Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - ro79dc20d

Pages: [1]
1

My funds finaly showed on BTER.  My wallet showed 207 confirmations.

I'm just left perplexed about not finding a working PTS block explorer.



2
I sent am email last night and got a reply this morning "Dear Sir/Madam,
Your request has been recorded for processing".

I also tried the QQ chat software method,  one of support agents simply pasted a screen caputre of my account showing me my deposits. Not much help.


Meanwhile my wallet is showing my transaction now has  180 confirmations. but I cannot find my transaction on the PTS block explorer, https://coinplorer.com/PTS.

Is there another PTS block explorer ?


3
I never had a transfer issue in the past, PTS transfers have always been fast.  Today a transfer of 2.11 PTS transfered to Pi4MoZg3dzDsRgTB6THqbB4cwqyhwBAaFs is still not showing up hours later.  I tried using  https://coinplorer.com/PTS to view my transaction and there is no trace of it.

I am using wallet 8.6.0-unk-beta

Any suggestions.

Status: 57 confirmations
Date: 04/02/2014 19:39
To: Bter.com PTS Pi4MoZg3dzDsRgTB6THqbB4cwqyhwBAaFs
Debit: -2.11 PTS
Transaction fee: -0.0001 PTS
Net amount: -2.1101 PTS
Transaction ID: 584650f920c8293e266e1532bf4521e24c305b66c3f5615b88f92b22d5175fd8

4
BitShares PTS / Re: fast AMD OpenCL PTS miner released
« on: January 28, 2014, 03:16:15 am »
I had the same error I removed the Intel OpenCL SDK on one system, on the other in device manager show hidden devices and remove driver for Intel 4600 video driver.

You can confirm that the Intel OpenCL driver is installed by running cgminer -n

That solved my issue.

I get the following error ...

*****************************************************************************
** clpts - OpenCL PTS Pool Miner v0.7 RC2 <experimental>
** by NaN - based on ptsminer.
** If you like this software, please consider sending tips to: opencl.miner@gmai
l.com
** PTS:  PtLx9kDLTXtR1ae3u7naXLPeGjjHZ1PGoR
** BTC:  1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
** Your donations will encourage further optimization and development
**
** press CTRL+C to exit
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 2): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
        Name of device #1 / 1 (deviceID 0): Tahiti


Vendor of platform #2 / 2: Intel(R) Corporation
error in gpuhash.h, line 131: Method clGetDeviceIDs(...) failed (errorcode -1)

5
MemoryCoin / Re: CPU/GPU mining hardware comparison
« on: January 15, 2014, 05:19:19 am »
yam-yvg1900-M7j-win64-haswell  4770K OC to 4.5 GHz 14.13 HPM
yam-yvg1900-M7j-win64-nehalem x5650 OC to 3.9 GHz 10.76 HPM
yam-yvg1900-M7j-win64-nehalem dual x5660 2.8 Ghz 16 HPM
yam-yvg1900-M7j-win64-sandy-bridge dual x2690 2.9 GHZ 40 HPM
mc2-1gh-win PowerColor 7970 18 HPM

6
BitShares PTS / Re: yam (yvg1900) miner performance comparison
« on: January 08, 2014, 02:52:36 am »
CPU: Intel i7-4770K  3.5GHz (OC 4.5GHz) (4 cores)
RAM: 16 GB DDR3-1866 RAM
OS: Windows 8.1 (64bit) Huge page support enabled
Software: yam-yvg1900-M7i-win64-Haswell

PTS Agg. CPM (512 MB): 340 (AV=13 after AV-optimization)
PTS Agg. CPM (1024 MB): 350 (AV=5 after AV-optimization)

CPU: Intel Xeon X5560  2.8 GHz (OC 3.5GHz) (4 cores)
RAM: 8 GB DDR3-1600 RAM
OS: Windows 8 (64bit) Huge page support enabled
Software: yam-yvg1900-M7i-win64-nehalem

PTS Agg. CPM (512 MB): 240 (AV=30 after AV-optimization)

CPU: Intel Xeon X5660  2.8 GHz (6 cores)
RAM: 96 GB DDR3-1333 ECC  RAM
OS: Windows 2012 (64bit) Huge page support enabled
Software: yam-yvg1900-M7i-win64-nehalem

PTS Agg. CPM (1024 MB): 290 (AV=13 after AV-optimization)

7
to get better performance with version 5 client run multiple instances

for example with a dual Xeon E5-2690 I get about 380 Col/min with 32 threads
but running two instances of ptsminer_64bits with 16 threads each yields 220 col/min

I also set the affinity of each process ( using procexp) so each instance runs from a single cpu, seems to add about 10+/- col/min

so 440 col/min vs 380

Pages: [1]