Interesting project, but I found a few problems / irritants with it:
1. It's set for a UK keyboard (I think) and thus doesn't work with a US keyboard properly.
2. It's missing screen. This is absolutely 100% essential for any mining box with multiple cores.
3. SDK 2.4 is about 15 Mh/s slower than 2.1 on a 5870 core at 900 MHz. Should really replace 2.4 with 2.1.
4. Instructions on boot don't make any sense, specifically the line about "tar icd-registration.tgz -C /" What are you trying to do here? I assume you're trying to untar it to the root directory. If that's the case, you forgot the essential command line parameters. It should be "tar xvfz icd-registration.tgz -C /"
5. DHCP is not setup by default on the network connections.
Just my input!
if i were british, i'd set up the keyboard that way too... and everybody doesn't use DHCP - it's better to have to look at your own network settings. as for SDK 2.4 vs. 2.1 - 2.4 is becoming required: for the 6xxx AMDs, and for compatibility with OpenCL.so.1. the latest (and potentially greatest) miner (Hashkill) doesn't even support 2.1 at all - and on my 5xxx's it's faster. software moves on, y'know. there's a link to configuring screen resolution. all in all, for a beta-ish release, i find it *quite* good. |
|
|
|
The MD5 hash don't match with the file i downloaded from this site today.
my hash is MD5: d50c4d3a38a1349111bac5f69b9571f1 linuxcoin-v0.1b-ati-cd.iso
while it says CD MD5: 71e5253bc5bda47003c57d71c52db869 linuxcoin-v0.1b-ati-cd.iso
My file size is 684 MB (717,387,776 bytes) on win7 32.
Who is wrong?
0.05BTC says the MD5 hash you (and i) got is the hash for version 0.1a... |
|
|
|
I seem to be having an odd problem with a 5970, has anyone experienced this?
Running Linux, same build as the rest of my miners, which are not having this problem (so I know it's not the software, or if it is, I don't know why/how it's different than all my other mining boxes):
Upon first booting up and starting the miner (doesn't matter if it's poclbm or phoenix) on GPU0, things are working fine and putting out ~391 Mh/s. After awhile, the hash rate drops and goes back up to the normal rate... it continues to do this until a reboot.
It's like it's throttling and/or overheating, but temps are more than fine, and in the case of that core is less than GPU1. GPU0 is humming along at 74C, GPU1 is running 75 - 76C, so it's definitely not heat related.
Does anyone have any ideas why my hash rate is dipping? Has anyone seen this before, where one GPU on a 5970 dips and the other is solid?
/proc/interrupts shows a roughly equal number of interrupts on both cards.
I'm pretty stumped and about to reload. There is one oddity with this box and that is the HD access seems to be slower than it should be, given it's on a SATA drive in this instance, whereas my other miners are on IDE back planes... but I can't see how a wonky HD might affect the internal workings of the GPU.
Anyway, anyone got an idea?
SATA and one PCIe slot? seems more likely to be a wonky motherboard than hard drive or card. if it's the same build as other miners, i'd try swapping the weird 5970 into a different miner. if there's no problem, it's almost surely the motherboard. at the least, try swapping slots on the two GPUs in the questionable box. |
|
|
|
if you game at all or anything, just get a 6850... mining in crossfire is simple, easy and less complicated, with the added benefit of great gaming etc
oh yeah... gaming. that's true. |
|
|
|
you could send 1.33 BTC, and request a 1 BTC refund. bonus points if you're a member of the Somali royal family, trying to get help with salvaging your family's wealth...  |
|
|
|
Hey.
I'm thinking about a little mining project.
I thought of running around 2 comps at first, and upgrading from there on.
Setup:
2x 5870 / 5850 since they generate a lot of MH/s and are really cheap.
Gigabyte GA-PH67-UD3, Socket-1155 (Cheapest SB board that supports CF)
Intel Core™ i3 Dual Core i3-2100T
Cooler Master GX 550W PSU
Random cheapest case and random cheapest memory.
