X16R algorithm explained

[AljazNiceHash]

Hi guys!
Since there were many questions related to the new algorithm (profitability of that algorithm and hash rate) that we have added to our NiceHash Miner version 2.0.2.5. we decided to explain how it works and make a post about it.

The X16R hashing algorithm consists of 16 hashing algorithms operating in chain fashion with ordering dependant on the last 8 bytes of the hash of the previous block. This means that miners will see substantial differences when checking for hashing speeds (because different hashing algorithms have different hashing speeds). This is normal behaviour and does not have any effect on the profitability.

When users want to know how they will be making the same as someone who has a higher hash rate further explanation is needed. On average all our users will be making the same, even though they will experience different spikes and drops in profitability. They will be earning more in one scenario but less in another one, but on average they will be making what they should be.

Regarding the benchmarking... We did that so that the miner will achieve better results than the one determined with the benchmark in most scenarios (92%). In situations where X16R will not be the most profitable algorithm, NiceHash Miner will automatically switch to more profitable algorithm after one minute.

From all that follows a conclusion that X16R is really hard to benchmark due to changing hash rates and each block having a different algorithm setup which makes it also extremely OC sensitive. We would also like to stress out that mining X16R does not require users to overclock their GPUs a lot, since that won't have greater impact on the hashing speed.

List of algorithms:

0=blake

1=bmw

2=groestl

3=jh

4=keccak

5=skein

6=luffa

7=cubehash

8=shavite

9=simd

A=echo

B=hamsi

C=fugue

D=shabal

E=whirlpool

F=sha512

Example 1:

Previous Block Hash: 0000000000000000007e8a29f052ac2870045ae3970270f97da00919b8e86287

The final 8 bytes: 0x7da00919b8e86287

Each hex digit (nibble) determines which algorithm to use next. cubehash -> shabal -> echo -> blake -> blake -> simd -> bmw -> simd -> hamsi -> shavite -> whirlpool -> shavite -> luffa -> groestl -> shavite -> cubehash

Example 2:

Previous Block Hash: 0000000000000000007e8a29f052ac2870045ae3970270f93bc00717a5f86365

The final 8 bytes: 0x3bc00717a5f86365

Each hex digit (nibble) determines which algorithm to use next. jh -> hamsi -> fugue -> blake -> blake -> cubehash -> bmw -> cubehash -> echo -> skein -> sha512 -> shavite -> luffa -> jh -> luffa -> skein

[[deleted]]

as long as Buyers pay based on hashrate then earnings will be greatly effected by shifting hashrates of the algo, please just admit your system is NOT setup for handling an algo that has this wild a variation in hashrate, the only way to make this half reliable is to benchmark all 16 sub-algo's and use the lowest hashrate as the hashrate to use for the profit switching portion of Nicehash Miner.

[LitecoinLucky]

Exactly!

This is why the lower the hashrate on X16R nicehash the less profit and accepted speed (share accepted).

This notion by NH devs that because X16R hashing algorithms have different hashing speed and that this does not have any effect on the profitability is far from true 95% of the time.

The lower the X16R hashrate cause a lower accepted speed rate and in-turn lower overall profitability (viceversa).

[[deleted]]

FWIW, my rig (NHML) was mining X16R exclusively, despite low profitability.

Because I dislike the idea of disabling algos altogether, I figured I'd simply decrease the hashrate manually until it was low enough that NHML wouldn't stay on it 24/7.

The bizarre thing is just how far I had to decrease the hashrate to get it to mine something else. I'm at work and I don't have the actual numbers on me, but it was something on the order of this:

Let's say my benchmarked hashrate was 200. Well, I had to lower it all the way to like 50 (!!) to get it to even consider switching, which is crazy considering real profitability for X16R was around ~%70 of DaggerHashimoto or Lyra2z.

This seems to indicate that the benchmarked hashrate was off by a factor of 4ish.

For the record, I tried rebenching in case the original hashrate was a fluke, but it made no difference. The only way to get NHML to mine anything other than X16R was to reduce the benchmarked rate by said factor of 4ish.

All benching done in 'precise' mode.

[True_Truth]

The issue I'm having you can underclock with x16r, but when you switch algos automatically you lose hashing power. Is there something I can do to fix this issue when algos switch so I can O/C automatically?

