Search content
Sort by
Showing 8 of 8 results by mountaintoy
Re: [ANN] dstm's ZCash / Equihash Nvidia Miner v0.5.7 (Linux / Windows)
I have a question or two. Thru telemetry I check on my rig. And I just got home from work. Check my rig and it says uptime is 1 day and 8 hours. But there's Contime and that says 2 hour and some minutes. For being up for 1 day and 9 hours or so it only shows 2220 shares That's not normal.
Can someone help understand why such low shares and what Contime is?
Can someone help understand why such low shares and what Contime is?
I believe Contime is just the time since the last server reconnect. I don't think it's a big deal unless it happens a lot. Not sure about the shares though.
Re: [ANN] dstm's ZCash / Equihash Nvidia Miner v0.5.6 (Linux / Windows)
I had some problem with "Share above target " - Nicehash pool.
I have problem with stability too. Rig - 6 xdifferent type of 1070 cards, differnet OC. Maybe is problem OC, but I can not find good solution for rig yet.
With EWBF I have not problem at all. So I switched to ZM only for short time.
If I compare second rig /ZM and EWBF/ with my 1080ti cards - there is not difference for me.
Thanks for good job.
I have problem with stability too. Rig - 6 xdifferent type of 1070 cards, differnet OC. Maybe is problem OC, but I can not find good solution for rig yet.
With EWBF I have not problem at all. So I switched to ZM only for short time.
If I compare second rig /ZM and EWBF/ with my 1080ti cards - there is not difference for me.
Thanks for good job.
Code:
017-11-26 12:42:48|# GPU0 connected to: equihash.eu.nicehash.com:3357
Code:
2017-11-26 12:45:52|# GPU1 rejected share: [1,"Share above target.",null]
2017-11-26 12:45:52|# GPU3 server set difficulty to: 000f0f0f0f00000000000000...
2017-11-26 12:45:54|# GPU4 server set difficulty to: 000f0f0f0f00000000000000...
2017-11-26 12:45:58|> GPU0 71C Sol/s: 459.3 Sol/W: 3.65 Avg: 467.6 I/s: 249.4 Sh: 1.66 1.00 63 +
2017-11-26 12:45:59| GPU1 70C Sol/s: 497.2 Sol/W: 2.99 Avg: 495.2 I/s: 264.7 Sh: 2.66 0.88 63 ++
2017-11-26 12:46:00|# GPU3 rejected share: [1,"Share above target.",null]
2017-11-26 12:46:00|# GPU1 rejected share: [1,"Share above target.",null]
2017-11-26 12:46:01|> GPU2 67C Sol/s: 493.5 Sol/W: 3.01 Avg: 496.1 I/s: 265.1 Sh: 3.33 1.00 51
2017-11-26 12:46:03| GPU3 73C Sol/s: 505.1 Sol/W: 3.01 Avg: 495.3 I/s: 264.0 Sh: 2.33 0.86 47 +++
2017-11-26 12:46:05|> GPU4 66C Sol/s: 475.4 Sol/W: 3.70 Avg: 474.3 I/s: 251.8 Sh: 2.65 1.00 47 ++
2017-11-26 12:46:07| GPU5 64C Sol/s: 467.6 Sol/W: 3.09 Avg: 466.8 I/s: 249.6 Sh: 4.32 1.00 54
2017-11-26 12:46:07| ========== Sol/s: 2898.0 Sol/W: 3.24 Avg: 2895.4 I/s: 1544.6 Sh: 16.94 0.94 54
2017-11-26 12:46:15|# GPU1 rejected share: [1,"Share above target.",null]
2017-11-26 12:46:16|# GPU1 rejected share: [1,"Share above target.",null]
2017-11-26 12:46:16|# GPU3 rejected share: [1,"Share above target.",null]
2017-11-26 12:45:52|# GPU3 server set difficulty to: 000f0f0f0f00000000000000...
2017-11-26 12:45:54|# GPU4 server set difficulty to: 000f0f0f0f00000000000000...
2017-11-26 12:45:58|> GPU0 71C Sol/s: 459.3 Sol/W: 3.65 Avg: 467.6 I/s: 249.4 Sh: 1.66 1.00 63 +
2017-11-26 12:45:59| GPU1 70C Sol/s: 497.2 Sol/W: 2.99 Avg: 495.2 I/s: 264.7 Sh: 2.66 0.88 63 ++
2017-11-26 12:46:00|# GPU3 rejected share: [1,"Share above target.",null]
2017-11-26 12:46:00|# GPU1 rejected share: [1,"Share above target.",null]
2017-11-26 12:46:01|> GPU2 67C Sol/s: 493.5 Sol/W: 3.01 Avg: 496.1 I/s: 265.1 Sh: 3.33 1.00 51
2017-11-26 12:46:03| GPU3 73C Sol/s: 505.1 Sol/W: 3.01 Avg: 495.3 I/s: 264.0 Sh: 2.33 0.86 47 +++
2017-11-26 12:46:05|> GPU4 66C Sol/s: 475.4 Sol/W: 3.70 Avg: 474.3 I/s: 251.8 Sh: 2.65 1.00 47 ++
2017-11-26 12:46:07| GPU5 64C Sol/s: 467.6 Sol/W: 3.09 Avg: 466.8 I/s: 249.6 Sh: 4.32 1.00 54
2017-11-26 12:46:07| ========== Sol/s: 2898.0 Sol/W: 3.24 Avg: 2895.4 I/s: 1544.6 Sh: 16.94 0.94 54
2017-11-26 12:46:15|# GPU1 rejected share: [1,"Share above target.",null]
2017-11-26 12:46:16|# GPU1 rejected share: [1,"Share above target.",null]
2017-11-26 12:46:16|# GPU3 rejected share: [1,"Share above target.",null]
Thx for reporting, will check.
If it's any help I've seen this a couple times on usa.nicehash as well.
Code:
2017-11-26 4:57:11 AM|# GPU0 connected to: equihash.usa.nicehash.com:3357
Code:
2017-11-27 3:55:49 AM|# GPU0 server set difficulty to: 000f0f0f0f00000000000000...
2017-11-27 3:55:50 AM| GPU0 55C Sol/s: 499.2 Sol/W: 3.55 Avg: 506.7 I/s: 270.9 Sh: 2.75 1.00 75 +
2017-11-27 3:55:58 AM|# GPU0 rejected share: [1,"Share above target.",null]
2017-11-27 3:56:01 AM|# GPU0 rejected share: [1,"Share above target.",null]
2017-11-27 3:56:10 AM| GPU0 55C Sol/s: 502.0 Sol/W: 3.55 Avg: 506.5 I/s: 270.7 Sh: 2.98 0.93 70 +++
2017-11-27 3:56:14 AM|# GPU0 rejected share: [1,"Share above target.",null]
2017-11-27 3:56:24 AM|# GPU0 rejected share: [1,"Share above target.",null]
2017-11-27 3:56:30 AM| GPU0 55C Sol/s: 510.5 Sol/W: 3.55 Avg: 506.7 I/s: 270.8 Sh: 3.30 0.87 90 ++++
2017-11-27 3:55:50 AM| GPU0 55C Sol/s: 499.2 Sol/W: 3.55 Avg: 506.7 I/s: 270.9 Sh: 2.75 1.00 75 +
2017-11-27 3:55:58 AM|# GPU0 rejected share: [1,"Share above target.",null]
2017-11-27 3:56:01 AM|# GPU0 rejected share: [1,"Share above target.",null]
2017-11-27 3:56:10 AM| GPU0 55C Sol/s: 502.0 Sol/W: 3.55 Avg: 506.5 I/s: 270.7 Sh: 2.98 0.93 70 +++
2017-11-27 3:56:14 AM|# GPU0 rejected share: [1,"Share above target.",null]
2017-11-27 3:56:24 AM|# GPU0 rejected share: [1,"Share above target.",null]
2017-11-27 3:56:30 AM| GPU0 55C Sol/s: 510.5 Sol/W: 3.55 Avg: 506.7 I/s: 270.8 Sh: 3.30 0.87 90 ++++
Re: [ANN] dstm's ZCash / Equihash Nvidia Miner v0.5.6 (Linux / Windows)
The new version is working great after reworking my overclock. The oc I had been using with previous versions was causing the miner to crash. Reducing the oc managed to keep about the same rate while slightly increasing efficiency from about 3.3 Sol/W to about 3.5.
Keep up the good work.
Code:
ID DEVICE NAME °C ∅ Sol/s ∅ Sol/W ∅ Watt
0 GeForce GTX 1070 55 498.70 3.53 141.56
0 GeForce GTX 1070 55 498.70 3.53 141.56
Keep up the good work.
What settings are you using and what card is it?
MSI Gaming X
+150 clock +610 mem 60% power
Efficiency is a little better at 60%, rate is closer to 510 Sol/s at 70% power.
What drivers are you using. My card is Gigabyte G1 and with this settings i get 470 sols max. Drivers 388.13.
Tnx
I'm using the same drivers. 388.13
Is it possible your card has a lower base speed?
Afterburner displays my memory as 4428MHz (+625) and GPU bounces around from 1848-1886MHz (+150) and voltage is around .889mV
Re: [ANN] dstm's ZCash / Equihash Nvidia Miner v0.5.6 (Linux / Windows)
I'm having issues with memory errors after 6 hours, is there a restart script i can use in my .bat ?
Look at previous pages, there is alot of scripts examples.
The new version is working great after reworking my overclock. The oc I had been using with previous versions was causing the miner to crash. Reducing the oc managed to keep about the same rate while slightly increasing efficiency from about 3.3 Sol/W to about 3.5.
Keep up the good work.
Code:
ID DEVICE NAME °C ∅ Sol/s ∅ Sol/W ∅ Watt
0 GeForce GTX 1070 55 498.70 3.53 141.56
0 GeForce GTX 1070 55 498.70 3.53 141.56
Keep up the good work.
What settings are you using and what card is it?
MSI Gaming X
+150 clock +610 mem 60% power
Efficiency is a little better at 60%, rate is closer to 510 Sol/s at 70% power.
3.53sols/w is pretty low tbh, except if you have great electricity price, my rigs have between 4.2 and 4.3s/w efficiency.
You're right, it's not the most efficient. You've definitely been working on efficiency more than I have. I can get to 3.9 s/w by dropping the clock speed and lowering the power a bit more, but electricity is pretty cheap here and I've been using it to heat the room it's in. I turn the power up when it gets cool and turn it down when it's warm unless I'm testing.
I'm only running a single card for now. When I pick up a few more cards heat and power consumption will be a bigger issue.
Re: [ANN] dstm's ZCash / Equihash Nvidia Miner v0.5.6 (Linux / Windows)
The new version is working great after reworking my overclock. The oc I had been using with previous versions was causing the miner to crash. Reducing the oc managed to keep about the same rate while slightly increasing efficiency from about 3.3 Sol/W to about 3.5.
Keep up the good work.
Code:
ID DEVICE NAME °C ∅ Sol/s ∅ Sol/W ∅ Watt
0 GeForce GTX 1070 55 498.70 3.53 141.56
0 GeForce GTX 1070 55 498.70 3.53 141.56
Keep up the good work.
What settings are you using and what card is it?
MSI Gaming X
+150 clock +610 mem 60% power
Efficiency is a little better at 60%, rate is closer to 510 Sol/s at 70% power.
Re: [ANN] dstm's ZCash / Equihash Nvidia Miner v0.5.6 (Linux / Windows)
The new version is working great after reworking my overclock. The oc I had been using with previous versions was causing the miner to crash. Reducing the oc managed to keep about the same rate while slightly increasing efficiency from about 3.3 Sol/W to about 3.5.
Keep up the good work.
Code:
ID DEVICE NAME °C ∅ Sol/s ∅ Sol/W ∅ Watt
0 GeForce GTX 1070 55 498.70 3.53 141.56
0 GeForce GTX 1070 55 498.70 3.53 141.56
Keep up the good work.
Re: [ANN] dstm's ZCash / Equihash Nvidia Miner v0.5.4 (Linux / Windows)
Here's mine for what it's worth. Efficiency isn't quite as good, but it's stable enough for a little web browsing on the side. Using the Voltage/Frequency curve seems to be a little more stable for me. 1070 Gaming X
https://imgur.com/8EmeqnT
https://imgur.com/8EmeqnT
Re: [ANN] dstm's ZCash / Equihash Nvidia Miner v0.5.3 (Linux / Windows)
I wasn't aware so many of you are using overclocked/unstable systems, however I'm currently working on an GPU responsiveness infrastructure - so this kind of things will improve.
Everyone has to overclock/underclock in order to max the profit,...most of the miners love to push the cards to their limit,...i personally love to find the perfect balance for each card,...ideal performance/watt ratio,...but in both scenarios you need a stable miner, which is flexible for stock and overclock/underclock settings,...it has to be stable otherwise it's no good,...that's the main reason I'm still sticking with ewbf,...because it's unstable on higher clocks,...but it has a good potential
There is some misunderstanding here, it's not the miner that gets unstable, it's the hardware that gets unstable if you overclock it.
I'm curious what OC settings people are needing to change vs EWBF. The settings I use for EWBF are just as stable with a slightly higher rate on this one.
I'm running a single 1070 OC'd and slightly undervolted getting about 500-502 Sol/s.