Anyone running this on a Tahiti ?
Some stats with the latest build (built on 14.04, runs on 14.04 and 16.04): RX470 Nitro+ 4GB, Hynix RAM, modded bios (1500 straps), default GPU clock, 1925 memory clock - 83.5 sol/s Linux 16.04, amdgpu-pro Total 501.8 sol/s [dev0 86.3, dev1 86.6, dev2 85.3, dev3 78.5, dev4 83.1, dev5 88.5] 672 shares
Total 501.8 sol/s [dev0 84.1, dev1 86.1, dev2 86.6, dev3 80.1, dev4 82.1, dev5 88.7] 672 shares
Total 501.2 sol/s [dev0 80.8, dev1 86.4, dev2 87.7, dev3 83.5, dev4 82.6, dev5 87.8] 672 shares
Total 501.1 sol/s [dev0 79.2, dev1 89.3, dev2 87.9, dev3 85.7, dev4 79.3, dev5 86.8] 672 shares
Total 501.7 sol/s [dev0 80.9, dev1 90.6, dev2 84.6, dev3 85.5, dev4 78.5, dev5 85.6] 672 shares
RX470 Nitro+ 4GB, Elpida RAM, modded bios (1500 straps), default GPU clock, 2000 memory clock - 87 sol/s Linux 16.04, amdgpu-pro Total 88.0 sol/s [dev0 90.6] 330 shares
Total 86.8 sol/s [dev0 87.2] 330 shares
Total 86.5 sol/s [dev0 88.0] 330 shares
Total 87.3 sol/s [dev0 89.8] 330 shares
Total 86.7 sol/s [dev0 88.8] 330 shares dev1: 380X, stock bios, stock clocks - 45 sol/s dev2: 7950, stock bios, 1050 GPU, 1550 memory - 70 sol/s (slower than below due to very old AMD CPU) Linux 14.04, fglrx Total 116.6 sol/s [dev1 46.4, dev2 69.8] 360 shares
Total 117.5 sol/s [dev1 44.7, dev2 70.1] 360 shares
Total 116.7 sol/s [dev1 43.9, dev2 70.6] 360 shares
Total 117.6 sol/s [dev1 45.2, dev2 71.0] 360 shares
Total 116.7 sol/s [dev1 45.1, dev2 69.0] 360 shares
Total 115.6 sol/s [dev1 45.2, dev2 66.3] 360 shares
Total 115.6 sol/s [dev1 45.8, dev2 67.6] 360 shares
Total 114.8 sol/s [dev1 45.4, dev2 64.4] 360 shares 7970, stock bios, 1150 GPU, 1500 memory - 70 sol/s Linux 14.04, fglrx Total 70.5 sol/s [dev0 72.5] 358 shares
Total 71.1 sol/s [dev0 72.9] 358 shares
Total 71.0 sol/s [dev0 74.0] 358 shares
Total 70.6 sol/s [dev0 73.9] 358 shares
Total 70.4 sol/s [dev0 75.5] 358 shares
Total 70.3 sol/s [dev0 75.9] 358 shares dev1/2: 7950, stock bios, 1050 GPU, 1550 memory - 73 sol/s (faster than above due to better CPU G3240) dev3/4: 390X/390, stock bios, 1125/1150 GPU, 1500 memory - 100 sol/s dev5: 7970, modded bios, 1150 GPU, 1500 memory - 85 sol/s Linux 14.04, fglrx Total 421.6 sol/s [dev0 74.0, dev1 72.8, dev2 98.9, dev3 98.0, dev4 81.4] 164 shares
Total 422.7 sol/s [dev0 73.7, dev1 72.6, dev2 102.1, dev3 98.8, dev4 80.6] 167 shares
Total 422.9 sol/s [dev0 70.7, dev1 71.1, dev2 101.4, dev3 98.1, dev4 85.0] 167 shares
Total 423.1 sol/s [dev0 71.3, dev1 73.5, dev2 102.7, dev3 99.0, dev4 84.6] 169 shares
Total 424.0 sol/s [dev0 70.9, dev1 73.9, dev2 102.6, dev3 99.2, dev4 85.7] 171 shares
Total 425.3 sol/s [dev0 71.9, dev1 72.4, dev2 103.1, dev3 99.9, dev4 85.5] 173 shares
Total 426.0 sol/s [dev0 72.7, dev1 73.2, dev2 98.6, dev3 100.9, dev4 86.3] 174 shares
|
|
|
|
first install cygwin - python, then run miner with python
I have Instal python 3.4 and now I instal cygwin and don't work ((( I don't run Windows version, but it seems you have to install cygwin version of python. Native Windows one does not work. Я не использую Windows, но похоже, что нужно использовать python от cygwin. Нативная версия не работает. |
|
|
|