- Will this give profit in the end? They will run 24/7.
firstly, if you're going to run AMD GPUs, you should consider AMD CPU and chipsets, rather than mixing AMD and Intel. i hear they don't like each other. think about it. secondly, if this is a dedicated miner a single-core CPU is fine: like a Sempron 140. 45 Watts. the CPU is irrelevant to mining. thirdly, i agree generally that a 550W PSU is too low. keep in mind that you may want to upgrade your GPUs someday. lastly, don't forget the random fans... |
|
|
|
nice rack... oops.  |
|
|
|
Ok, thanks for the reply  Any recommendations on a cheap mobo to run 2 or more 5850? Also, how much of a power supply do you think it will take to run two of those together? just speculating tough, not planning on doing that yet hehe msi makes pretty good motherboards for mining. a lot of people here use them. i have a couple of their 870A-G54's, in two dual-PCIe miners. they make motherboards with more slots than that. just a personal preference here - if you're going to use AMD GPUs, you oughtta use AMD processors and chipsets. works for me. for your PSU, add 125% of your GPU running at 99% (in watts), to triple the wattage your CPU consumes. hard drives are negligible. fans are a bit - don't forget to add them in. if your miner is dedicated it shouldn't even have things like speakers or CD/DVD drives. so a 6850 (~150W) plus a 5850 (~180W) plus 25% = ~410. plus a 45W Sempron single-core X3 = 135W. plus 3W for an SSD and 25W for fans gives a grand total of about 575W. a 650W PSU should do nicely. |
|
|
|
|
seems to me that the way it's set up now makes perfect sense.
the network has to stay strong - which means it must grow. moore's law will take care of the hardware.
...and the eventual point will be to mine for transaction fees. no?
|
|
|
|
Ok, I just had a weird idea, but I think bitcoin could make MLM-structured businesses really easy to deploy. I'm using the term "MLM" here ("multi-level marketing"), but I should probably call it "social peer-to-peer economics" or something in order to remove negative connotation. Take it for what it's worth.
So suppose you create a service that lets you create a bitcoin account by branching off from another account. Basically, in order to create an account you must designate a parent account. So let's say we have an original account A, and a second account, B, which is a child of A.
Now, whenever this B account gets an incoming transaction, it triggers an automatic payment to A, the parent account. So, say A gets paid 10 BTC. The service that holds this account then automatically takes 5 BTC and transfers it to account A.
Because bitcoin has no transaction fee and can be (nearly) infinitely divisible, this hierarchical structure could go on and on. Supposing account A from our example also had a parent account, then it would take 2.5 BTC and transfer it there, etc.
Suddenly, we have a fair way to share music and pay the distributors properly. Imagine if your friends have a band, and they want to release their music, but want to get paid for it too. They could ask people like you to charge 2 BTC for a copy of their music. Enthusiastic fans become distributors and get paid 1 BTC, and the other BTC gets split, and split, and split, all the way back to the original artists. If you have millions of copies distributed in this manner, it would all add up.
Sticklers might ask, Why would anyone give the address of their "MLM wallet" when they could just give their direct bitcoin address instead? Certainly they could. No one can force everyone to do the right thing. But this would certainly lower the barrier to a more fair system. I think people want a way to pay artists and to also take a small piece for their part. At least, I do.
Any improvements, or other possible problems?
seems ridiculously complicated. just get content creators to accept Bitcoin. that works much better. improvements? get in touch with steve jobs about taking Bitcoin at iTunes. possible problems? get in touch with steve jobs about taking Bitcoin at iTunes. |
|
|
|
|
a 5850 will get you about a 50% higher Mhash/sec rate - and should probably cost a touch less new, too (depending on the vagaries of brand availabilities and rebates).
seems pretty clear-cut.
|
|
|
|
Well hm...look for *.isa. /tmp should be writable, that's very strange.
maybe try it in one of the /hashkill subdirectories? BTW, i tried running it as sudo - it said no such program as 'export'. |
|
|
|
Efficiency can go over 100% or below 100% - it's a matter of luck. I've had some periods where it is way over 100%, also periods where it drops at 70-80%. Overall with time it should get close to 100% though. The stale counter is additive, yes.
BTW could you provide me the ISA dump?
I am mostly interested in the SQ_PGM_RESOURCES:NUM_GPRS field which should be among the last lines.
hmm... how do i do that? i tried running "export GPU_DUMP_DEVICE_KERNEL=3" (also 1 and 0) in tmp - but no isa file magically appeared. i also tried while hashkill was running. what am i doing wrong? |
|
|
|
been running non-stop on slush since my last post. no real issues. efficiency is down a touch - steady at 98-99%. the 'stale' counter is session-additive, right? it's up to 139. Mhash/sec holding rock-solid at 173. no variance at all. if you'd like any generated logs or anything, let me know, gat3way. |
|
|
|
per my previous post: running a Sapphire 5770 @ 960 GPUcore, 250 Mem, a bit overvolted. temp at a pretty constant 64 C. Catalyst 11.3, SDK 2.4. on debian testing with the 2.6.32-5-amd64 kernel. i'm now running the latest version (still called 0.2.4-x86_64) on slush's pool. 173 Mhash/sec like a heartbeat. efficiency at or above 100%. a winner! |
|
|
|
|
thank you, gat3way.
i'll install tonight and let you know.
|
|
|
|
Yep thats the one!
My first post sucked, i just read it back! - Many thanks for helping me.
Ok so now i have what I think is working! this is in the gui summary tab now
Running command: poclbm.exe --user=**********--pass=******* -o localhost -p 8332 -d0 --verbose -v -w 128
Listener for "Default" started
Running command: poclbm.exe --user=**********--pass=******* -o localhost -p 8332 -d1 --verbose -v -w 128
Listener for "gpu2" started
Does that look correct? is there any way of telling its working?
i'm not sure - don't use poclbm. but it looks ok. i've been using DiabloMiner and playing with Hashkill (i'm waiting for cache-flushing with that - it's fast). with those you don't need to specify the port. or the localhost either, at least for Diablo. and they both find all your GPUs and concatenate them - no need for a command line call for each card (the -d <device> option). if you're getting a Mhash/sec readout at the bottom of your screen, it's probably working. |
|
|
|
Thanks very much, but i believe its not as simple as that, I dont use my CPU to mine (1090T @ 4.5 ghz under water) as they are useless, I use my 6990. I believe it goes along the lines of having to boot up the bitcoin program in server mode, then start the gui client, then create a username and password with the solo utilities, then somehow connect the GUI miner to the Bitcoin wallet to download block data so you can solo mine. I know i can just click generate bitcoins in that respect Many thanks for the reply however! ah. i had no idea, from the information in your first post. ok - you have two program choices where bitcoin is concerned: 'bitcoin' and 'bitcoind'. they are essentially the same, and you may only run one of them at a time. they both use the same bitcoin.conf file to configure options. the only difference between them is that bitcoind runs the daemon by default (hence the 'd') and bitcoin doesn't (and must be started with the daemon option to provide that functionality. you might find this page useful: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Running_Bitcoin#Bitcoin.conf_Configuration_Fileif you're solo mining, you need a bitcoin.conf with just two lines: rpcuser=, and rpcpassword=. and then you start your miner using those same credentials. was that what you were asking? |
|
|
|
I recommend taking a weekend and playing with it. My general method is to bump up the core 5 mhz at a time, and then let it sit for 15 minutes, while watching for the 'verification failed, check hardware' messages.
Once I see one of those, back it down 5 mhz, and leave it running, checking in every 30 minutes. Normally if the machine doesn't produce a verification failed message within 2 hours, then it will stay stable 24/7.
I have 2 GPUs out of the 10 running that will pop up the verification failed message every 3-4 hours. The percentage of time/shares lost to these errors is less than the loss in mHash/sec if I were to drop it 5 more mhz, so I'm letting them run with it.
i agree. play with it. i also note that, while overclocking the GPU and overvolting the card can add more stress (i.e., heat) and reduce the life-expectancy of the card; underclocking the memory (typically down to 300 Mhz or so - in little steps...) does two things, one of which is entirely counter-intuitive: 1.) it increases Mhash/sec! whooda thunk it? and... 2.) it lowers the temperature at which the card runs - most often lowering it quite markedly. and let's remember that it is heat which is the great enemy - nothing else. just using a card hard won't hurt it, as long as it stays relatively cool. so i would heartily recommend adding overclocking to your repertoire of skills... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
