[ANN][AUTO-SWITCH] Profit-switch auto-exchange pool: CleverMining.com

[Flep182]

Have you tried already at 700 Mhz?

[suchmoon]

Looking for some input on this, and wanted to post here to see if any of you are also experiencing this issue with CM.

I purchased a few gridseeds and pointed one to CM when standing these up to test and implement.  Rarely do I get any accepted shares on this pool (maybe 2 or 3 every 15 minutes), have many rejected and it is just detecting new blocks over and over without receiving or submitting work.

These are my settings:

cgminer.exe --scrypt -o stratum+tcp://us.clevermining.com:3333 -u btcaddress -p xx --gridseed-options=baud=115200,freq=850,chips=5 --hotplug 30

Basically default.  I am using the cgminer version supplied by GAWMiners on a laptop and used Zadig to install the USB drivers so the miners could be recognized, device manager shows it as a Universal Serial Bus Device STM32 Virtual COM Port.  If I close cgminer and reopen, every time the dual miners are not recognized.  If I have to or need to restart cgminer, I have to close it, unplug the miners from the laptop, wait 15 seconds and plug back in then launch cgminer to detect.  I am not using a USB hub.  Not sure if this info is relevant. 

If I run the miners with WeMineLTC.com, I get all Accepted shares with their var diff, so we are assuming the diff with the multi pools is the problem.  Are we all just SOL when it comes to multi pool mining with these?  I see a lot of posts regarding the dual miners and CM but no resolution as of yet unless I am missing it in my searches.

You have 30k accepted in about 1.5 hours. That's >360 KH/s if my math is correct. In other words you are doing fine. Yes you'll see fewer accepts and more diff changes/work restarts/etc, that's how this pool works due to higher difficulty and coin switching. This will not affect your earnings.

[suchmoon]

Don't know what to say about the scarce accepted rate though... I don't have gridseeds.

They're just slow. 360 KH/s at diff 512 means an accepted share every ~90 seconds on average I think. Nothing to worry about.

[bitlind]

Ok thank you for clearing that up, so basically I an interpreting what I see wrong... ok I'm stupid and learning.  thanks guys

I guess what concerned me was the difference I was seeing when mining on wemineltc.  Rejects are extremely low, and accepted shares sent are much more rapid, but I guess that has to do with the difficulty and the work being given to the miner?  Like I said, still learning



All of this is expected...

[alienesb]

Are we doing any Shibecoin mining?

[suchmoon]

Ok thank you for clearing that up, so basically I an interpreting what I see wrong... ok I'm stupid and learning.  thanks guys

I guess what concerned me was the difference I was seeing when mining on wemineltc.  Rejects are extremely low, and accepted shares sent are much more rapid, but I guess that has to do with the difficulty and the work being given to the miner?  Like I said, still learning

All of this is expected...

Yes, difficulty 155 vs 512 means you'd be getting accepted shares 3-4 times more often on average. "Average" is the keyword here, you could get a share every few seconds and then none for 5 minutes, but over a longer period of time it will average the expected level. In other words, look at the "A:" column after running for a reasonably long time (12-24 hours), it should show very similar numbers on either pool.

Rejects depend on which coin is being mined, some produce more rejects than others (and possibly more than wemineltc). Again, nothing to worry about since the pool coin switcher most likely has accounted for it.

[mneehon]

Similar question related to GridSeeds...  They are struggling on high difficulty, and I'm not buying "but on average..." argument.

Is there a way to limit difficulty of shares when mining on CM?  I found none so far...

[highwalker]

Terk - the stratum difficulty is always fixed at 512 instead of the VARDIFF, or is the VARDIFF not working with the pool?

Also when do you intend to open up the API for user and pool stats?

[punisher1]

my btc adress :   1Bwp83DtsaN913AdJRyfaPS983YaFFpSB2

i have Unexchanged 0.00219303 BTC for more than 2 weeks ...
any chance to convert them ?

[byt411]

Around Nov/Dec 2013, I was mining with Middlecoin and getting around 0.001-0.004 BTC per day using a Radeon 5750. Usually getting towards the lower end of that range but getting payouts every day. Now after a 5 month break I started mining with CleverMining and the amount of BTC to be paid sucks. Checking my stats on their website (because no payouts yet), I'm getting not much more than 0.0001 BTC per day. Only 10% of what I got with Middlecoin. Why could this be?

I'll post the cgminer screenshot because to be honest, I don't really know what I am looking at. Except it says the program was started at 5am? That can't be right, I would have been asleep...

I don't see a problem. MiddleCoin is the worst pool, and you lost a lot of btc from mining there.
Rates in Dec 2013 was around 0.017BTC/MHash/Day, and now they are around 0.0035BTC/MHash/Day. Has nothing to do with the pool.

Terk - the stratum difficulty is always fixed at 512 instead of the VARDIFF, or is the VARDIFF not working with the pool?

Also when do you intend to open up the API for user and pool stats?

Vardiff was disabled like in February, Terk promised to have Vardiff up latest in April, but still isn't up.

[suchmoon]

Similar question related to GridSeeds...  They are struggling on high difficulty, and I'm not buying "but on average..." argument.

Is there a way to limit difficulty of shares when mining on CM?  I found none so far...

If you can do basic math you don't have to "buy" anything. Let it run for 24 hours, check the stats. Gridseeds work fine even at 1024 diff given enough time.

[suchmoon]

Around Nov/Dec 2013, I was mining with Middlecoin and getting around 0.001-0.004 BTC per day using a Radeon 5750. Usually getting towards the lower end of that range but getting payouts every day. Now after a 5 month break I started mining with CleverMining and the amount of BTC to be paid sucks. Checking my stats on their website (because no payouts yet), I'm getting not much more than 0.0001 BTC per day. Only 10% of what I got with Middlecoin. Why could this be?

I'll post the cgminer screenshot because to be honest, I don't really know what I am looking at. Except it says the program was started at 5am? That can't be right, I would have been asleep...

Profitability has decreased significantly since December. You can expect ~0.003 BTC per day per MH/s at this time, and you only have 0.07 MH/s, so this works out to about 0.0002 BTC per day.

You screenshot shows intensity 10, you might want to increase that.

[mneehon]

Similar question related to GridSeeds...  They are struggling on high difficulty, and I'm not buying "but on average..." argument.

Is there a way to limit difficulty of shares when mining on CM?  I found none so far...

If you can do basic math you don't have to "buy" anything. Let it run for 24 hours, check the stats. Gridseeds work fine even at 1024 diff given enough time.

I wonder if you can show that "basic math" you are talking about.  I believe that if share is not submitted, it cannot be "replaced" by twice the shares during the same size time slot later because miner doesn't generate shares, it accepts work from pool.  One has to count how many shares are submitted in 24 hours when share difficulty is e.g. 64, and then count how many shares are submitted in 24 hours when share difficulty is 1024, and then compare these two numbers taking into account share size.

You are assuming that these two numbers are the same.  There is no way to test your assumption without the ability to manually set difficulty.  I'm pretty positive than due to larger number of rejected/stale shares at higher difficulty, average for 24 hours will be lower at difficulty higher than miner can handle.  Isn't that the reason VARDIFF exists and p2pools have a parameter where you can specify desired difficulty?

Also looking at graphs on betarigs (damn those graphs) I can clearly see that GPU that I lease shows accepted average rate within 0-1% of what cgminer shows, whereas 8-10 pods gridseed rigs consistently show accepted average rate 10-15% lower than what cgminer shows.

[byt411]

Similar question related to GridSeeds...  They are struggling on high difficulty, and I'm not buying "but on average..." argument.

Is there a way to limit difficulty of shares when mining on CM?  I found none so far...

If you can do basic math you don't have to "buy" anything. Let it run for 24 hours, check the stats. Gridseeds work fine even at 1024 diff given enough time.

I wonder if you can show that "basic math" you are talking about.  I believe that if share is not submitted, it cannot be "replaced" by twice the shares during the same size time slot later because miner doesn't generate shares, it accepts work from pool.  One has to count how many shares are submitted in 24 hours when share difficulty is e.g. 64, and then count how many shares are submitted in 24 hours when share difficulty is 1024, and then compare these two numbers taking into account share size.

You are assuming that these two numbers are the same.  There is no way to test your assumption without the ability to manually set difficulty.  I'm pretty positive than due to larger number of rejected/stale shares at higher difficulty, average for 24 hours will be lower at difficulty higher than miner can handle.  Isn't that the reason VARDIFF exists and p2pools have a parameter where you can specify desired difficulty?

Also looking at graphs on betarigs (damn those graphs) I can clearly see that GPU that I lease shows accepted average rate within 0-1% of what cgminer shows, whereas 8-10 pods gridseed rigs consistently show accepted average rate 10-15% lower than what cgminer shows.

Well, no. 2 512 shares = 1 1024 share. The 24 hour average, regardless of difficulty, should be nearly the same.

Rejects are still the same, if not more with low difficulty, since stales are very easily produced.

[Xenocyde]

Around Nov/Dec 2013, I was mining with Middlecoin and getting around 0.001-0.004 BTC per day using a Radeon 5750. Usually getting towards the lower end of that range but getting payouts every day. Now after a 5 month break I started mining with CleverMining and the amount of BTC to be paid sucks. Checking my stats on their website (because no payouts yet), I'm getting not much more than 0.0001 BTC per day. Only 10% of what I got with Middlecoin. Why could this be?

I'll post the cgminer screenshot because to be honest, I don't really know what I am looking at. Except it says the program was started at 5am? That can't be right, I would have been asleep...

Profitability has decreased significantly since December. You can expect ~0.003 BTC per day per MH/s at this time, and you only have 0.07 MH/s, so this works out to about 0.0002 BTC per day.

You screenshot shows intensity 10, you might want to increase that.

Ah I didn't realise profitability had decreased so much in this time. I'll probably just mine in winter to keep me warmer lol.

I stick to an intensity of 10 so the system does not become unresponsive.


edit: I just shut it down and "Reject Ratio: 17.3%" seems rather high, doesn't it? This had been running all night and then all day at the point I stopped it.

In the picture you provided your real reject rate is shown on the same line as the hashrate and it's around 2%.

[suchmoon]

Similar question related to GridSeeds...  They are struggling on high difficulty, and I'm not buying "but on average..." argument.

Is there a way to limit difficulty of shares when mining on CM?  I found none so far...

If you can do basic math you don't have to "buy" anything. Let it run for 24 hours, check the stats. Gridseeds work fine even at 1024 diff given enough time.

I wonder if you can show that "basic math" you are talking about.  I believe that if share is not submitted, it cannot be "replaced" by twice the shares during the same size time slot later because miner doesn't generate shares, it accepts work from pool.  One has to count how many shares are submitted in 24 hours when share difficulty is e.g. 64, and then count how many shares are submitted in 24 hours when share difficulty is 1024, and then compare these two numbers taking into account share size.

You are assuming that these two numbers are the same.  There is no way to test your assumption without the ability to manually set difficulty.  I'm pretty positive than due to larger number of rejected/stale shares at higher difficulty, average for 24 hours will be lower at difficulty higher than miner can handle.  Isn't that the reason VARDIFF exists and p2pools have a parameter where you can specify desired difficulty?

Also looking at graphs on betarigs (damn those graphs) I can clearly see that GPU that I lease shows accepted average rate within 0-1% of what cgminer shows, whereas 8-10 pods gridseed rigs consistently show accepted average rate 10-15% lower than what cgminer shows.

cgminer already shows shares submitted as "difficulty 1", i.e. multiplied by pool difficulty. In other words, if pool diff is 512 and it accepts a share, cgminer's "A:" will increase by 512, if pool is VARDIFF then "A:" will increase by whatever the diff is at that time. So that part is already taken care of and my point still stands - run it for 24 hours, check the "A:", compare it to whatever your benchmark is.

P2Pools settings and VARDIFFs exist mainly to produce smooth hashrate charts and to reduce server load (higher diff = fewer worthless shares for the server to deal with).

Not sure I get your point about Betarigs - are you the rig owner or the renter? If you're are the renter, then the rig owner is overstating the hashrate, if you're the owner - well...

Keep in mind that cgminer for gridseeds shows the theoretical hashrate based on the number of chips and frequency. Try setting freq=1000 or chips=2 and you'll see what I mean. In other words, it's meaningless. Use "A:".

[byt411]

Similar question related to GridSeeds...  They are struggling on high difficulty, and I'm not buying "but on average..." argument.

Is there a way to limit difficulty of shares when mining on CM?  I found none so far...

If you can do basic math you don't have to "buy" anything. Let it run for 24 hours, check the stats. Gridseeds work fine even at 1024 diff given enough time.