I think I am ready to go back to linux rigs. Can I ask someone to add a simple feature to the python code? I wish to port my open source cross-platform web based miner monitor for silentarmy. An example of it I already posted above:  It was written for Claymore's miner but currently supports only single request: {"id":0,"jsonrpc":"2.0","method":"miner_getstat1"}and expects some stats back (miner version, uptime in seconds, sol/s per card and total, total/rejected shares and temp:fan - not for now). It should wait for TCP connection on some port (3333). On connection it should receive an RPC request (that may or may not be CZM-compatible), return data and disconnect (as CZM does). Written properly, more RPCs could be supported (restart, pool change, etc). Unfortunately, I never used python for real and everything I write will not be optimal. I could also write an external script to parse output, but it also will not be cross-platform. So if anyone can add a feature of JSON RPC to the miner, I'd be happy to port the monitor for it. It is written in javascript and runs under nodejs (Windows, Linux, MacOS - all work as a host). |
|
|
|
4 RX 470 stock with 59~65 RX470 Nitro+ 4GB Elpida (straps 1500, GPU @1260, Mem @2000): Total 80.7 sol/s [dev0 78.8] 156 shares
Total 81.4 sol/s [dev0 80.4] 156 shares
Total 81.3 sol/s [dev0 81.0] 156 shares
Total 80.8 sol/s [dev0 80.1] 156 shares
Total 80.3 sol/s [dev0 80.3] 156 shares
Total 79.7 sol/s [dev0 80.4] 156 shares
Total 80.5 sol/s [dev0 80.1] 156 shares
WooHoo!!! |
|
|
|
I do not think 25% is right value.
At least for r9 390 on ubuntu 15.04 with fglrx I get:
1) 40-42H/s for silentarmy current git;
2) 52-55H/s for claymore 1.1;
Claymore 4 is stated to be even faster.
Here's v4 on 390X: |
|
|
|
I always assumed it was impossible to reverse engineer an EXE File back to the source code.
It is impossible to do verbatim. But a developer doesn't need that. It is a kind of art to see in machine code some constructs that can be identified. And it is possible to see somethimg useful - depending on your skills. If code is encrypted, it adds a bit of time to decrypt that. Again, depending on skills. Modern operating systems with dynamic linking and lot of system calls make this task a lot easier. If code runs in memory, everything is possible, even if the software was initially protected from debugging/reverse engineering. Makes sense only what you want to find, and how much time and efforts (and/or money) you want to put into the research. |
|
|
|
I have 6 windows rigs, and manage all from one computer. You can remote desktop without a monitor plugged in. Claymore updates take me less than 5 minutes for all 6. With remote monitor, life is easy.
Everything is possible. Makes only sense what's convenient and what's the price. On Linux I expose only ssh secure port, and use text terminal from my phone via slow GPRS connection (for instance) to get work done. On Windows I have to run GUI via fast link. I don't like the idea to expose RDP ports to the Internet, so I either have to use a kind of VPN, ssh passthrough, or use tools like TeamViewer. RDP has issues - miner sometimes can't read/manage temps/fans if started from remote session. Sometimes it works - I can't find out why and when. For miner there is absolutely no sense to run GUI to manage rigs. It is a matter of taste, but Linux is also free and more stable, has a watchdog that can reboot it even if GPU driver hangs. Windows sometimes can't or require external watchdog device. Etc, etc. |
|
|
|
I think there is more of a difference between drivers on Linux. Maybe speed difference also people with different CPUs? Some have posted their personal optimizations, but it is hard to judge typical speeds for sure.
