But I don't have a 4 core CPU...  What I do have is a gt610 in a winxp32* machine that stays running 24/7/365. (*I've also recently made the switch to live usb ubuntu to do away with the hard drives, but willing to revert if needed.) I've been desperately trying to find a miner that I can run (Lyra2rev2 especially) but apparently being a 32 bit system is making that an impossible task. Low hash rates and negative $ profit are of no concern as long as there are valid shares being delivered to something. CCminer is just so close to perfect for this but yet still out of reach. If this is a total pipe dream and beyond the scope of ccminer, I'm sorry to have wasted time in this topic. Alternatively, if anyone would be willing to point me in the right direction of a miner that would work, please do; I would appreciate it tremendously. Your main problem is that you want to mine a new algo on old HW. An older version of ccminer would probably work but you would be more limited in your choice of algos. 32 bit PCs aren't the problem, I've got one mining with Win7-32 and all precompiled versions are 32 bit anyway, I think the problem is XP. Compiling on Win7 and above may no longer work on XP. Your best bet is to compile on XP, I don't know if you've tried that yet. |
|
|
|
I have a motherboard that has five PCI slots (two PCI's are the small version). It didn't like four 750 Ti's, but was fine with three 750 Ti's and 960. Do you think this is a Windows thing out of curiosity?
Did you plug in all cards in at the same time ? When using windows i always start installing the cards in the pci-e port nearest the cpu. And then adding more cards one by one as long as they get detected by windows. Sometimes it can be a real hazzle before windows find all cards, i even have to move cards around on the pci-e ports to get all cards going. So, plugging all four cards in there and installing the graphics driver will probably not work right away. Make sure you use a powered riser in the x1 slot if the 750ti doesn't have an external power connector. |
|
|
|
Geforce GT 610, Fermi, compute 2.1, 48 cuda cores.
My mistake, missed it when I checked the list. You wouldn't get much out of it anyway, a 4 core cpu could probably do better. |
|
|
|
Crazy question - could i run (2) algos on the same rig in (2) separate instances. For example - (1) instance running X11 and (1) instance running (Skein2) on the same cards? What are the draw backs if any? I checked power consumption and there doesn't seem to be a change in power draw. Just wondering if I can break my rig that way? Thanks - pokeytex
Can't break your rigs that way but likely the driver will crash sooner or later. Or one algo will probably dominate the other so the hashrate won't be equal. I've done it unintentionally, never saw any crashes but never let it run for any length of time or measure performance. |
|
|
|
Can't get win32 to do it.. No luck on linux.. Bios on my other computer won't let me use the card.. Most algos rarely give accepted shares if at all with other miners.. I guess my 610 is going to sit out cold. 610 is not a cuda gpu. |
|
|
|
Crazy question - could i run (2) algos on the same rig in (2) separate instances. For example - (1) instance running X11 and (1) instance running (Skein2) on the same cards? What are the draw backs if any? I checked power consumption and there doesn't seem to be a change in power draw. Just wondering if I can break my rig that way? Thanks - pokeytex
Interesting thought. It won't break anything, it's just like running multiple processes on a CPU. But I don't think it will work well. Most processors perform better with fewer processes with better cache performance and less task switching overhead. Vector (SIMD) processors like cuda are even more optimized for doing the same thing over and over. What you are suggesting would be suitable in a hyperthreaded environment where two threads share a common set of execution resources. As long as the two threads require different execution units they can run simultaneously. Unfortunately mining algos use almost exclusively integer arithmetic so the combined peformance of the two threads would be the equivalent of one. It might be worth an experiment to see what the combined performance is. You can always run different instances on different cards if you want to mine two algos at the same time. |
|
|
|
hi,
this question is for the pool opp. or at least I think it is.
from the ccminer version .69 till now (up to .74)
my units are all running on .74 sp-mod but it keeps showing them running as .68 sp-mod, both in the pool page and in my wallet.
true it does not make any difference in through put, but it just catches me off guard when I look while still half a sleep and see .68 and not the newest version .74
thanks
Just wondering, are you looking for your miner under the correct algo you have it set too? And, did you use sp_'s 7zip .exe or compile it yourself? More than likely, I think you may be looking at the wrong algo. But.... wish that was true. but no, I am looking at the right alog and i am looking at the right wallet. ( where it list the miners that your running). and i use the the down load. in my cmd file it shows up as .74 but on the pool and my wallet it comes up as .68, The first line output when you start ccminer is the version. That's what the pool will display. but it is not. that is the reason that I started this, by asking the pool op to look into this. Your mind seems closed to the fact you are not running the version of ccminer you think you are. Until you open your mind I can't help you. Good luck waiting for the OP. |
|
|
|
"I wouldn't be concerned with drawing 75W from an x1 slot if the x16's weren't already fully loaded.
How does that conflict with your statement?
I think I misread that statement. I thought it meant that a x16 slot can provide more power. Maybe you meant that you can power up to 2 cards from a standard motherboard? Then yes: I use to say that up to three is safe. I think I know where we went off the rails. I was describing the intent of the 1x slot in the context of the entire PCIe subsystem while you were focussed on the maximium power of a 1x slot in isolation. I also assumed that if someone (a miner specifically) was looking at installing a GPU in a 1x slot they already had GPUs in the x16 slots. We're all good. |
|
|
|
The main benefit of the BTC MBs is the ability to supply 75W to 1x slots which are normallly limited to 15-25W, which makes
the use of unpowered risers possible.
All the motherboards can provide 75W thru the 1x slots, it's by specifications. The rest of the pins do not provide any power. The difference is that the BTC MB can provide 75W to ALL the slots together. I don't have the actual spec but this seems to say otherwise... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCI_Express#PowerI wouldn't be concerned with drawing 75W from an x1 slot if the x16's weren't already fully loaded. 200W is the max draw I would put on the PCIe bus unless the MB is specifically designed for higher. I assume you are reading it wrong. It says that the card can request 75W regardless of the type, even though it should be a graphic card; no mentions of the connector type. Furthermore, the powered pins are all on the 1x part of the connector. I don't know why you are bringing up connector types and power pins because it has nothing to do with what I'm saying. I'm talking about the aggregate power through the PCIe bus of the motherboard. A quote from you in a previous post: "The difference is that the BTC MB can provide 75W to ALL the slots together." I agree entirely. Then I said: "I wouldn't be concerned with drawing 75W from an x1 slot if the x16's weren't already fully loaded. 200W is the max draw I would put on the PCIe bus unless the MB is specifically designed for higher." How does that conflict with your statement? |
|
|
|
hi,
this question is for the pool opp. or at least I think it is.
from the ccminer version .69 till now (up to .74)
my units are all running on .74 sp-mod but it keeps showing them running as .68 sp-mod, both in the pool page and in my wallet.
true it does not make any difference in through put, but it just catches me off guard when I look while still half a sleep and see .68 and not the newest version .74
thanks
Just wondering, are you looking for your miner under the correct algo you have it set too? And, did you use sp_'s 7zip .exe or compile it yourself? More than likely, I think you may be looking at the wrong algo. But.... wish that was true. but no, I am looking at the right alog and i am looking at the right wallet. ( where it list the miners that your running). and i use the the down load. in my cmd file it shows up as .74 but on the pool and my wallet it comes up as .68, The first line output when you start ccminer is the version. That's what the pool will display. |
|
|
|
The main benefit of the BTC MBs is the ability to supply 75W to 1x slots which are normallly limited to 15-25W, which makes
the use of unpowered risers possible.
All the motherboards can provide 75W thru the 1x slots, it's by specifications. The rest of the pins do not provide any power. The difference is that the BTC MB can provide 75W to ALL the slots together. I don't have the actual spec but this seems to say otherwise... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCI_Express#PowerI wouldn't be concerned with drawing 75W from an x1 slot if the x16's weren't already fully loaded. 200W is the max draw I would put on the PCIe bus unless the MB is specifically designed for higher. |
|
|
|
i wonder what would happen if the powered risers had power connected AND the 2 molex connections were connected at the same time? ... theoretically - it shouldnt matter as the system will only draw what its needs ... practically - im too chicken to try  ... i really dont want to find that my theory is way off and destroy 6 cards in one hit ... #crysx Feel free to do it, BTC mobo is working nice with 6 cards ( 960 ) and all 6 non-powered risers ( 2 molex on mobo fitted ) for me. I have 2 of them, other is with 5 cards + 1 on USB3.0 because had to be placed further for better cooling ( try to have some 8-10 cm between cards ) And any risers need maintenance - cleaning from time to time, that could save you some cards having the powered risers AND the molex connectors on the motherboard at the same time? ... #crysx The powered riser I have doesn't have the slot power connected so it would be of no use to have extra MB power available. I presume most, if not all, powered risers are the same. The main benefit of the BTC MBs is the ability to supply 75W to 1x slots which are normallly limited to 15-25W, which makes the use of unpowered risers possible. |
|
|
|
I can see it in the link. I don't have a compute 3.5 card. Maybe there are some possible speedups to be made on the 780ti. Anyone with a 780ti card who can compile the latest version (add compute 3.5 in the projectfile (or makefile) What hashrates are you getting? EVGA 780ti SC +100 GPU OC Quark: 11.7 MH/s X11: 6.35 MH/s Lyra2v2: 7.7 MH/s Neo: 330 KH/s (375 with r58) |
|
|
|
Using the x86 latest release, I'm getting a * is not a valid win32 application error. I'm using WinXP 32bit with a 2.1 card on a spare computer and upgrading that one is not an option, nor is relocating it to a better machine. I really want it to work and I'm having trouble finding any good algorithms that cooperate on older/different versions.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
That error indicates a problem with the ccminer.exe executable, probably not compatible with WinXP32. Since you've eliminated most options the only one left is to try building ccminer from source on your XP machine. Even if it's possible (I doubt that it is) it's not worth the effort. |
|
|
|
the p= doesnt work
right now im hashing lyre at .18 and i have p=.25
thats below profitable at that point
Again, not my pool and I don't usually set the difficulty, I let the pool do that. However, instead of p=<diff>, you might give c=<algo>_<diff> a try. Example: c=LYB_0.025 Just a thought. CapnBDL  p= is price d= is diff My friend, you are a bit mistaken with this type of pool. p=...is the password (which almost no one uses), so in it's place the c=..is the norm, /w c= meaning the coin (algo). Sometimes, after that you can add a difficulty with the _xx. The underscore being the action.This pool is based on the old yaamp pool and I'm just trying to help. A few of the pools (Westhash,etc) allow the d=...as difficulty, not sure on this one. Not saying I know the code, just offering a different option. Can't hurt to try...what have you got to lose? Try it! Let me know, I'd like too. Settle down. The question has nothing to do with difficulty or coin selection. Hashpower (as did yaamp) supports a price option in the password according to the documentation. Just a wild guess but try adding a leading zero: -p p=0.25. The p= option has multiple uses so it might be picky about syntax and insist a price start with a numeric. |
|
|
|
You should go for the gtx 750 with 1gig of memory. Pick it up for less that $100 on ebay. overclock the core to 1,5 Ghz and get 6,2MHASH@quark with a tdp of 38Watt.. Some time ago quark was paying 0.1BTC per GHASH, but the market has crashed. Most altcoins are not profitable anymore.
$0.33 a day ROI in 300 days with free power.. But you can also mine lyra2v2@4MHASH
Okay, I'm still learning. So would it be true to say that a Maxwell 750 will outperform a Keplar 780? Or are there optimized forks for each still giving the 780 an edge? And in terms of computing power, it the 750ti worth the few extra dollars? Don't discard an old card if it's bought and paid for, use it. But if you're buying new, definitely go maxwell. A 780ti will hash double a 750ti on most algos with either fork. The downside with the 780ti is power consumption, about 4 times a 750ti. The 780 vs 750 comparison is probably similar. I can't speak for sm 3.0. The obsession with 750/750ti is they appear to be the most power efficient cards available which is important for farms where electricity is a major expense. |
|
|
|
@ joblo, Slava_K,
I have compiled just fine, in the past. Right up thru 1.5.69, then Community did an upgrade. Now, it won't even compile the files it used to. Not sure what my next step is. Might have to reload everything needed 'fresh'. Damn, I hate it when MS does it's upgrades.
Thanks for the info ppl.
Did you reinstall cuda after upgrading VSC? |
|
|
|
HI,
I am trying to do a 'build' on the new ccminer, in windows, using Visual Studio Community but am getting errors when I try to load for a solution.
error reads;
W:\TEMP\ccminer-1.5.73\ccminer.vcxproj : error : The operation could not be completed. Unspecified error
W:\TEMP\ccminer-1.5.73\ccminer.vcxproj : error : One or more errors occurred.
Has anyone else had this problem and how do I correct? I know there is a working .exe in the 7z file but I like to build on my machine. What do I not have installed? Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks
I had no problems compiling. Hiw did this error occur? I assume it's your first attempt if you suspect something is missing. I generally double click on ccminer.sln. If this doesn't work try to start VSC all by itself then open ccminer.sln from VSC. If it doesn't work it should, at least, point you in the right direction. I'm guessing from the error message that you tried to open the wrong file or a corrupt download. Also make sure you have lots of disk space. |
|
|
|
nVidia Driver 358.91, Win 7 x64--
I upgraded the driver on my Win 7 box today, and all I get from NiceHash is "retry in 30 seconds" using release dot 73. Not just Quark, but Lyra2v2 and Neoscrypt also. I rebooted, no better performance. I then played a game, as my GTX 960 on this box is usually the first to try something new. My rigs are Linux boxes.
I'll maybe roll the driver back tomorrow. --scryptr
It is a pool side problem. I use miner control and after 3 retries switching to another stratum. Well it's not likely a pool side problem if he is is the only one with the problem. I have seen two similar problems on nicehash for which I have no explanation. All of my rigs fail to connect to nicehash on the first atempt but suceed on the retry. There is no error message other than the retry message. This has been happening for a few months and is consistent. No one else seems to have reported this problem. I have also seen repeated connection failures on one machine only. It would retry forever and always fail. Rebottong the machine would fix it temporarilly. This problem ocurred for a while then vanished. I'm not sure what made it go away, maybe a driver upgrade. These problems have never occurred on any other pool, just nicehash, or more specifically westhash usa. |
|
|
|
Hi Guys,
It seems my original post has caused so much confusion I would like to explain a bit further. I was/am having trouble connecting to the pool. Here is what I was/am trying to do. I wanted to mine the 'Quark' algo...not the coin (payout to a different coin). While mining the 'Quark' algo, I entered a completely different coin/algo to be paid in (lets say Dash (x11), as an example). I set my GPU to the correct 'Quark' port of 4033. I entered my 'Dash' info (address), etc, but am getting the 'Authenication failure' error message.
Is that 'NOT' the way this pool operates? In order for me to mine a 'quark' algo, do I have to enter/mine to a quark address. If so, then your instructions are not very good and how do I get a pay-out to a different coin than what I mined?
I hope this clears up the problem and someone can now tell me what to do...other than tell me to read the friggin' directions. (not a noob, ya boob).
Thank You
yiimp doesn't do coin conversion so you mine a coin, not an algo, and get paid in that coin. It doesn't work like the old yaamp. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
