how to do failover?
This is how:
https://app.box.com/s/fcr463xucjalwmkkspdxcszy4qjkoh8l
Topic: Zealot/Enemy (z-enemy) NVIDIA GPU miner (ver2.6.2 - kawpow RavenCoin). - page 39. (Read 107022 times)
April 27, 2018, 07:05:01 AM
April 27, 2018, 02:57:28 AM
how to do failover?
April 27, 2018, 02:03:02 AM
I use this and one other miner and these two forks are awesome. I don't mind the dev fee because the increase in hash rate is considerably higher. But this is where I stumble.... I don't know the first thing about overclocking.
I asked this in one other thread, so I am hoping to get a hit, but sorry about my poor netiquitte.
I have a Gigabyte Gaming 1070 Ti and a MSI 960. I am currently using the AORUS software to do the OC'ing with their preset "Overclock" function. I can and have used MSI Afterburner, but sadly I really don't know the first thing about what I should look for and how to establish stability with low risk.
I don't mind if the wattage goes up a little (electricity is pretty cheap), but I do want the hashrate to go up considerably. All I really want to know is what setting should I use that others may have had some success with.
The only other algo I really use is Neoscrypt (which is more memory intensive).
I asked this in one other thread, so I am hoping to get a hit, but sorry about my poor netiquitte.
I have a Gigabyte Gaming 1070 Ti and a MSI 960. I am currently using the AORUS software to do the OC'ing with their preset "Overclock" function. I can and have used MSI Afterburner, but sadly I really don't know the first thing about what I should look for and how to establish stability with low risk.
I don't mind if the wattage goes up a little (electricity is pretty cheap), but I do want the hashrate to go up considerably. All I really want to know is what setting should I use that others may have had some success with.
The only other algo I really use is Neoscrypt (which is more memory intensive).
April 26, 2018, 06:02:19 PM
I'm with you guys since firsts versions. The best miner ever for x16r!
April 26, 2018, 10:39:35 AM
Hi
I've been using your miner since v1.03. Why did you removed support for x17 algo which is available in older versions.
I've been using your miner since v1.03. Why did you removed support for x17 algo which is available in older versions.
April 26, 2018, 06:14:39 AM
Yes, try --api-remote and/or --api-allow= ( simple 0/0 )
Thanks. Adding --api-allow = 0/0 did the trick.
April 25, 2018, 07:58:39 PM
did anyone compare enemy x16r miner vs others?
I mean not just estimated amounts, but real tests and figures?
I`m still thinking to switch but a little bit worried on closed source code.
I mean not just estimated amounts, but real tests and figures?
I`m still thinking to switch but a little bit worried on closed source code.
Yes, you have a separate thread for that.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/x16r-rvn-miner-head-to-head-test-log-3385643
But does it realy makes sence with this OC settings descibed in this thread?
I thought x16r is more intensive with +core OC, but not the memory?
April 25, 2018, 02:46:04 PM
I don't want to accuse someone of cheating because i didn't conduct real tests but pool graph is showing less hashrate than the miner (phi algo).
5x1080Ti, fluctuating around 150Mhs, Zergpool, i=20 (no OC, stock settings)
Anyway, keep up the good work, x16r and x16s definitely the fastest out there we are waiting forward for new releases!
5x1080Ti, fluctuating around 150Mhs, Zergpool, i=20 (no OC, stock settings)
Anyway, keep up the good work, x16r and x16s definitely the fastest out there we are waiting forward for new releases!
I am having the same problem. Locally I get "X" hashrate but at the pool I get about 10/15% less. Tested with PHI and with X16R. Tested 2 different pools. Always the same problem
This is usual and occurs on these algos. The way to get close is by setting a static difficulty and slowing raising it until you get very close to console side hashrate. After tuning my static difficulty i am within 5% of console side hashrate on the 24 hours average hashrate.
April 25, 2018, 07:50:23 AM
did anyone compare enemy x16r miner vs others?
I mean not just estimated amounts, but real tests and figures?
I`m still thinking to switch but a little bit worried on closed source code.
I mean not just estimated amounts, but real tests and figures?
I`m still thinking to switch but a little bit worried on closed source code.
Yes, you have a separate thread for that.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/x16r-rvn-miner-head-to-head-test-log-3385643
April 25, 2018, 07:34:56 AM
@enemy ...
No Centos 7 x64 or Fedora 27 x64 still?
We can help compile it, or even give instructions on how to if you are unfamiliar with the OS.
The 'linux' distribution of your binary is NOT based on RHEL and therefore does not work in RHEL based OS Distributions.
Let me know mate.
#crysx
No Centos 7 x64 or Fedora 27 x64 still?
We can help compile it, or even give instructions on how to if you are unfamiliar with the OS.
The 'linux' distribution of your binary is NOT based on RHEL and therefore does not work in RHEL based OS Distributions.
Let me know mate.
#crysx
April 25, 2018, 07:25:45 AM
did anyone compare enemy x16r miner vs others?
I mean not just estimated amounts, but real tests and figures?
I`m still thinking to switch but a little bit worried on closed source code.
I mean not just estimated amounts, but real tests and figures?
I`m still thinking to switch but a little bit worried on closed source code.
April 25, 2018, 06:07:46 AM
I’m sure about static diff . Like you see test show 175 (MH/s) on pool side, not 150. And yes, minus 3-5% is ok for any miner. Bad ping, slate shares/ rejects. But over 10% - something wrong can be on pool side, bad internet connection, autodiff, etc... 
