  Even if it is a kernel copy, for further improvement at a later date.  The algo is getting some notice, and I would like to put it in my autoswitch batch file for HashPower.com       --scryptr

Where are you seeing such demand?

HASHPOWER.CO--

The HashPower.co  pool seems to be having a hiccup with the algo.       --scryptr

I tried mining on it when it started but no blocks found.

I put Freya on it. I predict a block shortly.

EDIT: Or not.

Code:

[03:41:18] Failed to connect to stratum on hashpower.co:4833                    
[03:41:18] setup_stratum_socket() on Hashpower.co Ziftr Pool failed                    
[03:41:18] Initiating stratum failed on Hashpower.co Ziftr Pool  

They disabled the only coin (Ziftr) because no blocks went thru.

[tbearhere]

ZIFTR COIN---

The "ZR5" algo seems to be creating a demand.  I noticed that the tpruvot ccminer includes this algo, but apparently sp_ 's version does not.  Am I wrong?  Could it be included in the public/private sp_ releases soon?  Even if it is a kernel copy, for further improvement at a later date.  The algo is getting some notice, and I would like to put it in my autoswitch batch file for HashPower.com       --scryptr

scryptr anyone ...what is the hashrate on the ZR5 algo on the 750ti please?

Thx

[djm34]

ZIFTR COIN---

The "ZR5" algo seems to be creating a demand.  I noticed that the tpruvot ccminer includes this algo, but apparently sp_ 's version does not.  Am I wrong?  Could it be included in the public/private sp_ releases soon?  Even if it is a kernel copy, for further improvement at a later date.  The algo is getting some notice, and I would like to put it in my autoswitch batch file for HashPower.com       --scryptr

scryptr anyone ...what is the hashrate on the ZR5 algo on the 750ti please?

Thx

don't want to be the party pooper, but the main exchange for ziftr was cryptsi...

[tbearhere]

ZIFTR COIN---

The "ZR5" algo seems to be creating a demand.  I noticed that the tpruvot ccminer includes this algo, but apparently sp_ 's version does not.  Am I wrong?  Could it be included in the public/private sp_ releases soon?  Even if it is a kernel copy, for further improvement at a later date.  The algo is getting some notice, and I would like to put it in my autoswitch batch file for HashPower.com       --scryptr

scryptr anyone ...what is the hashrate on the ZR5 algo on the 750ti please?

Thx

don't want to be the party pooper, but the main exchange for ziftr was cryptsi...

Thx djm .... ooooooo well. 

[Grim]

Perhaps offer private use of it to the donators for a period of time? See how they like having to care about the issue of "that one asshole" who publishes - early, in this case.

possibly ...

but then again ... not all servers are secure and - not all deal makers are honorable ...

#crysx
[/quote]

Good one and quite fair and possible will push the "donations" a bit.
Something reasonable like 60,90 or 120 days after you would publish the source.

Cuz afterall private miners in the long run kill off any coin.

[sp_]

Private kernal for sale. 0.1BTC

Release 2 sp-mod private (750ti) (faster than release 78)

x11: +2.4%
x13: +5.4%
x15: +4.5%
lyra2v2: +6.45%
quark: +3.2%
qubit: +2.3%

I have optimized all the most profitable algos is CCminer. Only 0.1 BTC People..

[joblo]

Look, I'd actually like to improve Spread (as well as X11 itself) for Nvidia, but that means I have to go over 5,375 lines of AMD GCN assembly by paw (yes, I just checked) and understand it perfectly in order to not only write it in OpenCL, but then port it to CUDA. You can't imagine what a pain in the ass this is.

why not do a pledge with escrow?

eg. 5 BTC for x11

if 5BTCs are reached you start doing your magic ...

I prefer not to promise something I dont have yet - especially because people are going to ask what the hashrate is going to be, and the answer is "fuck if I know" until I've done it.

And there's the pressure to deliver quickly.

[joblo]

Private kernal for sale. 0.1BTC

Release 2 sp-mod private (750ti) (faster than release 78)

x11: +2.4%
x13: +5.4%
x15: +4.5%
lyra2v2: +6.45%
quark: +3.2%
qubit: +2.3%

I wish I could code cuda.