FYI we have built a prototype plug in play CPU based home miner. Not sure if we are going to release it yet, but its essentially a CPU system shrunk to the minimum size possible, with custom BIOS and components optimized for  Random X and based off 3900.

Operation will be similar to Apollo, it runs off an embedded linux system with browser based GUI.

14KH/s @150 Watts at the wall using our custom PSU, in a quiet stackable 7x7x2.5 inch box. 

We will shortly release a Ethash miner testing tool, it's just a simple open source node.js project. You will be able to run controlled long-running tests on all miners. The reason this is important is that the displayed hashrates of Claymore and Phoenix are just bullshit. They both add +1.5% or more of fake hashrate. I don't ask anyone to buy these claims without being able to verify it themselves though, which is why we'll release the tool (which acts as a low diff fake pool with a static epoch and controlled job update mechanism) and everyone can see for themselves if they are willing to mine air for ~24h. To verify that we're not insane, we've also reverse engineered both miners, analysed their kernels, traced their OpenCL enqueue calls, and the evidence is clear.

Plenty of people have already pointed this out just by logging all shares over time, but it's really hard to prove anything. You need controlled runs of (preferably) 1 million shares, which is more or less impossible without controlling the environment properly. Another simple way is just to find a big farm from e.g. the frontpage of ethermine.org (found blocks) and check the difference between their reported and accepted hashrate.

Here is one example: https://ethermine.org/miners/6F714AaAAF72977267601cC1cADC49fb3966Ff89/dashboard

Reported: 3.206 TH/s, Accepted: 3.111 TH/s, difference -2.97%. I'm fairly certain this is Phoenix miner. Why do we have a diff of -3%? The dev fee is 0.65%, and there are 1% stale shares, and this is a HUGE sample set that should converge nicely. Contrary to what people seem to believe, the additional -1.35% just should _not_ disappear. For comparison, here is a run using our soon-to-be-released testing tool for 247k shares on Phoenix 4.7c:

Code:

Hashrates for 1 active connections:
    Global hashrate: 228.51 MH/s vs 235.43 MH/s avg reported [diff -2.94%] (A247366:S1575:R0 shares, 93582 secs)
    Global stats: 99.37% acc, 0.63% stale, 0% rej.
    [1] hashrate:  228.51 MH/s vs 235.43 MH/s avg reported [diff -2.94%] (A247366:S1575:R0 shares, 93582 secs)


Look at that, a diff of -2.94% between the reported and accepted hashrate, what a coincidence? To be fair though, 247k shares is only good for a +-0.5% estimate at 99% confidence, so we must treat the value accordingly. The point is that neither CM nor PM can never ever produce a poolside hashrate over time that matches their displayed hashrates.

Sorry for a long rant to your simple question, the bigger point I'm trying to make is this: unless miners start accepting that CM and PM are bullshitting their displayed hashrates, "comparing" CM/PM/TRM/Ethminer is pointless, you'll just be stating that CM and PM are much better than what they really are.

he to smart but not read your post or have 6 years and not learn * and / in matematic
btw. nice score - 12,6HR/wat is good. samsung rules- hynix bad

Still too much. ;-)

4x watercooled Vega 56 with Vega 64 BIOS, 1401/975MHz 810-820mV in ODNT, ~8200Hs pulling 650W from the wall:

https://i.ibb.co/z8Lwrs7/Quad-Vega56-XMR.png

What is the power consumption for the Vega rig? How much is one GPU consuming through the wall?
My 6x VEGA 56 Rig is doing 12000 H/s (v4 monero) with 1500W from the wall.
Isn't it much? In the previous algo it used to consume 1250-1300W from the wall for the same hashrate.

who are you?

you say this and i insult you? go get treated. how old are you? 6 years?

You have ignore a little under my name and ignore me

sry. Doctor knows very well why I do this


http://imgbox.com/vNHF2cqb
3 hour is better?

2*vega 56@64bios + 1Vega64LE CNR = 7100HR 650/680W from the wall.
http://imgbox.com/mPcBek9D

This might have been answered but i cant find it, I keep getting "You must run miner with admin rights"

when i try the strap command , I am running it normal like i used to using the start.bat and the config files , any ideas

livada, could you share how you managed to fix the eio.dll issue?
I'm unable to send you a private message, as my account has a newbie status.

Thanks

Having tested version 1.7.1 I will say with confidence
for old pitcairn cards
  benchmark shows a huge drop on heavy, normalv7, normalv8,
stellitev4 test interrupted by message
Error CL_BUILD_PROGRAM_FAILURE when calling clBuildProgram [ctx-> Program] for DeviceID 0 (Thread 0)
[2018-11-23 17:25:04] GPU's Error initing. Stopping miner process
[2018-11-23 17:25:04] Stopping miner process
transition to kernel 2 did not give results
I am completely disappointed with the miner
great job