I can set the vm to 32,000 and 64,000 as my ssd is a 128gb.
I set all my vm's at 32,000-64,000 as each board has four cards and my ssds are big enough to do that.
I did that for eth coin and left it foe zec coin.
How do you do that ?
Topic: My second ZEC + XMR+ ETH thread builds info links thoughts and photos. - page 58. (Read 147923 times)
November 12, 2016, 11:13:42 AM
I can set the vm to 32,000 and 64,000 as my ssd is a 128gb.
I set all my vm's at 32,000-64,000 as each board has four cards and my ssds are big enough to do that.
I did that for eth coin and left it foe zec coin.
How do you do that ?
November 12, 2016, 10:25:59 AM
What are your thoughts on switching back over to ETH?
you should have 2 rigs minimum and one should do eth.
I mine both and shift from 80% zec to 80% eth.
I still feel zec has more pump to come so I have 15 gpus mining zec and 4 gpus mining eth.
I check both coins 3 to 4 times a day.
November 12, 2016, 09:51:54 AM
What are your thoughts on switching back over to ETH?
It's only a 6$ difference for me eth vs zec
But if zec keeping going down I'll have to switch back to keep profits in the $700+
Then again if it keeps going down most will switch back then difficulty will rocket on eth
And zec will be more profitable again.
So it's really six in one hand and half a dozen in the other hand
November 12, 2016, 09:36:35 AM
What are your thoughts on switching back over to ETH?
November 12, 2016, 08:41:33 AM
if you havent tried "-i 0" in v4 ZEC miner by Claymore, be sure to use it.
My Nanos and 390 rigs, some cards have now touched 100-105 H/s overnight, from 70-80 H/s using "-i 2"
The -i 0 switch was suppose to provide lowest intensity and avoid CPU going 100% but after a while, CPU cycle reduction of about 10-15% from my 1840s and 4400s..... and surprisingly squeezed high hash as promised by Claymore.
My Nanos and 390 rigs, some cards have now touched 100-105 H/s overnight, from 70-80 H/s using "-i 2"
The -i 0 switch was suppose to provide lowest intensity and avoid CPU going 100% but after a while, CPU cycle reduction of about 10-15% from my 1840s and 4400s..... and surprisingly squeezed high hash as promised by Claymore.
Isn't 0 the default for the -i switch?
My 1840s run around 10% without the -i.
hey youre right rawbert - just ran a few rigs without the -i swicth and it defaults to -i 0 anyways and still hits the high sol levels.
btw, i noticed that the more RAM you have in the rig the faster the GPUs hit 100 h/s. I guess ZEC algo like a lot of RAM.
2 of my rigs have 16GB, I used to use them as proxy servers in the pre-Claymore days, these 2 rigs now with 390s are best performing in the farm, running steady at 100-105 h/s and no taxing on the 1840s.
Hmmm I must try more ram on the 6 card dual core rig see if that fixes the low sol/s and 100% CPU
November 12, 2016, 08:34:25 AM
if you havent tried "-i 0" in v4 ZEC miner by Claymore, be sure to use it.
My Nanos and 390 rigs, some cards have now touched 100-105 H/s overnight, from 70-80 H/s using "-i 2"
The -i 0 switch was suppose to provide lowest intensity and avoid CPU going 100% but after a while, CPU cycle reduction of about 10-15% from my 1840s and 4400s..... and surprisingly squeezed high hash as promised by Claymore.
My Nanos and 390 rigs, some cards have now touched 100-105 H/s overnight, from 70-80 H/s using "-i 2"
The -i 0 switch was suppose to provide lowest intensity and avoid CPU going 100% but after a while, CPU cycle reduction of about 10-15% from my 1840s and 4400s..... and surprisingly squeezed high hash as promised by Claymore.
Isn't 0 the default for the -i switch?
My 1840s run around 10% without the -i.
hey youre right rawbert - just ran a few rigs without the -i swicth and it defaults to -i 0 anyways and still hits the high sol levels.
btw, i noticed that the more RAM you have in the rig the faster the GPUs hit 100 h/s. I guess ZEC algo like a lot of RAM.
2 of my rigs have 16GB, I used to use them as proxy servers in the pre-Claymore days, these 2 rigs now with 390s are best performing in the farm, running steady at 100-105 h/s and no taxing on the 1840s.
November 12, 2016, 08:27:34 AM
Sorry to be kinda off-topic, but here are the friendliest group of persons on the forum regarding mining. I have some problem with ZCash, since the very beggining : I've always been under profitable. While 215 H/s is written on the screen, Flypool reports me only a 24 hours average of about 185 H/s. Moreover, while the calculator says me that I should mine barely 0,04 ZEC a day, I just closed the actual day with 0,029 ZEC mined. I agree that the difficulty might be risibng or something, but 25% less is quite alarming. Does one has the answer to that problem or an idea from where it does come from ?
I have also an other problem, only with ZCash : my shares don't get validated. I have walls of SHARE FOUND (40 consecutive for now) but slightly less accepted shares. Any clue about it ?
Edit : they just all got rejected, except 4, so 10% of them.
I have also an other problem, only with ZCash : my shares don't get validated. I have walls of SHARE FOUND (40 consecutive for now) but slightly less accepted shares. Any clue about it ?
Edit : they just all got rejected, except 4, so 10% of them.
the two problems may be related I am doing some checking maybe you can tell me your:
mobo
windows ? or linux ?
your cpu?
your ram ?
your hdd or ssd?
I have four mobos
and 1 seems to do what yours does.
ASRock H81 Pro BTC
Windows 7 64 Bits
G1840
8Gb
SSD 32Go
For citronick, I'm using Claymore miner V4. Maybe it does come from the -t 1 I set ? I'll try to remove it just now.
Yeah try -t 0
I have the same board but I have a bigger ssd.
I can set the vm to 32,000 and 64,000 as my ssd is a 128gb.
I set all my vm's at 32,000-64,000 as each board has four cards and my ssds are big enough to do that.
I did that for eth coin and left it foe zec coin.
My h81 has the weakest cpu and it has the most rejects.
My asrock z170 has an i7 6700t >>>>> 3 cards and under 1%
My asus z170 has an i5 6500t >>>>> 4 cards and under 2%
my biostar z170 has an i3 6100t >>>>> 4 cards and under 2%
my asrock h81 has the g1840 >>>>>> 4 cards and about 5% I am expecting an i5 4570s today once I get it I will post if it reduces the error rate.
November 12, 2016, 04:09:21 AM
Sorry to be kinda off-topic, but here are the friendliest group of persons on the forum regarding mining. I have some problem with ZCash, since the very beggining : I've always been under profitable. While 215 H/s is written on the screen, Flypool reports me only a 24 hours average of about 185 H/s. Moreover, while the calculator says me that I should mine barely 0,04 ZEC a day, I just closed the actual day with 0,029 ZEC mined. I agree that the difficulty might be risibng or something, but 25% less is quite alarming. Does one has the answer to that problem or an idea from where it does come from ?
I have also an other problem, only with ZCash : my shares don't get validated. I have walls of SHARE FOUND (40 consecutive for now) but slightly less accepted shares. Any clue about it ?
Edit : they just all got rejected, except 4, so 10% of them.
I have also an other problem, only with ZCash : my shares don't get validated. I have walls of SHARE FOUND (40 consecutive for now) but slightly less accepted shares. Any clue about it ?
Edit : they just all got rejected, except 4, so 10% of them.
the two problems may be related I am doing some checking maybe you can tell me your:
mobo
windows ? or linux ?
your cpu?
your ram ?
your hdd or ssd?
I have four mobos
and 1 seems to do what yours does.
ASRock H81 Pro BTC
Windows 7 64 Bits
G1840
8Gb
SSD 32Go
For citronick, I'm using Claymore miner V4. Maybe it does come from the -t 1 I set ? I'll try to remove it just now.
November 12, 2016, 03:25:28 AM
big boost with claymore 4.0
7 cards = 395mh or about 56.5 H/s
7 cards = 395mh or about 56.5 H/s
Spent all night migrating entire farm to v4.... staggering results.... the farm now is nearly 6 KH/s -- it could have been more but I have retained the BIOS mods for 480s and Nanos since they perform maximum hash / power ETH mining on Claymore v7.3, to enable switching back to ETH at any time. I have disabled all CPU mining to support Claymore's CPU cycles required to drive the GPUs on v4 codes.
What sorcery this Claymore miner, 480s mid-80s, Nanos mid 70s and 290/290x mid 70s H/s and 390s mid 80s H/s -- worth the dev fees
Silentarmy seems to be getting competative figures now, I'll be testing that out on a couple rigs today.
