Korishan
Administrator
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2017
- Messages
- 7,539
Ok, so I took Mike's advice and decided to run nanopool (that was a long and twisted road of learning!). So I ended up downloading Claymore for the CPU and the AMD GPU. Got everything configured and such.
However, I was noticing the hash rates were a lot lower than they were when I was running NiceHash. And yeah, they are both CryptoNight algorithms. And it was running about 1/2 as fast.
So I was talking with someone else about what was happening, and it dawned on me, couldn't I use the NH's programs and configure them for my needs? Change them from NH to nanopool.
Well, turns out I could. And way easy to configure, too. The two programs are xmrig and xmr-stak (CPU and GPU respectively). So I pulled them out of the folders, copied them to my Mining folder and started looking at the config files and adjusting them my pools wallet, etc.
So I run xmrig and I'm getting about 115H/s, about 20 more than I was getting running through NH. In xmr-stak, it was running about 120 H/s, again, about 20 more than from within NH.
At the time, I didn't realize, that by running xmr-stak in standalone, it was hashing on the CPU "and" the GPU at the same time. So the 120 was combined.
But here's the oddity: Running xmrig by itself yielded 115H/s, and running xmr-stak along side it, it still got 115H/s AND I was getting about 61-65H/s from xmr-stak on the CPU. So nearly 175H/s with the combined power of the two.
Now, my question is, why is this? I'm confused as to why I can run two algos on the CPU and get better performance out of it. I figured the xmrig would of decreased by at least 20H/s, if not more. But it ran stable at that speed for over 20minutes. Same with the xmr-stak results.
I haven't tried it with running the xmrig-AMD mining with the xmr-stak and see what results I get. I think I'll try that out now.
However, I was noticing the hash rates were a lot lower than they were when I was running NiceHash. And yeah, they are both CryptoNight algorithms. And it was running about 1/2 as fast.
So I was talking with someone else about what was happening, and it dawned on me, couldn't I use the NH's programs and configure them for my needs? Change them from NH to nanopool.
Well, turns out I could. And way easy to configure, too. The two programs are xmrig and xmr-stak (CPU and GPU respectively). So I pulled them out of the folders, copied them to my Mining folder and started looking at the config files and adjusting them my pools wallet, etc.
So I run xmrig and I'm getting about 115H/s, about 20 more than I was getting running through NH. In xmr-stak, it was running about 120 H/s, again, about 20 more than from within NH.
At the time, I didn't realize, that by running xmr-stak in standalone, it was hashing on the CPU "and" the GPU at the same time. So the 120 was combined.
But here's the oddity: Running xmrig by itself yielded 115H/s, and running xmr-stak along side it, it still got 115H/s AND I was getting about 61-65H/s from xmr-stak on the CPU. So nearly 175H/s with the combined power of the two.
Now, my question is, why is this? I'm confused as to why I can run two algos on the CPU and get better performance out of it. I figured the xmrig would of decreased by at least 20H/s, if not more. But it ran stable at that speed for over 20minutes. Same with the xmr-stak results.
I haven't tried it with running the xmrig-AMD mining with the xmr-stak and see what results I get. I think I'll try that out now.
Ohwell! Live, learn, tweak, and learn some more!