Pages:
Author

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

newbie
Activity: 39
Merit: 0
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. 
jr. member
Activity: 80
Merit: 2
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...
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?
newbie
Activity: 85
Merit: 0
Mega Like for this topic!
However, im concerned about efficiency per Watt, try with 65% ~ 80%PL
sr. member
Activity: 798
Merit: 252
Insane In The Blockchain ⚠
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.
jr. member
Activity: 80
Merit: 2
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?
newbie
Activity: 10
Merit: 0


.......

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

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..  Smiley
jr. member
Activity: 99
Merit: 8
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
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.
newbie
Activity: 3
Merit: 0
Great test.
newbie
Activity: 64
Merit: 0
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?
sr. member
Activity: 547
Merit: 250
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
newbie
Activity: 6
Merit: 0
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.
sr. member
Activity: 1021
Merit: 324
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.
jr. member
Activity: 274
Merit: 1
Tried on 2 different PCs, sp-mod is buggy. Makes errors.
sr. member
Activity: 547
Merit: 250
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
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
*
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:
Jump to:
© 2020, Bitcointalksearch.org