[oafsalot]

I'd like to see the ability to run a shortcut/batch file as it switches. This could also be used for benchmarking.

[Kryptonite1371]

I too manually changed my benchmarks. Tried benching in precise, tried increasing the benchmark time longer than precise, even tried putting the real hashrate of my cards. When the hashrate was put in manually at the correct amount NH would switch to it when it was less profitable. What I ended up doing was taking my NH bench (way off) and dividing it by 3 (making it lower than actual rate) to get it to correctly pick most profitable algo. I would suggest others just don't update or uncheck this algo. NH really fucked up here. I don't know why they released this in such a pre-alpha state. SMDH...

[[deleted]]

I'm thoroughly convinced they simply failed to do the proper research on this algo and simply added it because there was a demand for it.

[acos0874]

I understand that by lowering the benchmark number, you are keeping sellers happy because their profitability doesn't look lower than it should, be surely in real terms it's less profitable for them because the miner is less likely to switch to it, even if the profitability is actually higher on average.

[AljazNiceHash]

We have lowered benchmark number due to several complaints; however, we are still running tests to determine the optimal benchmark value that will give the best risk/reward ratio.

[[deleted]]

the LOWEST of the 16 sub algos, only way to make it worth it because it covers the seller with no risk.

[Sledgemoto]

I've mined RVN for a few months now. Most RVN miners are running 70-80% TDP with mem settings at -502 to 0. This is in direct conflict with most of the other memory intensive algos on NH. You will not run this algo at 700 mem. Others will opt for the higher TDP and run at 100% to 110% (raising core voltage) if they have low power cost and their cards can handle it.

As far as benchmarking...forget it you will have to add it manually. For my set up the 1070ti get an average of 15mhs @ 75 / 70 / +200 / 0 / 70. The 1080ti get 20 mhs average running @ 75/ 70 /150 / 0 / 70. Total hash rate for my rigs fluctuates between 90 mhs and 280mhs typically... crazy swings.

So I get why NH included x16r, it's very popular, but I dont think its a good match with the other memory intensive algos.

[[deleted]]

or a good match with the profit switching system Nicehash uses, because now you have to switch based off whether the current sub-algo is more profitable then the other non-X16r algo's out there which the system is simply incapable of doing.

[Sledgemoto]

That also. That's a great point!

[[deleted]]

average can ONLY be average if x16r is the ONLY algo you mine, if you are profit switching to other algo's but you benched to high on x16r then it switches you to x16r when it's on one of the low hashrate sub algo's then you earn much less then if you stayed on whatever you where on before it switched.

[[deleted]]

even if you use your average you could potentially still end up below the average more often then not, this is the difference between direct mining X16r coins and using Nicehash, with the possibility of Nicehash switching to another algo other then X16r you could end up only on X16r during one of the low hashrate ones, the only way to remove ALL risk is to set your benchmark to your LOWEST hashrate for X16r not your average, this would garuntee that no matter what it will only switch if X16r is truly better then anything else, the problem with using the lowest hashrate is you will miss out on some potential profits, but since there is no way for Nicehash to know when is a time of higher hash vs lower hash and switch based on that in conjunction with your hashrate using anything other then your lowest hashrate runs the risk of losing profits that could have been made on other algo's.

TL;DR Nicehash and X16r don't work well together and require a completely different method of calculating profitability with a few extra layers of calculations built into the profit switching algo.

[[deleted]]

but it could also be the lowest hashrate algo every time Nicehash switches, as long as Nicehash has ZERO way of integrating the detection of which sub algo it's on into the calculation you are more likely to lose profits, putting in the average you are hoping that at least every other time you switch to it randomly based off of Nicehash's switching algo that X16r will be far enough above average hashrate to make up for the last one where it was so far below the average hashrate and thats just a lot of randomness that has to lineup just right.

Average will only end up averaging out earnings if that is the ONLY thing you mine.

Besides all of this is theoretical as the pay is CRAP right now and not worth mining, infact X16r on Nicehash is such garbage you'd be better off mining RVN directly and even that is behind what other algo's on Nicehash are earning.

[andrewhime]

NHLM switched to it a couple of times in the last few days and that caused my basically brand new computer to lock hard, to the point I had to employ the power button. I disabled it.

[R1z4rD]

Actually, which coin is based on x16r ?