Hi, it actually makes sense to have benchmarks per coin instead of per algo. It may be a bit of hard work to tweak this in the programming, but in the long run us (users) will have a more down to earth expectation of what we would be earning and the profit switching would be more accurate.
I'm not sure why you would want this. Awesome Miner calculates your earnings based upon your current hashrate, and current price price/difficulty of the coin.
If you are getting a different hashrate for two coins on the same algorithm, then something is wrong with you system or setup.
I think you do not pay much attention to hashrates for hours like me.
Choose 10 different coins, for example Neoscrypt, from different pools in different parts of the world, and then take the test. You'll see that you get different hashrate values.
If I am in Spain and I am in contact with a server in the USA or Japan, my connectivity is not as good, with which the hashrate is reduced. If the configuration of Vardiff is not correct in the server, it also changes the hashrate, and so several more things. Hypothetically it is always the same hashrate, but different causes make it fall for different reasons. A Pool in a bad server, will have bad connectivity, bad response, and therefore a poorer hashrate.
I think you are introducing artificial problems here. The hashrate on the pool side may be different, but it will be the same on your rig for the same algorithm if every other setting is equal.
I don't understand why you would intentionally connect to pools that would introduce more latency.
The only way to get it right and correct is to be able to measure the hashrate by pool / currency
But this would be an inaccurate measurement by Awesome Miner. Awesome Miner can't control the packets as they travel across the internet. You could be affected by natural latency, by bad routing by ISPs and carriers.
I only invite you to take the test and then give your opinion. I have seen it in many currencies, in X17, x16s etc ... Different currencies, different hashrates, but within a margin. In X17 XVG the same rig gives 114-118 mhs, and in another currency that I can not remember now it did not exceed 105, and it is the same thing.
These hashrate differences cause the switch to be incorrect.
This is forcing me to do 3 hours tests in each pool / currency to see the deviation and modify it in the pool through the Profit field, but this is just a patch.
Please do the test and then give your opinion.
I honestly think you are making this harder than it should be. You should be selecting low latency pools.
So what do you suggest? to look for the best group and leave the profit at 1?
How to know if a group is the best or not, if it is not measured with a test?
I am going to leave a list of different currencies, looking for your best Pool, and you will see what difference there is from estimated profits (profit 1) to when it is measured at least 2 times, that is, two tests of 3 hours at different times and doing the average, you can verify that Profit 1 is not valid and is deceptive.
I really appreciate your answers, and I know that theoretically you are right, but one thing is theory and another practice.
Honestly, I think you want to make the difficult easy. You can win with little effort, but you can earn more with more effort.
List of measured coins, measured in Profit, have been tested twice and averaged their results, from the estimate to receive and what is actually received in the pool, to see if you understand the problem
INN 0.60 BSOD
MANO 0.80 gos.cx
ABS 0.65 gos.cx
DNR 0.65 yiimp.eu
BTX 0.95 suprnovq
RVN 0.9 ravenminer
PGN 0.97 suprnova
XVG 0.80 suprnova
CREA 0.77 yiimp.eu
RABBIT 1.2 angry pool
BSD 0.80 Suprnova
ZCR 1.05 phi-phi-pool
GIN 1.07 angrypool
XMN 0.95 gos.cx
Mona 0.65 suprnova
GRLC 0.9 garlicpool
DSR 0.80 uniming.net
TLR 0.90 taler-pool.online
MBC 0.65 arcpool repeat in blockmasters.co
Urals 1.6 pool.uralcoins.info
Kreds 0,70 supernova
B-hash 1.15 BSOD
Ore 0.95
btcz 1.01
GRV 1.04 BSOD
ALPS 0.98 angrypool
CRS 0.9 haspool.eu
Lux Phi2 0.84 bsod
hth 0.80 protopool
btg 0.95 suprnova
crc 0.80 bsod
DIN 1.05 BSOD
ZXZ 1.01 gos.cx
SPK 0.7 bsod
You only look for the best pool (I also look for it, but I check it) and forget, do not change any parameters or test the pool's performance.
Now think slowly, and imagine who will have the best auto swtich closest to reality.
And now I wait for your explanation because what I do is wrong, or really bad is to make the minimum effort and then complain about poor performance.
Right now I'm testing coins and pools, my goal is just to stay between 20-30 coins that I will change every month, we are several people at once checking the performance of the pools and we write them down in an online excel, each one deals with a Lot of coins and makes the measurements.
Now say that my way of working, even being slower and heavier, has no logic but to add a pool and forget.
It's the last time I post that list and it's not complete. Every 15 days all the coins are reviewed, first we look for a better pool, and then we do another 3 hours work test, seeing the estimated and the obtained, to calculate the Profit.
This can obviously be automated in a certain way only if the program allows it, but does not allow it. These measurements are key to hit more times in the auto switch.
For you a pool can be good, because it is close to it, or because it conforms to ignorance, but for me it can be a pool disaster.
to practical examples, it is not the same to earn 0.1 btc per day than to earn 0.13 btc, it is 30% more, but yes, it is more difficult, but I want results, I am not afraid of working hours. To others like you, it's going to be simple and easy, but a little blind as to what you expect and obtain.