Changing the hashing algorithm
-
Solo mining is working for me, already found 2 blocks other than letting my CPU mine it for a while, is there any other help I can do?
-
For the LA server I’m guessing we use
menoetius.phoenixcoin.org
port 20554
for username the wallet address and can we just leave password blank?Yes. Blank or whatever. You can also use “Pool Mining” for solo mining (server = http://127.0.0.1, port = 19554, username and password = what you have in phoenixcoin.conf). There will be a difference in performance though.
The wallet uses the reference C code for its solo miner. CPUminer (minerd) is powered by the SSE2 assembly code. It is also used for pool mining by the wallet. Try both and report your KH/s. For example, my 3GHz 4-core A8-3870K delivers 10KH/s using the built-in miner and 8KH/s using CPUminer (yes, it’s slower in my case).
-
I’m really excited about this new development but its not exactly being shouted from the rooftops…reddcoin seem to have an update every day through social medias.
Its getting people excited as you’ve probably noticed…saying that…I can’t help…had a chat with some locals about feathercoin in my sleepy German village pub…went down like a lead balloon…
Think they were more interested in winning the world cup…a joke one of them told me…what’s the difference between the English national team and a tea bag…the tea bag stays in the cup longer…
anyway…I’m waffling…good work fellas
-
it’s a shame rate of release can’t be tied to some form of community health indicator. But I guess there isn’t one that would be suitable or reliable.
Not exactly what you’re looking for I’m sure, but I use Coingecko as a “community health indicator”.
-
Interesting, but I can even that could be manipulated to get you up the ladder, as it also takes into account the number of followers on twitter, and facebook which is easily upped by making fake accounts, same with followers on github.
Same with people could make forks of the code, to raise its status, liquidity is a good stat though
-
Hi, i have downloaded the testnet and i am currently solomining with my CPU, is this all you need for testing? is there anything else we can do?
I take it these coins are pointless mining, just for testing, shame huh!
-
Hi, i have downloaded the testnet and i am currently solomining with my CPU, is this all you need for testing? is there anything else we can do?
I take it these coins are pointless mining, just for testing, shame huh!These testnet coins are of no value indeed. You can post your CPU model and hash rate (wallet / CPUminer).
-
Im using my work Laptop and the wallet in the link above, 0.6.6.0 and solo mining.
using 3/4 cores of an i3-2310M and getting exactly 3000 hashes per second good sir.
-
Ive got 14.3kh/s on Intel® Core™ i5-3570K CPU @3.40GHz
-
I got 24.3kh/s on Intel® Core™ i7-3770K CPU @ 3.50 GHz 3.90 GHz
-
intel xeon cpu e5-2697 v2 @2.97 ghz
solo mining - kind of interesting how it degrades despite not running out of logical processors.
1 thread - 2655 h/s
2 threads - 5230 h/s
4 threads - 10kh/s
8 threads - 20 kh/s
12 threads - 30 kh/s
24 threads - 45 kh/s
32 threads - 64 kh/s
44 threads - 72 kh/s
pool mining
1 thread - 8.9kh/s
2 thread - 17.2kh/s
4 threads - 33.3 kh/s
8 threads - 67.6 kh/s
12 threads - 100 kh/s *pool miner tends to hang beyond here if I let it run for more than just a few seconds*
-
Not connect http, why ?
-
i had the same problem. no idea how to fix it though. i just used one of the 2 pools listed.
-
intel xeon cpu e5-2697 v2 @2.97 ghz
solo mining - kind of interesting how it degrades despite not running out of logical processors.
1 thread - 2655 h/s
2 threads - 5230 h/s
4 threads - 10kh/s
8 threads - 20 kh/s
12 threads - 30 kh/s
24 threads - 45 kh/s
32 threads - 64 kh/s
44 threads - 72 kh/s
pool mining
1 thread - 8.9kh/s
2 thread - 17.2kh/s
4 threads - 33.3 kh/s
8 threads - 67.6 kh/s
12 threads - 100 kh/s *pool miner tends to hang beyond here if I let it run for more than just a few seconds*
Hi, i assume you are using Hyper-V or VMware and assigning vCPUs, At a guess, i would imagine using HT cores could contend very quickly. Are you in a position to disable HT on the CPU and assign cores only? just to see if a single core gives more that 2 threads with HT on?
Just a thought.
Luke
-
Yes. Blank or whatever. You can also use “Pool Mining” for solo mining (server = http://127.0.0.1, port = 19554, username and password = what you have in phoenixcoin.conf). There will be a difference in performance though.
The wallet uses the reference C code for its solo miner. CPUminer (minerd) is powered by the SSE2 assembly code. It is also used for pool mining by the wallet. Try both and report your KH/s. For example, my 3GHz 4-core A8-3870K delivers 10KH/s using the built-in miner and 8KH/s using CPUminer (yes, it’s slower in my case).
Please give me a screen-shot .
-
I got 3.4 KH/s with 2 threads on I3-2330 2.2 GHz at pool mining.
-
Intel G2020 CPU 3.1G is6.5Kh.
-
So, i have a question… When the move is complete, do we think CPU mining will actually be viable? Is CPU mining going to be exclusive for a while before GPU? If GPU mining neoscrypt is working on release, will anyone actually use CPU?
Just throwing it out there, be nice to have an idea, Cheers
-
Not connect http, why ?
Maybe add rpcallowip=127.0.0.1, rpcuser=lizhi and rpcpassword=123 to data/testnet/phoenixcoin.conf?
-
Hi, i assume you are using Hyper-V or VMware and assigning vCPUs, At a guess, i would imagine using HT cores could contend very quickly. Are you in a position to disable HT on the CPU and assign cores only? just to see if a single core gives more that 2 threads with HT on?
Just a thought.
Luke
I wasn’t using any kind of virtual machine. I could go in to the bios and turn off the hyper threading but I can’t imagine that helping overall since you cut the overall power by half. I probably wont be in front of the computer to play with it for a day or so, regardless, I really expect this was more of a bottleneck imposed by the managing process (ie the wallet). I mean the wallet had locking issues when using pool settings with 12 or more threads . so there might be some bugs in there. however, the underlining code that does the new scrypt seems to be running ok though. (which I thought was the point of the test :) )
