{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/fireice-uk/xmr-stak/issues/1730","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/fireice-uk/xmr-stak","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/fireice-uk/xmr-stak/issues/1730/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/fireice-uk/xmr-stak/issues/1730/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/fireice-uk/xmr-stak/issues/1730/events","html_url":"https://github.com/fireice-uk/xmr-stak/issues/1730","id":342746306,"node_id":"MDU6SXNzdWUzNDI3NDYzMDY=","number":1730,"title":"support to CPU mine at more than 75% for dedicated machines ","user":{"login":"ToXIc69","id":25327504,"node_id":"MDQ6VXNlcjI1MzI3NTA0","avatar_url":"https://avatars2.githubusercontent.com/u/25327504?v=4","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/ToXIc69","html_url":"https://github.com/ToXIc69","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ToXIc69/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ToXIc69/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ToXIc69/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ToXIc69/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ToXIc69/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ToXIc69/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ToXIc69/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ToXIc69/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/ToXIc69/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"assignees":[],"milestone":null,"comments":7,"created_at":"2018-07-19T14:13:46Z","updated_at":"2018-07-19T18:00:04Z","closed_at":null,"author_association":"NONE","body":"Hi guys thanks for a great miner, is it possible to add an option to utilize the CPU miner higher than 75 %? \r\nI have dedicated hardware and would like to get some more H/s out of it. I've gone over all the recommended options and settings but can't get any more. "},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/fireice-uk/xmr-stak/issues/comments/406363525","html_url":"https://github.com/fireice-uk/xmr-stak/issues/1730#issuecomment-406363525","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/fireice-uk/xmr-stak/issues/1730","id":406363525,"node_id":"MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQwNjM2MzUyNQ==","user":{"login":"Spudz76","id":2391234,"node_id":"MDQ6VXNlcjIzOTEyMzQ=","avatar_url":"https://avatars3.githubusercontent.com/u/2391234?v=4","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/Spudz76","html_url":"https://github.com/Spudz76","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Spudz76/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Spudz76/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Spudz76/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Spudz76/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Spudz76/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Spudz76/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Spudz76/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Spudz76/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Spudz76/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2018-07-19T18:00:04Z","updated_at":"2018-07-19T18:00:04Z","author_association":"CONTRIBUTOR","body":"Maybe it's a quad socket board? Running as dual with CPU0 and 2 loaded (which could leave a logical hole for CPU1 socket that is not populated) and then the numbering makes a little more sense.\r\n\r\nOr they used a quad capable chipset for a dual board for some reason and mapped it as above.\r\n\r\nLinux always makes their ID sequential regardless the \"street address\" on the mobo.  Hmm.  I thought Windows did also, just the HT cores interleaved on the odds instead of appended."}}
{"actor":{"display_login":"Spudz76"}}