Then there is another secondary problem.
The auto profit does it according to the benchmark profile or to save the Hash.
But of course in my profile it puts 8.22 in cucka31, but in the day it does not even reach 7, but it does not change the currency because what it sends is the saved hash, not the hash that is being produced.
That is the important thing to be able to have a better solution for the temperatures, because it is not only the fact that it yields less, but also that it is more serious because the auto switch does not look at real parameters (impossible for X16r for example), but I want you to understand that problem
A Rig produces X power in a Something, but when that Rig in summer by temperature yields 20% less, it does not take it into account. Somehow the programming of the auto switch should know if that rig has 1 or several cards of reduced core or power, and automatically apply to the hash saved a transparent reduction, so as to better guess with the hash changes produced by the heat. It would be something to keep in mind. It is clear that if 1 or more cards are in the limit of temperature, low pontencia and the hash they get is not the one that is saved as a reference, but knowingly, you can apply a transparent reduction to that hash when one or more cards are in maximum temperature, because they will not be producing their maximum. I hope you understand what I mean.
Right now the auto profit with the function of maximum temperature lowering the core and dropping the hash, is not realistic in its changes, and keeps me in currencies that are not the most profitable at that moment because of the heat.
Awesome Miner is currently only measuring the hashrate and power usage based on the clocking you had when you do the benchmark. In this case you have taken care of the temperature by lowering the performance, and at this point the previously benchmarked hashrate and power usage is no longer fully correct. I do understand your point here - that you may not be able to reach this level of hashrate and power usage due to high temperatures.
I don't think there is any easy solution to this as Awesome Miner would have to be quite smart about finding out this automatically without making any mistakes.
Rather it was commenting on if there was something easy but if you tell me it would be complicated, then I am satisfied. I'll look somehow the middle hash to put it by hand. I imagined that the auto profit was going to be difficult to modify by taking the benchmark reference. I leave a suggestion to see if it serves you. You can use an average of (benchmark + current hash) / 2 for Auto profit, so you have a very real average, you combine the saved hash + the hash generated at the moment divided by 2 to have a mean. It will always be a more real approach than just the benchmark. It's just a suggestion that I just came up with, it could be used for the whole year. The bad things are the algos that are extremely variable like x16r. Well it's just a suggestion, I understand how difficult it is and I understand that it is not done.
I am more interested in reducing power instead of Core, or even a mixed system, that works the same as the current temperature limit but primarily reduces Power and with less emphasis on Core. The point is to control the temperature with the lowest hash drop. There will always be a hash fall, it is inevitable, but according to my tests at hand, the hash suffers much less reducing power to that card, as it continues to maintain the CORE and is sometimes even able to keep the hash almost intact. But with the reduction of core the hash always falls.
The idea is as simple as putting another temperature limit option, that there are two, one for Core the current one and another for Power as I suggest, it has no more problem. Instead of 5 in 5 jumps it can be shorter steps like 2 in 2, or 3 in 3. But I tell you in tests that I have done by hand, many times the hash does not suffer just because the core is still intact and the temperature drops by power reduction. I also see it very interesting
As always I try to be constructive with my suggestions or criticisms, and I think that your system is the best in the market.
Finally, I still have some online interface problems but really if it is working, that is a direct problem with intelibrezee, I am already using windows 1903 which is quite stable. I have greatly reduced that error with this version but it still continues to appear and you have to restart once or several times until AM reads that remote well. Because I understand that this problem is remote.