I wonder if you can show that "basic math" you are talking about.  I believe that if share is not submitted, it cannot be "replaced" by twice the shares during the same size time slot later because miner doesn't generate shares, it accepts work from pool.  One has to count how many shares are submitted in 24 hours when share difficulty is e.g. 64, and then count how many shares are submitted in 24 hours when share difficulty is 1024, and then compare these two numbers taking into account share size.

You are assuming that these two numbers are the same.  There is no way to test your assumption without the ability to manually set difficulty.  I'm pretty positive than due to larger number of rejected/stale shares at higher difficulty, average for 24 hours will be lower at difficulty higher than miner can handle.  Isn't that the reason VARDIFF exists and p2pools have a parameter where you can specify desired difficulty?

Also looking at graphs on betarigs (damn those graphs) I can clearly see that GPU that I lease shows accepted average rate within 0-1% of what cgminer shows, whereas 8-10 pods gridseed rigs consistently show accepted average rate 10-15% lower than what cgminer shows.

cgminer already shows shares submitted as "difficulty 1", i.e. multiplied by pool difficulty. In other words, if pool diff is 512 and it accepts a share, cgminer's "A:" will increase by 512, if pool is VARDIFF then "A:" will increase by whatever the diff is at that time. So that part is already taken care of and my point still stands - run it for 24 hours, check the "A:", compare it to whatever your benchmark is.

P2Pools settings and VARDIFFs exist mainly to produce smooth hashrate charts and to reduce server load (higher diff = fewer worthless shares for the server to deal with).

Not sure I get your point about Betarigs - are you the rig owner or the renter? If you're are the renter, then the rig owner is overstating the hashrate, if you're the owner - well...

Keep in mind that cgminer for gridseeds shows the theoretical hashrate based on the number of chips and frequency. Try setting freq=1000 or chips=2 and you'll see what I mean. In other words, it's meaningless. Use "A:".

You, sir, are very correct. That's exactly how it works. So 2 x 512 = 1 x 1024.
Get it mneehon?

[mneehon]

Similar question related to GridSeeds...  They are struggling on high difficulty, and I'm not buying "but on average..." argument.

Is there a way to limit difficulty of shares when mining on CM?  I found none so far...

If you can do basic math you don't have to "buy" anything. Let it run for 24 hours, check the stats. Gridseeds work fine even at 1024 diff given enough time.

I wonder if you can show that "basic math" you are talking about.  I believe that if share is not submitted, it cannot be "replaced" by twice the shares during the same size time slot later because miner doesn't generate shares, it accepts work from pool.  One has to count how many shares are submitted in 24 hours when share difficulty is e.g. 64, and then count how many shares are submitted in 24 hours when share difficulty is 1024, and then compare these two numbers taking into account share size.

You are assuming that these two numbers are the same.  There is no way to test your assumption without the ability to manually set difficulty.  I'm pretty positive than due to larger number of rejected/stale shares at higher difficulty, average for 24 hours will be lower at difficulty higher than miner can handle.  Isn't that the reason VARDIFF exists and p2pools have a parameter where you can specify desired difficulty?

Also looking at graphs on betarigs (damn those graphs) I can clearly see that GPU that I lease shows accepted average rate within 0-1% of what cgminer shows, whereas 8-10 pods gridseed rigs consistently show accepted average rate 10-15% lower than what cgminer shows.

cgminer already shows shares submitted as "difficulty 1", i.e. multiplied by pool difficulty. In other words, if pool diff is 512 and it accepts a share, cgminer's "A:" will increase by 512, if pool is VARDIFF then "A:" will increase by whatever the diff is at that time. So that part is already taken care of and my point still stands - run it for 24 hours, check the "A:", compare it to whatever your benchmark is.

P2Pools settings and VARDIFFs exist mainly to produce smooth hashrate charts and to reduce server load (higher diff = fewer worthless shares for the server to deal with).

Not sure I get your point about Betarigs - are you the rig owner or the renter? If you're are the renter, then the rig owner is overstating the hashrate, if you're the owner - well...

Keep in mind that cgminer for gridseeds shows the theoretical hashrate based on the number of chips and frequency. Try setting freq=1000 or chips=2 and you'll see what I mean. In other words, it's meaningless. Use "A:".

Not sure you understand what I'm saying so here it is.  Share of difficulty of 1024 takes twice as long as difficulty 512 (approximately), right?

So let's assume that diff 1024 takes a second to solve, and 512 half-second; then in a minute miner ideally solves 60 1024 diff shares or 120 512 diff shares and total is the same (60 * 1 * 1024 = 120 * 1 * 512 = 61440).
Then let's assume that only 90% of 1024 shares are accepted, and 95% of 512 diff shares (due to block changes etc).  Then accepted work during a minute (or any other period of time) is not the same (60 * 0.9 * 1024 = 55296 < 120 * 0.95 * 512 = 56386).

So in ideal case it does average out, but that is not my point.  It does not "average out" when rejection rate is different depending on difficulty and this is what it looks like to me in case of gridseeds.  Where am I wrong?

Regarding "speed" that cgminer shows for gridseeds, well, there should be a reference point, right?  There is the advertised speed, that is used in comparisons, and pricing of hardware, and dismiss it as "fake" is not really correct.

[byt411]

Around Nov/Dec 2013, I was mining with Middlecoin and getting around 0.001-0.004 BTC per day using a Radeon 5750. Usually getting towards the lower end of that range but getting payouts every day. Now after a 5 month break I started mining with CleverMining and the amount of BTC to be paid sucks. Checking my stats on their website (because no payouts yet), I'm getting not much more than 0.0001 BTC per day. Only 10% of what I got with Middlecoin. Why could this be?

I'll post the cgminer screenshot because to be honest, I don't really know what I am looking at. Except it says the program was started at 5am? That can't be right, I would have been asleep...

Profitability has decreased significantly since December. You can expect ~0.003 BTC per day per MH/s at this time, and you only have 0.07 MH/s, so this works out to about 0.0002 BTC per day.

You screenshot shows intensity 10, you might want to increase that.

Ah I didn't realise profitability had decreased so much in this time. I'll probably just mine in winter to keep me warmer lol.

I stick to an intensity of 10 so the system does not become unresponsive.


edit: I just shut it down and "Reject Ratio: 17.3%" seems rather high, doesn't it? This had been running all night and then all day at the point I stopped it.

In the picture you provided your real reject rate is shown on the same line as the hashrate and it's around 2%.

Ah I see it. Wonder why it said 17.3% then .

Because there are what we call "Fake Rejects", which are displayed as "Rejected Untracked Stratum share on pool 0", which is basically just a communication error between miner and pool.

[suchmoon]

Not sure you understand what I'm saying so here it is.  Share of difficulty of 1024 takes twice as long as difficulty 512 (approximately), right?

So let's assume that diff 1024 takes a second to solve, and 512 half-second; then in a minute miner ideally solves 60 1024 diff shares or 120 512 diff shares and total is the same (60 * 1 * 1024 = 120 * 1 * 512 = 61440).
Then let's assume that only 90% of 1024 shares are accepted, and 95% of 512 diff shares (due to block changes etc).  Then accepted work during a minute (or any other period of time) is not the same (60 * 0.9 * 1024 = 55296 < 120 * 0.95 * 512 = 56386).

So in ideal case it does average out, but that is not my point.  It does not "average out" when rejection rate is different depending on difficulty and this is what it looks like to me in case of gridseeds.  Where am I wrong?

Reject rate does not depend on pool difficulty. In the long term you will be getting the same reject rate (percentage) at diff 512 or diff 1024 or diff 1, all other things being equal.

You seem to be thinking that there is a "duration" to solve a share. There is no duration, only a probability of any given hash meeting the specified difficulty.

Regarding "speed" that cgminer shows for gridseeds, well, there should be a reference point, right?  There is the advertised speed, that is used in comparisons, and pricing of hardware, and dismiss it as "fake" is not really correct.

I just stated a fact. I even gave you an example to try if you don't believe me, since you seem to have a problem with facts. You can tell cgminer to run your Gridseed at a frequency it is not capable of running at, and cgminer will happily report a high hashrate, even though submitted shares will be low if any. You can also give cgminer an incorrect number of chips and it will report an incorrect hashrate. It does not count the actual hashes generated, it just assumes that a Gridseed at X frequency with Y chips will produce Z hashes. Here is the relevant line of code in dtbartle's cgminer, which most if not all Gridseed cgminer clones are based on:

https://github.com/dtbartle/cgminer-gc3355/blob/master/driver-gridseed.c#L705