miniZ v2.0a Equihash 144,5 125,4 210,9 150,5 192,7 BeamHash3 ProgPoW Ethash CFX - page 53.

miniZ

member

Activity: 690

Merit: 17

Quote from: hogwash.89m on May 01, 2019, 06:34:03 PM

It happens sometimes, after long run.
And I think it can be connected to sudden crush when mining on fee.server,
it happens to me once.

This error I saw few times already.

Quote from: DanGB on May 01, 2019, 07:21:49 PM

miniZ,
I also had the miner crash once last night. I'm glad I had asked for that runtime/local time modification because that made it very simple to spot it and then find it in the log. You can see that it was on the dev fee and then the miner started up again (I have it in a loop in the bat file). I am guessing no errors were written to the log because the miner just crashed. Thanks again for your great work...

Hi DanGB, hogwash.89m,
We have been looking into this and we managed to replicate the error. It is fixed now and will be included in the next build. We are testing a few things still but should be out soon.
Thanks for helping us to track the problem!
Cheers

DanGB

newbie

Activity: 25

Merit: 0

Quote from: hogwash.89m on May 01, 2019, 06:34:03 PM

Quote from: miniZ on May 01, 2019, 05:56:35 PM

Quote from: hogwash.89m on May 01, 2019, 03:27:51 PM

Error when mining on dev [fee.server].

Hi hogwash.89m,
thanks for reporting this. We never had that error.
We are looking into this.
Cheers

It happens sometimes, after long run.
And I think it can be connected to sudden crush when mining on fee.server,
it happens to me once.

This error I saw few times already.

miniZ,
I also had the miner crash once last night. I'm glad I had asked for that runtime/local time modification because that made it very simple to spot it and then find it in the log. You can see that it was on the dev fee and then the miner started up again (I have it in a loop in the bat file). I am guessing no errors were written to the log because the miner just crashed. Thanks again for your great work...

Code:

