What is the lscpu or cat /proc/cpuinfo output for the coffee lake cpu?
Are SHA extensions supported like as in the apollo lake CPU?
Thank you for your help.
No SHA until Cannonlake. |
|
|
|
Dont get it about simd and groesti.
Two of the slowest algos of the X1X chains, which sp_ devoted a lot of work to (rightfully). Also they are probably what you can improve more, based on alexis code. Ironically two of the better functions on the CPU. There is no HW AES on a GPU so that affects Groestl. Simd on the CPU is horizontally vectorized maybe it will provide some ideas for improving the GPU implementation. By horizontal I mean that a single nonce can be hashed using vector instructions where vertical would be hashing multiple nonces in parallel in a single thread. |
|
|
|
Hi, the aes-avx2 windows binary build crashes on i5-7600 while using hsr algo (-t 4 -a hsr). No issues for aes-avx version.
Looking into it. |
|
|
|
New in v3.6.9
Added phi1612 algo for LUX coin
Added x13sm3 algo, alias hsr, for Hshare coin
Hshare coin coins do not seem to be mine What is the updated algorithm for mining the coin? Thanks for reposting the first post but I've already read it, maybe you should read it too. |
|
|
|
|
Why not both? The GPU needs a CPU to host it so make it a Ryzen.
|
|
|
|
Hi, I haven't been on here for a while now. Just wondering if the Windows binary is now compiled with SHA support working. I have both a Ryzen 1700 and a TR 1950X I'd like to fully utilize when there's down time, which both have hardware SHA acceleration if I am correct.
Thanks!
Unfortunately I can't yet compile with SHA. One user claims to have successfully done it on Windows but didn't share the procedure so I'm now skeptical. |
|
|
|
|
The latest version of cpuminer-opt now supports phi1612. Follow the link in my sig.
|
|
|
|
latest ccminer with x14 algo giving me invalid shares
It's not x14. It's a new algo with 14 functions, specifically x13 + sm3. In cpuminer-opt it's called x13sm3 but hsr also works as an alias. |
|
|
|
Will that x14 work with older coins that use x14...should be called x14a?
It's not x14. It's a different algo. You cannot mine HCash with asics. The creator of the opensource ccminer gpu-miner just modified the x14 in ccminer to be able to mine hcash. He should have renamed the algo to -a hcash Yes he should have.  Thx sp Trying to catch up on 8 months of being away and not being able to mine...only have 8x 750ti's hashing right now. The 2x 980ti..2x 970..and 1x 1070 are in the closet and I'm not allowed to mine with them yet.  Dev too lazy, has x14 case call hsr function. hsr seems a reasonable algo name. Even though it's a coin symbol it's the only coin to use the algo. x13sm3 is a more technically accurate name as it's actually x13 + sm3. That follows the same naming scheme as x11evo and x11gost. It doesn't make sense to name it x14 because it's x14 - shabal + sm3. I'm leaning toward x13sm3 with hsr as an alias. |
|
|
|
the dev was tagged with red trust be careful i think this is another signatum scam ongoing, the modus operandi look the same, because the coin do not offer anything new a part from the algo
You mined complete bullshit-clone DNR VEGAcoin, that have charged in scam straight from the launch, now trading less than 1 satoshi on doge market and soon will be delisted, and now you are talking about scam. Just go away. Maybe it's the same like SIGT, but you don't have the right to talk about scam after all. saying that this is a scam doesn't mean that i will not mine it, i'm just telling the truth that's all we all know that this place is full of scam and we will mine regardless, but newbie investors need to know this The negative trust rating should be put into perspective. It's just some blowhard expressing an opinion. In my opinion it's an abuse of the trust rating feature because there was no trust relationship. No one's been scammed, it's just a coin launch. Even if it's just another clone or shitcoin, it doesn't make it a scam. The comment with the negative tag... Yet another brand new account launching yet another pump-and-dump clonecoin.
Don't be fooled, these anonymous 'devs' are the same people behind multiple other useless clonecoins launched with the same pick-n-mix approach to the PoW algorithm as though that somehow makes it 'innovative'. It does not.
Would the author care to backup the claims? Give us the details so we can judge for ourselves. |
|
|
|
Anyone planning on testing the 7980XE?