I don't understand why Claymore is so insistant on pushing Windows and ignoring LINUX, I suspect that more mining rigs run LINUX than run WIndows.
im sure it has to do with the whole code stealing thing.... which imo is dumb its an open source product... granted he should have got credit but i think it went to far.. to blast it all over for everyone to see so you can boost your own ego saying im better than claymore is a little childish...
the game is now on! silent army matches Claymore now..
i think this is how it works with Claymore, he is in business with "the fees" if only his miner has some % faster than other miner/s. it's like if you are earning 50$ a day from mining from free miners, you will earn 55$ using his miner but with fees.
regarding the code stealing issue (my speculation), maybe he is focusing in making those miner devs that focus especially in linux miners to pay for the humiliation by dragging miners to windows and use his miner (his home court advantage maybe).
November 12, 2016, 02:04:57 AM
i have 900sol/s going into flypool sometimes it goes from 770-1ksol/s it bounces around.. the pool is still in alpha so it isnt going to be a solid set number like on the ether pool they have..
All pools all miners will see variance due to luck in finding shares - I routinely see 20-30% variation on their ETH pool with rare bigger spikes up or down.
If your LONG term average is close to your local numbers, nothing to worry about.
I've never been impressed with PowerColor cards, the few I've had never were good at overclocking or long-term reliability even when NOT overclocked.
I've gotten to the point of just ignoring the company entirely.
November 12, 2016, 01:29:27 AM
if you havent tried "-i 0" in v4 ZEC miner by Claymore, be sure to use it.
My Nanos and 390 rigs, some cards have now touched 100-105 H/s overnight, from 70-80 H/s using "-i 2"
The -i 0 switch was suppose to provide lowest intensity and avoid CPU going 100% but after a while, CPU cycle reduction of about 10-15% from my 1840s and 4400s..... and surprisingly squeezed high hash as promised by Claymore.
My Nanos and 390 rigs, some cards have now touched 100-105 H/s overnight, from 70-80 H/s using "-i 2"
The -i 0 switch was suppose to provide lowest intensity and avoid CPU going 100% but after a while, CPU cycle reduction of about 10-15% from my 1840s and 4400s..... and surprisingly squeezed high hash as promised by Claymore.
Isn't 0 the default for the -i switch?
My 1840s run around 10% without the -i.
November 12, 2016, 12:07:04 AM
if you havent tried "-i 0" in v4 ZEC miner by Claymore, be sure to use it.
My Nanos and 390 rigs, some cards have now touched 100-105 H/s overnight, from 70-80 H/s using "-i 2"
The -i 0 switch was suppose to provide lowest intensity and avoid CPU going 100% but after a while, CPU cycle reduction of about 10-15% from my 1840s and 4400s..... and surprisingly squeezed high hash as promised by Claymore.
My Nanos and 390 rigs, some cards have now touched 100-105 H/s overnight, from 70-80 H/s using "-i 2"
The -i 0 switch was suppose to provide lowest intensity and avoid CPU going 100% but after a while, CPU cycle reduction of about 10-15% from my 1840s and 4400s..... and surprisingly squeezed high hash as promised by Claymore.
I am now pushing 1000h using 15 gpus. Three four card rigs and one four card rig.
No over clocks all stock bios. I do use the -i 0
I just had an idea will try it and get back.
I set my wattman settings to -30 for power and I dropped from 9.1 to 8.4 amps at 240 volts.
I did lose a little hash so I am now doing 965h at 2016 watts. That is just over 2 watts a h
November 11, 2016, 11:46:32 PM
if you havent tried "-i 0" in v4 ZEC miner by Claymore, be sure to use it.
My Nanos and 390 rigs, some cards have now touched 100-105 H/s overnight, from 70-80 H/s using "-i 2"
The -i 0 switch was suppose to provide lowest intensity and avoid CPU going 100% but after a while, CPU cycle reduction of about 10-15% from my 1840s and 4400s..... and surprisingly squeezed high hash as promised by Claymore.
My Nanos and 390 rigs, some cards have now touched 100-105 H/s overnight, from 70-80 H/s using "-i 2"
The -i 0 switch was suppose to provide lowest intensity and avoid CPU going 100% but after a while, CPU cycle reduction of about 10-15% from my 1840s and 4400s..... and surprisingly squeezed high hash as promised by Claymore.
November 11, 2016, 11:08:47 PM
I just removed My power color card from my rig ...
and everything run like A1 ... I can OC my cards.
I will try it on my second MOBO.
Might finally found the real issue.
and everything run like A1 ... I can OC my cards.
I will try it on my second MOBO.
Might finally found the real issue.