CZM 1.1 gave me similar speeds for Windows and Linux on the same machine with RX470 x 2, 1GB or RAM and very old and slow CPU. Other Linux miner was not able to give the same due to high CPU requirements. Now the same machine runs 4.0 under Windows. So, at least one problem with "other miner" is high CPU usage. I don't like to use Linux because in general it is a royal pain to set things up. I would use it to get 6 cards on ASrock H81 BTC PRO boards, but when I set up, was dual mining, and can't undervolt in Linux. Some cards I can bios mod, so I could do it now, I just don't want to mess with it, and Win7 can do 5 cards with some MB Bios changes. I have used it before from time to time, and tried getting it going on HTPC, but ran into too many issues. Also When Ubuntu changed to new garbage UI, turned me off more. I know you can switch window managers, or use diff distro, but that's also more work. If I wasn't as busy, and have 5 kids, I would consider it more. I use Ubuntu Server VMs for work some though (web/android dev). So not against it, I just use what works best for me. I would tell the same Re: Windows. For headless rigs it is a pain in the ass. I used to run ubuntu off 1GB USB flash and never had any problem. Neither had GUI. Now I have to use 16GB USB flash and run Windows 10 To Go from them. I miss ssh for configuration. It's not about money, there are several reasons why I'm not going to release ZCash miner for Linux in near future - most of haters who say that I stole SA engine are on Linux so let's they use some different miner. Also I don't like to see as someone applies IDA to my miner to see how it works. All those may switch to Windows and continue running your miner. Also for those who concerned, it is not too difficult to run IDA on decrypted Windows code. It's just a matter of skills and efforts. Formally say, they studied your code the same way as you might study theirs (open source), and I didn't remember where your readme files explicitly prohibited reverse engineering. Still, I understand you (because somehow I am similar to you in that regard). But a lot of users miss Linux version, still being able to run Windows if no other comparable option exists yet. |
|
|
|
Just booted windows disk and tested newer Claymore 4.0
GPU #0: Ellesmere, 8192 MB available, 36 compute units
GPU #1: Ellesmere, 8192 MB available, 36 compute units
ZEC - Total Speed: 135.354 H/s, Total Shares: 151, Rejected: 1, Time: 00:05
ZEC: GPU0 68.841 H/s, GPU1 66.452 H/s
Pool switches: ZEC - 0
Current ZEC pool share target: 0x0025d4c3 (diff: 1732H)
GPU1 t=49C fan=62%, GPU2 t=60C fan=65%
//
This is with intensity set to 2 and my quad amd APU A8-7600 is 50% loaded. Using -i 0 I get almost equal results with silentarmy's miner. CZM 4.0: PowerColor 390X Devil (hybrid cooling) OC'ed: 100 Sol/s for primary card. 93-98 for others (and I don't know why - all risers are x1, Gen.2 PCI-e mode, CPU load with -i 0 is low, using 1-2 slowdowns with my weak G3240 CPU.  Agreed we need a Linux miner first, Windows users are happy with CZM. PS. Host is Windows, just forgot to update the label in my web monitor config. |
|
|
|
- to anyone who can't save from google drive due to download limit and have own gmail account - right-click on file, "make copy",
download from own google drive page. Tried for 3.1 - it did not help. |
|
|
|
In short, he uses rude words to say that there is little sense in increasing miner speed, because EVERYBODY get increased speeds, so in relative terms eveybody stay equal, with same profit as before, just using much more electricity and getting more heat. Also he whines for 2.5% fee and wants it to be decreased  So bored to read that "Russian" with syntax errors and slang, so even Google isn't able to translate it properly. But in fact, he is right in that: - more hashrate for ALL means the same profit (in contrast to this miner being sold privately to big companies) - more hashrate for all means more power consumption -> less profit - more hashrate on old cards -> more miners -> less profit - easier miner -> more newbies -> less profit He was wrong, though, saying that nothing changed except hashrate and power consumption. The author of the miner wants people use THIS miner, not others. So he tries to make it the fastest so all use it. Thus, more users of this miner - more dev fee. Easy as 1-2-3. So Claymore's interest is not a community as was said by someone, just a profit with very smart business model. He is a great developer, no questions. But still he is led by own interest, not community as someone said. The community is now just like a big private mining pool with 2.5% fee comparing to few "small" pools like suprnova and flypool with their 1% fee and lot of efforts to keep hardware running. More Sol/s does NOT mean more profit at all. So in the end all we've lost except dev. What I don't understand why to cut Linux version fee when big players use Linux rigs. I guess because big players already use private miners and only "community" miners who use Linux can't do that now. Looks like I went to bed and woke up in Moscow.
Mr.Putin? |
|
|
|
на Nvidia софт будет? а то 33 сол с гтх1070 борщевато
На 78 странице сам Клаймор отписался "I will not release NVidia support", что можно перевести дословно как "Я не буду делать поддержку Nvidia". Хотя на прошлой неделе на вопрос "Когда будет поддержка Nvidia", он ответил "Не на этой неделе безусловно". Майню на картах 290х Асус
Через не определенное количество временни перестает майнить и подвисает
Didn't you notice that this is not a Russian-speaking forum, guys? For 90% of people here it looks like a SPAM. |
|
|
|
I'm curious, what are the unmodified values for GPU_FORCE_64BIT_PTR, GPU_MAX_HEAP_SIZE, GPU_USE_SYNC_OBJECTS, GPU_MAX_ALLOC_PERCENT, GPU_SINGLE_ALLOC_PERCENT or is there a way to reset them to values before setx command? I ask this because I'm currently mining with my daily pc that i play games etc. Would any of these commands affect gaming etc. negatively?
I guess they are documented in the AMD SDK and by default they are not defined. Unless you know defaults may be better to remove those variables from the global environment (see advanced system properties, I believe, they can be found and deleted there if were set at least once). I can't say about affecting games, but for few known to me systems setting GPU_FORCE_64BIT_PTR=0 resulted in Calymore's ETH dual miner crash with RX470 cards. So I used all them but removed after that. On some other systems setting this showed me 3GB of VRAM for 380X and RX470 card instead of real 4GB. So in short, yes, I would remove all of them and use in the form of set (not setx) only those that really affect mining performance (by testing on a particular system). |
|
|
|
C. 5 x RX470 + 1 x RX480
Ubuntu 16.04.1 server, amdgpu-pro
Was 135-147 sol/s, now is 145-148 sol/s
Just wanted to ask about CPU model and usage. It seems that the performance highly depends on the CPU. Running 470x2 on old single core gave me 7 per thread on 470. Slightly better mobo + CPU gave 14/thread (28 per 470) - almost your result, see below. Claymore's gives 45 Sol/s per 470 on Windows - on the 1st single core machine with 1GB of RAM (45 vs 14 Sols/s of this miner on the same mobo under Linux). The results with single card and few cards on the same machine are also quite different. I use G3240 dual core CPUs on my rigs and it is not enough to run this at full speed. So as for me, moving some filtering from CPU/bus into cards should be considered as a priority task if we want to outperform Claymore's miner. I've read that it is ALREADY faster. But trying on my cards (7950, 7970, 390, 390X, 470) - all with G3240 CPUs - I was not able to get the same results. Was close to with a single RX470 (Elpida RAM, 1500 straps, 2000 mem/1260 GPU - 46-47 Sol/s, Ubuntu 16.04 + amdgpu-pro 16.40) but without latest eXtremal patch. So I do not understand how do you get a half of that only (148/6=25 Sol/s) on you rigs, but almost sure that the CPU usage is the reason. Have no other ideas. |
|
|
|
GPU_FORCE_64BIT_PTR 0
So write "set" before the GPU....stuff and you're good to go. I like to use "setx" with those commands in a separate bat and not set them everytime I start mining.
I never use setx because it affects every program running later, not just miner. And you may not need them same for all miners. But for miner it is enough to set them in the current shell that runs this bat file. The syntax of set and setx is different: for setx you do NOT need '=', but for set you do (thanks Microsoft for 'consistency'): setx GPU_FORCE_64BIT_PTR 0 or set GPU_FORCE_64BIT_PTR=0 Again, I will never spoil the global environment with setx unless I really need that. And in this particular case you hardly need it since anyway you run the miner from the bat file. So simple set is preferred. And yes, set /? or setx /? always help |
|
|
|
How low can it go???
Those called us idiots when we predicted that. And told "how much Sols can we squeeze from this card" ignoring the fact that in hope Claymore puts up the anticipated 80sols per 280x today or there is no profits mining ZEC on this price  I asked the same: Well which option was better?
- a smaller community which mining ZEC with "piece-of-shit"-miners (©Genoil) and earn 3 BTC/1 ZEC, or
- every noob, rag, tag and bobtail mining ZEC now with Claymore's and earn ~0.26 BTC/1 ZEC?
Don´t get me wrong, Claymore's miner is once more an excellent piece of software. But who (except himself) benefits now from it?
Surely, the ZEC hashrate would have risen also without his miner - but I´m sure, never such fast.
