Difference --> 0.00295 BTC
Not a completely negligible difference.
Not a completely negligible difference.
I would call that negligible.
Topic: [ANN][AUTO-SWITCH] Profit-switch auto-exchange pool: CleverMining.com - page 269. (Read 554401 times)
February 18, 2014, 12:09:13 PM
I would call that negligible.
February 18, 2014, 12:07:47 PM
Share difficulty isn't really a round time. It's more of a threshold. You're calculating shares all the time, but most of them have a value below the difficulty threshold, so you're not submitting them.
A share difficulty of 500k doesn't mean you're mining away on a huge chunk for ages (which would be bad for fast block times), it just means that you only submit a share when it randomly happens to have a value over 500k. But that single share wouldn't be any more likely to be rejected than any diff 16 share.
Also, empirically speaking, Middlecoin has a difficulty of 1024 but I never had particularly high reject rates there, always around 2-3%.
Wouldn't a 16 share take less time to compute compare to a 1024 share?
Middlecoin also have multiple servers, which I think is one of the biggest problem with CM right now.
No, it wouldn't. Watch your cgminer (or whatever you use) closely. You sometimes get huge shares, in the hundreds of thousands or even millions, out of nowhere. These don't take long to compute, they're just unlikely to happen.
And yeah... more servers would be neat indeed.
February 18, 2014, 12:02:55 PM
Share difficulty isn't really a round time. It's more of a threshold. You're calculating shares all the time, but most of them have a value below the difficulty threshold, so you're not submitting them.
A share difficulty of 500k doesn't mean you're mining away on a huge chunk for ages (which would be bad for fast block times), it just means that you only submit a share when it randomly happens to have a value over 500k. But that single share wouldn't be any more likely to be rejected than any diff 16 share.
Also, empirically speaking, Middlecoin has a difficulty of 1024 but I never had particularly high reject rates there, always around 2-3%.
Wouldn't a 16 share take less time to compute compare to a 1024 share?
Middlecoin also have multiple servers, which I think is one of the biggest problem with CM right now.
February 18, 2014, 12:00:17 PM
Hi everyone,
I have just received my payout from altcoinplex.
Its about 0.024 BTC/MH for two days.
They didnt payout yesterday due to some issue with dogecoin blockchain. However, they payout to me for today and yesterday.
http://stats.altcoinplex.com/users/bitcoin/1MjNG9pGippwTSHraPnB1MBKwjr4q2ykiY.html
I have just received my payout from altcoinplex.
Its about 0.024 BTC/MH for two days.
They didnt payout yesterday due to some issue with dogecoin blockchain. However, they payout to me for today and yesterday.
http://stats.altcoinplex.com/users/bitcoin/1MjNG9pGippwTSHraPnB1MBKwjr4q2ykiY.html
February 18, 2014, 11:55:36 AM
Quote
@tyj8tim: Share difficulty has nothing to do with reject percentage. Or with overall profits, or with anything that matters.
I actually have my doubts on that with a switching pool.
I agree that IF we mine at a pool that only mines one coin, then the variance will average out and you will see a steady payout after a few hours or 24 hours.
However, at CM we get a lot of stale rejects. And I'm assuming these are not all counting towards our hashrate (correct me if I'm wrong). From my understanding, stale rejects are the ones that's too old because the pool already pointed to the new block. So if someone has a ~10% reject on average, that means ~10% of the time when he finished his share, the pool already moved on and his calculated shares are useless. This is especially a problem for a pool that's hopping around and getting into block times that's less than a minute or even 30 seconds.
So IMO, by lowering the share difficulties, you can shorten individual miner's share round time and minimize the probability of submitting stale shares.
Share difficulty isn't really a round time. It's more of a threshold. You're calculating shares all the time, but most of them have a value below the difficulty threshold, so you're not submitting them.
A share difficulty of 500k doesn't mean you're mining away on a huge chunk for ages (which would be bad for fast block times), it just means that you only submit a share when it randomly happens to have a value over 500k. But that single share wouldn't be any more likely to be rejected than any diff 16 share.
Also, empirically speaking, Middlecoin has a difficulty of 1024 but I never had particularly high reject rates there, always around 2-3%.
February 18, 2014, 11:55:10 AM
I checked the profit average from 2/5 to 2/17 from both sites (biggest window provided by wafflepool) and found
Wafflepool range average = 0.010807 btc/Mh/24hour
Clevermining range average = 0.010903 btc/Mh/24hour
While clevermining has +10% rejects, and wafflepool has <1% rejects.....Wafflepool is the clear winner atm.
Wafflepool range average = 0.010807 btc/Mh/24hour
Clevermining range average = 0.010903 btc/Mh/24hour
While clevermining has +10% rejects, and wafflepool has <1% rejects.....Wafflepool is the clear winner atm.
CleverMining had some very rough days just after launch (Feb 4th) because of technical problems. Please compare either 30-day averages or last 3-4 days because we've been suffering from tech issues which were affecting our profitability between Feb 4th and Feb 13th).
No problem
2/14 to 2/17 stats from WP and CM
CM average 0.012403 BTC/Mh/Day
WP average 0.011455 BTC/MH/Day
WP@ 3.33Mh/s --> 3.2967Mh/s after rejects (1% rejects)
CM@ 3.33Mh/S --> 2.997Mh/s after rejects (10% rejects)
Earning Per day average
WP = 0.037763 BTC/Day
CM = 0.03717 BTC/Day
Different = 0.00059 --> WP still on top for now.
I'm not trying to to say CM is a bad pool. I love the designs and easy access to quick stats. If the reject rates can be lowered to a comparable level like WP, you can expect pool's hash power to increase exponentially.
February 18, 2014, 11:51:18 AM
i started mining this pool with my 6gpu rig but after a few hours cards 5 & 6 go dead, also these 2 cards sometimes hang at a low hashrate on startup
anyone else had this problem?
anyone else had this problem?
February 18, 2014, 11:45:51 AM
I checked the profit average from 2/5 to 2/17 from both sites (biggest window provided by wafflepool) and found
Wafflepool range average = 0.010807 btc/Mh/24hour
Clevermining range average = 0.010903 btc/Mh/24hour
While clevermining has +10% rejects, and wafflepool has <1% rejects.....Wafflepool is the clear winner atm.
Wafflepool range average = 0.010807 btc/Mh/24hour
Clevermining range average = 0.010903 btc/Mh/24hour
While clevermining has +10% rejects, and wafflepool has <1% rejects.....Wafflepool is the clear winner atm.
CleverMining had some very rough days just after launch (Feb 4th) because of technical problems. Please compare either 30-day averages or last 3-4 days because we've been suffering from tech issues which were affecting our profitability between Feb 4th and Feb 13th).
February 18, 2014, 11:41:35 AM
Your thought process regarding lower diffs for a miner has been argued to death over at MC, the consensus is no, diff does not have any long term effect on profitability or otherwise.
Anywho, I see a lot of posts whining about high rejects and swapping pools because of it. But no mention of profits had during said period. If you swapped away from a pool just because of rejects without considering your btc/mhs, you're stupid.
True that most people think it doesn't have long term effect. But IMO I think those conclusions are wrong, as pointed out in my description.
And again, I tallied the profit average between Wafflepool and CM (basically the same, CM 0.89% higher). However, CM has +10% reject rates (the pool average given at the stats page), and WP has ~<1% rejects (reported by many users, and I checked as well).
To do the math I'll use 3.33Mh/s for example
WP@ 3.33Mh/s --> 3.2967Mh/s after rejects
CM@ 3.33Mh/S --> 2.997Mh/s after rejects
Using average profitability from each pool
[email protected] BTC/Mh/Day @3.2967Mh/s --> 0.035626BTC
[email protected] BTC/Mh/Day @2.997Mh/s --> 0.032626BTC
Difference --> 0.00295 BTC
Not a completely negligible difference.
February 18, 2014, 11:39:37 AM
I also wonder why rejects are higher here than with other coin switching pools. Maybe CM switches coins more frequently than others?
February 18, 2014, 11:31:07 AM
The rejects caused by "switching coins" that Terk keeps is bullshit IMO.
I have tested a few switching pools and all rejects are under 3% without a doubt. What do they do? Not switch coins? I would like to know really why everyone has a ton of rejects.
I have tested a few switching pools and all rejects are under 3% without a doubt. What do they do? Not switch coins? I would like to know really why everyone has a ton of rejects.
February 18, 2014, 11:30:20 AM
Quote
@tyj8tim: Share difficulty has nothing to do with reject percentage. Or with overall profits, or with anything that matters.
I actually have my doubts on that with a switching pool.
I agree that IF we mine at a pool that only mines one coin, then the variance will average out and you will see a steady payout after a few hours or 24 hours.
However, at CM we get a lot of stale rejects. And I'm assuming these are not all counting towards our hashrate (correct me if I'm wrong). From my understanding, stale rejects are the ones that's too old because the pool already pointed to the new block. So if someone has a ~10% reject on average, that means ~10% of the time when he finished his share, the pool already moved on and his calculated shares are useless. This is especially a problem for a pool that's hopping around and getting into block times that's less than a minute or even 30 seconds.
So IMO, by lowering the share difficulties, you can shorten individual miner's share round time and minimize the probability of submitting stale shares.
Your thought process regarding lower diffs for a miner has been argued to death over at MC, the consensus is no, diff does not have any long term effect on profitability or otherwise.
Anywho, I see a lot of posts whining about high rejects and swapping pools because of it. But no mention of profits had during said period. If you swapped away from a pool just because of rejects without considering your btc/mhs, you're stupid.
February 18, 2014, 11:20:54 AM
Quote
@tyj8tim: Share difficulty has nothing to do with reject percentage. Or with overall profits, or with anything that matters.
I actually have my doubts on that with a switching pool.
I agree that IF we mine at a pool that only mines one coin, then the variance will average out and you will see a steady payout after a few hours or 24 hours.
However, at CM we get a lot of stale rejects. And I'm assuming these are not all counting towards our hashrate (correct me if I'm wrong). From my understanding, stale rejects are the ones that's too old because the pool already pointed to the new block. So if someone has a ~10% reject on average, that means ~10% of the time when he finished his share, the pool already moved on and his calculated shares are useless. This is especially a problem for a pool that's hopping around and getting into block times that's less than a minute or even 30 seconds.
So IMO, by lowering the share difficulties, you can shorten individual miner's share round time and minimize the probability of submitting stale shares.
February 18, 2014, 11:09:27 AM
well... 2.5 hours of testing with 1mh/s - A:100864 R:20480
so it's 16% rejects for me... too bad...
so it's 16% rejects for me... too bad...
February 18, 2014, 11:02:44 AM
Try wafflepool instead of just going back to middlecoin... Then watch your rejects drop to almost nothing, and profits increase along side.
How they manage to do that?
They probably just mine different coins with longer block times, which makes it less likely for you to submit a share for a block that is already solved. Terk seems to have calculated that these fast coins are worth mining even with sky-high rejects. Or he's wrong and Wafflepool is doing it right, I don't know.
On a related note, I would also appreciate an EU server. us.clevermining.com seems to be located in Seattle WA, which is simply too far away from me. US East Coast would be at least a little better.
--
@tyj8tim: Share difficulty has nothing to do with reject percentage. Or with overall profits, or with anything that matters.
February 18, 2014, 11:00:41 AM
Try wafflepool instead of just going back to middlecoin... Then watch your rejects drop to almost nothing, and profits increase along side.
How they manage to do that?
More servers + lower share difficulties.
I checked the profit average from 2/5 to 2/17 from both sites (biggest window provided by wafflepool) and found
Wafflepool range average = 0.010807 btc/Mh/24hour
Clevermining range average = 0.010903 btc/Mh/24hour
While clevermining has +10% rejects, and wafflepool has <1% rejects.....Wafflepool is the clear winner atm.
February 18, 2014, 10:44:13 AM
I am hopping for a asia server..
February 18, 2014, 10:43:11 AM
I am over at altcoinplex
here my stats
http://stats.altcoinplex.com/users/bitcoin/1MjNG9pGippwTSHraPnB1MBKwjr4q2ykiY.html
here my stats
http://stats.altcoinplex.com/users/bitcoin/1MjNG9pGippwTSHraPnB1MBKwjr4q2ykiY.html
February 18, 2014, 10:33:40 AM
Try wafflepool instead of just going back to middlecoin... Then watch your rejects drop to almost nothing, and profits increase along side.
How they manage to do that?
February 18, 2014, 10:23:09 AM
Averaging 13% rejects over the last 24 hours.
Jump to: