X16R - RVN - Miner head to head test log - page 2.

bswilmington

newbie

Activity: 39

Merit: 0

Quote from: beursstarter on May 13, 2018, 10:05:44 AM

Quote from: MaxiMan on May 13, 2018, 05:16:46 AM

Mega Like for this topic!
However, im concerned about efficiency per Watt, try with 65% ~ 80%PL

Why is that important? As long as it's profitable, I mine at 100 pl because otherwise I don't earn as much as I could. Why leave capacity unused, even if it is somewhat less profitable above 80 pl...

Some people like to factor in cost in electricity. But if that coin goes from $0.05 to $10, that cost savings actually hurts you. I'm with you on running it at most optimal point of hash rate instead of hash per kwh. But for each there own, so I ain't bashing opinions on savings.

beursstarter

jr. member

Activity: 80

Merit: 2

Quote from: MaxiMan on May 13, 2018, 05:16:46 AM

Mega Like for this topic!
However, im concerned about efficiency per Watt, try with 65% ~ 80%PL

Why is that important? As long as it's profitable, I mine at 100 pl because otherwise I don't earn as much as I could. Why leave capacity unused, even if it is somewhat less profitable above 80 pl...

Morama

member

Activity: 104

Merit: 44

With different Rigs - have I to set the value for difficulty for each Rig?

Example:
Rig 1: 40 MH/s -> d=20
Rig 2: 65 MH/s -> d=32.5
Rig 3: 35 MH/s -> d=17.5

or the full account?
d = 70?

MaxiMan

newbie

Activity: 85

Merit: 0

Mega Like for this topic!
However, im concerned about efficiency per Watt, try with 65% ~ 80%PL

Mikanoshi

sr. member

Activity: 798

Merit: 252

Insane In The Blockchain ⚠

Quote from: platinum4 on May 10, 2018, 08:48:55 PM

Significantly deflated EXE size versus normal ccminer, can this do skunk and tribus? Those run faster on the fatter 43mb ones.
gitmod 4a the 8MB kind is messed up; probably should recompile
oh it cant take i 21.5 now, it maxes at i 21.0625

It is compressed using MPRESS2, alexis 1.0 under UPX is 4MB.

beursstarter

jr. member

Activity: 80

Merit: 2

Quote from: JackIT on May 12, 2018, 12:03:38 PM

Quote from: jugger1028 on May 12, 2018, 11:28:49 AM

Jackit, can you explain this part on your stratum difficulty test? Static stratum diff set to 40 (~Mh/s / 2), if you're running 12 1080ti, I would have thought your mh/s would be closer to ~228 mh/s? I'm trying to gauge my difficulty setting for my config on 8x 1080ti and was wondering, thanks.

sure.. the 12 GPU rig is split into three instances/groupings of 4 GPUs each, with the -d flag
This allows me to test three miners simultaneously.

Each instance/grouping hashes somewhere between 70-80MH/s on average. I didn't want to set the diff too low so I just went with 80MH/s / 2 = 40

Why won't you set the diff too low, is there a disadvantage?

realfinansist

newbie

Activity: 10

Merit: 0

Quote from: JackIT on May 10, 2018, 05:19:59 PM

.......

Perhaps you have a test using one of the miners for different operating systems Windows vs. Linux?

jugger1028

jr. member

Activity: 213

Merit: 3

Quote from: JackIT on May 12, 2018, 12:03:38 PM

Quote from: jugger1028 on May 12, 2018, 11:28:49 AM

Jackit, can you explain this part on your stratum difficulty test? Static stratum diff set to 40 (~Mh/s / 2), if you're running 12 1080ti, I would have thought your mh/s would be closer to ~228 mh/s? I'm trying to gauge my difficulty setting for my config on 8x 1080ti and was wondering, thanks.

sure.. the 12 GPU rig is split into three instances/groupings of 4 GPUs each, with the -d flag
This allows me to test three miners simultaneously.

Each instance/grouping hashes somewhere between 70-80MH/s on average. I didn't want to set the diff too low so I just went with 80MH/s / 2 = 40

That's what I figured, I appreciate the explanation. I am a silent observer of your work, I love it, I think it's a big plus to the mining community. I am a financial analyst by profession and I love the level of detail you provide so thank you for all that you do..

