sp, any news regarding your GTX 950 ? I received mine today, tested with lyra2v2, and it is not much faster than GTX 750 Ti (only ~15%). I think there is room for improvement.
While on another hand, GTX 950 is the most efficient card for mining Axiom. 900 hps @ 60 W.
Topic: CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded NVIDIA Maxwell / Pascal kernels. - page 977. (Read 2347664 times)
What's happening with the x11 algo. Nicehash in paying 1BTC/GHASHday now... The dash price seems to be stable
X11 22.0831 GH/s 0.9001 * 1.0013 * 1.1767 / 1.0622 *
X11 22.0831 GH/s 0.9001 * 1.0013 * 1.1767 / 1.0622 *
here i chirp in - the broken record that i am sp ...
my two most fav algos in the world at the moment ... x11 and quark ...
i am more than willing to pay for massive optimizations with those algos - especially x11 ...
its an algo that isnt going to go anywhere - and will only grow ...
#crysx
Why not go for a three tiered plan?
CCMiner Free - not fully optimized, totally free.
CCMiner Lite - 10% faster than Free, mines at 1-2% fee to sp_. (I will take this one)
CCMiner Pro - 20% faster than Free for x BTC, comes with some features that large farms want & need.
Adjust the % of optimization to what you think is fair for your input & what you are getting. I guess many will use "Lite" version just as its 10% faster than free
CCMiner Free - not fully optimized, totally free.
CCMiner Lite - 10% faster than Free, mines at 1-2% fee to sp_. (I will take this one)
CCMiner Pro - 20% faster than Free for x BTC, comes with some features that large farms want & need.
Adjust the % of optimization to what you think is fair for your input & what you are getting. I guess many will use "Lite" version just as its 10% faster than free
and what of the other devs that commit optimizations / inclusions / rewrites of the various algos and implementations of 'pulls' that others do for ccminer-spmod? ...
dont forget - this fork is sp's fork - but it is also a conglomeration of work from so many other authors ...
it looks good on paper ( or txt here in this case ) but i honestly believe its impractical ...
i have a farm - would i pay a certain amount for the 'pro' version? ... i can ... but why not use the smaller versions in that case? ... or use the versions that tpruvot puts out? ... or djm34's? ... or klaust's? ... or ...
see what i mean? ...
besides - that looks like a microsoft model of doing things ... no tanx from my end ...
#crysx
hmm but its really not easy to donate unless its a coin like VTC, small miners have to wait a lot before donating BTC. If miner mines to devs its easy, may be devs can come to some agreement among themselves on how to split things up. As for MS model, i guess its good to have features you want & pay for it. This is different from MS in the sense that miners can have a say in what feature they want nothing forced on them, and there is always free version so no one is forced to pay either. Right now we have this very same arrangement with sp's private kernels available which are 20% faster.
We can come up with all kind of plans but it really depends on how much profit miners are making & how fairly they want to share in the economy. Its more about ethics than anything else. We have seen that what happens when profits are not shared (AMD miner model). We are also seeing same in real economy & stock markets that when profits are not shred/reinvested its bad for everyone. So if people are not dumb/greedy & short sighted & want to cannibalize their own profits, then they will pay or market will self adjust by going towards either development stagnation or private miners.
There are a lot of different ways you could present a product and probably no one model is right. I know % based mining fees are the easiest for all involved. If you do a 'paid' version you have to setup a actual way of accepting payment (unless they're just going to do manual transactions with paper receipts). You can split % based mining among contributors as well.
Also agree about the AMD mining conundrum. Good example of all the profit going to a handful of people. I definitely think developers should be fairly compensated, but all the burden (or profit) shouldn't be put on one group of individuals.
I've pushed for something like this a few different times because I don't want to see development stop and I think it's quite fair (as long as the percent isn't jacked up a lot).
As I mentioned earlier, if CCMiner had a API, they could easily adopt MultiMiner to be a frontend and add stats... It's opensource.
it seems that the percentage for mining is the main way that a dev can get his / her portion of the development donation ... but as sp iterated earlier - it wouldnt take much for someone to refork and remove such code ...
the amd model is a fairly simple one - but as you have stated - in the hands of an elite few ... im not against that - except that monopolies are formed that way and that is quite detrimental to the mining community ... and im not against it because the few devs that DO develop the optimizations and miners do release their code and optimizations when they feel that it is ready for the community to take ... in any case - it really isnt this model of opensource availability - so its not really a working model that we can really look at ...
i think that a community of users that GIVE as they receive is a better way of donating to the developers than forcing percentages and keeping miners private ... BUT - unfortunately - not everyone GIVES in order to use these miners and optimizations ... if that was the case - we would not even be discussing this ... is ALL miners gave a little once a week - then the devs would have a LOT of incentive to continue development ...
which is why donating hashrate - no matter how small - may be all the help the devs need ... and moreso - all the donation the smaller miners CAN give for the time being ...
#crysx
You think there would be more people trying to rip off their code then would donate (especially a small fee like 1-2%)? I disagree entirely. It's not perfect. There is no perfect model. Mining fee is the best out of all of them and I'm definitely against mining profits being in the hands of the few as that is exactly what cryptos aren't about. That's what ASICs are and that's why everyone tried to get away from them.
As I talked about earlier, if people want to take this seriously they definitely could make a company around such a model. There are definitely a decent amount of coders around the forums and then they could do extra things like DRM protection and features.
Donations are donations, that's it. You can never expect and you should never expect donations. This means people wont donate even if you think they should and that shouldn't bother you. However if you want steady income and compensation you should sell your work in whatever form that takes. The fact that you guys are trying to haggle and guilt people in the community into donating definitely means that a different payment model should be looked into because the current one is not meeting their requirements. There is nothing wrong with this and there is nothing wrong with switching models.
point taken ...
still - it is what it is ...
who will trust a company unless the devs ARE the company? ... or have a financial obligation to the company? ...
try and team up all the devs to work under one roof - or trust one entity and you are in for some real work ... not impossible and more than plausible - but very very VERY difficult ...
#crysx
@crysx
I appreciate your work with the donation links. I was wondering why are you not creating a multipool. This way you can split the fees between yourself & devs or may be give any excess donations to devs. All the miners who post here & your own farm can mine on your pool instead of nicehash so we have enough hashrate to be profitable. This way everyone wins. yaamp is now opensource so you can use or modify that code. Also if this turns out to be profitable then someone from community can customize the pool code to add features. Also i heard that sp_ is creating a pool or something like that, may be you 2 can work together. What say everyone?
I appreciate your work with the donation links. I was wondering why are you not creating a multipool. This way you can split the fees between yourself & devs or may be give any excess donations to devs. All the miners who post here & your own farm can mine on your pool instead of nicehash so we have enough hashrate to be profitable. This way everyone wins. yaamp is now opensource so you can use or modify that code. Also if this turns out to be profitable then someone from community can customize the pool code to add features. Also i heard that sp_ is creating a pool or something like that, may be you 2 can work together. What say everyone?
tanx for the feedback sambiohazard ...
this is already in the works ...
though everyone ( except for one dev - who needs some more time to think about whether he wants to or not ) has turned me down to setup the multipool ... for their own reasons - and all valid reasons ... yaamp himself started the setup of the first pool but dropped it due to his involvment in his other projects - so his interest wained in setting up the first multipool and refunded the btc ... he was very helpful - but not wholeheartedly interested in it ... his new projects though are where his focus is ... which is fine - and probably better ... so who can blame him ...
i actually want two pools setup - and will require a developer to modify the code - as im not a coder ... especially in the realms of these great developers who contribute to all the miners ( and ive listed a few earlier ) ...
i havent approached quite a few of the actual devs here ( and in other threads ) due to their workload as it is - but a couple of your suggestions are already part of the plan when i can find someone to install the mulipool to my sepcifications ... i have no issue with payment either - as none of this is being asked to be done for free ... a deal could even be cut - but that depends on the deal the dev and can do ...
it WILL go ahead ... though i think it will be eventual - and which dev will determine which code gets used ... yaamp code is great and is very flexible - but again - i have no one here to help get it organized ...
so maybe this response could be used as a public notice that im looking for someone who knows the code to work with me ( yes - especially devs included ) to setup two multipools ...
nicehash are really good - except for the fees that get charged out ... this is a thorn in my side - but i also understand that they ARE a business and need to make profit ( fiat ) from all their endeavours ... the whole setup was based around yaamp code - ccminer-spmod - exchanges - and market ( which is still under wraps and under development ) ... thefarm has a part to play in this also and im growing that by the week - but one step at a time ...
i WANT the devs to have more than just a few donations here and there ( and the devs are always appreciative of all those who donate - but how much incentive are those donations for them to release private miners and improve public ones? ) ... i want to see a constant flow with of miners and community members donating ...
and i also know that im NOT the only one ...
#crysx
What's happening with the x11 algo. Nicehash in paying 1BTC/GHASHday now... The dash price seems to be stable
X11 22.0831 GH/s 0.9001 * 1.0013 * 1.1767 / 1.0622 *
X11 22.0831 GH/s 0.9001 * 1.0013 * 1.1767 / 1.0622 *
In zTheWolfz example the drop in the hashrate is 2.5% wich is significant. seperate kernals for compute 5.0 and compute 5.2 will solve it.
DJM34 already did this in the lyra2v2 implementation.
DJM34 already did this in the lyra2v2 implementation.
Maybe possible to add a specific card option switch? Or released a different optimization binary for different card?
If it's too much development effort, then forget about it
If it's too much development effort, then forget about it
Still seeing a little better numbers from r57 vs r61v4 I think that's the release number for the most recent r61.
with my new tweaked command line, same flags used for both test. Do I have a magic r57 release?
with my new tweaked command line, same flags used for both test. Do I have a magic r57 release?
When comparing releases you should show the results with the same number of accepts in the miner. Since some cards trottle and loose performance over time.
Can anyone tell me how to get a multi GPU rig mining Ethereum with the ethminer-cuda? I have all Nvidia maxwell cards and have tried everything I could to get it to work. Any thoughts? My machines run Windows 8.1 and my .bat file is ethminer -F http://eth2.suprnova.cc:3000/pokeytex.cgar/10 --mining-threads 5
thanks in advance. - pokeytex
thanks in advance. - pokeytex
CUDA SWITCH--
Where is the Cuda switch "-U"? And, at a pool, you normally need your account number, not a user name. You need to generate an account number with Geth, the text-only command line wallet. Check the several CryptoMining Blog articles on how to set up and run Ethminer, several have been linked on recent pages in this thread.
If you are running Windows 8.1 and have 750ti cards, you will not get optimal results, only ~1Mh/s per card. There is a known bug.
--scryptr
@scryptr supurnova.cc uses username.workername, not wallet address like other pools for ethereum. So his .bat file is only missing -U
Still seeing a little better numbers from r57 vs r61v4 I think that's the release number for the most recent r61.
with my new tweaked command line, same flags used for both test. Do I have a magic r57 release?
r57
r61v? downloaded a page of so back from your link sp_
with my new tweaked command line, same flags used for both test. Do I have a magic r57 release?
r57
r61v? downloaded a page of so back from your link sp_
Can anyone tell me how to get a multi GPU rig mining Ethereum with the ethminer-cuda? I have all Nvidia maxwell cards and have tried everything I could to get it to work. Any thoughts? My machines run Windows 8.1 and my .bat file is ethminer -F http://eth2.suprnova.cc:3000/pokeytex.cgar/10 --mining-threads 5
thanks in advance. - pokeytex
thanks in advance. - pokeytex
CUDA SWITCH--
Where is the Cuda switch "-U"? And, at a pool, you normally need your account number, not a user name. You need to generate an account number with Geth, the text-only command line wallet. Check the several CryptoMining Blog articles on how to set up and run Ethminer, several have been linked on recent pages in this thread.
