Lack of fallover server support makes this miner UNUSABLE in a production environment.
Fixing that should have been a priority a WHILE ago.
Did some comparison testing on my 1070 ti rig between 0.5.5 and EWBF 0.3.4b yesterday - what I found was that DSTM gave a little higher hashrate when the cards were being run at a low power setting (under 70%, or 124 watts) but at that 124 watt point the hashrate was almost identical and EWBF started giving better hashrate above that point.
The differences were small though, and DSTM seems to vary hashrate a lot more which makes it hard to do a good comparison.
I also dislike the fixed 2% "developer contribution" level, MORE than makes up for the hashrate differences I've seen vs EWBF and EWBF lets YOU set the contribution rate (no, I don't use 0 - but 2% IMO is a RIPOFF when other software is so close on performance).
I agree the fee is high the DEV should let us adjust that not that it matters to me ,I would probable leave it on but don't be so dam greedy is my message to dstm the miner is good but don't fuck it up by being Greedily ... . an don't give us the excuses your not at first i tried to play like you cared etc but that's how I see it an let the jerks put me down now with the same ole excuses he works hard ...but I agree there maybe should be a fee but don't get greedily and ruin a good thing ...
Awesome Miner now has Support for dstm's ZCash Equihash Nvidia Miner
...... if you don't know yet !!!. no more EWBF's CUDA Zcash miner for me not that EWBF's CUDA Zcash miner is a bad soft ware miner it's not ,dstm's ZCash Equihash Nvidia Miner is better ...
https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/676942.0 