...ignoring the fact it's a very power hungry algo.
You know that the power depends on the voltage, right? Lower the power limit to 50% on nvidia or lower the voltage/core clock on amd and it'll draw less than ethereum. Nobody is forcing you to run at max power level, especially when the efficiency of hash/watt decreases with the power draw.
Lyra2z can still be mined at the original power level. You can simply lift the limit up and it'll hash more.
ProgPow and most other core-based algorithms scale perfectly well with core count and doesn't have these weird discrepancies where a weak card (RX 570) hashes as much as a twice more expensive one (GTX 1070). That way you can get 2x more performance from 2x more expensive card, so it just balances it out. RX 570 and 580 will be as powerful as GTX 1060 3 and 6GB. Vega 56/64 will be as powerful as GTX 1070/1070Ti.
Yes, there are algorithms where AMD or NVIDIA are still better, but right now we're focusing on ProgPow.
Of course you can lower the power limit on ProgPow. I'm doing just that with my Vega cards for example. I need to drop it by 30% to keep a rig of six Vega64's under 1400W... Which unfortunately it has a large impact on the hashrate. So it might improve your efficiency (slightly) but not enough to make it remarkably more profitable. On RX 570's dropping PL by only 10% radically lowers hashrate and it worsens as you go lower.
I have 8 vegas and they are all modded voltages are like 850 to 800 for thr core and they pull no more than 160 to 180 watts even on x16 , progpow and like 140 watts on cn forks .
vegas must be power play modded with that spreadsheet unless you have refernce card which has a power play mod floating around.
I never even touch the power limit on any of my amd cards, it’s overdriven tool for my rx cards and powerplay plus overdriven for the vegas.
My vegas are my best mining cards hash/watt.
btw why is there no power play mod for rx cards?
Actually I had never seen that answer so happy days.
I am indeed running a modded soft PP table on the Vegas. But I can't run such low voltages or the cards will crash. I've got reference Sapphire RX Vega 56's flashed to 64's btw. Have you got AIB Vegas?
This is my reg file, in case someone can spot anything terrible in it:
Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00
Get in touch via bitcointalk on updates or further development wishes. User brnsted
ETH A13015081E1f9CF27A2843e2A623F362D0d08666
XMR 47NgZN7Mp5CcfKzUKhFHXiMuXghudzFegUPWaTUJU71QVze3P1o2gd9MuhroHrYGAH1spqWEWDrnvUp eqFCic8B772ySpCM
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Class\{4d36e968-e325-11ce-bfc1-08002be10318}\0005]
"PP_PhmSoftPowerPlayTable"=hex:B6,02,08,01,00,5C,00,E1,06,00,00,EE,2B,00,00,1B,\
00,48,00,00,00,80,A9,03,00,F0,49,02,00,8E,00,08,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,\
00,00,00,00,00,02,01,5C,00,4F,02,46,02,94,00,9E,01,BE,00,28,01,7A,00,8C,00,\
BC,01,00,00,00,00,72,02,00,00,90,00,A8,02,6D,01,43,01,97,01,F0,49,02,00,71,\
02,02,02,00,00,00,00,00,00,08,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,05,00,07,00,03,00,05,00,\
00,00,00,00,00,00,01,08,20,03,52,03,52,03,52,03,52,03,52,03,6B,03,89,03,01,\
01,89,03,01,01,84,03,00,08,60,EA,00,00,00,40,19,01,00,01,80,38,01,00,02,DC,\
4A,01,00,03,90,5F,01,00,04,00,77,01,00,05,90,91,01,00,06,C0,D4,01,00,07,01,\
08,D0,4C,01,00,00,00,80,00,00,00,00,00,00,1C,83,01,00,01,00,00,00,00,00,00,\
00,00,70,A7,01,00,02,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,88,BC,01,00,03,00,00,00,00,00,\
00,00,00,38,C1,01,00,04,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,88,D5,01,00,05,00,00,00,00,\
01,00,00,00,70,D9,01,00,06,00,00,00,00,01,00,00,00,00,26,02,00,07,00,00,00,\
00,01,00,00,00,00,05,60,EA,00,00,00,40,19,01,00,00,80,38,01,00,00,DC,4A,01,\
00,00,90,5F,01,00,00,00,08,28,6E,00,00,00,2C,C9,00,00,01,F8,0B,01,00,02,80,\
