Topic: ETH Hash King - Tracking of 2 of the major ETH Miners for AMD (Read 620 times)

It will be correct test but even in such a test we see that trm better then phoenix only for 0.2% This is about nothing. For 3 month tests looks like it would be about 0.02% probably. As for me this test shows the same results for 2 top miners

so

card A always mined with Trm         pointed at a pool same pool as other 2 cards
card B always mined with Phoenix   pointed at a pool. “
card C always mined with Claymore pointed at a pool “


card  A always used slot 1 and never moved correct?
card B always used slot 2 and never moved correct?
card C always used slot 3 and never moved correct?

So Card A might be a better card
slot 1 might be a better slot.
TRM might be better software.

Since you always ran TRM on slot 1 with card a

You did not prove what you said or think you proved

TRM is best

instead you proved that see ;bolding in blue.

for a valid test.

it takes Three months long

trm on card a slot 1
pho on card b slot 2
clay on card c slot 3

next month

trm on card b slot 2
pho on card c slot 3
clay on card a slot 1

next month

trm on. card c slot 3
pho on card a slot 1
clay on card b slot 2

this methodology eliminates card quality and slot quality and only show all three softwares equaly using each card and slot.

in theory it would be more accurate since card quality is equal and slot quality is equal

since the software used all three cards and all three slots.

please ignore me if you did swap software as i suggested. i did not see  it mentioned.

but I am tired tonight.

Claymore is eol?

---

---

than do

card a on slot 1 for a week Trm

while doing

card b on slot 2 for a week pho

next

do
 card a on slot 1 for a week pho
with
card b on slot 2 for a week trm

Maybe i will try that

I have 2 video comparisons:
Phoenix vs TeamRed (48 Hours Mining Comparison) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hamCWMCvQvU
Claymore vs Phoenix (24 Hours Mining Comparison) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJx9IZ2xgCs

If you test lolMiner and SRBMiner that would be great, too!
Take a break and thanks for your work.

Those stats were pulled off the pool, I have no control over it. I had everything setup on the same rig, same pool, same internet... So just had to go by what the pool told me.

I may test lolMiner -- won't test Nanominer. I've seen/heard too many horror stories already.

If I run a 2nd test it will include LOL and SRB but it won't be until after the 1st of the year.

I lost way too much sleep/time/energy on this one... I need a break.

Great test!

Can you test lolMiner and Nanominer?

Your stale rate is high. From 1.75% (PM) to 1.95% (TRM).

.

About 65 days ago, I was thinking about working on a project where I tracked data per miner and tracking to see how well these miners actually are… I had stable rigs; that ran for months on end and I was looking for something to do.. So, on Monday September 9th I started running a test on Team Red Miner 0.7.10,  Phoenix Miner 5.1c and Claymore 15. Each miner was assigned a card a card within the mining rig, each card has the same exact settings within Over Drive N Tool, each card was connected to the same pool with their own ETH address. The idea was; if the rig crashes for whatever reason, all 3 miners would be effected the same amount of time.

So, each morning for the past 60 days I logged into the pool and gathered the Avg hashrate at the pool reported over the prior 24 hours, the total shares, stale shares and also the amount of ETH mined in the past 24 hours. 

Here is the link to the spreadsheet for the numbers collected daily.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vRU7H6KI8QXShrf9zygsw5p3aRcdGzH-c_WdDogmzr9BHZdsm1hmzKW7UvmxwsguWt67UuCN2cHzQPk/pubhtml
After I started this test, I then realized that Claymore was EOL, so after 30 days I stopped gather stats on this one. Also, LOLMiner hadn’t realized their eth miner at this time.

Let dive into some stats shall we?

Team Red Miner:
Expected Hashrate   56.04
Average Hash   55.36
Days At or Above 56.04   26
Days Below 56.04   34
% off from Expected   -1.21%
Average Daily Shares   1197.35
Days Won   31
Total ETH   0.25684

As you can see, TRM was clocked in at 56.61 mh in the miner console, with a 1% DEV fee I was expecting roughly 56.04 mh at the pool. Over the course of the 60 days, they were able to achieve or exceed this number 26 days (43%) The average hashrate at the pool over those 60 days landed them at 55.36 mh and total shares daily at 1197. They produced the most ETH on a daily basis 31 days (51.6%). Their average hashrate was down at the pool 1.21% from their expected hashrate. I saw this number go as low as 1.4 % and as hash at .9 %. Over the course of a longer testing period with higher hashrate (more gpu), you would see the average hashrate typically average out to being close to what is expected based upon the days at or above their expected hashrate.
Pheonix Miner:

Expected Hashrate   57.26
Average Hash   55.14
Days At or Above 57.26   8
Days Below 57.26   52
% off from Expected   -3.69%
Average Daily Shares   1191.77
Days Won   19
Total ETH   0.25625

As you can see, PM was clocked in at 57.63 mh in the miner console, with a .65% DEV fee I was expecting roughly 57.26 mh at the pool. Over the course of the 60 days, they were able to achieve or exceed this number 8 days (13%) The average hashrate at the pool over those 60 days landed them at 55.14 mh and total shares daily at 1192. They produced the most ETH on a daily basis 19 days (31.6%). Their average hashrate was at the pool was 55.14 mh which is 3.69% off from their expected hashrate. After about a week, most of the time the average hashrate at the pool was off 3-3.75%. Which is very concerning.
I know some of you will take this as a grain of salt and throw your hands up and say, there is no proof that PM lies on their hashrate – 2miners did the same thing and their test produced the opposite results! 1st, the 2mineres test was merely for 2 hours… If they wanted to something significant they should have collected data over the course of 30-60 days. Also, if you head over to the largest ETH pool (Ethermine) and check out the top miners with the crazy large farms you can see plain as day too.

< ">https://ethermine.org/miners/1F63849be02C91DACf2DbD38bedD0205a4a0F6D9/dashboard>
Reported: 2.7 GH
Avg: 2.6 GH
Off: 4%

https://ethermine.org/miners/cd34fcfcf2856e89c8934f5584e00867c3eff9ff/dashboard
Reported: 1.7 GH
Avg: 1.6 GH
Off: 6%




Primarily what I wanted to do; is test each miner out side by side… Same pool different addresses and throw these stats on a spreadsheet for all to see and digest… I want to challenge everyone not to just take whatever these miners are producing at the console to heart! I want folks to look at these numbers and then take it to the pool and track them and verify them yourselves. I want the folks like BItsBeTripping, Vosk, Red Panda Mining to do their research too and not just always use the same miner for testing…

This is my take on the whole report – PM a few years back was able to get their hands on a stolen Claymore kernel (supposedly) so they came into the crypto world like a rocket ship with the “fastest and lowest dev fee miner” available. They took that kernel and lowered the Dev Fee and added the extra fluff to get to that point. They wanted to gain as much Dev fee as possible from Claymore at the time. You’ll never see that miner console reported hashrate at the pool (Long term) which means long term planning on how much ETH you’ll be getting will always be short. Depending on your hashrate, you could be “losing” up to an ETH per year! (It won’t be lost, but you’ve projected yourself out to get roughly 13 ETH by year end based upon what the miner console says, but you really only got 12 ETH)



Please Note: I’ve already started running full miners on these ETH addresses to clear whatever remaining ETH out of the pool.

30 day PM Avg Pool Hash Graph

https://imgur.com/a/i7tjDlT[

30 day TRM Avg Pool Hash Graph

https://imgur.com/a/AElvMDq