Re: [ANN] Bminer: a fast Equihash miner for CUDA GPUs (5.2.0)

Quote from: snovik on January 31, 2018, 08:57:07 PM

Quote from: threeflappp on January 31, 2018, 04:18:13 PM

So I've been testing Bminer for a few days now and I am going back to DSTM's miner (zm).

First off, everyone else should be doing their own tests and make their own judgement. Take my results with a grain of salt. I started this test because I tried out no devfee option on this miner and saw pretty much no change whatsoever on the hash rate which was really strange.

Hardware: 5 x GTX 1070

Testing methodology: Start miner. Take note of Sol/s. Wait 24 hour. After the first 24 hour, take note of Debit AP. Wait another 24 hour, take note of Debit AP.

Note: Second Debit AP is what I used in this table to keep this short. Of course, testing for longer than this will give more accurate results but this is enough for me. DO YOUR OWN TEST.

Miner	Average Sols	Dev Fee	Payout Last 24HR
Bminer	2510	Yes	0.12886265
Bminer	2510	No	0.12936028
DSTM's (zm)	2440	Yes	0.14198767

As I said before, there's no difference in hash rate whether you're running with dev fee or not. During these tests, I check whattomine everyday for their 24 hour estimated rewards; it was around 0.145. This is just an estimation but I think it's a good guideline of what you should be paid as it has been accurate for me for months and months.

I think the hash rate shown is padded and I will be going back to DSTM's in the mean time.

Can other people test no devfee option? Anyone else keeping track of their payouts?

this is ridiculous. what kind of scientific methodology is that? decide for whatever you want if you play with random results.

go back in the thread. I was running both miners for 4 or 5 days on the same rig with the same system config and 4 same cards for each miner. This means that I averaged out most of if not all randomness which is there to average out. And I got ca. 6-7% better results from the pool hash rate stats and not some random debit credit which also depends on a hell lot of factors beyond your control.

really, before you post any message like that think whether you compare apples to apples or it is google to apples and then stop complaining about what you see. because you just cannot compare the way you do

Actually, threeflappp's testing methodology looks fine to me. A 24 hour test is more than sufficient if the pool finds blocks every few minutes and this length of time also corresponds to whattomine's estimated payout based on the average difficulty over the past 24 hours. Running the test for more than 1 day makes it much more difficult to track the average difficulty unless you consistently record actual and estimated payout amounts every day at the same time.

One last point: your overly defensive tone while being a newbie sure seems strange... Usually new members on a forum are well-advised to do more reading and less attacking.

EDIT - I should add that there is a critical component to threeflappp's test: what whattomine predicted the earnings should be for each 24 hour period. Without this info the test is completely and totally useless.