If you are running Windows 8.1 and have 750ti cards, you will not get optimal results, only ~1Mh/s per card. There is a known bug.
--scryptr
Can anyone tell me how to get a multi GPU rig mining Ethereum with the ethminer-cuda? I have all Nvidia maxwell cards and have tried everything I could to get it to work. Any thoughts? My machines run Windows 8.1 and my .bat file is ethminer -F http://eth2.suprnova.cc:3000/pokeytex.cgar/10 --mining-threads 5
thanks in advance. - pokeytex
thanks in advance. - pokeytex
Why not go for a three tiered plan?
CCMiner Free - not fully optimized, totally free.
CCMiner Lite - 10% faster than Free, mines at 1-2% fee to sp_. (I will take this one)
CCMiner Pro - 20% faster than Free for x BTC, comes with some features that large farms want & need.
Adjust the % of optimization to what you think is fair for your input & what you are getting. I guess many will use "Lite" version just as its 10% faster than free
CCMiner Free - not fully optimized, totally free.
CCMiner Lite - 10% faster than Free, mines at 1-2% fee to sp_. (I will take this one)
CCMiner Pro - 20% faster than Free for x BTC, comes with some features that large farms want & need.
Adjust the % of optimization to what you think is fair for your input & what you are getting. I guess many will use "Lite" version just as its 10% faster than free
and what of the other devs that commit optimizations / inclusions / rewrites of the various algos and implementations of 'pulls' that others do for ccminer-spmod? ...
dont forget - this fork is sp's fork - but it is also a conglomeration of work from so many other authors ...
it looks good on paper ( or txt here in this case ) but i honestly believe its impractical ...
i have a farm - would i pay a certain amount for the 'pro' version? ... i can ... but why not use the smaller versions in that case? ... or use the versions that tpruvot puts out? ... or djm34's? ... or klaust's? ... or ...
see what i mean? ...
besides - that looks like a microsoft model of doing things ... no tanx from my end ...
#crysx
hmm but its really not easy to donate unless its a coin like VTC, small miners have to wait a lot before donating BTC. If miner mines to devs its easy, may be devs can come to some agreement among themselves on how to split things up. As for MS model, i guess its good to have features you want & pay for it. This is different from MS in the sense that miners can have a say in what feature they want nothing forced on them, and there is always free version so no one is forced to pay either. Right now we have this very same arrangement with sp's private kernels available which are 20% faster.
We can come up with all kind of plans but it really depends on how much profit miners are making & how fairly they want to share in the economy. Its more about ethics than anything else. We have seen that what happens when profits are not shared (AMD miner model). We are also seeing same in real economy & stock markets that when profits are not shred/reinvested its bad for everyone. So if people are not dumb/greedy & short sighted & want to cannibalize their own profits, then they will pay or market will self adjust by going towards either development stagnation or private miners.
There are a lot of different ways you could present a product and probably no one model is right. I know % based mining fees are the easiest for all involved. If you do a 'paid' version you have to setup a actual way of accepting payment (unless they're just going to do manual transactions with paper receipts). You can split % based mining among contributors as well.
Also agree about the AMD mining conundrum. Good example of all the profit going to a handful of people. I definitely think developers should be fairly compensated, but all the burden (or profit) shouldn't be put on one group of individuals.
I've pushed for something like this a few different times because I don't want to see development stop and I think it's quite fair (as long as the percent isn't jacked up a lot).