38,01,00,03,90,5F,01,00,04,F4,91,01,00,05,D0,B0,01,00,06,C0,D4,01,00,07,00,\
08,6C,39,00,00,00,24,5E,00,00,01,FC,85,00,00,02,AC,BC,00,00,03,34,D0,00,00,\
04,68,6E,01,00,05,08,97,01,00,06,EC,A3,01,00,07,00,01,68,3C,01,00,00,01,04,\
3C,41,00,00,00,00,00,50,C3,00,00,00,00,00,80,38,01,00,02,00,00,A0,86,01,00,\
04,00,00,01,08,00,98,85,00,00,40,B5,00,00,60,EA,00,00,50,C3,00,00,01,80,BB,\
00,00,60,EA,00,00,94,0B,01,00,50,C3,00,00,02,00,E1,00,00,94,0B,01,00,40,19,\
01,00,50,C3,00,00,03,78,FF,00,00,40,19,01,00,88,26,01,00,50,C3,00,00,04,40,\
19,01,00,80,38,01,00,80,38,01,00,50,C3,00,00,05,80,38,01,00,DC,4A,01,00,DC,\
4A,01,00,50,C3,00,00,06,00,77,01,00,00,77,01,00,90,5F,01,00,50,C3,00,00,07,\
90,91,01,00,90,91,01,00,00,77,01,00,50,C3,00,00,01,18,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,\
0B,E4,12,60,09,60,09,4B,00,0A,00,54,03,90,01,90,01,90,01,90,01,90,01,90,01,\
90,01,00,00,00,00,00,02,04,31,07,DC,00,DC,00,DC,00,90,01,00,00,59,00,69,00,\
4A,00,4A,00,5F,00,73,00,73,00,64,00,40,00,90,92,97,60,96,00,90,55,00,00,00,\
00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,02,02,D4,30,00,00,02,10,60,EA,00,\
00,02,10
In my experience w/ a number of other algos (haven't tested PP yet,) AIB and ref aren't all that different performance or efficiency wise - mainly it's just about cooling. As for your PPT, i can say for certain that at least on CNv2, those voltages would be completely unnecessary for those clocks - even using TRM which is the most taxing CNv2 miner out there. Just as @Marvell2 stated - 800-850mv (avg about 840) is what seems to be necessary for an 1107 SOC clock, while also running a core clock in the range you're using. Furthermore, given you're flashed to a 64 bios, you should be able to go up to an 1107 mem clock w/ no change to voltage - whether that provides any benefit to this algo vs your 1000Mhz setting, I'm not sure.
...unless I am doing something wrong.
Your top SOC is 1200, but you only run that w/ a mem clock over 1107. For <= 1107 clocks in mem state P3, you'll be running an 1107 SOC, which is the major factor (possibly more so than core clock) in what voltage you'll need. So a mem clock range from 1100-1140 can cause a massive power swing - right at 1108Mhz. 1200 SOC requires around 900mv, 1107 requires ~835mv (+/- 10mv) from my experience - at least w/ CNv2. SOC and core seem to share voltage lines, so depending on core clock, those numbers can go up/down. For instance, w/ ethash, core frequency can go all the way down to 850MHz (if not lower, but that's the driver floor) w/o affecting performance, which leaves a lot of power headroom for SOC - i can get my 64s all the way down to 805mv still running 1107 mem.
950-975mv sounds really high to me, even for a 1200 SOC. At least for CNv2, that would be crazy high. It's possible PP is super taxing on the core, pulling more power that way, and thus starving the SOC causing instability. But if you keep your mem under 1107, it's hard to believe you would need even 900mv. Sounds like something else - I run ref Sapphires as well as Nitros, and they all behave roughly how I've detailed here. Btw, I'm assuming samsung mem? maybe diff if hynix - possible that you're just running too high clocks for it. Otherwise, if it's not your settings, maybe you have a power delivery problem?
They are ref Sapphires and do have Samsung memory indeed.
The power delivery, huh. Who knows. I've got an EVGA 1600 G2 to power the six of them which leaves enough headroom, at least for CNv1/2. They are all plugged on an Onda D1800 board, which might actually be the culprit. I'm not sure how well built that board is. There might just be power leakage/loss from there.
try only 3 cards and alternate the slots.
I used to do that with that board and it allowed me to push cards pretty hard.