JackIT

jr. member

Activity: 99

Merit: 8

Quote from: jugger1028 on May 12, 2018, 11:28:49 AM

Jackit, can you explain this part on your stratum difficulty test? Static stratum diff set to 40 (~Mh/s / 2), if you're running 12 1080ti, I would have thought your mh/s would be closer to ~228 mh/s? I'm trying to gauge my difficulty setting for my config on 8x 1080ti and was wondering, thanks.

sure.. the 12 GPU rig is split into three instances/groupings of 4 GPUs each, with the -d flag
This allows me to test three miners simultaneously.

Each instance/grouping hashes somewhere between 70-80MH/s on average. I didn't want to set the diff too low so I just went with 80MH/s / 2 = 40

jugger1028

jr. member

Activity: 213

Merit: 3

Jackit, can you explain this part on your stratum difficulty test? Static stratum diff set to 40 (~Mh/s / 2), if you're running 12 1080ti, I would have thought your mh/s would be closer to ~228 mh/s? I'm trying to gauge my difficulty setting for my config on 8x 1080ti and was wondering, thanks.

Cage1121

newbie

Activity: 3

Merit: 0

Great test.

bubbAJoe

newbie

Activity: 64

Merit: 0

Quote from: platinum4 on May 11, 2018, 09:57:13 PM

Quote from: buzzkillb on May 11, 2018, 08:24:27 PM

Quote from: platinum4 on May 10, 2018, 08:48:55 PM

Quote from: sp_ on May 10, 2018, 10:13:39 AM

x16r / x16s spmod-git4a has been released. Free no fee, more speed.

https://github.com/sp-hash/suprminer/releases

now you can run your test vs 1.09

Significantly deflated EXE size versus normal ccminer, can this do skunk and tribus? Those run faster on the fatter 43mb ones.

gitmod 4a the 8MB kind is messed up; probably should recompile

oh it cant take i 21.5 now, it maxes at i 21.0625

sp-mod from above link appears faster on tribus then tpruvots latest ccminer.

It is faster hashrate-wise but the increased power draw actually makes the profitability lower than tpruvot

Huh? I haven't seen any additional power draw from any of the SP mods. What are you using to measure power? How much more of a power draw are you seeing? What / how many GPUs?

platinum4

sr. member

Activity: 547

Merit: 250

Quote from: buzzkillb on May 11, 2018, 08:24:27 PM

Quote from: platinum4 on May 10, 2018, 08:48:55 PM

Quote from: sp_ on May 10, 2018, 10:13:39 AM

x16r / x16s spmod-git4a has been released. Free no fee, more speed.

https://github.com/sp-hash/suprminer/releases

now you can run your test vs 1.09

Significantly deflated EXE size versus normal ccminer, can this do skunk and tribus? Those run faster on the fatter 43mb ones.

gitmod 4a the 8MB kind is messed up; probably should recompile

oh it cant take i 21.5 now, it maxes at i 21.0625

sp-mod from above link appears faster on tribus then tpruvots latest ccminer.

It is faster hashrate-wise but the increased power draw actually makes the profitability lower than tpruvot

Jounouchi

newbie

Activity: 6

Merit: 0

Quote from: platinum4 on May 10, 2018, 08:48:55 PM

Quote from: sp_ on May 10, 2018, 10:13:39 AM

x16r / x16s spmod-git4a has been released. Free no fee, more speed.

https://github.com/sp-hash/suprminer/releases

now you can run your test vs 1.09

Significantly deflated EXE size versus normal ccminer, can this do skunk and tribus? Those run faster on the fatter 43mb ones.

gitmod 4a the 8MB kind is messed up; probably should recompile

oh it cant take i 21.5 now, it maxes at i 21.0625

Same situation here, 4 still the best among of sp_'s works.

buzzkillb

sr. member

Activity: 1021

Merit: 324

Quote from: platinum4 on May 10, 2018, 08:48:55 PM

Quote from: sp_ on May 10, 2018, 10:13:39 AM

x16r / x16s spmod-git4a has been released. Free no fee, more speed.

https://github.com/sp-hash/suprminer/releases

now you can run your test vs 1.09

Significantly deflated EXE size versus normal ccminer, can this do skunk and tribus? Those run faster on the fatter 43mb ones.

gitmod 4a the 8MB kind is messed up; probably should recompile

oh it cant take i 21.5 now, it maxes at i 21.0625

sp-mod from above link appears faster on tribus then tpruvots latest ccminer.

abanamat

jr. member

Activity: 274

Merit: 1

Tried on 2 different PCs, sp-mod is buggy. Makes errors.

platinum4

sr. member

Activity: 547

Merit: 250

Quote from: sp_ on May 10, 2018, 10:13:39 AM

x16r / x16s spmod-git4a has been released. Free no fee, more speed.

https://github.com/sp-hash/suprminer/releases

now you can run your test vs 1.09

Significantly deflated EXE size versus normal ccminer, can this do skunk and tribus? Those run faster on the fatter 43mb ones.

gitmod 4a the 8MB kind is messed up; probably should recompile

oh it cant take i 21.5 now, it maxes at i 21.0625

JackIT

jr. member

Activity: 99

Merit: 8

sp-mod git4a Vs. Enemy 1.08 Vs. Enemy 1.09a

For this test I used a single 12 GPU 1080Ti rig on Windows 10, split into three mining instances. All three mining instances were balanced to get as close to the same hash rate as possible.
Each mining instance is running at the same time on the same machine mining on the same pool.

All three instances have intensity set to 21, GPU target power set to 100%, no overclocking.

Static stratum diff set to 40 (~Mh/s / 2)

The instances/rig are managed by Awesome Miner, which restarts the miners for various reasons, based on rules I set.

The plan is to do three rounds of testing, each round lasting approximately 8-12hrs, at the conclusion of each round I'll rotate the miner to a new instance, until each miner has had a chance to run on each instance.
I'll then normalize the results to averaged blocks found per round, so that each instance/round is represented equally.

Miners tested:
Enemy 1.09a - 1% dev fee
Enemy 1.08 - 1% dev fee
sp-mod git4a - no dev fee

Results:

Round 1 - Duration 710 minutes - 165 blocks found (no restarts)

[Instance 1] Normalized: 116.71 RVN | Raw: 117.90 RVN - sp-mod - Pool Link
[Instance 2] Normalized: 123.48 RVN | Raw: 124.74 RVN - Enemy 1.08 - Pool Link
[Instance 3] Normalized: 12917 RVN | Raw: 130.49 RVN - Enemy 1.09 - Pool Link

Round 2 - Duration 602 minutes - 147 blocks found (no restarts)

[Instance 1] Normalized: 116.43 RVN | Raw: 104.79 RVN - Enemy 1.09 - Pool Link
[Instance 2] Normalized: 110.89 RVN | Raw: 99.28 RVN - sp-mod - Pool Link
[Instance 3] Normalized: 113.23 RVN | Raw: 101.91 RVN - Enemy 1.08 - Pool Link

Round 3 - Duration 723 minutes - 178 blocks found (no restarts)

[Instance 1] Normalized: 116.56 RVN | Raw: 127.03 RVN - Enemy 1.08 - Pool Link
[Instance 2] Normalized: 117.33 RVN | Raw: 127.87 RVN - Enemy 1.09 - Pool Link
[Instance 3] Normalized: 113.58 RVN | Raw: 123.78 RVN - sp-mod - Pool Link

Normalized Average Results

#1

*

JackIT

jr. member

Activity: 99

Merit: 8

Enemy 1.09a Pool / Stratum Difficulty Testing is complete:

Test Results

sp_

legendary

Activity: 2954

Merit: 1087

Team Black developer

x16r / x16s spmod-git4a has been released. Free no fee, more speed.

https://github.com/sp-hash/suprminer/releases

now you can run your test vs 1.09

Pages:

«
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
»

Bitcoin Forum>Alternate cryptocurrencies>Mining (Altcoins)

Jump to:

Topic: X16R - RVN - Miner head to head test log - page 2. (Read 7659 times)