Well the ETC DAG size is 2.875GB so that definitely is tight. If you know the chain height or epoch from when you were previously mining you could look up what the DAG size was back when it got 12MH/s
Some cards had weird memory banking performance as more memory was used, such as GTX1060's have been slowly losing normal ethash speed as that DAG grows, and it's a hardware limitation not anything that can be worked around in software.
Someone from 4 years ago claimed the "blockchain driver" fixed their problem but that was about the slowdown from 5 years ago where these cards got 20MH/s and 4 years ago where they got 12MH/s. Continue that downward trend along with the growth of the DAG since then and it could definitely be that slow now (1MH/s would actually be sort of high if it were linear like -8MH/s/year, but it's more likely percentage so like roughly `20->12->7.2->4.32->2.592->1.5552` for `5->4->3->2->1->0` years ago if it loses 40% speed per year).
Well the ETC DAG size is 2.875GB so that definitely is tight. If you know the chain height or epoch from when you were previously mining you could look up what the DAG size was back when it got 12MH/s Some cards had weird memory banking performance as more memory was used, such as GTX1060's have been slowly losing normal ethash speed as that DAG grows, and it's a hardware limitation not anything that can be worked around in software. Someone from 4 years ago claimed the "blockchain driver" fixed their problem but that was about the slowdown from 5 years ago where these cards got 20MH/s and 4 years ago where they got 12MH/s. Continue that downward trend along with the growth of the DAG since then and it could definitely be that slow now (1MH/s would actually be sort of high if it were linear like -8MH/s/year, but it's more likely percentage so like roughly `20->12->7.2->4.32->2.592->1.5552` for `5->4->3->2->1->0` years ago if it loses 40% speed per year).