November 11, 2016, 09:04:32 PM
Sorry to be kinda off-topic, but here are the friendliest group of persons on the forum regarding mining. I have some problem with ZCash, since the very beggining : I've always been under profitable. While 215 H/s is written on the screen, Flypool reports me only a 24 hours average of about 185 H/s. Moreover, while the calculator says me that I should mine barely 0,04 ZEC a day, I just closed the actual day with 0,029 ZEC mined. I agree that the difficulty might be risibng or something, but 25% less is quite alarming. Does one has the answer to that problem or an idea from where it does come from ?
I have also an other problem, only with ZCash : my shares don't get validated. I have walls of SHARE FOUND (40 consecutive for now) but slightly less accepted shares. Any clue about it ?
Edit : they just all got rejected, except 4, so 10% of them.
I have also an other problem, only with ZCash : my shares don't get validated. I have walls of SHARE FOUND (40 consecutive for now) but slightly less accepted shares. Any clue about it ?
Edit : they just all got rejected, except 4, so 10% of them.
the two problems may be related I am doing some checking maybe you can tell me your:
mobo
windows ? or linux ?
your cpu?
your ram ?
your hdd or ssd?
I have four mobos
and 1 seems to do what yours does.
November 11, 2016, 09:01:55 PM
big boost with claymore 4.0
7 cards = 395mh or about 56.5 H/s
7 cards = 395mh or about 56.5 H/s
Spent all night migrating entire farm to v4.... staggering results.... the farm now is nearly 6 KH/s -- it could have been more but I have retained the BIOS mods for 480s and Nanos since they perform maximum hash / power ETH mining on Claymore v7.3, to enable switching back to ETH at any time. I have disabled all CPU mining to support Claymore's CPU cycles required to drive the GPUs on v4 codes.
What sorcery this Claymore miner, 480s mid-80s, Nanos mid 70s and 290/290x mid 70s H/s and 390s mid 80s H/s -- worth the dev fees
Silentarmy seems to be getting competative figures now, I'll be testing that out on a couple rigs today.
I don't understand why Claymore is so insistant on pushing Windows and ignoring LINUX, I suspect that more mining rigs run LINUX than run WIndows.
im sure it has to do with the whole code stealing thing.... which imo is dumb its an open source product... granted he should have got credit but i think it went to far.. to blast it all over for everyone to see so you can boost your own ego saying im better than claymore is a little childish...
A lot of people hate that Claymore charges dev fee. My opinion is all the guys that wrote a program that works well should get some money.
Kano and ck did not. Then Luke of Bfg miner kind of ripped them off.
I would think if Kano and ck had the same amount of dev fees that claymore got they would be really loaded.
I would prefer claymore would retire his fees.
Say 1.2 then 1.1 then 1.0 Down to 0 after a year.
He still would make coin and look less greedy.
It also would encourage a new coin every year.
Or. Drop the fee every 2 months from 1.2 to 0 so two years and it is free.
Alt coins will always tend to be a more disposable coin then btc.
Not a fact a guess. As I see a super coin as the super highway and alt coins as taxis and trucks needed to move transactions.
im going to quote that sentence in my sign it is the best saying for alts coins i ever read
Sorry to be kinda off-topic, but here are the friendliest group of persons on the forum regarding mining. I have some problem with ZCash, since the very beggining : I've always been under profitable. While 215 H/s is written on the screen, Flypool reports me only a 24 hours average of about 185 H/s. Moreover, while the calculator says me that I should mine barely 0,04 ZEC a day, I just closed the actual day with 0,029 ZEC mined. I agree that the difficulty might be risibng or something, but 25% less is quite alarming. Does one has the answer to that problem or an idea from where it does come from ?
I have also an other problem, only with ZCash : my shares don't get validated. I have walls of SHARE FOUND (40 consecutive for now) but slightly less accepted shares. Any clue about it ?
Edit : they just all got rejected, except 4, so 10% of them.
I have also an other problem, only with ZCash : my shares don't get validated. I have walls of SHARE FOUND (40 consecutive for now) but slightly less accepted shares. Any clue about it ?
Edit : they just all got rejected, except 4, so 10% of them.
i have 900sol/s going into flypool sometimes it goes from 770-1ksol/s it bounces around.. the pool is still in alpha so it isnt going to be a solid set number like on the ether pool they have..
now onto the rejected shares.. what miner are you using?
November 11, 2016, 08:35:29 PM
Sorry to be kinda off-topic, but here are the friendliest group of persons on the forum regarding mining. I have some problem with ZCash, since the very beggining : I've always been under profitable. While 215 H/s is written on the screen, Flypool reports me only a 24 hours average of about 185 H/s. Moreover, while the calculator says me that I should mine barely 0,04 ZEC a day, I just closed the actual day with 0,029 ZEC mined. I agree that the difficulty might be risibng or something, but 25% less is quite alarming. Does one has the answer to that problem or an idea from where it does come from ?
I have also an other problem, only with ZCash : my shares don't get validated. I have walls of SHARE FOUND (40 consecutive for now) but slightly less accepted shares. Any clue about it ?
Edit : they just all got rejected, except 4, so 10% of them.
I have also an other problem, only with ZCash : my shares don't get validated. I have walls of SHARE FOUND (40 consecutive for now) but slightly less accepted shares. Any clue about it ?
Edit : they just all got rejected, except 4, so 10% of them.
November 11, 2016, 08:26:29 PM
big boost with claymore 4.0
7 cards = 395mh or about 56.5 H/s
7 cards = 395mh or about 56.5 H/s
Spent all night migrating entire farm to v4.... staggering results.... the farm now is nearly 6 KH/s -- it could have been more but I have retained the BIOS mods for 480s and Nanos since they perform maximum hash / power ETH mining on Claymore v7.3, to enable switching back to ETH at any time. I have disabled all CPU mining to support Claymore's CPU cycles required to drive the GPUs on v4 codes.
What sorcery this Claymore miner, 480s mid-80s, Nanos mid 70s and 290/290x mid 70s H/s and 390s mid 80s H/s -- worth the dev fees
Silentarmy seems to be getting competative figures now, I'll be testing that out on a couple rigs today.
I don't understand why Claymore is so insistant on pushing Windows and ignoring LINUX, I suspect that more mining rigs run LINUX than run WIndows.
im sure it has to do with the whole code stealing thing.... which imo is dumb its an open source product... granted he should have got credit but i think it went to far.. to blast it all over for everyone to see so you can boost your own ego saying im better than claymore is a little childish...
A lot of people hate that Claymore charges dev fee. My opinion is all the guys that wrote a program that works well should get some money.
Kano and ck did not. Then Luke of Bfg miner kind of ripped them off.
I would think if Kano and ck had the same amount of dev fees that claymore got they would be really loaded.
I would prefer claymore would retire his fees.
Say 1.2 then 1.1 then 1.0 Down to 0 after a year.
He still would make coin and look less greedy.
It also would encourage a new coin every year.
Or. Drop the fee every 2 months from 1.2 to 0 so two years and it is free.
Alt coins will always tend to be a more disposable coin then btc.
Not a fact a guess. As I see a super coin as the super highway and alt coins as taxis and trucks needed to move transactions.
November 11, 2016, 08:13:45 PM
big boost with claymore 4.0
7 cards = 395mh or about 56.5 H/s
7 cards = 395mh or about 56.5 H/s
Spent all night migrating entire farm to v4.... staggering results.... the farm now is nearly 6 KH/s -- it could have been more but I have retained the BIOS mods for 480s and Nanos since they perform maximum hash / power ETH mining on Claymore v7.3, to enable switching back to ETH at any time. I have disabled all CPU mining to support Claymore's CPU cycles required to drive the GPUs on v4 codes.
What sorcery this Claymore miner, 480s mid-80s, Nanos mid 70s and 290/290x mid 70s H/s and 390s mid 80s H/s -- worth the dev fees
Silentarmy seems to be getting competative figures now, I'll be testing that out on a couple rigs today.
I don't understand why Claymore is so insistant on pushing Windows and ignoring LINUX, I suspect that more mining rigs run LINUX than run WIndows.
im sure it has to do with the whole code stealing thing.... which imo is dumb its an open source product... granted he should have got credit but i think it went to far.. to blast it all over for everyone to see so you can boost your own ego saying im better than claymore is a little childish...
November 11, 2016, 07:38:06 PM
big boost with claymore 4.0
7 cards = 395mh or about 56.5 H/s
7 cards = 395mh or about 56.5 H/s
Spent all night migrating entire farm to v4.... staggering results.... the farm now is nearly 6 KH/s -- it could have been more but I have retained the BIOS mods for 480s and Nanos since they perform maximum hash / power ETH mining on Claymore v7.3, to enable switching back to ETH at any time. I have disabled all CPU mining to support Claymore's CPU cycles required to drive the GPUs on v4 codes.
What sorcery this Claymore miner, 480s mid-80s, Nanos mid 70s and 290/290x mid 70s H/s and 390s mid 80s H/s -- worth the dev fees
Silentarmy seems to be getting competative figures now, I'll be testing that out on a couple rigs today.
I don't understand why Claymore is so insistant on pushing Windows and ignoring LINUX, I suspect that more mining rigs run LINUX than run WIndows.
Jump to: