Topic: Claymore's ZCash/BTG AMD GPU Miner v12.6 (Windows/Linux) - page 294. (Read 3839210 times)

There is a fallacy commonly believed by miners......that pool hash rate makes a difference to your earnings. Being on a high hash rate pool means they find more blocks, but those mined coined have to be split among a LOT of miners. Being on a smaller hash rate pool means you find less blocks, but you get more coins per block since the mined coins are shared among fewer miners. Over time it is a wash, same same, no difference at all. So the pool you choose simply needs to be stable with an honest pool op. Size is irrelevant. Dwarfpool consistently pays a hash rate that is like what your miner shows. Flypool, coinmine.pl, suprnova normally pay a hash rate less than what the miner shows.
[/quote]


But what about the luck . Isnt it such thing: all pools start to find next block , the one with more hashpower do int faster then others and gets all reward. Others with less hashpower have to be lucky to find it first. Am I wrong ?
[/quote]You are not wrong, but you are wrong lol. Rarely would your scenario come into play. When a new block is released to the network for solving, the previous block(and often a few blocks before that) hasn't been solved yet. The pools then send commands to miners to drop working on the current block and start working on the new block. (In a multipool your miner might be sent a command to stop work and switch to a completely different coin while other miners remain.) This has the effect of spreading hash over several blocks being mined and drastically reduces the impact of "luck" because pools don't want to rely on luck either.


Thanks for comprehensive answer. Il keep it in mind.

I see, but it was for me quite good profit before and what happened now?
Why I lost half of my profit ?
[/quote]There is a fallacy commonly believed by miners......that pool hash rate makes a difference to your earnings. Being on a high hash rate pool means they find more blocks, but those mined coined have to be split among a LOT of miners. Being on a smaller hash rate pool means you find less blocks, but you get more coins per block since the mined coins are shared among fewer miners. Over time it is a wash, same same, no difference at all. So the pool you choose simply needs to be stable with an honest pool op. Size is irrelevant. Dwarfpool consistently pays a hash rate that is like what your miner shows. Flypool, coinmine.pl, suprnova normally pay a hash rate less than what the miner shows.
[/quote]


But what about the luck . Isnt it such thing: all pools start to find next block , the one with more hashpower do int faster then others and gets all reward. Others with less hashpower have to be lucky to find it first. Am I wrong ?
[/quote]You are not wrong, but you are wrong lol. Rarely would your scenario come into play. When a new block is released to the network for solving, the previous block(and often a few blocks before that) hasn't been solved yet. The pools then send commands to miners to drop working on the current block and start working on the new block. (In a multipool your miner might be sent a command to stop work and switch to a completely different coin while other miners remain.) This has the effect of spreading hash over several blocks being mined and drastically reduces the impact of "luck" because pools don't want to rely on luck either.

"if they're honest then yes, you really do earn slightly more at larger pools, and decreased cognitive costs are a real issue"
"p2pool has huge costs to run in practice for real miners - just setting it up sucks up time for instance, and it's design means that those with lower latency than others get an unfair advantage"
"so basically the thing is a pool will never orphan themselves, which means given a x% orphan rate, the pool with 50% hashing power has x/2% higher revenue"

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/282tsb/mining_in_a_small_pool_is_statistically_as/

But what about the luck . Isnt it such thing: all pools start to find next block , the one with more hashpower do it faster then others and gets all reward. Others with less hashpower have to be lucky to find it first. Am I wrong ?

There is a fallacy commonly believed by miners......that pool hash rate makes a difference to your earnings. Being on a high hash rate pool means they find more blocks, but those mined coined have to be split among a LOT of miners. Being on a smaller hash rate pool means you find less blocks, but you get more coins per block since the mined coins are shared among fewer miners. Over time it is a wash, same same, no difference at all. So the pool you choose simply needs to be stable with an honest pool op. Size is irrelevant. Dwarfpool consistently pays a hash rate that is like what your miner shows. Flypool, coinmine.pl, suprnova normally pay a hash rate less than what the miner shows.

Anyone getting this error ?

str error 10

I see, but it was for me quite good profit before and what happened now?
Why I lost half of my profit ?

Thanks for the tip about shell:startup, I think the same. Then I searched Internet for the autostart method they allmost all pointed to shell:common startup.

Well, Iv got only GPUs. And yes I use dwarfpool for ETH , bcz. they have more hashpower then others, but not for ZEC , they have not mush hashpower.

miningpoolhub has an honest OP. He is quite active and quick to answer support questions. I use miningpoolhub for my Baikal and my scrypt ASIC's, but not my GPU rigs(yet) simply because I want the coins mined by the ASIC's to be converted automatically to BTC, but I don't want the GPU coins converted. I use dwarfpool for ZEC and ETH algos.

My bet it is because of the difference between shell:startup and shell:common startup. My guess would be that since shell:common startup is in the Program Data folder tree, W10 runs it more like a service so it starts at bootup BEFORE you visit the desktop using team viewer. I'll test it a bit and try to remember to post results. I've put a shortcut into the shell:common startup since I have frequent power outages(3-4 times a month grrrrr) and see what happens. With the shortcut in shell:startup you have to sign into the desktop before the .bat gets activated.

Same thing on other pool. Thougt they steel shares. Last night diff was up to 1370000

Hi Friends!

Anybody is on miningpoolhub?   What wrong with it? It made me just half of my day profit of 24/7...

Or may be difficulty became stronger? or this is just shit on this pool?

And like usually question:))) What is the best pool for today?

Cheers

Hmmmm.... I have same situation. W 10 with teamviewer, Windows not registered. Windows autostarts , .bat starts automaticaly.

All ive done : remove user password, remove power sleep, remove auto lock screen, put link in autostart. Have hardware watchdog installed and all going fine for months.   

Dec 23 18:31:40 rig zecminer64[2097]: ZEC: Share accepted (2 ms)!
Dec 23 18:31:41 rig zecminer64[2097]: server: bind failed with error: 98, next attempt in 10sec...
Dec 23 18:31:51 rig zecminer64[2097]: server: bind failed with error: 98, next attempt in 10sec...

On linux. Any idea what is 98 error?

That solution will not work if you have a user password. Unfortunately I'm stuck in that situation on one rig(windows isn't registered so it won't let me remove the password) and I have to teamviewer in, which gets windows to the desktop, so the .bat in startfolder loads


EDIT: After posting my reply I reread and noticed a slight difference. I have my shortcut in shell:startup, not shell:common startup. I see that using common startup is in the ProgramData tree, instead of the AppData tree. So I'll have to test it.

I feel your pain !   {Update - Reinstalling the amd driver fixed it}

Ubuntu 16 + amdgpupro + rx series card gives me immediate segfault.

Hello, any linux users ? What drivers do you use ? Is it working on Ubuntu 16 + amdgpupro ?
Thanks !