Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Merits 1 from 1 user
Re: Grin | Cuckoo POW | Benchmarking from c29 to c31 | Everything you need to know
by
bakermining76
on 18/02/2019, 21:02:58 UTC
⭐ Merited by vapourminer (1)
Did you confirm your hashrate poolside?



Running on sparkpool, with a nice average, using GMiner 1.3.1 on 4 X 1080ti's mining c29.
That would make it 6.5 G/s+ AVERAGE per ti. Reward wise as expected.
It could be your pool. You should try another one.

Firstly, I made a mistake in my prior post. I intended to say Bminer showed 6.0 gps (not 5.6gps), but poolside, I got 6.1 gps. You mentioned in your prior post that you were getting a solid 7.1 gps per card, but this post shows you're getting 6.5 gps poolside - that was my whole point. Gminer shows significantly higher hashrates than the pool, while other miners do not and/or it is less pronounced.


Rather than spewing numbers about, I'd encourage you to continue testing. I've tested Luxor, F2pool, sparkpool, and Grinmint using Minerbabe's Kbminer, Bminer, Gminer, and Grinminer on Linux (mostly SMOS) plus Bminer, Gminer, and Grinpro on Windows 10. I've done some with a P106 x6 rig + 2 1080s, 2 1080 Ti's, a 2070, and a 2080 Ti in various configurations. (Side note: Every time I add 20xx cards to a rig with 10xx cards on SMOS, one 10xx card fan will stop working correctly, so I have to separate them). I'm located in the southeast US, and in every test I've conducted, Luxor has shown lower rejects and higher reported hashrates than F2pool, sparkpool, on grinmint (in that order). Additionally, Gminer has always shown a higher hashrate than reported poolside, and Bminer has always shown a lower or equal hashrate to that reported poolside.

If you are only going to use Windows, I've found that, for my circumstances on the pools I've tried and the cards I have, Bminer 14.0+ shows better results than Gminer 1.31.