As I mentioned earlier, if CCMiner had a API, they could easily adopt MultiMiner to be a frontend and add stats... It's opensource.
it seems that the percentage for mining is the main way that a dev can get his / her portion of the development donation ... but as sp iterated earlier - it wouldnt take much for someone to refork and remove such code ...
the amd model is a fairly simple one - but as you have stated - in the hands of an elite few ... im not against that - except that monopolies are formed that way and that is quite detrimental to the mining community ... and im not against it because the few devs that DO develop the optimizations and miners do release their code and optimizations when they feel that it is ready for the community to take ... in any case - it really isnt this model of opensource availability - so its not really a working model that we can really look at ...
i think that a community of users that GIVE as they receive is a better way of donating to the developers than forcing percentages and keeping miners private ... BUT - unfortunately - not everyone GIVES in order to use these miners and optimizations ... if that was the case - we would not even be discussing this ... is ALL miners gave a little once a week - then the devs would have a LOT of incentive to continue development ...
which is why donating hashrate - no matter how small - may be all the help the devs need ... and moreso - all the donation the smaller miners CAN give for the time being ...
#crysx
You think there would be more people trying to rip off their code then would donate (especially a small fee like 1-2%)? I disagree entirely. It's not perfect. There is no perfect model. Mining fee is the best out of all of them and I'm definitely against mining profits being in the hands of the few as that is exactly what cryptos aren't about. That's what ASICs are and that's why everyone tried to get away from them.
As I talked about earlier, if people want to take this seriously they definitely could make a company around such a model. There are definitely a decent amount of coders around the forums and then they could do extra things like DRM protection and features.
Donations are donations, that's it. You can never expect and you should never expect donations. This means people wont donate even if you think they should and that shouldn't bother you. However if you want steady income and compensation you should sell your work in whatever form that takes. The fact that you guys are trying to haggle and guilt people in the community into donating definitely means that a different payment model should be looked into because the current one is not meeting their requirements. There is nothing wrong with this and there is nothing wrong with switching models.
What does this -p d=0.002 do? 
it's the desired share difficulty you can set as password parameter on some multipools or on nicehashWhat does this -p d=0.002 do?
it's the desired share difficulty you can set as password parameter on some multipools or on nicehashWhat does this -p d=0.002 do?
it's the desired share difficulty you can set as password parameter on some multipools or on nicehashSo a difficulty of 0.002 is better on some algo/hardware than 0.001 it uses at default when nothing is set?
What does this -p d=0.002 do?
it's the desired share difficulty you can set as password parameter on some multipools or on nicehash You can test release 61+ here:
http://cryptomining-blog.com/wp-content/download/ccminer-1.5.61-git-spmod.zip
lyra2v2 is doing almost 15MHASH on the 980ti.
The lyra2v2 kernal is unchanged.
Optimalizations in Blake-256, bmw-256, keccak-256 and skein-256
http://cryptomining-blog.com/wp-content/download/ccminer-1.5.61-git-spmod.zip
lyra2v2 is doing almost 15MHASH on the 980ti.
The lyra2v2 kernal is unchanged.
Optimalizations in Blake-256, bmw-256, keccak-256 and skein-256
What does this -p d=0.002 do?
if somebody would add a timed benchmark option to ccminer (eg. --benchmark 60 would run the miner in benchmark mode for 60 seconds, then exit), micheal would add a ccminer test to his phoronix-test-suite and probably use it to benchmark new hardware and publish results on https://www.phoronix.com/
see github issue: https://github.com/phoronix-test-suite/phoronix-test-suite/issues/78
see github issue: https://github.com/phoronix-test-suite/phoronix-test-suite/issues/78
great news ! i was waiting a service like this
if somebody would add a timed benchmark option to ccminer (eg. --benchmark 60 would run the miner in benchmark mode for 60 seconds, then exit), micheal would add a ccminer test to his phoronix-test-suite and probably use it to benchmark new hardware and publish results on https://www.phoronix.com/
see github issue: https://github.com/phoronix-test-suite/phoronix-test-suite/issues/78
see github issue: https://github.com/phoronix-test-suite/phoronix-test-suite/issues/78
Jump to: