 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »
|
|
Any response from this Jack-ass yet?
|
|
|
|
Awesome sleuthing, spruce. I'd tip you if I wasn't so cheap!  |
|
|
|
|
I don't care when they allow trading. I just want access to my account to get my BTC out. I want that ASAP!
|
|
|
|
|
+1
The suspicious activity list doesn't show any logins from others so people must be trying (and failing) to access my account.
My gmail address was in the leak as well. I use unique passwords for all accounts, luckily.
|
|
|
|
|
It's not just you. I'm experiencing more stales than valids right now...
|
|
|
|
This is the way I do it. user@miner00:~$ cat screen_mining.rc
screen -t GPU0 0 /home/user/mine.sh 1
screen -t GPU1 1 /home/user/mine.sh 2
screen -t GPU2 2 /home/user/mine.sh 3
user@miner00:~$
mine.sh sets up the clocks, the fans, etc on the specified card and launches the miner. just run like this: screen -c screen_mining.rc |
|
|
|
|
I've got 3 5870s and am currently mining in 3 different pools. I like each pool for different reasons so I decided it would be best to spread the love. The benefit of redundancy (in case a pool goes down) is nice as well.
|
|
|
|
Are you running it on linux? if so did you do env Display= :0.1 or whatever you need to do?
Yep. DISPLAY is set properly. Other calls (like setfanspeed) work. Those two calls always fail. |
|
|
|
Odd, can't get core or memory clocks from one of my two 5870s. core: getCoreClockSpeed() Failed.
mem: getMemoryClockSpeed() Failed.
Edit: typo, should be 5870. |
|
|
|
|
I was contemplating writing this exact thing. Thank you. Will check it out.
|
|
|
|
It should never ever try to run clc alone. clc is invoked (was invoked) by the OpenCL runtime itself. With 2.4, clc is deprecated and it should be not exec'd at all.
Hm it could be somehow trying to use an older SDK. Please check again what the LD_LIBRARY_PATH variable contains (it is the only envvar you need with 2.4 as ATISTREAMSDKROOT one was deprecated). Also, you can check the SDK version in effect by doing:
ldd /usr/bin/hashkill |grep OpenCL
this will print out the exact path to the OpenCL library used.
ldd reports I'm using 2.4 as expected.. I'm confused. |
|
|
|
|
wth? I was submitting shares but they were not being accounted for for a few hours....
|
|
|
|
Hmmmm...perhaps I should add a build log output option. That's rather strange indeed, it's a generic one and there should be no reason it fails on 5870 while compiling on 5570 for example....
Ah I see now...you are reaching a hardcoded limit for a binary size. OK this will be fixed.
I don't think this is for me, at least... I ran an strace on hashkill and it appears that it may be dying while trying to run clc? I look a little further and it appears my 2.4 SDK doesn't have a clc binary in bin/x86_64 (or at all). Something may be up with my SDK. I re-downloaded it and see the same thing. Am I missing something here? Edit: More research shows that they removed clc from the 2.4 SDK. Does hashkill still need it? |
|
|
|
Yeah, there are some optimizations in the kernel, specific for 2.4 SDK. It should not be failing to build the kernel though, that's rather strange. Did you install the icd-registration.tgz stuff from 2.4?
Yeah. Just verified it's contents are in /etc/OpenCL/vendors - it is.. No change. |
|
|
|
Hmm you did not forget to do sudo ./install.sh, not just ./install.sh ?
Nope. It'll work if I change the SDK to 2.3. But with 2.4 it will not work at all. (2.3 is slow for me) |
|
|
|
|
Drop your memory speeds down to 300MHz and you'll see quite a drop in temps.
I'm running two 5870s on a Celeron 2.6GHz with almost no CPU usage. But I'm in Linux so I am not sure what to expect in Windows.
|
|
|
|
What GPU do you have, bolapara?
Two 5870s |
|
|
|
Hmmm, trying to use the latest version with SDK 2.4 and I get this: [hashkill] Compiling OpenCL kernel source (amd_bitcoin.cl)[error] (ocl_bitcoin.c:997) clBuildProgram error (-11) |
|
|
|
phoenix 1.46 agg=13 bfi_int vectors card 1: 5870, 995 core, 300 mem poclbm - 431 phatk - 438 card 2: 5870, 900 core, 300 mem poclbm - 389 phatk - 397 Nice little bump. |
|
|
|
Just run it open-sided. Not as ideal as a high-flowing case, sure, but I just don't think that sort of expense is necessary for a degree or two of difference from running a cheapo case open sided.
Fair point for those it works for but it isn't always an option for everyone. I need to keep the sound to a minimum. |
|
|
|
|
