|
Title: 12.3 WHQL release ... ) Post by: ZPK on March 29, 2012, 10:27:44 PM http://support.amd.com/us/kbarticles/Pages/AMDCatalystSoftwareSuiteVersion123ReleaseNotes.aspx
please your opinions and tests) Title: Re: 12.3 WHQL release ... ) Post by: ssateneth on March 30, 2012, 03:31:57 AM Do not use. Not able to overclock anything (shows as 0 core and 0 memory).
Title: Re: 12.3 WHQL release ... ) Post by: ummas on March 30, 2012, 06:33:11 AM @ssateneth
windows or linux ?? Title: Re: 12.3 WHQL release ... ) Post by: chiropteran on March 30, 2012, 04:10:51 PM No mining change from 12.2 Can still overclock fine, CPU usage still low, mhash unchanged.
This is on a single 6970 on windows 7 64 bit, using clocktweak and diablominer. Title: Re: 12.3 WHQL release ... ) Post by: juhakall on March 30, 2012, 06:35:48 PM I have the same problem with this version that first came up with 12.2. When using cgminer 2.3.1-2, SDK 2.1 and phatk kernel on a 5870, my hashrate is normal, but the miner never submits any shares. Downgrading to 12.1 helps.
Title: Re: 12.3 WHQL release ... ) Post by: ssateneth on March 31, 2012, 01:05:44 AM I have the same problem with this version that first came up with 12.2. When using cgminer 2.3.1-2, SDK 2.1 and phatk kernel on a 5870, my hashrate is normal, but the miner never submits any shares. Downgrading to 12.1 helps. Same. I was wondering why my 2.1 sdk wouldnt submit shares but 2.6 would. Also windows. Title: Re: 12.3 WHQL release ... ) Post by: blandead on March 31, 2012, 07:03:06 AM Im using the 12.3 WHQL driver, still able to underclock memory to 200 Mhz (optimal speed), Core Clock is now at 1020 Mhz
hashing away at 457 Mhash/s on my single 6970 using vectors (77 degrees Celsius for temperature) Also I'm using full release OpenCL 1.2 driver, but the only difference I noticed is more stability. Used to have my core clock at 1015 Mhz What hashrates is everyone else getting that are so bad with new drivers? Title: Re: 12.3 WHQL release ... ) Post by: ssateneth on March 31, 2012, 11:31:39 PM Im using the 12.3 WHQL driver, still able to underclock memory to 200 Mhz (optimal speed), Core Clock is now at 1020 Mhz hashing away at 457 Mhash/s on my single 6970 using vectors (77 degrees Celsius for temperature) Also I'm using full release OpenCL 1.2 driver, but the only difference I noticed is more stability. Used to have my core clock at 1015 Mhz What hashrates is everyone else getting that are so bad with new drivers? I get zero because I refuse to use any sdk other than 2.1 Title: Re: 12.3 WHQL release ... ) Post by: -ck on April 01, 2012, 01:19:46 AM I'm now using the 12.3 LLQL (Linux Low Quality Labs) release and it's satisfactory on my 6970s and 7970. The 7970 on linux would crash at lower than normal clock speeds with the 12.2 release but that problem has gone away with 12.3.
Title: Re: 12.3 WHQL release ... ) Post by: juhakall on April 01, 2012, 10:55:47 AM If the new drivers continue to have problems with SDK 2.1, I guess it's time to move on and use the SDK bundled with the drivers + diablo kernel. That gives me about 98% of the hashrate compared to SDK 2.1.
Title: Re: 12.3 WHQL release ... ) Post by: -ck on April 01, 2012, 11:04:39 AM If the new drivers continue to have problems with SDK 2.1, I guess it's time to move on and use the SDK bundled with the drivers + diablo kernel. That gives me about 98% of the hashrate compared to SDK 2.1. It's worth noting that I spent a lot of time customising the poclbm kernel in cgminer as well so that it works well with sdk 2.6, and of course cgminer has a diablo kernel option as well.Title: Re: 12.3 WHQL release ... ) Post by: Diapolo on April 01, 2012, 02:40:44 PM If the new drivers continue to have problems with SDK 2.1, I guess it's time to move on and use the SDK bundled with the drivers + diablo kernel. That gives me about 98% of the hashrate compared to SDK 2.1. It's worth noting that I spent a lot of time customising the poclbm kernel in cgminer as well so that it works well with sdk 2.6, and of course cgminer has a diablo kernel option as well.An a diakgcn option as well (use with -k diakgcn -v2 -w 256) ;). Dia Title: Re: 12.3 WHQL release ... ) Post by: -ck on April 01, 2012, 09:46:59 PM The other thing is that sdk 2.4/2.5 should actually work fine and they're very close in performance to 2.1 anyway.
Title: Re: 12.3 WHQL release ... ) Post by: -ck on April 02, 2012, 05:03:45 PM I'm now using the 12.3 LLQL (Linux Low Quality Labs) release and it's satisfactory on my 6970s and 7970. The 7970 on linux would crash at lower than normal clock speeds with the 12.2 release but that problem has gone away with 12.3. I take it back. It is slightly less stable with 12.3 than with the 8.921 driver release. I randomly get a GPU disappearing with 12.3 that doesn't reappear after a spontaneous reboot, but its fan keeps spinning.Title: Re: 12.3 WHQL release ... ) Post by: ssateneth on April 02, 2012, 07:07:06 PM Thing is, if it ain't broken, don't fix it. Why would I ever "upgrade" to a dodgy driver/SDK if the ones I use now are proven to be the fastest and most reliable of all? The latest isn't always the greatest. 11.12/12.1 and 2.1 forevah.
Title: Re: 12.3 WHQL release ... ) Post by: DeathAndTaxes on April 02, 2012, 07:20:29 PM I agree. Most of the changes to drivers has to do with gaming functionality, improved compatibility with new games, and new feature bug fixes (tesselation, hydravision, etc).
Until we reach a point that a) existing drivers/SDK either can't be used anymore (most likel) b) offer better performance c) offer improved stability d) offer more features (expanded under/overclocking & under/overvolting, etc) I don't see a reason to Title: Re: 12.3 WHQL release ... ) Post by: -ck on April 02, 2012, 11:19:31 PM The fact is that the existing drivers -were- broken. It did not properly set up my mixed 7970/6970 rig and I had to put them a specific order on the motherboard to work, and to manually add devices to the xorg conf. So these problems should go away on moving from the preview release driver to 12.3. Furthermore, there were rumours of a very slight increase in hashrate going to 12.3. However, it introduced other problems as you've seen me say. But since I now have a working stable machine, I ain't changing it for shit unless there's a much more compelling reason.
|