Quote from: Matthew_Nanopool on July 31, 2018, 12:50:25 PM

Quote from: lamboholic on July 27, 2018, 08:33:25 AM

Hi community,

New test as promised. Now its Minerall.io vs. NanoPool

https://minerall.io/minerstats/0x72a5c922ade85b799664347e50dd0acdd838c14a 0.0913 ETH

https://eth.nanopool.org/account/0x72a5c922ade85b799664347e50dd0acdd838c14a 0.06234010 ETH

Minerall stats

NanoPoll stats

Of course, everything depends on a pool luck rate. The Minerall's pool started worse, but then managed to catch up and overtake NanoPool. The test is now finished. Any suggestion which pools to compare next?

Hi there,

You have to also take into account your Average and Last reported hash-rate discrepancy on Nanopool. According to the screenshot you attached,
your 6 hour Average H/s was 119.4 whereas your Last reported H/s was 186 (see your Nanopool account). Basically instead of getting paid for your actual
hash-rate, you were getting for 119.4 only, which was the reason, I guess, why you got less.

PS: Your Last reported and Average hash-rate have to be close to each other, otherwise there is something wrong (10% discrepancy is acceptable).

Hi there,
Thanks for your reply. But need to clarify. I had two totally similar rigs, each on 180MH/s. How it could happened that Nanopool didn't see part of my hash-rate?