Topic: CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded NVIDIA Maxwell / Pascal kernels. - page 802. (Read 2347664 times)

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

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

#crysx

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

Pm sendt.

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

-grendel25

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%

possibly ...

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

#crysx

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

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?

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

HASHPOWER.CO--

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

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

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...)

True, people pay for modifications. Not for "soon to become modifications". I can imagine that most of the devs just don't start modding things they know that will take some serious time..

Anyhow, you've got my backing back over at the AMD side  , but that's no news right there

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

if you can translate the boost to spreadx11 
or is the sha256 part too much of a bottleneck to see any gains?

i do sp - and am willing to put thefarm forward for it ...

i DONT want windows - that will not work with me ...

over the last week - i have been recouping and redeciding on ALL of what i have done ( and need to do ) - in and out of thefarm - and its is never going to be a windows system ...

i am placing a few miners together over the next month - and will have a pool of funds that will be assigned SPECIFICALLY for inhouse updates ... and linux ONLY ...

so if you have some good increases in x11 - im willing to look at it - and also willing to make a deal over it ... and did i mention im NOT interested in windows? ...

...

#crysx

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

Nobody want a boost in x11?