The specs don't impress me and it's overpriced. It has a low base clock and a relatively small cache, both critical for CPU mining. Intel is known for better single threaded performance but that doesn't matter when mining. The 24 MB cache limits the number of threads mining cryptonight to 12, not even enough to load all the physical cores. A Threadripper 1920X (12C/24T, 32MB cache) will likely perform better for less than half the price. Compute intensive algos are irelevant because GPUs are much more efficient and CPUs can't comptete. The 7980XE doesn't yet have SHA support, unlike Ryzen, but that's less of an issue because there are few algos that can use it. It does have AVX512 but I don't see much benefit in that because it only improves compute performance. On those algos that could potentially use it the gain would be small, less than the gain from AVX to AVX2. There are fewer opportunities to promote AVX2 to AVX512 because AVX512 works on larger vectors, only algos that use vectors of 512 bits or greater can use it. I'm curious for some real results to compare, but I won't be bying one. Keep in mind that it extends the registers to 32 (xmm16-xmm31 / ymm16-ymm31 / zmm16-zmm31). If register pressure is an issue, it can help. It also offers masking with K registers which might be useful in some cases. One problem though is that avx512 gets underclocked... in a xeon system which worked around 2 - 2.1 ghz normal, and typical code execution was boosted at 2.6ghz, avx512 was running at ~1.8ghz. Google cloud has some servers with avx512 which you can play on without buying avx512 CPUs, but they kind of suck at benchmarking due to being VMs with unstable performance (resource sharing). Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I have not seen any register issues with the existing vectored code. The x, y & z regs are also overlaid in the 7980XE but only the lower 256 or 128 bits can be accessed by ymm or xmm respectively. This creates a lot of overhead when an app needs to revert to smaller vectors for some operations. Like I said there are fewer opportunities with larger vector operations. AVX & AVX2 are also underclocked, AVX512 is underclocked more. The K registers seem interesting. I don't fully understand them but they appear to be able to reduce the number of instructions when shuffling vector elements. |
|
|
|
This is the home of cpuminer-opt, The optimized CPU miner.
v3.6.8
Legacy version 3.5.9.1
someone can teel me what of the 2 versions is best for my CPU AMD A10 quad-core processor A10-7300 turbo core 3.20GHz??? Thank you You conveniently left out the part that explains the legacy version. Anyway it's virtually useless because the affected algorithms mostly have ASIC miners now or very efficient GPU miners. The only people who should consider using the legacy version are those who know what the're doing. If you have to ask, don't use it. |
|
|
|
|
Good advice but for the wrong reason.
Algorithms are the key but the explanation seems contradictory.
Algos that run hot are so because the CPU can do more work and hash more efficiently.
Algos like cryptonight run cooler because the CPU is often stalled waitng for data from memory.
Now the paradox. Algos that are efficient with a CPU are more efficient with a GPU and even more
efficient with an ASIC (if one exists). Even though the CPU hash is efficient it can't compete with
a GPU or ASIC.
The best algos to mine with a CPU are the least effcient because those algos are even less efficient
or non-existant on a GPU and provide less competition for CPUs.
|
|
|
|
Epsylon3, If i need to start from a random extranonce2.......... should i just change in this line in ccminer.cpp for (i = 0; i < (int)sctx->xnonce2_size && !++sctx->job.xnonce2[i]; i++); as i = rand(); or any other file change needed ? Why must it be random? Regardless, your proposed change is way off base. Take a look at util.cpp:stratum_notify for the start value. |
|
|
|
|
Your description is confusing, maybe a language issue. It seems you said the miner can distinguish between the
two cards, if so is there really a problem? If everything works properly maybe it's normal. I've never installed two cards
from different manufacturers so I'm just speculating.
|
|
|
|
Is it just me or is Windows Defender detecting cpuminer-opt as a Trojan:Win32/Vagger!rfn malware?
You can't read 3 posts back? |
|
|
|
|
I don't see the point of a dedicated solar system for mining. Solar is just one power source and mining is just one
power load. Why not connect the solar to the house power as a hybrid system where you can use solar for everything
when it's available and commercial power when not. This would avoid imbalances in power availability and load.
A dedicated solar mining system would either have excess load leaving some mining HW without power or
too much power that can't be absorbed by the mining HW and would have to be bled off and wasted. A hybrid system\
would ensure all the mining HW is mining all the time.
|
|
|
|
Anyone planning on testing the 7980XE?
The specs don't impress me and it's overpriced. It has a low base clock and a relatively small cache, both critical for CPU mining. Intel is known for better single threaded performance but that doesn't matter when mining. The 24 MB cache limits the number of threads mining cryptonight to 12, not even enough to load all the physical cores. A Threadripper 1920X (12C/24T, 32MB cache) will likely perform better for less than half the price. Compute intensive algos are irelevant because GPUs are much more efficient and CPUs can't comptete. The 7980XE doesn't yet have SHA support, unlike Ryzen, but that's less of an issue because there are few algos that can use it. It does have AVX512 but I don't see much benefit in that because it only improves compute performance. On those algos that could potentially use it the gain would be small, less than the gain from AVX to AVX2. There are fewer opportunities to promote AVX2 to AVX512 because AVX512 works on larger vectors, only algos that use vectors of 512 bits or greater can use it. I'm curious for some real results to compare, but I won't be bying one. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
