Quote from: oliwer21 on September 17, 2017, 07:24:51 AM

"Run linux" dev said the want support small miners and now "run linux"
There was not such problem with 7000block and even ddos. Prolem is with updates, what happend so special that dev must reduce windows hash on last update? BTW even your xeon-w3503_01 have 2x my ryzen 1700X (80% cpu usage, 37ghz all core) hasrate2... do you think it normal. Where all work from my cpu goes?
i don't want unpolite but miner vultr_debian4 is now in top 10 since 2-3 days, before never... who's this machine?(simple answer).
"We have an incredibly responsive Dev" Yes, for linux. They ignore ALL questions for past 3-4 days from windows users about hash rate. I now that bible_pay is running linux and he dont care windows...
BTW im not angry... i want just get atention of devs to get answers for questions that i make and other windows users. I only want to get through their "ignorance wall" ;P
P.S. Do You know why some users(on laderborad) have 8k HPS and 38k HPS2 and other with 36K HPS get also 38 HPS2?

First off, I have a misnamed worker. My W3503 is what the box started but I upgraded the chip to a X5650, at the time the pool was so flakely I was scared to change the worker name to reflect it's actual chip and then I forgot when the pool got more or less stable. So my W3503 is a X5650 six core, 12 thread chip. I also think the hashps in Windows is a bit off on the display side. That w3503 worker (X5650 chip) runs Win7, shows 9KhS but routinely pulls 20KhS or better in H2pS (usually above 25K). It's been running long enough to discount luck. So in part, I think some of the issue is internal reporting is off, but your actual work rate is higher.

My actual Linux X5650 is xeon_linux01 and it shows 44KhS but only pulls 28K H2pS on average. Sure, that's a decent margin, but I'm running a very stripped down version of Xubuntu off a USB, so I would expect a somewhat higher actual rate. Windows is pretty bloated in that regard and it can only be a drag on performance. So on average, my Linux box is about 15% faster. That's certainly within the realm of reason.

The Dev is overloaded. We basically have a one-man coin (he has some support from a few others but for the most part the buck stops with him). Right now, the priorities should be wallet stability which is very dependent on pool stability. And pool stability is very dependent on anti-DDOS. So these are rightly the priorities.

In the end, you can install or upgrade the windows version in probably 3 minutes flat. If you want to spend 2 hours to gain 15%, follow the Linux Installation instructions, hope you don't miss a step and go for it. Until the wallet is stable though, you're looking at an hour or better every time there is a wallet update to upgrade your Linux. But really, the difference is not nearly as significant in the real world as the hashps report shows. So it's shouldn't be a very high priority against the weight of those other items.