Hello, any chance to implement "best share" info in ccminer api for ex with summary request ? For solo of course.
just done in my linux(=dev) branch
PS: my thread link is in my signature
Topic: CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded NVIDIA Maxwell / Pascal kernels. - page 887. (Read 2347659 times)
just done in my linux(=dev) branch
PS: my thread link is in my signature
One 750ti mining lyra@5MHASH on windows with sp-mod 71 42watt
Nicehash prices (24h) 0,3025 * 0,005
gives: 0,0015125BTC=$0,420475 / day
Your private kernel on lyra2v2 how much faster ?Nicehash prices (24h) 0,3025 * 0,005
gives: 0,0015125BTC=$0,420475 / day
+10% ?
No, I don't have a private lyra2v2 kernal. My public does 5.4 at max, but then not stable. 5MHASH can run for months.. (windows public exe file 71 asus strix 750ti +100)
DJM34's private is doing over 6MHASH per 750ti, and tsivs 5,6MHASH. (but their kernals use more power)
But if you use linux you only get 4,5MHASH (10% slower)
One 750ti mining lyra@5MHASH on windows with sp-mod 71 42watt
Nicehash prices (24h) 0,3025 * 0,005
gives: 0,0015125BTC=$0,420475 / day
Your private kernel on lyra2v2 how much faster ?Nicehash prices (24h) 0,3025 * 0,005
gives: 0,0015125BTC=$0,420475 / day
+10% ?
Waaaahaaa too much intrigue!!! . İ just can thank to who have qualified participation to community..At this time i have been switched off my rigs cus of nothing worth to mine.it's gone for electricity already.
One 750ti mining lyra@5MHASH on windows with sp-mod 71 42watt
Nicehash prices (24h) 0,3025 * 0,005
gives: 0,0015125BTC=$0,420475 / day
powercost:
42*24/1000 *$0.1 = $0,1008
Profit:
$0,420475
-$0,1008
-------------------------
$0.319675 per 750ti
With the current low prices the power cost is only 24% of the revenue. (With an electric price of 0.1$ per KWh)
1000 cards 319$ a day..
each of your message are either about asking for donation or asking people to pay...
I think you became a bit too greedy even on crypto standard.
I mean sure, I like to get paid for the work I do, but I don't release stuff which doesn't work (like all your broken release) just to get additional donation.
That's clearly what I don't like in the way you act, you give a bad name to developers (we are many to do honest work in a transparent way and the way you behave is bad for everybody).
I think you became a bit too greedy even on crypto standard.
I mean sure, I like to get paid for the work I do, but I don't release stuff which doesn't work (like all your broken release) just to get additional donation.
That's clearly what I don't like in the way you act, you give a bad name to developers (we are many to do honest work in a transparent way and the way you behave is bad for everybody).
I don't think you have any room to talk dude. Selling your miners for 3BTC and only to people you like says it all.
I'm not sure you know what a hypocrite is, but you're the spitting image of one, especially when you start preaching about giving devs a 'bad name'. The reason CCminer is so popular is because the population likes his work and continues to use it with his continued support. That is also why he gets donations. If he was the one giving devs a bad name, no one would be here.
This in particular "we are many to do honest work in a transparent way"... what if anything do you do that is transparent? How many private miners are you selling? What is their hashrate on a 970 and 750ti? How many copies have been sold? What is their power usage on each of the devices? How much do they cost?
SP has been answering all of those questions and does answer then when asked. You don't and wolf0 doesn't.
Oh, and by the way, EVERY question that was related to dev I've been PM'd, I've answered. Do you know WHY I don't always answer sale questions? Because quite honestly, it's boring, and unless the sale will be largely profitable, I really often don't want to.
You know what I love answering? People who want to help themselves - learn things. So I do that more. Sorry.
Waaaahaaa too much intrigue!!! . İ just can thank to who have qualified participation to community..At this time i have been switched off my rigs cus of nothing worth to mine.it's gone for electricity already.
So the pub miner is broken? :l
It has been fixed in the 1.6.6-spmod fork as well. 0.1 BTC Windows only x86 exe
to guys spitting on developers like djm34 and wolf0: probably you don't know that many public opensource miners and algos where made by them.
they could just let you mine with cpu and their customers with gpu.
if you continue to bother them (and me), that's where you'll end up.
so please think before speaking.
they could just let you mine with cpu and their customers with gpu.
if you continue to bother them (and me), that's where you'll end up.
so please think before speaking.
They are... but they usually release a slower version then release a private version with a higher hashrate and/or they get commissioned to make the miner in the first place. That's not the same thing as charity or doing it 'for the community'. Some cases it's even double or triple dipping (getting paid two-three times over for the same work).
I'd look at the work and why they did it in the first place before thinking it's charity. They don't do bad work, but it's 'work' and not freebies that you'd think from a first glance. If a coin dev or the community commissions them to make a miner for their coin, those are who you should thank, not them.
But most of the time you can't tell what's going on because they keep everything hush-hush to prevent prying eyes and ears from figuring things out.
So the pub miner is broken? :l
It has been fixed in the 1.6.6-spmod fork as well. 0.1 BTC Windows only x86 exe
to guys spitting on developers like djm34 and wolf0: probably you don't know that many public opensource miners and algos where made by them.
they could just let you mine with cpu and their customers with gpu.
if you continue to bother them (and me), that's where you'll end up.
so please think before speaking.
they could just let you mine with cpu and their customers with gpu.
if you continue to bother them (and me), that's where you'll end up.
so please think before speaking.
each of your message are either about asking for donation or asking people to pay...
I think you became a bit too greedy even on crypto standard.
I mean sure, I like to get paid for the work I do, but I don't release stuff which doesn't work (like all your broken release) just to get additional donation.
That's clearly what I don't like in the way you act, you give a bad name to developers (we are many to do honest work in a transparent way and the way you behave is bad for everybody).
I think you became a bit too greedy even on crypto standard.
I mean sure, I like to get paid for the work I do, but I don't release stuff which doesn't work (like all your broken release) just to get additional donation.
That's clearly what I don't like in the way you act, you give a bad name to developers (we are many to do honest work in a transparent way and the way you behave is bad for everybody).
I don't think you have any room to talk dude. Selling your miners for 3BTC and only to people you like says it all.
I'm not sure you know what a hypocrite is, but you're the spitting image of one, especially when you start preaching about giving devs a 'bad name'. The reason CCminer is so popular is because the population likes his work and continues to use it with his continued support. That is also why he gets donations. If he was the one giving devs a bad name, no one would be here.
This in particular "we are many to do honest work in a transparent way"... what if anything do you do that is transparent? How many private miners are you selling? What is their hashrate on a 970 and 750ti? How many copies have been sold? What is their power usage on each of the devices? How much do they cost?
SP has been answering all of those questions and does answer then when asked. You don't and wolf0 doesn't.
percentage based stratum miner, even if closed source, is easily fooled with routing or network filtering and in some cases you could even make it mine on your pool instead of dev's (it might work for solo mode, though).
Encryption, authentication, and verification... Even then, we're operating under the assumption that the method would never change and people are greedy enough to try and thwart a 2% donation. I'd use it because I want to support the developers, some people would simply because they're too lazy.
Claymores model has worked for quite some time. Too many assumptions operating here based off of year and a half old fee miners that were built without support and a 15-20% fee. This is a completely different scenario.
I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong, but I can't mine to a solo wallet. I simply don't get accepted OR rejected shares from the wallet. However, if I set gen=1 then the CPU miner starts and it reports in CCminer when that gets accepted or rejected shares.
You need to buy my private penta kernal. It works. I have fixed the solomining bug there..
0.3 BTC. (0.2BTC discount for DJM34)
So the pub miner is broken? :l
the usual blah blah blah I'm used to hear for ages.
we want to donate! then you opensource, and nobody donates.
percentage based stratum miner, even if closed source, is easily fooled with routing or network filtering and in some cases you could even make it mine on your pool instead of dev's (it might work for solo mode, though).
it's not the devs who are gready, it's the miners.
remember that devs are making programs that let miners MAKE MONEY: a previously unheard of "money making machine".
it's not like an android wallpaper.
we want to donate! then you opensource, and nobody donates.
percentage based stratum miner, even if closed source, is easily fooled with routing or network filtering and in some cases you could even make it mine on your pool instead of dev's (it might work for solo mode, though).
it's not the devs who are gready, it's the miners.
remember that devs are making programs that let miners MAKE MONEY: a previously unheard of "money making machine".
it's not like an android wallpaper.
I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong, but I can't mine to a solo wallet. I simply don't get accepted OR rejected shares from the wallet. However, if I set gen=1 then the CPU miner starts and it reports in CCminer when that gets accepted or rejected shares.
You need to buy my private penta kernal. It works. I have fixed the solomining bug there..
0.3 BTC. (0.2BTC discount for DJM34)
SOLO-MINE JoinCoin--
I set up solo-mining for JoinCoin. My GTX 960 gets about 29.9Mh/s with standard PentaBlake ("penta" algo). Currently, JoinCoin has a block reward of 2 coins, and a difficulty of ~300 for PentaBlake. If I get any coins in the next few hours, I'll report back.
--scryptr
EDIT:
While I was typing, I got this:
GTX 960 SSC solo-mining JoinCoin with standard PentaBlake
I will try a while longer. --scryptr
I set up solo-mining for JoinCoin. My GTX 960 gets about 29.9Mh/s with standard PentaBlake ("penta" algo). Currently, JoinCoin has a block reward of 2 coins, and a difficulty of ~300 for PentaBlake. If I get any coins in the next few hours, I'll report back.
--scryptr
EDIT:
While I was typing, I got this:
GTX 960 SSC solo-mining JoinCoin with standard PentaBlake
I will try a while longer. --scryptr
What does your config look like. Are you sure you have set it to mine penta? Since joincoin is a multi-algo coin, you need to specify the algo in the config file.
This pool works, I mined 120coins in less than 24 hours some days ago with one single 6x 750ti rig.
http://coinspool.cu.cc/info_joincoin-pentablake
JoinCoin CONFIGURATION FILES--
My wallet configuration (in ...appdata/roaming/joincoin):
==========cut line===========
gen=0
listen=1
daemon=1
server=1
rpcuser=yourname
rpcpassword=x
rpcallowip=127.0.0.1
rpcport=9150
rpcconnect=127.0.0.1
algo=pentablake
addnode=gdhtrc7qoh3qowvf.onion:17941
addnode=5k7xsbnnw3mpotx6.onion:17941
addnode=7xbw5q6s4b66hdls.onion:17941
addnode=scfnohgtgod2rzid.onion:17941
addnode=2fsfvfcizsok7sx5.onion:17941
addnode=xdckaipkzzztc7qb.onion:17941
addnode=i5znffoaikqooeyc.onion:17941
addnode=drtevq326tweby2k.onion:17941
addnode=b2mgu5dvcw3m7cxw.onion:17941
addnode=gsmlz6gnk22kdij2.onion:17941
addnode=ufi2euhvrpakwrih.onion:17941
addnode=53zy47p5wly5penk.onion:17941
addnode=nwjw2badoulwc4yi.onion:17941
addnode=im4qpcjdr5uzd7yb.onion:17941
addnode=ecunlzj3niqwaeqs.onion:17941
==========cut line==========
The algo "pentablake" is spelled out completely as per the JoinCoin OP. My mining configuration follows:
==========cut line===========
{
"url" : "127.0.0.1:9150",
"user" : "yourname",
"pass" : "x",
"algo" : "penta",
"intensity" : 20,
"cpu-mining" : true,
"cpu-priority" : 5,
"quiet" : false,
"debug" : false
}
==========cut line===========
My solo-join.conf (above) is called with this batch file:
==========cut line===========
:loop
C:\work\mine\spminer\ccminer.exe -c solo-join.conf
pause
goto loop
==========cut line===========
I am goiing to try whirlpool next. --scryptr
EDIT:
WHIRLPOOL SUCCESS--
I changed the algo in my solomining configuration to whirlpool (the default JoinCoin algo) and it worked!
GTX 960 FTW finds JoinCoin block with whirlpool algo.
First mined block on JoinCoin wallet.
--scryptr
I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong, but I can't mine to a solo wallet. I simply don't get accepted OR rejected shares from the wallet. However, if I set gen=1 then the CPU miner starts and it reports in CCminer when that gets accepted or rejected shares.
since i was curious about the evolution of the miner, i've performed some benchmarks on a 960 with various popular building with both cuda 6.5 and 7.5...
I am OK with these results (I work witk quark and lyra2rev2, Ubuntu and standard kernel/clock, for lower TdP) :Code:
cuda 6.5.19
version x11 x13 neoscrypt qubit quark lyra2v2
-----------------------------------------------------------------
1.5.61 4896.75 3817.49 307.50 7370.82 9901.39 4975.50
1.5.62 4830.94 3824.48 308.17 7367.76 9832.79 4892.54
1.5.63 4829.33 3827.89 307.98 7329.33 9942.74 5064.79
1.5.64 4830.37 3828.82 305.08 7364.21 9939.97 5022.05
1.5.65 4833.80 3829.02 308.03 7316.46 9935.27 5128.57
1.5.66 4841.17 3828.98 308.19 7309.84 9945.59 4964.04
1.5.67 4843.54 3842.94 304.59 7307.92 9895.11 5311.58
1.5.68 4871.72 3849.88 304.81 7333.10 9897.92 5284.52
1.5.69 4871.32 3846.09 305.23 7316.51 9926.38 5291.48
1.5.70 4850.56 3840.83 300.97 7325.78 9928.29 5274.59
1.5.71 4864.87 3848.43 302.00 7311.15 9938.50 5434.95
HEAD 4859.92 3846.95 279.25 7309.49 9943.24 5442.70
cuda 7.5.18
version x11 x13 neoscrypt qubit quark lyra2v2
-----------------------------------------------------------------
1.5.61 4545.64 3557.33 na 6833.08 9649.00 5137.34
1.5.62 4548.16 3536.73 na 6765.00 9741.35 5082.66
1.5.63 4549.85 3552.70 na 6766.62 9595.26 5254.05
1.5.64 4469.91 3544.88 na 6766.10 9772.69 5268.54
1.5.65 4537.04 3558.38 na 6760.28 9845.07 5329.07
1.5.66 4379.26 3547.62 na 6816.86 9779.27 5404.03
1.5.67 4572.08 3575.58 na 6764.94 9649.66 5782.35
1.5.68 4568.98 3576.28 na 6763.20 10016.10 5752.82
1.5.69 4564.96 3576.59 na 6760.18 9971.33 5747.59
1.5.70 4566.48 3564.19 na 6775.10 9936.68 5737.31
1.5.71 4529.04 3568.78 na 6756.01 9961.33 5505.06
HEAD 4564.34 3580.72 na 6748.33 10013.80 5506.37
edit: this is under linuxversion x11 x13 neoscrypt qubit quark lyra2v2
-----------------------------------------------------------------
1.5.61 4896.75 3817.49 307.50 7370.82 9901.39 4975.50
1.5.62 4830.94 3824.48 308.17 7367.76 9832.79 4892.54
1.5.63 4829.33 3827.89 307.98 7329.33 9942.74 5064.79
1.5.64 4830.37 3828.82 305.08 7364.21 9939.97 5022.05
1.5.65 4833.80 3829.02 308.03 7316.46 9935.27 5128.57
1.5.66 4841.17 3828.98 308.19 7309.84 9945.59 4964.04
1.5.67 4843.54 3842.94 304.59 7307.92 9895.11 5311.58
1.5.68 4871.72 3849.88 304.81 7333.10 9897.92 5284.52
1.5.69 4871.32 3846.09 305.23 7316.51 9926.38 5291.48
1.5.70 4850.56 3840.83 300.97 7325.78 9928.29 5274.59
1.5.71 4864.87 3848.43 302.00 7311.15 9938.50 5434.95
HEAD 4859.92 3846.95 279.25 7309.49 9943.24 5442.70
cuda 7.5.18
version x11 x13 neoscrypt qubit quark lyra2v2
-----------------------------------------------------------------
1.5.61 4545.64 3557.33 na 6833.08 9649.00 5137.34
1.5.62 4548.16 3536.73 na 6765.00 9741.35 5082.66
1.5.63 4549.85 3552.70 na 6766.62 9595.26 5254.05
1.5.64 4469.91 3544.88 na 6766.10 9772.69 5268.54
1.5.65 4537.04 3558.38 na 6760.28 9845.07 5329.07
1.5.66 4379.26 3547.62 na 6816.86 9779.27 5404.03
1.5.67 4572.08 3575.58 na 6764.94 9649.66 5782.35
1.5.68 4568.98 3576.28 na 6763.20 10016.10 5752.82
1.5.69 4564.96 3576.59 na 6760.18 9971.33 5747.59
1.5.70 4566.48 3564.19 na 6775.10 9936.68 5737.31
1.5.71 4529.04 3568.78 na 6756.01 9961.33 5505.06
HEAD 4564.34 3580.72 na 6748.33 10013.80 5506.37
Cuda 7.5 is faster rhan Cuda 6.5
release 1.5.71/70/69 are lower than the previous 1.5.68 (the faster release for me).
Thanks for the table, skunk :-).
All my gtx 960 cards are hashing lyra2v2 above 6MHASH using windows 7 64bit, cuda 6.5 and release 71 (official exe file).
All my gtx 960 card are hashing quark above 10MHASH on the gtx 960, often 10.5-12 using windows 7, cuda 6.5 and release 71 (official exe file).
No people gets angry when someone claim speed increases which doesn't exist (and ask donation for this fictitious upgrade).
When you spent 2 weeks working on an algo and you just have it released if someone claim an increase and that you test it and you don't find any difference well "angry people" don't like it...
When you spent 2 weeks working on an algo and you just have it released if someone claim an increase and that you test it and you don't find any difference well "angry people" don't like it...
You got payed to do the work you did on lyra2v2. My kernal is 10% faster on the cards I use to test them on.. I have many cards. Windows 64 (x86 build) cuda 6.5.
I have have shared my work for free...
If you compile in linux and use 64bit builds It's not my problem. You loose 10%. My modded kernals are not made for Linux..
Yesterday I did a fresh build of ccminer 1.7 TP from github. Quark was hashing at 12.5MHASH. If I build it on linux it will probably hash at 14.5MHASH.
Same for the SP-mod 71. I build it on windows I get 18.2 MHASH. On linux it's probobly less. (around 17MHASH)
You compare apples and oranges...
piss piss piss, someone pissed on the fire? Its starting to stink in here. lol
Yes. Enjoy the piss from the dj.Quark is hashing 12,5MHASH. In sp-mod 71 I get 18.2 MHASH (45.6%) faster
This is not an attack. This is just facts..
Your post might as well be saying, "The engine of my car is better, even though I ripped off his transmission."
Opensource work is based on other peoples work. In the latest ccminer clones, there are many chefs. The problem is that people get angry when their code is forked and optimized. Why should they, when they have done the exact same thing themselfes..
The spmod was forked early tpruvot (1.5.2) release, he forked it from the CCminer release. (the 2 christians) they forked it from pooler cpu-miner and pooler used alot of opensource code from different authors to create his miner.
Now the spmod is forked again by the nicehash dev team. This is good because Nicehash want's to improve the speed of all the miners to ensure that they are using the latest and fastest software.
Tpruvot has done some great things in his fork recently. Solomining is showing the total nethashrate. Poolside the miner is bether than mine
because it supports alot of tricks the pool use to lower the speed and steal from the miner. This is why I want to do a refork and add my fast kernals into the modern ccminer fork. This is borring work, but needs to be done. I expect to be payed. Developers have bills too...
so you admit now, that epsylon3 did the work and not copied it on you Now the spmod is forked again by the nicehash dev team. This is good because Nicehash want's to improve the speed of all the miners to ensure that they are using the latest and fastest software.
Tpruvot has done some great things in his fork recently. Solomining is showing the total nethashrate. Poolside the miner is bether than mine
because it supports alot of tricks the pool use to lower the speed and steal from the miner. This is why I want to do a refork and add my fast kernals into the modern ccminer fork. This is borring work, but needs to be done. I expect to be payed. Developers have bills too...
good that's progress...1 copy is sold for 0.1 BTC. And I will sell more copies.
each of your message are either about asking for donation or asking people to pay... I think you became a bit too greedy even on crypto standard.
I mean sure, I like to get paid for the work I do, but I don't release stuff which doesn't work (like all your broken release) just to get additional donation.
That's clearly what I don't like in the way you act, you give a bad name to developers (we are many to do honest work in a transparent way and the way you behave is bad for everybody).
I think we should definitely work SP, quarks, each of us are the beneficiaries.
And yes, Nvidia mining wouldn't be profitable without SP. Whenever the developers release algos for Nvidia there is a private version that follows shortly there after that almost no one can buy and costs a fuckton. Leaves the small miners to flop around at the bottom of the pool.
I would sponsor the devs with 2% of my hashrate, would you?
I honestly don't know why anyone is against a miner fee at this point given the alternative...
The % based donation sounds good, not sure how you could make it work with open source but even if it's closed source if it's available to everyone that's better than private miners that most don't have access to or even know about. I know we are competing for coins, but without a healthy mining community many alts will just die. Profit motive is good and is what makes the world work, just need to find a compromise so their is still enough profit left to keep the rest of the mining community involved so coins and gpu mining don't die off and the devs are supported for their work. Not sure the solution, but in the meantime I donate whenever I can to the ccminer devs including sp.
SGMINER? --
Whatever happened to Sgminer? The last official releases are over a year old.
I think the devs pissed in each other's beer.
--scryptr
Sgminer is maintained by nicehash: when they add an algo to their platform, they also update sgminer. But nobody's submitting optimisations (except some rare occasions like wolf0's whirlpoolx).Whatever happened to Sgminer? The last official releases are over a year old.
I think the devs pissed in each other's beer.
--scryptr
Wolf0 Also submitted a 100% increase in neoscrypt hashrate. (from 110H/s to 220H/s on the 280x)
And he bugfixed the lyra2v2 kernal on older amd cards..
Jump to: