CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded GPU kernels.

[ioglnx]

KlausT was active and implemented already pascalcoin into his CCminer branch tonight with primitive stratum support.
But I already tried the build and it's doesn't seem to work against nanopools pascalcoin pool

[sp_]

The hashrate bug  was fixed in the Klaus-t fork.

Difficulty has risen 400% in 12 hours because of nanopool. Not profitable any more..

[ioglnx]

Only for big farm owners like you :-D

[bensam1231]

CPU utilization needs to be improved immensely in the miners. Pretty sure that's what's messing with the hashrate the most.

[Amph]

The hashrate bug  was fixed in the Klaus-t fork.

Difficulty has risen 400% in 12 hours because of nanopool. Not profitable any more..

link tot he fixed version? can it mine on pool also?

[sp_]

Not yet. Nanopool is finding 85% of the Blocks now. The total hashrate reported in the Client is 6.9THASH. But nanopool report 11,772THASH alone. I think the real net hash is around 14THASH.

[7enuke]

KlausT was active and implemented already pascalcoin into his CCminer branch tonight with primitive stratum support.
But I already tried the build and it's doesn't seem to work against nanopools pascalcoin pool

you have this wndows release ?

[Amph]

Not yet. Nanopool is finding 85% of the Blocks now. The total hashrate reported in the Client is 6.9THASH. But nanopool report 11,772THASH alone. I think the real net hash is around 14THASH.

so 10 days to find a block with 5 giga which is around the speed of one rig(1070), this mean 0.008 per day, not worth it....

[ioglnx]

The best moment to hop in ZEC again its going up and since the hash is down the rewards getting more.^^that said I made 0,2zec more since last day.

[bathrobehero]

Currently 10 Gh/s a day will get you:
- based on the in-wallet block explorer's network hashrate (7 Th/s): 41 coins
- based on the difficulty calculation (current target): 39 coins
- based on nanopool's hashrate (11 Th/s) combined with the fact that they find roughly 90% of all blocks: 24 coins.

So with a single 1070 at 800 Mh/s you earn somewhere between $1.19-$2.04.

So it was both fun and frustrating while it lasted for nvidia.

[bensam1231]

Not sure why you guys keep quoting payment estimations. You can just type that into cryptocompare and gives you the same results, once again depending on nethash which is all over the fucking place and doesn't seem to be a accurate place for it yet (which is also why whattomines calculator isn't up yet).

[pallas]

When pool hashrate is much higher than network, it may be due to a high number of orphans, so be careful when you do your own math.

[bathrobehero]

Not sure why you guys keep quoting payment estimations. You can just type that into cryptocompare and gives you the same results, once again depending on nethash which is all over the fucking place and doesn't seem to be a accurate place for it yet (which is also why whattomines calculator isn't up yet).

Because more ways of estimating earnings gives us a better overall picture. And because the difficulty is the most reliable factor, not nethashrate.

[Amph]

this was just another coin to mine early and dump at 50-100k range or even 30k, huge profit

[Schleicher]

KlausT was active and implemented already pascalcoin into his CCminer branch tonight with primitive stratum support.
But I already tried the build and it's doesn't seem to work against nanopools pascalcoin pool

That's because the coding is not finished yet.
For example all the CUDA code for pascal is still missing.

[bensam1231]

Not sure why you guys keep quoting payment estimations. You can just type that into cryptocompare and gives you the same results, once again depending on nethash which is all over the fucking place and doesn't seem to be a accurate place for it yet (which is also why whattomines calculator isn't up yet).

Because more ways of estimating earnings gives us a better overall picture. And because the difficulty is the most reliable factor, not nethashrate.

It's not different, it's the same thing, the only thing that's different is the nethash you put into the equation.

[ioglnx]

KlausT was active and implemented already pascalcoin into his CCminer branch tonight with primitive stratum support.
But I already tried the build and it's doesn't seem to work against nanopools pascalcoin pool

That's because the coding is not finished yet.
For example all the CUDA code for pascal is still missing.

Klaus no worries I know it is not complete yet :-D It was no intention to say you made bad work or such.
If you felt hurt I'm sorry - I was just telling that you are on it and first attempt (der Hüftschuss) didn't worked for me :-D

Keep on good work.

Gruß^^

[pallas]

I modified the pascal cuda miner and optimized it, now it's doing 900 Mh/s on a 1070 consuming just 100W.
Is it good? Worth working on it, now that there are pools?

[ioglnx]

I modified the pascal cuda miner and optimized it, now it's doing 900 Mh/s on a 1070 consuming just 100W.
Is it good? Worth working on it, now that there are pools?

Give it a shot pallas.

[bathrobehero]

Not sure why you guys keep quoting payment estimations. You can just type that into cryptocompare and gives you the same results, once again depending on nethash which is all over the fucking place and doesn't seem to be a accurate place for it yet (which is also why whattomines calculator isn't up yet).

Because more ways of estimating earnings gives us a better overall picture. And because the difficulty is the most reliable factor, not nethashrate.

It's not different, it's the same thing, the only thing that's different is the nethash you put into the equation.

Both nethashrate and the difficulty fluctuates a lot so we don't have precise estimates but they're very different metrics.

The difficulty is the clear and precise number of how much work has to be done to solve a block while nethashrate only shows us the total mining power on the network. If the difficulty retarget would be perfect, the two would be the same (as to showing profitability) but it's far from it. If the nethashrate is higher than what the difficulty should be to keep the blocktime then you just get more blocks mined than the intended blocktime and vice versa - which is why we had rapid blocks and very slow blocks.