Quote from: Biodom on September 10, 2014, 04:52:18 PM

Quote from: pekatete on September 10, 2014, 04:02:29 PM

Quote from: Biodom on September 10, 2014, 03:07:08 PM

Quote from: pekatete on September 08, 2014, 04:14:19 PM

Quote from: Biodom on September 08, 2014, 04:09:32 PM

Could you report hash difference (if any) after 24hr?

I sure will (and that is why I said "still early days ...".

Well, it has been a few days. Can you report any increase in hashing on 4.6.0 in comparison with the stock version?
Thanks.

One thing that is still whirling away in my mind is why the same chip always comes trumps with the X? Also this may have something to do with power, as I am running the S3 off a 550 watt server PSU. If the unit is drawing anything over 460 watts, then that might be the reason.

I have one batch1 miner at 237.5 with one ASIC that always has the X, hence it is at 464-465Gh instead of 478Gh, but since it is still better than 441 at default, I let it be.

I suppose I could let it be, but it seems to be running per my "normal" now I have turned it down a notch and thus far a touch above the hash-rate I got when overclocked at the higher freq (with 4.6 upgrade).

This, however, is the proof of the pudding (to me at least) that 4.6 is worthy of getting, if not just for the security bug-fixes.

Quote from: dlasher on September 10, 2014, 03:32:15 PM

Couple of days of running under 4.6.0 now, and very happy. CPU load lower, and less hashrate variance.

BEFORE:

AFTER:

Thank you Con!

And the proverbial chicken and egg situation:
The smoother hash-rate variance is due to stable submissions thus accurate dynamic Diff allocation, or is it the other way round?