[ 0d 5h55m22s|00:48:25 01/05/2019] S:1592/0 199(197.9)Sol/s 979(980.4)W [fee.server]- 137ms (97.9%) (2.1%)
0>GTX 1070 Ti `S:212/0 [47øC/59%] 12.33 I/s 24.0(24.5)Sol/s 121(123.4)W clk=1594MHz mclk=3553MHz Sol/W=0.20
1>GTX 1070 Ti `S:187/0 [53øC/69%]*12.47 I/s 24.6(24.7)Sol/s 124(122.5)W clk=1417MHz mclk=3553MHz Sol/W=0.20
2>GTX 1070 Ti `S:185/0 [50øC/64%]*12.51 I/s 25.1(24.9)Sol/s 115(122.2)W clk=1544MHz mclk=3553MHz Sol/W=0.20
3>GTX 1070 Ti `S:200/0 [52øC/67%]*12.43 I/s 25.0(24.7)Sol/s 130(122.6)W clk=1468MHz mclk=3553MHz Sol/W=0.20
4>GTX 1070 Ti `S:217/0 [53øC/68%]*12.43 I/s 25.0(24.7)Sol/s 121(121.1)W clk=1506MHz mclk=3553MHz Sol/W=0.20
5>GTX 1070 Ti `S:211/0 [53øC/68%] 12.30 I/s 24.7(24.4)Sol/s 124(121.9)W clk=1455MHz mclk=3553MHz Sol/W=0.20
6>GTX 1070 Ti `S:157/0 [51øC/65%]*12.54 I/s 24.8(24.9)Sol/s 122(122.9)W clk=1594MHz mclk=3553MHz Sol/W=0.20
7>GTX 1070 Ti `S:182/0 [54øC/70%]*12.71 I/s 25.1(25.2)Sol/s 123(122.2)W clk=1607MHz mclk=3553MHz Sol/W=0.21
[ 0d 5h55m33s|00:48:37 01/05/2019] S:1599/0 199(197.9)Sol/s 993(980.9)W [fee.server]- 134ms (97.9%) (2.1%)
0>GTX 1070 Ti `S:212/0 [47øC/59%] 12.32 I/s 24.1(24.5)Sol/s 126(123.4)W clk=1556MHz mclk=3553MHz Sol/W=0.20
1>GTX 1070 Ti `S:187/0 [53øC/68%] 12.48 I/s 24.9(24.7)Sol/s 127(122.5)W clk=1480MHz mclk=3553MHz Sol/W=0.20
2>GTX 1070 Ti `S:185/0 [50øC/64%] 12.51 I/s 25.1(24.9)Sol/s 118(122.2)W clk=1506MHz mclk=3553MHz Sol/W=0.20
3>GTX 1070 Ti `S:200/0 [52øC/67%] 12.43 I/s 25.1(24.7)Sol/s 125(122.6)W clk=1430MHz mclk=3553MHz Sol/W=0.20
4>GTX 1070 Ti `S:217/0 [53øC/68%] 12.43 I/s 24.8(24.6)Sol/s 124(121.1)W clk=1531MHz mclk=3553MHz Sol/W=0.20
5>GTX 1070 Ti `S:211/0 [53øC/68%] 12.30 I/s 24.6(24.4)Sol/s 127(121.9)W clk=1379MHz mclk=3553MHz Sol/W=0.20
6>GTX 1070 Ti `S:157/0 [51øC/67%] 12.54 I/s 24.7(24.9)Sol/s 126(122.9)W clk=1354MHz mclk=3553MHz Sol/W=0.20
7>GTX 1070 Ti `S:182/0 [54øC/70%] 12.71 I/s 25.1(25.2)Sol/s 122(122.2)W clk=1569MHz mclk=3553MHz Sol/W=0.21
Number of CUDA devices found: 8
miniZ,150,5[1:0:00]: Selecting GPU#0[0] GeForce GTX 1070 Ti
miniZ,150,5[1:0:00]: Selecting GPU#1[1] GeForce GTX 1070 Ti
miniZ,150,5[1:0:00]: Selecting GPU#2[2] GeForce GTX 1070 Ti
miniZ,150,5[1:0:00]: Selecting GPU#3[3] GeForce GTX 1070 Ti
miniZ,150,5[1:0:00]: Selecting GPU#4[4] GeForce GTX 1070 Ti
miniZ,150,5[1:0:00]: Selecting GPU#5[5] GeForce GTX 1070 Ti
miniZ,150,5[1:0:00]: Selecting GPU#6[6] GeForce GTX 1070 Ti
miniZ,150,5[1:0:00]: Selecting GPU#7[7] GeForce GTX 1070 Ti
Algo: EQ[150,5]
Pool#0: user[0480437dc7c1c92f2e2b992b5b33cfb2483e9f827ca8eb5bcddd880a6feeb92e.C_G_1070Ti]
server[beam.sunpool.top] port[3334] ssl[yes] pers[Beam-PoW]
Logging:: file[miniZ.log] period[10] delay[0]
Temp. limit: [70øC]
[ 0d 0h 0m09s|00:48:53 01/05/2019] S: 1/0 168(168.2)Sol/s 483(482.6)W [beam.sunpool.top]- 128ms (100.0%) (0.0%)
0>GTX 1070 Ti `S: 0/0 [41øC/52%] 10.38 I/s 19.5(19.5)Sol/s 37( 37.1)W clk=1607MHz mclk=3553MHz Sol/W=0.53
1>GTX 1070 Ti `S: 0/0 [47øC/61%] 10.47 I/s 19.7(19.7)Sol/s 38( 38.0)W clk=1607MHz mclk=3553MHz Sol/W=0.52
2>GTX 1070 Ti `S: 0/0 [45øC/56%] 11.14 I/s 23.5(23.5)Sol/s 126(125.6)W clk=1594MHz mclk=3553MHz Sol/W=0.19
3>GTX 1070 Ti `S: 0/0 [46øC/60%] 10.46 I/s 17.6(17.6)Sol/s 41( 41.4)W clk=1607MHz mclk=3553MHz Sol/W=0.43
4>GTX 1070 Ti `S: 0/0 [46øC/60%] 10.28 I/s 18.0(18.0)Sol/s 38( 38.1)W clk=1620MHz mclk=3553MHz Sol/W=0.47
5>GTX 1070 Ti `S: 0/0 [49øC/59%] 10.94 I/s 19.9(19.9)Sol/s 123(122.9)W clk=1480MHz mclk=3553MHz Sol/W=0.16
6>GTX 1070 Ti `S: 0/0 [44øC/57%] 10.50 I/s 23.0(23.0)Sol/s 40( 39.5)W clk=1607MHz mclk=3553MHz Sol/W=0.58
7>GTX 1070 Ti `S: 0/0 [49øC/65%] 10.35 I/s 16.8(16.8)Sol/s 40( 40.1)W clk=1607MHz mclk=3553MHz Sol/W=0.42

hogwash.89m

newbie

Activity: 32

Merit: 0

Quote from: miniZ on May 01, 2019, 05:56:35 PM

Quote from: hogwash.89m on May 01, 2019, 03:27:51 PM

Error when mining on dev [fee.server].

