Search content
Sort by
Showing 6 of 6 results by dug03
so in the image with red font. u can see difference in power between version .2 and .3 .. .3 is a tad bit better. but in all my pc's with different mobos. different video cards different PSU's, all have now jagged lines. why is this happening.... im not gonna use another miner. but does anyone have a fix to smooth these teeth out?
can we get pics of others power lines on these algo's cause my whole entire lot, just now has this issue. and i know it's either a tweak i need to do, or miner just needs time to mature
? any ideas. again im working on BTG new fork 144_5
I'm also concerned about erratic power and GPU load with new EWBF on new equihash (BTG 144,5).
I tried both v0.2 and 0.3 and GTX 1070 at different clocks (including stocks) - the same result; as seen on the picture (right panel on the picture):
https://imgur.com/a/Uk0ziPs
Older EWBF (0.3.4b) with older equihash is fine with the same cards (left panel on the picture).
EWBF, please comment
Actually, the miner is working fine, it's this new friggin algo.... it effin' sucks. I did same, adjusted intensity, clocks, fan speed.... I don't see the advantage and my proof is jumping on to Suprnova mining ZEC with my 1060x6's and even with the asics I'm mining much more than BTG and @ 100% efficiency. Power with 144,5 jumped 69%/86% constantly and all it did was keep pushing the gpu temp up.
- I would like to hear what folks are really getting in shares for @ least 12hrs mining and if they think the algo change was really worth it. Maybe the ZEC DEVs were right,, it isn't worth and... and now I agree.
Well mining older equihash (ZCL, ZEC, etc) is not profitable at the moment (or let's say you are missing profits by not mining something else). If you have a look at MPH estimates of profitability: BTG is 2x more profitable to mine then ZCL, and 1.5x then ether. Going for ZEC at suprnova is a really bad decision. If I cannot make EWBF work with new equihash (and I'm not accepting this power spikes and GPU load for BTG mining), i'll just mine ether.
That's why I'm gonna wait for more honest input as to actual mined BTG shares on the new algo, MPH has been great for me but the profit estimates have been way off lately. As far as ZEC on Suprnova right now I have a console full of "green" for the last 2 hours compared to the 4/5 per screen on BTG... so just curious what a day will produce with the zec since it's been a while since I mined it, using ewbf 3.3b
so in the image with red font. u can see difference in power between version .2 and .3 .. .3 is a tad bit better. but in all my pc's with different mobos. different video cards different PSU's, all have now jagged lines. why is this happening.... im not gonna use another miner. but does anyone have a fix to smooth these teeth out?
can we get pics of others power lines on these algo's cause my whole entire lot, just now has this issue. and i know it's either a tweak i need to do, or miner just needs time to mature
? any ideas. again im working on BTG new fork 144_5
I'm also concerned about erratic power and GPU load with new EWBF on new equihash (BTG 144,5).
I tried both v0.2 and 0.3 and GTX 1070 at different clocks (including stocks) - the same result; as seen on the picture (right panel on the picture):
https://imgur.com/a/Uk0ziPs
Older EWBF (0.3.4b) with older equihash is fine with the same cards (left panel on the picture).
EWBF, please comment
Actually, the miner is working fine, it's this new friggin algo.... it effin' sucks. I did same, adjusted intensity, clocks, fan speed.... I don't see the advantage and my proof is jumping on to Suprnova mining ZEC with my 1060x6's and even with the asics I'm mining much more than BTG and @ 100% efficiency. Power with 144,5 jumped 69%/86% constantly and all it did was keep pushing the gpu temp up.
- I would like to hear what folks are really getting in shares for @ least 12hrs mining and if they think the algo change was really worth it. Maybe the ZEC DEVs were right,, it isn't worth and... and now I agree.
1060x6 averaging 22Mh/s using older Dell server board G43T, Intel E8500 3.16GHz, 8GB sys mem (set to System manage), tuned with Intel XTU utility, 3 cards EVGA. EWBF easily connects and looks quite promising as usual. Waiting for correct block height and ready to mine! DEV FEE left intact, every other miner gets and EWBF deserves it! Hope the DEV sticks with this 0.2 miner and keeps it tuned! THANKS EWBF!!
EDIT: looks like we are @ 535842 Blkhgt now...
EDIT: looks like we are @ 535842 Blkhgt now...
What does it mean when you say DEV FEE left intact? Are we paying someone to use EWBF, sorry for the naive question.
Some keep asking about the No fee option as in --fee 0 used back in earlier versions, and I laugh because look how many suffer with the Claymore miners yet pay that fee.... so I pay the 2% EWBF fee. It takes time coding these miners...
Ok so it sounds like there is a fee. How is that being paid, through the miner program ? Is it a one time fee or ongoing?
I think it's explained in the v0.2 descript on page 1 but like all miners it will mine every so many minutes or hashes to the Dev pool (usually flypool or Nanopool) and that's fine, EWBF is honest...
1060x6 averaging 22Mh/s using older Dell server board G43T, Intel E8500 3.16GHz, 8GB sys mem (set to System manage), tuned with Intel XTU utility, 3 cards EVGA. EWBF easily connects and looks quite promising as usual. Waiting for correct block height and ready to mine! DEV FEE left intact, every other miner gets and EWBF deserves it! Hope the DEV sticks with this 0.2 miner and keeps it tuned! THANKS EWBF!!
EDIT: looks like we are @ 535842 Blkhgt now...
EDIT: looks like we are @ 535842 Blkhgt now...
What does it mean when you say DEV FEE left intact? Are we paying someone to use EWBF, sorry for the naive question.
Some keep asking about the No fee option as in --fee 0 used back in earlier versions, and I laugh because look how many suffer with the Claymore miners yet pay that fee.... so I pay the 2% EWBF fee. It takes time coding these miners...
1060x6 averaging 22Mh/s using older Dell server board G43T, Intel E8500 3.16GHz, 8GB sys mem (set to System manage), tuned with Intel XTU utility, 3 cards EVGA. EWBF easily connects and looks quite promising as usual. Waiting for correct block height and ready to mine! DEV FEE left intact, every other miner gets and EWBF deserves it! Hope the DEV sticks with this 0.2 miner and keeps it tuned! THANKS EWBF!!
EDIT: looks like we are @ 535842 Blkhgt now...
EDIT: looks like we are @ 535842 Blkhgt now...
Nice to see ya back!
Played with v0.2 today with 1060x6 ssc. I only mine btg/zec/zcl for equihash so mined on the run,bat as is for ~200shares. Most nvidia OC cards already start above base so w/stock clocks it mined 12-13S/s @ 97-104w with less than 110ms latency. All accepted with only 2 rejects. Was on the 192_7 algo of course. Nvidia driver 391.24 cuda 9.1. Any cc overclock reduced efficiency as well as mem oc had 0 effect. As soon as I backed off the OC's it moved to ~14S/s. As usual EWBF will work well when the other equihash move to newer algos imho...
Played with v0.2 today with 1060x6 ssc. I only mine btg/zec/zcl for equihash so mined on the run,bat as is for ~200shares. Most nvidia OC cards already start above base so w/stock clocks it mined 12-13S/s @ 97-104w with less than 110ms latency. All accepted with only 2 rejects. Was on the 192_7 algo of course. Nvidia driver 391.24 cuda 9.1. Any cc overclock reduced efficiency as well as mem oc had 0 effect. As soon as I backed off the OC's it moved to ~14S/s. As usual EWBF will work well when the other equihash move to newer algos imho...