I know you can take a log file and if you have a long enough mining duration say 1 month, then you can easily add all the accepted+rejected+stale and get an accurate measurement and being within +- 1% is fairly close.
I think the 1% loss you are talking about is not related to the Claymore software but most likely due to the GPU drivers. I know with my AMD RX series GPUs there is a time when some GPUs hash a little slower for a few seconds and then resume the optimal speed. Been trying to figure out why it happens but couldn't and just left it the way it was because the speed loss was minimal. So find in your logs if your speed was always constant or did it slow down from time to time. You can probably find this easily with MS Excel when you load your log file.
Nobody is talking about speed fluctuations here. The averaged stated speed incorporates them. If miner does not work at some moment it prints 0.000 Mh/s in console (and log) and this zero is heaped when calculating the averaged speed and the number of samples is increased by one for this zero. Come on man use a little the last floor of your body. I talk that this
averaged stated speed in console and in the log is 1.5% higher than the real one which can be calculated from the found shares (locally, not at the pools side), difficulty and the time that the miner has worked.
I'm trying to follow but it's a bit confusing. So now you are claiming that the speed that the miner displays in console and reports to the pool is 1.5% higher than the actual one? and is that somehow related to your previous claim of Claymore taking higher than advertised devfee?
I was wrong that Claymore is taking higher than the advertised devfee. But I am 1000% sure that Claymore shows and reports to pools (if he reports what he shows in console) about 1.5% higher hash rate than the real one.
Ohh I see.
If you are into this kind of action can you maybe do all of us a favor and perform the same analysis on this one
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/phoenixminer-62c-fastest-ethereumethash-miner-with-lowest-devfee-winlinux-2647654And maybe post here with numbers and such?
I know for myself I'd be very much interested to see the actual numbers. Thx.
Partial results for PM 4.6C after two days mining with 10 RX570 + 1 RX580 and 14889 shares found (14799 shares + 90 devfee shares):
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1luXj5zlyeFdXeQ4QL9GcS1t7bSUPzAQdCompile AverageSpeed.cpp with visual studio
Or if you use GCC compiler:
comment row 4:
//#include "stdafx.h"
and compile it with:
g++ -o AverageSpeed.exe AverageSpeed.cpp
and run it with the following parameters:
AverageSpeed.exe 3 main Eth speed: log20190929_174105.txt
It will produce the averaged stated speed: 316.689 MH/s
The real effective speed is: 14889 (total shares) * 4,000,000,000 (ethermine difficulty) / 188886 (the seconds that the miner has worked) = 315.301 MH/s
So PM shows (316.689 / 315,301 - 1) * 100 = 0.44% higher hashrate than the real effective one. In comparision Claymore shows about 1.5% higher than the real one.
Will update the results when one week ends but 14889 found shares seems to me statistically representative test that will probably produce error under 0.1%. So I expect this 0.44% to finish between 0.34%-0.54% after 5 days.