Code:

5>GTX 1080 ` 100% [60°C/49%] 12.32 I/s 24.4(24.4)Sol/s 128(129.3)W clk=1518MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.19
[ 0d 3h34m14s] S:1990/0 159(159.6)Sol/s 825(824.0)W [fee.server]
0>GTX 1080 Ti ` 100% [61°C/51%] 18.70 I/s 36.7(37.5)Sol/s 182(179.8)W clk=1493MHz mclk=5899MHz Sol/W=0.21
1>GTX 1080 ` 100% [61°C/51%] 12.14 I/s 24.0(24.1)Sol/s 128(128.6)W clk=1379MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.19
2>GTX 1080 ` 100% [60°C/49%] 12.15 I/s 24.3(24.2)Sol/s 125(129.1)W clk=1468MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.19
3>GTX 1080 ` 100% [60°C/49%] 12.43 I/s 24.8(24.7)Sol/s 130(128.9)W clk=1493MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.19
4>GTX 1080 ` 100% [54°C/45%] 12.43 I/s 25.2(24.6)Sol/s 133(129.2)W clk=1531MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.19
5>GTX 1080 ` 100% [60°C/49%] 12.32 I/s 23.9(24.4)Sol/s 127(129.3)W clk=1404MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.19
0:error:1408F10B:SSL routines:ssl3_get_record:wrong version number:..\..\openssl-1.1.0f\ssl\record\ssl3_record.c:210:

Hi hogwash.89m,
thanks for reporting this. We never had that error.
We are looking into this.
Cheers

It happens sometimes, after long run.
And I think it can be connected to sudden crush when mining on fee.server,
it happens to me once.

This error I saw few times already.

miniZ

member

Activity: 690

Merit: 17

Quote from: sp_ on May 01, 2019, 03:36:22 AM

Quote from: miniZ on April 29, 2019, 04:11:04 PM

Hi MineOrDie,
   It should run as it looks like there is enough memory to run it (3019-25=2994), but
maybe it is still too tight...
   You still can try two things:
   1. --mode=3 (it will be a bit slow, but just to see if it works)
   2. exclude the first GPU (that has less free memory) with -cde 0
Then we can try to workout a solution for you :-)
Cheers

Tested beam in miniZ_v1.3n3_win-x64 on a gigabyte 1060 3g G1 gaming

Mode 3 is working on windows 7/windows 8.1 on 10603gb cards. using 2831 MB memory.

+500 mem
+100 core
70% tdp

~12.7 sol.

Windows 10 is not working...

Windows will reserve some of the gpu memory so you will never be able to utilize all of it.

Hi sp_,
thank you for this clarification.
Indeed there is not enough memory on windows 10 to run our solver.
Cheers

miniZ

member

Activity: 690

Merit: 17

Quote from: CuChO on May 01, 2019, 12:35:46 PM

Hey there great Miner , thanks for adding Beam . My testing so far (feedback ) workers going offline seems to be different , when I ran 1.3n (cpu usage 80%), my miner ran for 2 days 23 hours then I have the same issue , miner somehow get stuck and goes offline.

Now I'm on 1.3n2 been running for 2 days haven't see any issue (cpu usage 50%) but I see you have a new release v1.3n3 so I will give it a try

My system below:
i5 6400
16gb ram
Asus mining pro
4 gtx1080
2 rtx2070
3 rx580 running other miner.
Windows 10 Pro

Hi CuChO,
Thank you for your feedback.
Let us know if it keeps running nicely

Cheers

miniZ

member

Activity: 690

Merit: 17

Quote from: ltxminer on May 01, 2019, 09:01:44 AM

Quote from: miniZ on April 30, 2019, 09:18:56 AM

Quote from: ltxminer on April 30, 2019, 12:49:15 AM

A bunch of this in the newest version (v1.3n3)

algo 150,5
1070ti
Win7

Code:

[WARNING] GPU[0]: CUDA error 'an illegal memory access was encountered' in func 'eq_00.8[dx][[2;ba8<51B, SM, PS2>::solve' line 971
[WARNING] GPU[1]: CUDA error 'an illegal memory access was encountered' in func 'eq_00.8[dx][[2;ba8<51B, SM, PS2>::solve' line 971

algo 150,5
1060 3gb (mode=3)
Win7

Code:

[WARNING] GPU[0]: CUDA error 'unknown error' in func 'eq_00.8[dx][[2;ba8<51B, SM, PS2>::solve' line 971
[WARNING] GPU[1]: CUDA error 'unknown error' in func 'eq_00.8[dx][[2;ba8<51B, SM, PS2>::solve' line 971

Hi ltxminer, stzcze,
thank you for the log.

This CUDA warning/error might be related to your OC settings.
The miner now outputs these errors. We suggest you to modify a bit the OCs and check if it helps.

But we would like to know whether the miner exits. Could you let us know if it exits or just keeps going?
Cheers

I am using exact same OC settings as when i use n+ and n++

No crash in previous versions. A lot of crashing in n3

Hi ltxminer,
we did not change anything from n++ to v3n3 that could cause that. This CUDA error really looks like it is related to the OC settings.
Maybe you can try to adjust a little bit your OCs. There is always the chance the it would work with those settings on our next build.
Let us know if this helps.
Cheers

miniZ

member

Activity: 690

Merit: 17

Quote from: hogwash.89m on May 01, 2019, 03:27:51 PM

Error when mining on dev [fee.server].

Code:

5>GTX 1080 ` 100% [60°C/49%] 12.32 I/s 24.4(24.4)Sol/s 128(129.3)W clk=1518MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.19
[ 0d 3h34m14s] S:1990/0 159(159.6)Sol/s 825(824.0)W [fee.server]
0>GTX 1080 Ti ` 100% [61°C/51%] 18.70 I/s 36.7(37.5)Sol/s 182(179.8)W clk=1493MHz mclk=5899MHz Sol/W=0.21
1>GTX 1080 ` 100% [61°C/51%] 12.14 I/s 24.0(24.1)Sol/s 128(128.6)W clk=1379MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.19
2>GTX 1080 ` 100% [60°C/49%] 12.15 I/s 24.3(24.2)Sol/s 125(129.1)W clk=1468MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.19
3>GTX 1080 ` 100% [60°C/49%] 12.43 I/s 24.8(24.7)Sol/s 130(128.9)W clk=1493MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.19
4>GTX 1080 ` 100% [54°C/45%] 12.43 I/s 25.2(24.6)Sol/s 133(129.2)W clk=1531MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.19
5>GTX 1080 ` 100% [60°C/49%] 12.32 I/s 23.9(24.4)Sol/s 127(129.3)W clk=1404MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.19
0:error:1408F10B:SSL routines:ssl3_get_record:wrong version number:..\..\openssl-1.1.0f\ssl\record\ssl3_record.c:210:

Hi hogwash.89m,
thanks for reporting this. We never had that error.
We are looking into this.
Cheers

hogwash.89m

newbie

Activity: 32

Merit: 0

Error when mining on dev [fee.server].

Code:

5>GTX 1080 ` 100% [60°C/49%] 12.32 I/s 24.4(24.4)Sol/s 128(129.3)W clk=1518MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.19
[ 0d 3h34m14s] S:1990/0 159(159.6)Sol/s 825(824.0)W [fee.server]
0>GTX 1080 Ti ` 100% [61°C/51%] 18.70 I/s 36.7(37.5)Sol/s 182(179.8)W clk=1493MHz mclk=5899MHz Sol/W=0.21
1>GTX 1080 ` 100% [61°C/51%] 12.14 I/s 24.0(24.1)Sol/s 128(128.6)W clk=1379MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.19
2>GTX 1080 ` 100% [60°C/49%] 12.15 I/s 24.3(24.2)Sol/s 125(129.1)W clk=1468MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.19
3>GTX 1080 ` 100% [60°C/49%] 12.43 I/s 24.8(24.7)Sol/s 130(128.9)W clk=1493MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.19
4>GTX 1080 ` 100% [54°C/45%] 12.43 I/s 25.2(24.6)Sol/s 133(129.2)W clk=1531MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.19
5>GTX 1080 ` 100% [60°C/49%] 12.32 I/s 23.9(24.4)Sol/s 127(129.3)W clk=1404MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.19
0:error:1408F10B:SSL routines:ssl3_get_record:wrong version number:..\..\openssl-1.1.0f\ssl\record\ssl3_record.c:210:

CuChO

newbie

Activity: 7

Merit: 0

Hey there great Miner , thanks for adding Beam . My testing so far (feedback ) workers going offline seems to be different , when I ran 1.3n (cpu usage 80%), my miner ran for 2 days 23 hours then I have the same issue , miner somehow get stuck and goes offline.

Now I'm on 1.3n2 been running for 2 days haven't see any issue (cpu usage 50%) but I see you have a new release v1.3n3 so I will give it a try

My system below:
i5 6400
16gb ram
Asus mining pro
4 gtx1080
2 rtx2070
3 rx580 running other miner.
Windows 10 Pro

ltxminer

newbie

Activity: 14

Merit: 0

Quote from: miniZ on April 30, 2019, 09:18:56 AM

Quote from: ltxminer on April 30, 2019, 12:49:15 AM

A bunch of this in the newest version (v1.3n3)

algo 150,5
1070ti
Win7

Code:

[WARNING] GPU[0]: CUDA error 'an illegal memory access was encountered' in func 'eq_00.8[dx][[2;ba8<51B, SM, PS2>::solve' line 971
[WARNING] GPU[1]: CUDA error 'an illegal memory access was encountered' in func 'eq_00.8[dx][[2;ba8<51B, SM, PS2>::solve' line 971

algo 150,5
1060 3gb (mode=3)
Win7

Code:

[WARNING] GPU[0]: CUDA error 'unknown error' in func 'eq_00.8[dx][[2;ba8<51B, SM, PS2>::solve' line 971
[WARNING] GPU[1]: CUDA error 'unknown error' in func 'eq_00.8[dx][[2;ba8<51B, SM, PS2>::solve' line 971

Hi ltxminer, stzcze,
thank you for the log.

This CUDA warning/error might be related to your OC settings.
The miner now outputs these errors. We suggest you to modify a bit the OCs and check if it helps.

But we would like to know whether the miner exits. Could you let us know if it exits or just keeps going?
Cheers

I am using exact same OC settings as when i use n+ and n++

No crash in previous versions. A lot of crashing in n3

hogwash.89m

newbie

Activity: 32

Merit: 0

Hi miniZ,

After ~20 hours miner silently crashed, without any error.
Only thing it had happened when miner was mining on dev fee server.

On 1.3n+ or some beta version I noticed some openssl errors when miner connected dev fee pool, but miner didn't crash then.
I enable logging now so I capture the error will report it here.

(goto loop helps to restart the miner).

Code:

[ 0d19h26m34s] S:10514/1 160(159.9)Sol/s 843(825.4)W [beam-eu.sparkpool.com]
0>GTX 1080 Ti ` 100% [61°C/51%] 18.71 I/s 38.2(37.5)Sol/s 191(179.9)W clk=1493MHz mclk=5899MHz Sol/W=0.21
1>GTX 1080 ` 100% [61°C/50%] 12.13 I/s 24.4(24.1)Sol/s 135(128.9)W clk=1506MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.19
2>GTX 1080 ` 100% [60°C/49%]*12.16 I/s 24.1(24.3)Sol/s 127(129.0)W clk=1480MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.19
3>GTX 1080 ` 100% [60°C/49%] 12.44 I/s 24.4(24.7)Sol/s 131(129.1)W clk=1366MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.19
4>GTX 1080 ` 100% [55°C/45%] 12.42 I/s 24.1(24.5)Sol/s 132(129.2)W clk=1417MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.19
5>GTX 1080 ` 100% [61°C/51%] 12.33 I/s 24.5(24.5)Sol/s 128(129.3)W clk=1379MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.19
[ 0d19h26m44s] S:10517/1 159(159.9)Sol/s 828(825.1)W [fee.server]
0>GTX 1080 Ti ` 100% [61°C/51%]*18.70 I/s 38.0(37.5)Sol/s 180(179.9)W clk=1493MHz mclk=5899MHz Sol/W=0.21
1>GTX 1080 ` 100% [61°C/51%]*12.13 I/s 24.3(24.1)Sol/s 135(128.9)W clk=1442MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.19
2>GTX 1080 ` 100% [60°C/49%] 12.16 I/s 24.1(24.3)Sol/s 123(129.0)W clk=1480MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.19
3>GTX 1080 ` 100% [60°C/49%] 12.44 I/s 24.4(24.7)Sol/s 132(129.1)W clk=1404MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.19
4>GTX 1080 ` 100% [55°C/45%] 12.42 I/s 24.3(24.6)Sol/s 129(129.2)W clk=1404MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.19
5>GTX 1080 ` 100% [60°C/50%] 12.32 I/s 24.2(24.5)Sol/s 127(129.3)W clk=1392MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.19

Waiting for 0 seconds, press a key to continue ...
************ miniZ v1.3n3 ************
Number of CUDA devices found: 6
miniZ,150,5[8:0:00]: Selecting GPU#0[0] GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
miniZ,150,5[2:0:00]: Selecting GPU#1[1] GeForce GTX 1080
miniZ,150,5[2:0:00]: Selecting GPU#2[2] GeForce GTX 1080
miniZ,150,5[2:0:00]: Selecting GPU#3[3] GeForce GTX 1080
miniZ,150,5[2:0:00]: Selecting GPU#4[4] GeForce GTX 1080
miniZ,150,5[2:0:00]: Selecting GPU#5[5] GeForce GTX 1080
Algo: EQ[150,5]
Pool#0: user[14794c3bea134979c40773495734d655e561224a4e5bc3600d81886457223e0c5.rig0]
server[beam-eu.sparkpool.com] port[2222] ssl[yes] pers[Beam-PoW]
Optimisation: oc2[0 1 2 3 4 5]
Temp. limit: [70°C]
[ 0d 0h 0m08s] S: 3/0 133(132.6)Sol/s 283(283.4)W [beam-eu.sparkpool.com]
0>GTX 1080 Ti ` 100% [56°C/46%]*16.53 I/s 30.5(30.5)Sol/s 66( 66.0)W clk=1695MHz mclk=5899MHz Sol/W=0.46
1>GTX 1080 ` 100% [53°C/42%] 10.58 I/s 21.3(21.3)Sol/s 43( 42.7)W clk=1607MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.50
2>GTX 1080 ` 100% [53°C/44%] 10.63 I/s 18.4(18.4)Sol/s 45( 45.3)W clk=1607MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.41
3>GTX 1080 ` 100% [52°C/45%]*10.85 I/s 21.0(21.0)Sol/s 43( 43.0)W clk=1607MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.49
4>GTX 1080 ` 100% [48°C/43%] 10.78 I/s 18.7(18.7)Sol/s 42( 41.7)W clk=1607MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.45
5>GTX 1080 ` 100% [53°C/45%] 10.55 I/s 18.5(18.5)Sol/s 45( 44.8)W clk=1607MHz mclk=5355MHz Sol/W=0.41

Best regards,

DanGB

newbie

Activity: 25

Merit: 0

Quote from: miniZ on April 30, 2019, 08:37:16 PM

Quote from: DanGB on April 30, 2019, 07:27:25 PM

miniZ,

Things have been running pretty well for me the past 24 hours. I think my only crash was because I was on the edge on my power and clock settings. One thing though... I noticed that when I start the miner, about 30-45 seconds later (one time it was around 2 minutes) it sends 2 invalid shares to the pool. It did it this evening when I restarted 3 of my mining processes. These invalid shares occur before it starts to submit the dev fee. Not a huge issue, but I thought I would mention it.

Much thanks for your work on this...

Hi DanGB,
Thank you for the feedback.
We did a check just now and we did not experience the same couple of invalid shares during the first minutes. We will keep looking.
Could you let us know to which pool were you mining?
Cheers

Sunpool

sp_

legendary

Activity: 2954

Merit: 1087

Team Black developer

Quote from: miniZ on April 29, 2019, 04:11:04 PM

Hi MineOrDie,
   It should run as it looks like there is enough memory to run it (3019-25=2994), but
maybe it is still too tight...
   You still can try two things:
   1. --mode=3 (it will be a bit slow, but just to see if it works)
   2. exclude the first GPU (that has less free memory) with -cde 0
Then we can try to workout a solution for you :-)
Cheers

Tested beam in miniZ_v1.3n3_win-x64 on a gigabyte 1060 3g G1 gaming

Mode 3 is working on windows 7/windows 8.1 on 10603gb cards. using 2831 MB memory.

+500 mem
+100 core
70% tdp

~12.7 sol.

Windows 10 is not working...

Windows will reserve some of the gpu memory so you will never be able to utilize all of it.

miniZ

member

Activity: 690

Merit: 17

Quote from: DanGB on April 30, 2019, 07:27:25 PM

miniZ,

Things have been running pretty well for me the past 24 hours. I think my only crash was because I was on the edge on my power and clock settings. One thing though... I noticed that when I start the miner, about 30-45 seconds later (one time it was around 2 minutes) it sends 2 invalid shares to the pool. It did it this evening when I restarted 3 of my mining processes. These invalid shares occur before it starts to submit the dev fee. Not a huge issue, but I thought I would mention it.

Much thanks for your work on this...

Hi DanGB,
Thank you for the feedback.
We did a check just now and we did not experience the same couple of invalid shares during the first minutes. We will keep looking.
Could you let us know to which pool were you mining?
Cheers

RoninAlek

newbie

Activity: 26

Merit: 1

Quote from: miniZ on April 30, 2019, 06:29:47 PM

Quote from: RoninAlek on April 30, 2019, 05:19:49 PM

Quote from: miniZ on April 30, 2019, 02:42:14 PM

Quote from: AcharyaOne on April 30, 2019, 02:10:07 PM

Quote from: miniZ on April 30, 2019, 01:48:05 PM

Quote from: AcharyaOne on April 30, 2019, 01:20:46 PM

Hi,

What is the difference between miniZ v1.3n3 and miniZ v1.3n31?

Hi AcharyaOne,
there is no difference.
We updated the files about an hour ago with support for Maxwell GPUs.

In HiveOS, after creating the flightsheet and uploading the miner, if you want to update the same miner file with exaclty the same name, you need to delete the old one first from the system (or you will get stuck with the old one).

Because it may be difficult to delete this manually for some, we just added a new file with that extra '1' in case of someone needs it for a Maxwell and was using the v1.3n3 from yesterday.

Thanks.
Cheers

I get that what you are saying but there's a way to do it.
Maybe stop miner first but after that you can run the following command even from the dashboard (Run Command): /hive/miners/custom/custom-get http://miniz.ch/hiveos/miniZ-1.3n3.tar.gz -f
-f will reinstall miner

Thanks for your work, just wish it was a 1% fee :p

Cheers

Hi AcharyaOne,
Some people have difficulties using the command line, and to be honest we did not notice the dashboard (when we test on HiveOS we mostly to use the bash shell). Thanks a lot for the tip!

You may not believe this but 2% is very very little. At the moment is really not possible to change this, we still cannot even pay our current expenses from what we earn. If the situation changes we might reconsider

Thanks for using miniZ!
Cheers

Maybe --donate % Wink

Hi RoninAlek,
Thank you for your suggestion.
We will add --donate option (but we will not decrease the fee).
If the situation changes we might reconsider decreasing the fee

Cheers

Don't decrease the fee, just saying to add --donate. I personally think some fees (pools and mining software) should be higher.

DanGB

newbie

Activity: 25

Merit: 0

miniZ,

Things have been running pretty well for me the past 24 hours. I think my only crash was because I was on the edge on my power and clock settings. One thing though... I noticed that when I start the miner, about 30-45 seconds later (one time it was around 2 minutes) it sends 2 invalid shares to the pool. It did it this evening when I restarted 3 of my mining processes. These invalid shares occur before it starts to submit the dev fee. Not a huge issue, but I thought I would mention it.

Much thanks for your work on this...

miniZ

member

Activity: 690

Merit: 17

Quote from: RoninAlek on April 30, 2019, 05:19:49 PM

Quote from: miniZ on April 30, 2019, 02:42:14 PM

Quote from: AcharyaOne on April 30, 2019, 02:10:07 PM

Quote from: miniZ on April 30, 2019, 01:48:05 PM

Quote from: AcharyaOne on April 30, 2019, 01:20:46 PM

Hi,

What is the difference between miniZ v1.3n3 and miniZ v1.3n31?

Hi AcharyaOne,
there is no difference.
We updated the files about an hour ago with support for Maxwell GPUs.

In HiveOS, after creating the flightsheet and uploading the miner, if you want to update the same miner file with exaclty the same name, you need to delete the old one first from the system (or you will get stuck with the old one).

Because it may be difficult to delete this manually for some, we just added a new file with that extra '1' in case of someone needs it for a Maxwell and was using the v1.3n3 from yesterday.

Thanks.
Cheers

I get that what you are saying but there's a way to do it.
Maybe stop miner first but after that you can run the following command even from the dashboard (Run Command): /hive/miners/custom/custom-get http://miniz.ch/hiveos/miniZ-1.3n3.tar.gz -f
-f will reinstall miner

Thanks for your work, just wish it was a 1% fee :p

Cheers

Hi AcharyaOne,
Some people have difficulties using the command line, and to be honest we did not notice the dashboard (when we test on HiveOS we mostly to use the bash shell). Thanks a lot for the tip!

You may not believe this but 2% is very very little. At the moment is really not possible to change this, we still cannot even pay our current expenses from what we earn. If the situation changes we might reconsider

Thanks for using miniZ!
Cheers

Maybe --donate % Wink

Hi RoninAlek,
Thank you for your suggestion.
We will add --donate option (but we will not decrease the fee).
If the situation changes we might reconsider decreasing the fee

Cheers

miniZ

member

Activity: 690

Merit: 17

Quote from: hogwash.89m on April 30, 2019, 03:40:43 PM

One question @miniZ,
Do you have implemented some anti-hacking solution, as Gminer released "optimized" miner for 150_5?

He (or they) become famous as thieves of other miner code, probably they spend some time reverse engineering competitors miners and stealing ideas.

They released beta now which improves 150_5, and previously they updated kernel months ago.

So be aware.

PS: I like your miner, especially --oc2 option can be handy when power limit needs to go down through summer.

Also I noticed that "templimit" option isn't readed from config file.

Quote from: sharmanov on April 30, 2019, 04:07:14 PM

So... GMINER already got called out for copy n paste of lolminer that allowed them to add AMD support to Gminer. But now they coincidentally have a beta out that produces the same hashrate as your miner on beam, its funny because you guys just started supporting beam... I hope you can look at their build and find some unique to your development information to call them out as well. https://github.com/develsoftware/GMinerBetaRelease/releases if the BETA release link... You guys work way too hard to get ripped off of.

Hi hogwash.89m, sharmanov,
Thank you for sharing your concern.
We try to have some protection for the most critical part of the code, but it is not a sophisticated antihacking system. If our code can be read by the gpu, an hacker can read it too anyway.
Also, if all developers play fair, we believe that there will be room for all miners. It is good to have multiple mining options.

On our side, we hope that if performances are similar still many people will prefer miniZ over other miners

Regarding the "templimit", thanks for letting us know. We just fixed this and it will be out with the next build.

Thank you for using miniZ!
Cheers

RoninAlek

newbie

Activity: 26

Merit: 1

Quote from: miniZ on April 30, 2019, 02:42:14 PM

Quote from: AcharyaOne on April 30, 2019, 02:10:07 PM

Quote from: miniZ on April 30, 2019, 01:48:05 PM

Quote from: AcharyaOne on April 30, 2019, 01:20:46 PM

Hi,

What is the difference between miniZ v1.3n3 and miniZ v1.3n31?

Hi AcharyaOne,
there is no difference.
We updated the files about an hour ago with support for Maxwell GPUs.

In HiveOS, after creating the flightsheet and uploading the miner, if you want to update the same miner file with exaclty the same name, you need to delete the old one first from the system (or you will get stuck with the old one).

Because it may be difficult to delete this manually for some, we just added a new file with that extra '1' in case of someone needs it for a Maxwell and was using the v1.3n3 from yesterday.

Thanks.
Cheers

I get that what you are saying but there's a way to do it.
Maybe stop miner first but after that you can run the following command even from the dashboard (Run Command): /hive/miners/custom/custom-get http://miniz.ch/hiveos/miniZ-1.3n3.tar.gz -f
-f will reinstall miner

Thanks for your work, just wish it was a 1% fee :p

Cheers

Hi AcharyaOne,
Some people have difficulties using the command line, and to be honest we did not notice the dashboard (when we test on HiveOS we mostly to use the bash shell). Thanks a lot for the tip!

You may not believe this but 2% is very very little. At the moment is really not possible to change this, we still cannot even pay our current expenses from what we earn. If the situation changes we might reconsider

Thanks for using miniZ!
Cheers

Maybe --donate % Wink

sharmanov

newbie

Activity: 54

Merit: 0

So... GMINER already got called out for copy n paste of lolminer that allowed them to add AMD support to Gminer. But now they coincidentally have a beta out that produces the same hashrate as your miner on beam, its funny because you guys just started supporting beam... I hope you can look at their build and find some unique to your development information to call them out as well. https://github.com/develsoftware/GMinerBetaRelease/releases if the BETA release link... You guys work way too hard to get ripped off of.

Topic: miniZ v2.0a Equihash 144,5 125,4 210,9 150,5 192,7 BeamHash3 ProgPoW Ethash CFX - page 53. (Read 60004 times)