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 - svyatoslav

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4
31
MemoryCoin / Re: [ANN] mc2miner 0.1c - Optimized CPU Miner (Windows / Linux)
« on: January 07, 2014, 06:20:21 am »
My processor is:

processor   : 31
vendor_id   : AuthenticAMD
cpu family   : 21
model      : 1
model name   : AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 6282 SE             
stepping   : 2
cpu MHz      : 2600.000
cache size   : 2048 KB
physical id   : 1
siblings   : 16
core id      : 7
cpu cores   : 8
apicid      : 79
initial apicid   : 47
fpu      : yes
fpu_exception   : yes
cpuid level   : 13
wp      : yes
flags      : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 ht syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt pdpe1gb rdtscp lm constant_tsc rep_good nonstop_tsc extd_apicid amd_dcm aperfmperf pni pclmulqdq monitor ssse3 cx16 sse4_1 sse4_2 popcnt aes xsave avx lahf_lm cmp_legacy svm extapic cr8_legacy abm sse4a misalignsse 3dnowprefetch osvw ibs xop skinit wdt lwp fma4 nodeid_msr topoext perfctr_core cpb npt lbrv svm_lock nrip_save tsc_scale vmcb_clean flushbyasid decodeassists pausefilter pfthreshold
bogomips   : 5199.25
TLB size   : 1536 4K pages
clflush size   : 64
cache_alignment   : 64
address sizes   : 48 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
power management: ts ttp tm 100mhzsteps hwpstate cpb

I'm facing the error

./mc2miner --noavx --idle
mc2miner v0.1c version
Intel AES New Instructions NOT detected on this platform - mc2miner will now terminate.

./mc2miner
mc2miner v0.1c version
Intel AES New Instructions NOT detected on this platform - mc2miner will now terminate.

32
MemoryCoin / Re: [ANN] mc2miner 0.1b - Optimized CPU Miner (Windows / Linux)
« on: January 06, 2014, 06:38:02 pm »
Could you compile it under AMD or share sources plz. I'm facing this error

Intel AES New Instructions NOT detected on this platform - mc2miner will now terminate.

33
MemoryCoin / Re: voting cto/ceo/whatever while coin is going to fly
« on: January 03, 2014, 08:26:32 pm »
let the community decide, is it good idea being MMC 2.0 or not, IMHO negative experience is also valuable. But if the coin survive, we will be in a really good shape.

34
MemoryCoin / Re: mmc.xpool.xram.co - First Memorycoin Pool
« on: December 26, 2013, 07:30:38 pm »
Quote from: aorith on December 26, 2013, 03:46:54 pm
Hello,

 #include <boost/algorithm/string/classification.hpp>
                                                     ^
compilation terminated.


Ubuntu 13.10

 :'(

edit: nvm im retarded


which error?

35
MemoryCoin / Re: mmc.xpool.xram.co - First Memorycoin Pool
« on: December 26, 2013, 01:52:24 pm »
+1  :D

36
MemoryCoin / Re: mmc.xpool.xram.co - First Memorycoin Pool
« on: December 25, 2013, 09:01:06 pm »
Quote from: duck on December 25, 2013, 08:53:46 pm
I have a question. After being mining almost a day during the uptime I checked my stats and see that I had 0,03 MMC confirmed and 0,07 MMC unconfirmed.

Are those stats correct, if it is I don't think that worth the effort :/

Mining with 40 Cores in 6 computers...

Dude, I have also issue with the rate, I have more cores. With this difficulty and comp power we should have definitely more coins

37
MemoryCoin / Re: mmc.xpool.xram.co - First Memorycoin Pool
« on: December 25, 2013, 07:59:05 pm »
Some nodes doing well:

[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:28:03 | SHARES: 5 (100.0% | 37.4/h), VL: 5 (100.0%), RJ: 0 (0.0%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:32:50 | SHARES: 6 (100.0% | 28.1/h), VL: 6 (100.0%), RJ: 0 (0.0%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:37:59 | SHARES: 1 (100.0% | 62.1/h), VL: 1 (100.0%), RJ: 0 (0.0%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:39:03 | SHARES: 2 (100.0% | 59.0/h), VL: 2 (100.0%), RJ: 0 (0.0%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:40:29 | SHARES: 3 (100.0% | 51.9/h), VL: 3 (100.0%), RJ: 0 (0.0%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:44:28 | SHARES: 4 (100.0% | 32.2/h), VL: 4 (100.0%), RJ: 0 (0.0%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:45:51 | SHARES: 5 (100.0% | 34.0/h), VL: 5 (100.0%), RJ: 0 (0.0%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:48:01 | SHARES: 6 (100.0% | 32.7/h), VL: 6 (100.0%), RJ: 0 (0.0%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:48:37 | SHARES: 7 (100.0% | 36.2/h), VL: 7 (100.0%), RJ: 0 (0.0%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:49:14 | SHARES: 7 (100.0% | 34.4/h), VL: 7 (87.5%), RJ: 1 (12.5%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:50:49 | SHARES: 8 (100.0% | 34.8/h), VL: 8 (88.9%), RJ: 1 (11.1%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:51:11 | SHARES: 9 (100.0% | 38.1/h), VL: 9 (90.0%), RJ: 1 (10.0%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:51:31 | SHARES: 9 (100.0% | 37.2/h), VL: 9 (81.8%), RJ: 2 (18.2%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:53:31 | SHARES: 10 (100.0% | 36.4/h), VL: 10 (83.3%), RJ: 2 (16.7%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:53:52 | SHARES: 11 (100.0% | 39.2/h), VL: 11 (84.6%), RJ: 2 (15.4%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:54:13 | SHARES: 11 (100.0% | 38.4/h), VL: 11 (78.6%), RJ: 3 (21.4%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:56:14 | SHARES: 12 (100.0% | 37.5/h), VL: 12 (80.0%), RJ: 3 (20.0%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:56:45 | SHARES: 13 (100.0% | 39.5/h), VL: 13 (81.2%), RJ: 3 (18.8%), ST: 0 (0.0%)


some of them not
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:30:45 | SHARES: 9 (100.0% | 8.6/h), VL: 9 (75.0%), RJ: 3 (25.0%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:33:06 | SHARES: 10 (100.0% | 9.2/h), VL: 10 (76.9%), RJ: 3 (23.1%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:33:16 | SHARES: 11 (100.0% | 10.1/h), VL: 11 (78.6%), RJ: 3 (21.4%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:33:27 | SHARES: 11 (100.0% | 10.1/h), VL: 11 (73.3%), RJ: 4 (26.7%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:36:14 | SHARES: 12 (100.0% | 10.6/h), VL: 12 (75.0%), RJ: 4 (25.0%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:39:01 | SHARES: 13 (100.0% | 11.0/h), VL: 13 (76.5%), RJ: 4 (23.5%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:41:58 | SHARES: 14 (100.0% | 11.4/h), VL: 14 (77.8%), RJ: 4 (22.2%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:44:56 | SHARES: 15 (100.0% | 11.7/h), VL: 15 (78.9%), RJ: 4 (21.1%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:45:17 | SHARES: 16 (100.0% | 12.4/h), VL: 16 (80.0%), RJ: 4 (20.0%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:46:04 | SHARES: 17 (100.0% | 13.1/h), VL: 17 (81.0%), RJ: 4 (19.0%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:48:32 | SHARES: 18 (100.0% | 13.4/h), VL: 18 (81.8%), RJ: 4 (18.2%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:48:36 | SHARES: 19 (100.0% | 14.1/h), VL: 19 (82.6%), RJ: 4 (17.4%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:48:57 | SHARES: 20 (100.0% | 14.8/h), VL: 20 (83.3%), RJ: 4 (16.7%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:50:26 | SHARES: 21 (100.0% | 15.3/h), VL: 21 (84.0%), RJ: 4 (16.0%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:52:24 | SHARES: 22 (100.0% | 15.6/h), VL: 22 (84.6%), RJ: 4 (15.4%), ST: 0 (0.0%)
[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:58:16 | SHARES: 23 (100.0% | 15.3/h), VL: 23 (85.2%), RJ: 4 (14.8%), ST: 0 (0.0%)

38
MemoryCoin / Re: mmc.xpool.xram.co - First Memorycoin Pool
« on: December 25, 2013, 07:57:32 pm »
4 * 16 cores AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 6282 SE

39
MemoryCoin / Re: mmc.xpool.xram.co - First Memorycoin Pool
« on: December 25, 2013, 07:25:36 pm »
stats for 64 core and 64 threads

[STATS] 2013-12-25 19:23:21 | SHARES: 5 (100.0% | 5.4/h), VL: 5 (62.5%), RJ: 3 (37.5%), ST: 0 (0.0%)


40
MemoryCoin / Re: mmc.xpool.xram.co - First Memorycoin Pool
« on: December 25, 2013, 07:22:16 pm »
it It seems it getting faster :)

41
MemoryCoin / Re: mmc.xpool.xram.co - First Memorycoin Pool
« on: December 25, 2013, 07:20:42 pm »
Quote from: KillerByte on December 25, 2013, 07:19:22 pm
I don't quite understand your post... 10x slower?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

like this :)

10 times slower then hour ago, before it was around 50h for me, now 5, I have 64 cores

42
MemoryCoin / Re: mmc.xpool.xram.co - First Memorycoin Pool
« on: December 25, 2013, 07:18:18 pm »
10 times slower then hour ago, before it was around 50h for me, now 5, I have 65 threads

43
MemoryCoin / Re: mmc.xpool.xram.co - First Memorycoin Pool
« on: December 25, 2013, 07:14:52 pm »
pool is on, but very slow now

44
MemoryCoin / Re: mmc.xpool.xram.co - First Memorycoin Pool
« on: December 25, 2013, 06:22:26 pm »
may be we can help you with a good hosting, we really need it to be fast!

45
MemoryCoin / Re: mmc.xpool.xram.co - First Memorycoin Pool
« on: December 25, 2013, 06:12:22 pm »
personal stat on website does not work

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4

Page created in 0.029 seconds with 23 queries.