Agreed. When running a miner required some homework and people thought before dump, the price was high. Now every idiot (and that is not me as someone wrote in this thread earlier) mines and dumps it brainless, and price is falling. Yes, they squeeze more and more sols from old cards and still think that their profit will rise. They do not understand that profits rise only if some people have better miners, not all. And in the latter case we have more and more Sols/s, more and more cards, more and more power (compare 1.x and 2.x) but less and less profit. WooHoo! |
|
|
|
What about cpu usage on nedralph ft. mrb miner vs. claymore's?
That really is the main weak factor of silentarmy miner. I had to install miner on my friend's PC that is very slow single core Celeron with 1GB of RAM and RX470 x 2 cards. Silentarmy gave me only 7Sol/s per thread, so around 28 Sol/s for TWO RX470. The limiting factor was CPU and bus. I replaced the MB by a better one and got double performance - around 56 Sol/s. Still not a lot since the same miner with H81Pro BTC and G3240 gave more. Replacing the miner by CZM (let me call so the Claymore's Zcash miner further), I've got 90 Sol/s on that slowest mobo with single core CPU. So I hope mrb will pay some attention to this. Otherwise his miner isn't slower for modern cards. Can't say so yet for 79xx. But have to admit that 50% of success of CZM is remote management + telemetry, stability and easy use on all platforms. That pays for itself. And with the same performance people will use CZM just for that. As for me, I would use freeware miner and add telemetry scripting if necessary. But of course, we now need the same performance just to stay in a line with the majority. |
|
|
|
In this logic, the only ones mining would be the big farms. And this applies to any coin, not only ZEC. You are wrong! Unless you have a big farm and want to keep ZEC mining restricted to a few big players.
Genoil and Claymore are giving a chance for the domestic miner to make some profit, and that's a good thing!
Not only big players. Everyone could install linux, build silentarmy miner using clear instructions and run it home. But not everyone tried to do so. That is the key. That encouraged to learn something new. Now it is as simple as download and run. As for the chance, 1-2 days ago my small farm at home gave me $125/day with silentarmy what was rock solid for me. Today it is $50 even with CZM. No speculations, plain fact. |
|
|
|
The flaw with all your logic is that linux users have been seeing these speeds almost a week ago, the playfeild was not level , at some point windows users would have switched to linux and it would be the same net effect. Linux users (including me) have seen almost this not with 7970@46Sol/s. 290/390 - maybe, 4xx - maybe. And imagine how many 7950 cards were waiting... Also many people did not mine ZEC yet. There were reports on ZEC forums that they switch as soon as decent miner will be created. |
|
|
|
I guess, most peepz is now dumping, the price still falling reaches 0.74BTC as of the moment. and difficulty is also increasing. effect of claymore's Best miner :-)
Yeah, I really do not know why people are so happy. Here is the effect of CZM (this miner): profitability dropped by 2. In fact this is the end of profits on ZEC. Maybe it is good for decentralization, but it is an absolute evil for those who wanted (and made) some money on this. Let me explain in some bogus numbers if you like. Assume there were 3 players that generated 200, 300, 500 shares for 100 coins/day (10 shares per coin), they received 20 (200/10), 30 (300/10), 50 (500/10) ZEC coins. Assume 1 ZEC = 1 BTC. And they received 20, 30, 50 BTC/day. Now they have doubled hash rate and generate 400, 600 and 1000 shares. Since number of coins per day is the same (difficulty jump up to ensure it), now we need 20 shares per coin. They still create 100 coins/day and should receive 20 (400/20), 30 (600/20), 50 (1000/20) coins. The same amount, but increased power consumption. But now some lazy newbies started mining ZEC as well, and lot of old cards are now mining too. Let assume they added +20% of total shares. That is we decrease the ZEC profit by 20% and now receive 16, 24, 40 + new 20 percent of share for same 100 coins/day. Also we all are rich now and start dumping. The price dropped by 25%, and now in BTC we have 20% less. If 1 ZEC was = 1 BTC, now it is 0.75 BTC, and instead of original 20, 30, 50 BTC/day we and newbies receive 12 (16*0.75), 18 (24*0.75), 30 (40*0.75) and 15 (20*0.75) BTC. Was: 20, 30, 50
Now: 12, 18, 30 and 15 for new players who was waiting for this miner. And yes, you should also subtract 2.5% fee from this amount. Net result: 50% real profit loss. Numbers are not real, but the idea is the same. Do not know why people are so happy. I think only those who was not able to build a miner on Linux are now happy since they have come into the game. But good profitability is behind. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
