Topic: NPlusMiner - |MultiRig remote management|AI|Autoupdate|Pool/Algo switching - page 32. (Read 37605 times)

Thank you !

Wait for the next release!

Zergpool EU servers are not supported yet. Working on it...

Zergpool europe server support ?

27.02.2018 EU stratum server added for better connectivity in Europe region europe.mine.zergpool.com

Zpool, Doesn't have servers in Europe, only US

Released 2.0.1

   - Added x16r support

I was testing Zpool, not tested yet others...

Which pool are you using?

Great Job, Thank You Guys...

But, GUI version  (not tested yet cmd ) wont connect pool if location is EUROPE, only gives info that cant connect pool.
Resizable windows would be nice plus 

Great gob, but add in next release option to input the nicehash btc adress... becouse we mining to internal nicehash adress to safe the fee when withdraw the coins... thanks..

NPlusMiner-v2.0 Released
Download: https://github.com/MrPlusGH/NPlusMiner/releases

NPlusMiner now has a GUI !
    - Added GUI
    - Console lo can still access it
    - Relies on Config files (no .bat editing)
    - Track earnings in GUI. (Per address / Pool)

I think bitcointalk has conditioned me to assume 75% of the people have no idea what they are talking about, so anything too long winded I skim over     To be fair I have still read complaints about zpool when you get paid in the coin you mined.  In that case I think the core reason is that you can specify a currency, but you technically cant specify the coin you want to mine, so in the end its still converting it for you.  No doubt these auto-convert pools are dealing with crappy exchanges and selling regardless of how the charts look.

In my humble opinion I think these profit switching scripts are pointless for a single pool.  The real benefit is when they monitor multiple multi-algo pools.  Not every multi pool mines the same coins and algos, so automatically switching between what is most profitable is in theory beneficial.  Either way it would be nice to see this nplusminer continue to be developed;  Its the first one I've seen that at least tries to add in some prediction logic.

Well, I'll admit it is unreasonable to expect everyone to read every post by someone before replying to them. And I'm well aware of the many complaints against ZPool  which is why I tried them out in single algo, convert to anything besides BTC mode first; it was only after switching to multi-algo, convert to BTC mode that profitably went straight out the window.

In the end, I think @dragonmike has nailed down the real reason for such terrible profitability with these multi-algo, auto-convert pools, and that is what is hot right now might not be so hot when it finally gets shunted off to an exchange for conversion to BTC (especially with such crap exchanges like stocks.exchange - I sent some BTC there 7+ hours ago and it still hasn't shown up in my wallet, while another BTC transfer I did to a person here went through almost immediately...).

Hah, I was actually just starting to come to the same conclusion! That the problem with the algo-switchers is that the coin that is most profitable right now - especially shitcoins getting the pump-n-dump treatment - may have plummeted right back down by the time it is converted to BTC.

I've had mixed experiences running single-algo mode, though. Sometimes it worked out fine, but other times it was just as bad as multi-algo, convert to BTC mode. Still, I didn't test single-algo mode nearly as much and perhaps I should revisit it based on your experience.

Ah ok, I guess that is my fault for not fully reading how you were performing this experiment.  One other variable though is that you are using zpool, which is notorious for payingabout 20% less than it says it will.  Numerous threads and accusations about it.  Currently my bat file is running all 4 of the pluspools and so far zpool hasn't been the most profitable pool a single time.  It might be worth running this experiment with blazepool.

This is something I mentioned several months ago in Nemo's thread.

The problem lies in the fact that these algo-switchers are disconnected from the actual auto-exchange. Yes, in theory you might be mining the most profitable coin RIGHT NOW, but whatever amount in BTC you get from mining that coin is going to be fixed often several HOURS later: coins need to mature, then sit around a while for the pool to collect enough of them to be exchanged against BTC etc. All that time you have market risk and you end up getting a totally different price to what it was when the algo-switcher made its calculation (and I'm not even going to elaborate on the bid/offer spreads, trading and transfer costs).

Add to that the fact that every time you switch algo, you have downtime. For some algos you have very long downtime because GPUs need time to ramp up (Alexis miner is a good example for slow starting of multi-GPUs).

What I found is that mining single algo (eg. mining on Zergpool's Neoscrypt port) is often outperforming multi-algo switching because of all of the above. Pick an algo which sports a few profitable coins, stick to that algo and let the pool switch between the coins - there's no downtime that way because you mine the same algo all the way through). I've got two friends who have built 6x1080 rigs and mine using NH miner. I've got a 5x1080 rig myself and I've basically managed to match their profitability by doing the above, despite being one GPU short.

Yes, to FULLY TEST this I would need to go through a lot more trouble and buy another 6x 1080 rig, but seeing as none of you people are paying me to do any of this you'll just have to settle with me first doing a concurrent comparison between NiceHash and Zpool/NPlusMiner using my two rigs that are identical - each with a single GTX 1080 - and then use that as a baseline to establish relative profitability scaling when I run NPlusMiner on my 6x rig. So I will then be comparing a single GTX 1080 running NiceHash vs. 6x 1060 running NPlusMiner which I freely admit is not the most scientific way of doing a comparison, but it is "close enough for government work" as the old cliche goes.

I'm not sure how you can make these claims.  To fully test your theory you would need identical rigs, one mining nicehash, the other nplusminer during the same period.

That has been my experience, yes, but it doesn't make sense if you think about it: the whole idea behind multi-algo pools with auto-switching software like NPlusMiner is to mine whatever coin is delivering relative outperformance at the time; something which is temporary by definition!

Yet over the last few weeks I earned anywhere from 10% less (including fees of 7%) to 30% less per day than I would have made simply mining ZEN or NiceHash, and ZEN hasn't been especially profitable to mine during this time, either (in fact, that was why I was looking at multi-algo pools in the first place - difficulty vs. price was no longer so favorable for ZEN).

Mind you, this rig does earn less now regardless of what it is mining compared to a month ago - and it has been quite the dramatic fall from grace, so to speak - but that affects everything I might choose to mine, not just ZEN or NH or multi-algo, convert to BTC.

HOWEVER... I did find that my earnings much more closely matched what I would have made with NH if I selected a different auto-convert coin besides BTC. For example, I ran multi-algo mode on ZPool for several days with XVG, VTC and FTC selected as output coins and in all 3 of those cases I made a similar amount (in USD terms) as I would have with NH.

From that I concluded that ZPool is basically trustworthy, it's just that auto-converting a bunch of shitcoins to BTC isn't nearly as profitable as you might imagine.

Most probably.

In fact the difference in favor of ahash was due to the performance of x17 but not anymore.