Hello,
In smos I'm using the folowing miner options
./miner --server zec-eu1.nanopool.org --user WALLET.$rigName/EMAIL --pass z --port 6666 --pec --log 1 --logfile zcash.log
My rig restarts from time to time and I don't know why exactly. I tried to lower my OC settings first.
The issue is that the zcash.log file is always empty.
What I miss here? Thank you!
Topic: EWBF's CUDA Zcash miner - page 12. (Read 2164079 times)
Didnt search through the thread but are there any fanspeed and clock settings availible with ewfb? My Afterburner tends to freeze from time to time...
ok i done it. does anyone know if 1520 sols is good for 2 1080 ti or goes better?
strive to achieve 800 sols on the GPU, but it depends on the manufacturer and the OS settings.
Guys ining ZCL what do you think about this? Initiative https://fund.zclassic.org/
ok i done it. does anyone know if 1520 sols is good for 2 1080 ti or goes better?
do you know what i have to change in bat file for suprnova?
yes
can i mine with cuda miner zclassic?
I am seeing a lot of dev fee, in fact every 8 or 5 minutes it mines for 30 seconds or more. Does that count to 2%. Cheater, I know you have developed this but why cheating by saying 2% fee when its more like 20% or even more. 
I will try using this option though :
--fee 0
+1 for making me familiar with HUSH mining, but you should state your fees clearly to be honest.
I will try using this option though :
--fee 0
+1 for making me familiar with HUSH mining, but you should state your fees clearly to be honest.
On top of your groundless accusations (otherwise provide evidence: screenshots, logs), you are not particularly good in math. 30 sec every 5 min is not any close to "like 20% or even more".
Considering that is your first post I suggest you make it your last one on this forum.
Groundless accusation lol, are you mad or are you the developer? I wasn't sitting with a calculator to waste my time, I meant its more then 2%. Mining fee of 2 % = 72 seconds of dev fee mining in an hour, but I was seeing it doing it too frequently like every 5 minutes or so it mined for dev fee for 30 seconds. Dev fee mining is done continuously as I have used claymore ETH miner which does mine for dev fee but at 1% for 36 seconds / hour only.
I only registered here so that I can inform others.
Also after running this miner with --fee 0 option it crashed after 10 minutes and failed to restart automatically.
I am seeing a lot of dev fee, in fact every 8 or 5 minutes it mines for 30 seconds or more. Does that count to 2%. Cheater, I know you have developed this but why cheating by saying 2% fee when its more like 20% or even more.
I will try using this option though :
--fee 0
+1 for making me familiar with HUSH mining, but you should state your fees clearly to be honest.
I will try using this option though :
--fee 0
+1 for making me familiar with HUSH mining, but you should state your fees clearly to be honest.
On top of your groundless accusations (otherwise provide evidence: screenshots, logs), you are not particularly good in math. 30 sec every 5 min is not any close to "like 20% or even more".
Considering that is your first post I suggest you make it your last one on this forum.
I am seeing a lot of dev fee, in fact every 8 or 5 minutes it mines for 30 seconds or more. Does that count to 2%. Cheater, I know you have developed this but why cheating by saying 2% fee when its more like 20% or even more.
I will try using this option though :
--fee 0
+1 for making me familiar with HUSH mining, but you should state your fees clearly to be honest.
I will try using this option though :
--fee 0
+1 for making me familiar with HUSH mining, but you should state your fees clearly to be honest.
How often should you see devfee accepted share? I went through my miner and it seems its been just about every two or so. For the whole time its been mining. I dont mine paying to play but not sure how this adds up to 2% fees.
why does it bother you? If you are using the miner downloaded from the first page of this thread - then it's legit. Don't count dev's money. Just count your own revenues.
How often should you see devfee accepted share? I went through my miner and it seems its been just about every two or so. For the whole time its been mining. I dont mine paying to play but not sure how this adds up to 2% fees.
Has someone done some test on the most profitable mining pool for zclassic?
Hello ! (sorry for the bad english) 
Can you tell me, or explain ?
Has there been an increase in the frequency of "devfee" ?
Screen:
Can you tell me, or explain ?
Has there been an increase in the frequency of "devfee" ?
Screen:
depends on difficulty. should still be 2%.
use --fee 0 and your fee will be 0%
I actually advocated EWBF in DSTM thread, but sticking with DSTM now 
Test ended with average 3049 EWBF vs 3099 DSTM. 50 free hashes? Sounds good for me... --fee 0 didn't helped EWBF. And at least in my case i still see 2% less shares then reported by miner. And even some of tou say you see 1% it still does not save EFBW.
And this is GDDR5X cards witch presumably should have worked better on EFBW.
P.S. I am not related to DSTM or EFBW in any way, long time used both but recent discussion in DSTM thread pushed me to do a test myself. Believe me or not, this was exactly same machiene of 6x1080 (non ti) not tweaked in any way for one or another miner, and it was not even restarted during test period.
https://imageking.eu/images/dstmcompar.png large image
Test ended with average 3049 EWBF vs 3099 DSTM. 50 free hashes? Sounds good for me... --fee 0 didn't helped EWBF. And at least in my case i still see 2% less shares then reported by miner. And even some of tou say you see 1% it still does not save EFBW.And this is GDDR5X cards witch presumably should have worked better on EFBW.
P.S. I am not related to DSTM or EFBW in any way, long time used both but recent discussion in DSTM thread pushed me to do a test myself. Believe me or not, this was exactly same machiene of 6x1080 (non ti) not tweaked in any way for one or another miner, and it was not even restarted during test period.
https://imageking.eu/images/dstmcompar.png large image
Where do you see that --fee 0 doesnt help ? There several posts on the forums here proving that it stops the shares.
Any proofs that it doesnt ?
Has this project been abandoned? The OP and miner have not been updated in over 13 months. Last release of the program was December 07, 2016.
I actually advocated EWBF in DSTM thread, but sticking with DSTM now Test ended with average 3049 EWBF vs 3099 DSTM. 50 free hashes? Sounds good for me... --fee 0 didn't helped EWBF. And at least in my case i still see 2% less shares then reported by miner. And even some of tou say you see 1% it still does not save EFBW.
And this is GDDR5X cards witch presumably should have worked better on EFBW.
P.S. I am not related to DSTM or EFBW in any way, long time used both but recent discussion in DSTM thread pushed me to do a test myself. Believe me or not, this was exactly same machiene of 6x1080 (non ti) not tweaked in any way for one or another miner, and it was not even restarted during test period.
https://imageking.eu/images/dstmcompar.png large image
Test ended with average 3049 EWBF vs 3099 DSTM. 50 free hashes? Sounds good for me... --fee 0 didn't helped EWBF. And at least in my case i still see 2% less shares then reported by miner. And even some of tou say you see 1% it still does not save EFBW.And this is GDDR5X cards witch presumably should have worked better on EFBW.
P.S. I am not related to DSTM or EFBW in any way, long time used both but recent discussion in DSTM thread pushed me to do a test myself. Believe me or not, this was exactly same machiene of 6x1080 (non ti) not tweaked in any way for one or another miner, and it was not even restarted during test period.
https://imageking.eu/images/dstmcompar.png large image
Hello ! (sorry for the bad english)
Can you tell me, or explain ?
Has there been an increase in the frequency of "devfee" ?
Screen:
https://image.noelshack.com/fichiers/2018/04/6/1517020308-20180126-054448.jpg
https://image.noelshack.com/fichiers/2018/04/6/1517020310-20180126-055313.jpg
https://image.noelshack.com/fichiers/2018/04/6/1517020308-20180126-055249.jpg
Can you tell me, or explain ?
Has there been an increase in the frequency of "devfee" ?
Screen:
https://image.noelshack.com/fichiers/2018/04/6/1517020308-20180126-054448.jpg
https://image.noelshack.com/fichiers/2018/04/6/1517020310-20180126-055313.jpg
https://image.noelshack.com/fichiers/2018/04/6/1517020308-20180126-055249.jpg
Ok so playing around a bit with EWBF again. Was using this, went to another one and now looking at it again. BUT having an issue.
On my 1060 6GB card 0.3.4b version is NOT as hard on the GPU as the other miner I've been using. Mind you the GPU is pegged but on the core clocks are lower. That being said... is there a line command to make sure its utilizing it properly? My clocks are roughly 25-50Mhz slower on the core vs the other one I've been using and drops my SOL's roughly 15-18 Sol/sec.
This is what I'm using to kick it off.
miner --server us1-zcash.flypool.org --port 3333 --user XXXX --pass x --pec --fee 0.0
Edit Added info... out of MSI Afterburner
GPU usage = 100% (Same across both miners)
GPU FB usage = 74-75% vs 79-80% higher on the other miner! (Note FB = Frame Buffer)
GPU Core Clock = 1823Mhz average vs 1860Mhz average
Memory = 4200Mhz (Same across both miners)
GPU Power = 78-81% (Same across both miners) Set for 80% power limit
Been curious why another miner was getting better results constantly and now this would make sense why is that its not clocking the GPU as high yet same power/temps/clocking results for the switch between them.
On my 1060 6GB card 0.3.4b version is NOT as hard on the GPU as the other miner I've been using. Mind you the GPU is pegged but on the core clocks are lower. That being said... is there a line command to make sure its utilizing it properly? My clocks are roughly 25-50Mhz slower on the core vs the other one I've been using and drops my SOL's roughly 15-18 Sol/sec.
This is what I'm using to kick it off.
miner --server us1-zcash.flypool.org --port 3333 --user XXXX --pass x --pec --fee 0.0
Edit Added info... out of MSI Afterburner
GPU usage = 100% (Same across both miners)
GPU FB usage = 74-75% vs 79-80% higher on the other miner! (Note FB = Frame Buffer)
GPU Core Clock = 1823Mhz average vs 1860Mhz average
Memory = 4200Mhz (Same across both miners)
GPU Power = 78-81% (Same across both miners) Set for 80% power limit
Been curious why another miner was getting better results constantly and now this would make sense why is that its not clocking the GPU as high yet same power/temps/clocking results for the switch between them.
Jump to: