Topic: tdxminer lyra2z/XZC Miner for AMD GPUs on Linux - page 32. (Read 44574 times)

Actually there are enough xzc pools: suprnova, f2pool, mintpond, bsod, omnious, zpool, and of course mph. It's just hashrate distribution that sucks, everyone mines on mph. I can't understand why. Suprnova has 0% fee, f2pool is PPS, mintpond  has great interface and statistics...
I guess people got used to mph.

F2pool might change this, it already has 70 GH/s vs MPH 98 GH/s....

Agree on all points. Plus, temperature/fan speed monitoring is sketchy in linux, and unfortunately it's not included in the miner. Makes me worry a little about the cards... Windows is definitely needed. As well as new mining pools, with hopefully some North American or European Servers.

I wanted to mine but stopped because of MPH, I need to have freedom to choose from otherwise it's not good as we can see.
Linux setup is pain in the butt, one rig worked (but went back to other coin) and on second rig I can't make it work. Windows is needed.

Okay... so I finally got everything up and running, and man was it a b**** to get everything going. But then again, I'm a technical noob, and don't use Linux much.

Have 5 RX's on the miner, 4 480's and 1 580. Running just under 15 MH/s right now, averaging between 2.9-3.0 MH/s on each card. This is with no overclocking... getting the fans to speed up was enough of a pain in itself, default fans will run these cards up to 85C and stay there.

AMDGPU-PRO Drivers on Xubuntu 16.04.2 btw. Also, what the heck is going on with XZC's hashrate distribution? It's atrocious! 80-90% on MPH... if todxx can get enough traction with this miner/make a windows version maybe we could also consider directing this new hashrate source into a new and better pool. Something to consider.

I'm currently running on Suprnova, people had a lot of bad things to say about MPH. Other current potential options include Mintpond and f2pool... but f2 is foreign and I'm fairly comfortable with suprnova.

Thank you very much for posting this.

This problem appears to be caused by invalid data being received by the miner from the pool connection and not being processed correctly (this was most likely due to a network error of some sort).  In this case, the miner should treat this as a network error, causing it to close the connection to the pool and attempt to reconnect.  However, after examining the code, there is a bug that prevents the miner from properly clearing it's receiving network buffer in this case.  This bug causes the miner to repeatedly see the invalid data in every future reconnect attempt.  I will have a fix for this bug out as soon as I can.

I advise anyone using version 0.2.0.0 or earlier to monitor their rigs closely in case of this error occurring.  If your pool supports alert/monitoring emails, please use them.

Network errors like this are usually not common, but can occur more frequently on unstable/unreliable network connections.
Edit: New version with potential fix posted.

Just got this error reported by miner over and over, and mining stopped:

[2018-03-15 11:01:20] Pool xzc.f2pool.com failed to parse server rpc: {"id":1,"result":[[["mining.set_difficulty","deadbeefcafebabe21b9070000000000"],["mining.notify","deadbeefcafebabe21b9070000000000"]],"00007ce5",4],"error":null}


restarted miner, seems OK again....

he says he is working on it but it will take at least a week or two for something to get done

hello todxx
I read from your first post that to adopt your miner under windows would require about one month, but it is not clear will you do that?!
yes, this is time consuming deal, but the number of miners who use windows is about ten times more then people using linux..
so it should be very profitable for as a developer, cause more miner = more developer fee...

running 16 hours so far without any issues.

rx480 1106/1750 ~ 3 Mh/s
rx470 1095/1650 ~ 2.6Mh/s
rx580 1300/1000 ~ 3.5 Mh/s

Funny thing is when i overclock hashrate would decrease, ie rx480@1280/1900 would run 2.6 Mh/s, rx580@1380/2000 ~ 3.1 Mh/s. So i let it run on default clock, in auto DPM state. Not so easy to OC under linux.

Thanks for posting your results.  It's nice to have some confirmation that the kernels scale well on RX 470 GPUs.  The GPU kernels should scale relatively linearly with the number of CU and core clock speed.  They should not be affected very much by memory speed.


The hash rates should be the same for both.  The GPU kernels do not use very much memory, and they only use it for intermediate state, so memory capacity and clock should have little impact.


Thanks principino!  It will be nice to have some feedback on how the miner runs with more than a couple GPUs at a time.  I look forward to your results!


The 0.5Mh/s number is about what I remember getting on sgminer the last time I ran it.  I think with some tuning you can get to around 1.5 Mh/s on a Vega 64.

As for switching over your stable rigs to this miner, please keep in mind that this is still a beta release.  I do not promise that it will be stable on all hardware.  I've done my best to test it for stability on the hardware I have and so far I have not received any reports of instability, but I've only received feedback from a handful of people.  I would suggest slowly switching your rigs over one at a time, making sure that they are stable along the way.  I don't want to ruin anybody's profits because of potential bugs in the miner.  Also remember to check your GPU temperatures as the miner does not check them, and will continue mining even if they exceed safe limits.

I will try with 4 or 5 rx580 this week. I will let you know.

Thanks for your job

around 0.5 mhs

Out of interest, what are these cards achieving with SGminer? I haven't tried myself, I'm usually quite reluctant to experiment with my AMD rigs are they are my very stable cash cows mining ETH...

There is a limit on how many GPUs are supported in ROCm. It has something to do with PCI atomics and is pretty much hardware based.
Any way we could use AMDGPU Pro drivers for Vegas with your miner in the future?

Sounds like great news for ADM owners.
I have question about rx580. Is there any performance difference between 4Gb and 8Gb versions or hashrate is the same for both?

Also interested in a working out of a box version to test this miner.

Tested on Linux today (fresh install).

- RX 580: 3.2 MH/s
- RX 470: 2.5 MH/s

I am sure I could do better but I have no experience with overclocking under Linux. My rigs are Win 10, so eagerly awaiting the Windows version.
The miner worked without flaws, but I did not test for extended periods of time.

I didn't even know that setting existed.  Setting changed, fire away .

Hey todxx, my user being a Newbie I can't send PMs to you here, can you enable the setting? Yourself being a Newbie and all  .

I agree: I appreciate what you are doing for the community. A competitive miner with a dev fee somewhat reasonable is a win win situation. Thanks for both of you.