April 25, 2018, 05:21:36 AM
I don't want to accuse someone of cheating because i didn't conduct real tests but pool graph is showing less hashrate than the miner (phi algo).
5x1080Ti, fluctuating around 150Mhs, Zergpool, i=20 (no OC, stock settings)
https://pictr.com/images/2018/04/24/56c8de47ccf6e8215b87b07ca9d54bbf.jpg
Anyway, keep up the good work, x16r and x16s definitely the fastest out there we are waiting forward for new releases!
5x1080Ti, fluctuating around 150Mhs, Zergpool, i=20 (no OC, stock settings)
https://pictr.com/images/2018/04/24/56c8de47ccf6e8215b87b07ca9d54bbf.jpg
Anyway, keep up the good work, x16r and x16s definitely the fastest out there we are waiting forward for new releases!
I am having the same problem. Locally I get "X" hashrate but at the pool I get about 10/15% less. Tested with PHI and with X16R. Tested 2 different pools. Always the same problem
Was no one bug report on phi in our test discord , but anyway we set farm 5x 1080ti static diff -d=0.288 (online)
https://bsod.pw/?address=LZTPCXwwuFUzLqbi2XPqfXsv9HVwDALgM4
And thanks. Checking...
Are you sure about difficulty set? Mine was at 0.72 (Usually I start the miner without difficulty set, run it for a couple of hours and check the difficulty set by the pool on my wallet page. Then i write that diff in my bat file for future instances.)
April 25, 2018, 02:10:25 AM
Yes, try --api-remote and/or --api-allow= ( simple 0/0 )
April 24, 2018, 08:55:55 PM
I'm running HIVE OS and upgraded my first 3 rigs to HIVE OS 0.5-47, which includes z-enemy 1.08. Those rigs are no longer reachable from Awesome Miner.
My HIVE OS still starts the miner with api-bind: 0.0.0.0:4068, but there's nobody home when Awesome Miner tries to connect.
I was running ccminer-enemy 1.0.5 before under HIVE OS with no API issues.
What gives? Does z-enemy 1.08 not support api?
My HIVE OS still starts the miner with api-bind: 0.0.0.0:4068, but there's nobody home when Awesome Miner tries to connect.
I was running ccminer-enemy 1.0.5 before under HIVE OS with no API issues.
What gives? Does z-enemy 1.08 not support api?
April 24, 2018, 05:48:45 PM
I don't want to accuse someone of cheating because i didn't conduct real tests but pool graph is showing less hashrate than the miner (phi algo).
5x1080Ti, fluctuating around 150Mhs, Zergpool, i=20 (no OC, stock settings)
Anyway, keep up the good work, x16r and x16s definitely the fastest out there we are waiting forward for new releases!
5x1080Ti, fluctuating around 150Mhs, Zergpool, i=20 (no OC, stock settings)
Anyway, keep up the good work, x16r and x16s definitely the fastest out there we are waiting forward for new releases!
I am having the same problem. Locally I get "X" hashrate but at the pool I get about 10/15% less. Tested with PHI and with X16R. Tested 2 different pools. Always the same problem
Was no one bug report on phi in our test discord , but anyway we set farm 5x 1080ti static diff -d=0.288 (online)
https://bsod.pw/?address=LZTPCXwwuFUzLqbi2XPqfXsv9HVwDALgM4
And thanks. Checking...
April 24, 2018, 05:16:13 PM
Can You Solo Mine with it? if not - will it ever be implemented?
April 24, 2018, 01:23:04 PM
I don't want to accuse someone of cheating because i didn't conduct real tests but pool graph is showing less hashrate than the miner (phi algo).
5x1080Ti, fluctuating around 150Mhs, Zergpool, i=20 (no OC, stock settings)
Anyway, keep up the good work, x16r and x16s definitely the fastest out there we are waiting forward for new releases!
5x1080Ti, fluctuating around 150Mhs, Zergpool, i=20 (no OC, stock settings)
Anyway, keep up the good work, x16r and x16s definitely the fastest out there we are waiting forward for new releases!
I am having the same problem. Locally I get "X" hashrate but at the pool I get about 10/15% less. Tested with PHI and with X16R. Tested 2 different pools. Always the same problem
April 24, 2018, 09:07:33 AM
Mining with 1080 Ti (MSI Trio):
* LUX (phi)
37,x MH/s @OC: 80% TDP, +150 Core, +/-0 Mem - 58° C Temp
* BTX (bitcore)
34,x MH/s @OC: 80% TDP, +150 Core, +/-0 Mem - 58° C Temp
* LUX (phi)
37,x MH/s @OC: 80% TDP, +150 Core, +/-0 Mem - 58° C Temp
* BTX (bitcore)
34,x MH/s @OC: 80% TDP, +150 Core, +/-0 Mem - 58° C Temp
April 24, 2018, 07:27:07 AM
for each 1080 ti mining phi i get :
ccminer - 1080 ti 35.29 MH/s
Zealot - 1080 ti 39.60 MH/s
well this miner worth the 1% dev fee, well done
ccminer - 1080 ti 35.29 MH/s
Zealot - 1080 ti 39.60 MH/s
well this miner worth the 1% dev fee, well done
Jump to: