I think it has to do with drivers... One of the cards you are using is a dual core card right? So Windows is seeing 4 GPUs. I have had afterburner work fine with 3 GPU but the second you add the 4th in, you get the 'failed to init...." I have asked around ( http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=21352.0). Even put a 2BTC bounty on who could fix afterburner to work with 4 GPU and nobody was able to point me in the right direction. There were a lot of suggestions, but none proved to fix the problem. OK, so I have a workaround "solution" if you still have not found a way to OC your setup. Let me know and I can post details. I would like to know the workaround Sure, check out my post on Mike's thread: http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=21352.20Hope this helps you! |
|
|
|
Mike, I found a workaround to my problem. It should work for you as well. It's a bit of a hack, but it works. Here's what I did: download AOCLBF: http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=10264.0keep a downloaded copy around somewhere. Install it as instructed (basically place the 3 files into your guiminer filder location). You DON'T have to use this miner for mining, but it will allow you to OC and set fans  The very first time you run it, it will ask you how many miners to create. I specify the number of GPUs, not the cards, so for the 2 6990 + 6850, I tell it to create 5. You will see "client tabs" (ignore these for the moment) and a tab for each GPU. Here I use the GPU-related tabs to set my clocks and fans. I answer "no" to setting on next startup. After I OC the way I want, I simply start my usual miners. I do not use the AOCLBF for mining (at least not yet). Here comes the tricky part. On next restart/reset, this program most likely will not detect your GPUs correctly. This is probably why MSI Afterburner, trixc and others don't work either. What I do at this point is delete all the files related to AOCLBF (this includes a clocks.xxx file) and reboot. After reboot I repeat the install process and keep going. I hope this solves your issue Mike. If this helps, feel free to send me that bounty, but I won't cry if you don't: 15KwcqgcxjsXx6XGJgv56Ps6AjbeQP3Ge5 |
|
|
|
|
You can't downclock memory on 6990s by more than a 100 less than what the clock speed is at. (well it could be 110 less, but it's tricky to get that)
Example of what will work: 880/780, 900/800, 950/850 etc... etc...
Do not assume the above values is what you should be trying. Do your own experimenting while watching temps and fan speeds.
|
|
|
|
12x 6990?  and i only want one. edit: sorry i can't contribute anything to help you out. if i had 12 6990s i'd probably get 19" cases and a small sized rack. there's already good cooling solutions for these out there. check ebay |
|
|
|
Thanks for the post! I can confirm your results. I've applied what you have posted and am seeing nearly identical results to your setup. However, my OC switch is NOT in the default position. I will try this with the OC switch in default in the next few days.
Can you post back with results? I'm thinking AMD powertune is crippling the card if OC switch is not on. I get pretty much the same results as OP, very noticeable boost from the standard 330-340mhash per core to at least 400-420 (with the exception of the temperature thing) However, even at same clock rates, OC switch in position 1 "unlocks" the speed. In position 0 (default) the hashing rate just wont go past 370mhash/s or so. So the switch could be doing some sort of power limiting on some 6990's. So, it looks like I have to have the OC switch turned on... Departure, would you be able to double check your switch positions? I did make a small adjustment however, I set the clocks to 920 instead of 910 (everything else being the same). BTW, except clock speed, other params must be set exactly as they have been described by Departure. If they are not, you won't reproduce these results. Anyway, with 920 instead of 910, I'm seeing a constant lower boundary of 428 and upper to 458 per GPU. It's typical to observe: 428->432->458 in what seems to be some sort of a pattern, but I'm not gonna spend anymore time on this pattern observation to try to figure it out... Hope this helps. |
|
|
|
Thanks for the post! I can confirm your results. I've applied what you have posted and am seeing nearly identical results to your setup. However, my OC switch is NOT in the default position. I will try this with the OC switch in default in the next few days.
Can you post back with results? I'm thinking AMD powertune is crippling the card if OC switch is not on. I get pretty much the same results as OP, very noticeable boost from the standard 330-340mhash per core to at least 400-420 (with the exception of the temperature thing) However, even at same clock rates, OC switch in position 1 "unlocks" the speed. In position 0 (default) the hashing rate just wont go past 370mhash/s or so. So the switch could be doing some sort of power limiting on some 6990's. It definitely sounds like Powertune to me. Look at these links http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon-6950-6970-review/24http://www.anandtech.com/show/4061/amds-radeon-hd-6970-radeon-hd-6950/8Perhaps you need to add some % to the default powertune. I would try in increments of 5% or so. Interesting! You better have a rock-solid PSU with 6990s... Given this formula: Power Consumption =( (shaderUsage * shaderWeight) + (ropUsage * ropWeight) + (memoryUsage * memoryWeight) ) * clockspeed I think it should be possible to come up with "best" parameters to set these 69xx cards to. |
|
|
|
It seems ati tray tools can only support 2 cards, msi afterburner can do 3. However, I think you may be able to get around this problem by connecting the two with a crossfire bridge. I read that being suggested some where, I haven't tried it myself. I just took one of the cards out and put it in another machine. Linux can do 4 cards, but I can't seem to get around 'Configurable Peak Range'.
I also read that crossfire might slow it down a little. I had a few cards in crossfire not long ago, I am not sure if they really mined any slower.
It can handle more that 3 cards just fine. The problem is when you mix cards (at least for me). MSI was handling 4 6990s just fine. |
|
|
|
Can't use liquid cooling in a data center here... It's a disaster waiting to happen when something bursts.
You don't think it would be able to remove 10-15 degrees? Anything that can take VRMs from 100* down a few notches might be useful in extending the lifetime...
Can a 1 square inch Peltier cooler pass over 100W of heat (plus overhead), constantly, without melting? Then sure, it'll work. It would have to be 1.6-2 square inches... |
|
|
|
|
Can't use liquid cooling in a data center here... It's a disaster waiting to happen when something bursts.
You don't think it would be able to remove 10-15 degrees? Anything that can take VRMs from 100* down a few notches might be useful in extending the lifetime...
|
|
|
|
|
So, I've been thinking...
In order to push the cards and achieve stability with higher OC rates, VRM temps is what one needs to worry about more than GPU temps. (if you don't care about fan noise). I'm assuming that you took care of the airflow already and that you have been able to apply necessary voltages (higher) to achieve high OC stability.
My question is, has anyone looked into Peltier cooling?
Seems it may be possible to fashion something (at least on certain cards) on the back of the card (if that's where the VRMs are emitting at least some of the heat). Adding a heatsink over the thermoelectric cooler surface would also be possible but not necessary in order to remove heat from the board/VRMs, transfer to Peltier's surface and let appropriate airflow take it out the rest of the way.
If you understand what I'm talking about, please comment. Is this feasible? viable? worth pursuing? I'm planning on experimenting with this.
Has anyone experimented with this yet?
Thoughtful and useful comments are welcomed!
|
|
|
|
I think it has to do with drivers... One of the cards you are using is a dual core card right? So Windows is seeing 4 GPUs. I have had afterburner work fine with 3 GPU but the second you add the 4th in, you get the 'failed to init...." I have asked around ( http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=21352.0). Even put a 2BTC bounty on who could fix afterburner to work with 4 GPU and nobody was able to point me in the right direction. There were a lot of suggestions, but none proved to fix the problem. OK, so I have a workaround "solution" if you still have not found a way to OC your setup. Let me know and I can post details. |
|
|
|
Please add July 1st to the list! I was able to snatch 2 of them at 110 on the first. |
|
|
|
Well, there you have it... 345/130 = 2.65
Anyway, all this was started because it was proposed that at $130 5830 is no good. Obviously that's not the case...
Are we gonna put this to rest, or continue with non-productive arguments?
With this new proof yes the 5830 at 130 is better than a 5850 at megahash per dollar. I still believe you should wait to purchase it at 110 because you gain nothing for purchasing it at 20 dollars more. I do agree that 110 is better than 130! |
|
|
|
Hey guys thought I would just throw out my settings and software to maybe help other that are in the same boat I was in a couple of weeks ago(new people).
Operating System:
Windows 7 X64
Aero Theme Disabled
Drivers:
11.6 or 11.7 preview
Software:
Phoenix 1.50(with 3% patch to phat kernal)
Aoclbf: Vectors - HD5xx - phatk - Worksize(128), Aggression(7)
or
GUIminer: Miner(Phoenix with 3% patch to phat kernal), Flags(+k phatk VECTORS BFI_INT AGGRESSION=7 WORKSIZE=128)
GPU Clocks:
Core: 910 or 880(hash rate bouces around more)
Mem: 840
Volts: Leave OC switch on cards in default position, No need to overclock
Cooling:
60% Fan speed on cards
Linda box fan @ second speed
Temps:
Hottest: 72c
Coolest: 62c
Hash Rate:
432-455 MH/s per GPU
Details:
I currently have 3 x 6990 in one box, using a 890FX-UD7 board I was able to get good spacing between the cards, I also setup a linda box fan with cardboard wind tunnel directing the air straight onto the cards(not need but reduce the temps alot) Anyway get your self a copy of aoclbf front end, I suggest this because you can overclock/underclock your cards from the gui, and MSI after burn had faults when the 3rd card was put in.. Get your self a copy of the Phoenix 1.50 and apply the 3% mod in the kernal(open in text editor) I found for the 6990 cards the best memory clock setting is 840 anything below increases heat and is unstable and anything above just increases heat. also set your core clocks 910, so you should have all GPU's set to 910/840 while keeping the OC switch on the cards in its default position. in aoclbf tick vectors, 5HDxx+ , phatk and set your worksize to 128 and aggression 7, yes 7 because higher aggression will give you less MH/s and lower will give you less MH/s. Or if you prefer to use GUIminer or straight console the use these flags "-k phatk VECTORS BFI_INT WORKSIZE=128 AGGRESSION=7" also make sure to use drivers 11.6 or preview drivers 11.7 for each GPU you should get 432 MH/s and bounces to 455 MH/s back and forth, which brings a grand total of around 2600 MH/s to 2700 MH/s if you have 3 cards like me. having these core clocks set lower than most OC'ers and keeping the OC switch in its default posistion not only reduces cost due to using the standard voltage but also keeps your cards cooler, my 3 6990's never go above 70c(card fan speed at 60%) with the linda box fan wind tunnel(set to speed 2 out of 3). Of cause this is only a base for you to work from, you can adjust to your desire but I found this to be efficient and fast.
If you have any 6990 settings you would like to share, feel free to post them and im sure with every ones help we could come up with a optimal settings for these cards.
Departure, Thanks for the post! I can confirm your results. I've applied what you have posted and am seeing nearly identical results to your setup. However, my OC switch is NOT in the default position. I will try this with the OC switch in default in the next few days. |
|
|
|
If some one can supply that I would too though the highest I've ever heard any one get is around 330 megahash with a 5830.
330/130=2.538
2.538 is still less then 2.62
That's probably without latest optimizations... In order to tie the 5850 you would need to get 340.6 megahash out of your 5830 I highly doubt some one has reached this with a 5830. Quit doubting, negative Nancy (24/7, I just had to restart the miner trying to get a screenshot, the system is unusable at aggression=12):  Well, there you have it... 345/130 = 2.65 Anyway, all this was started because it was proposed that at $130 5830 is no good. Obviously that's not the case... Are we gonna put this to rest, or continue with non-productive arguments? |
|
|
|
If some one can supply that I would too though the highest I've ever heard any one get is around 330 megahash with a 5830.
330/130=2.538
2.538 is still less then 2.62
That's probably without latest optimizations... |
|
|
|
It's very easy to get 320 out of a 5830 with latest drivers, 1.5 Phoenix and 3% hack.
320/130=2.46
I was just going for simple numbers but the person below is getting 423 megahash with his 5850. 423/161=2.62 Its still a better card and I didn't even get into the lower power consumption or the megahash per total cost of server which does make it a even better card. I win.  I would love to see an overvolted 5830 compared to this person's 5850. You gotta compare apples to apples. edit: You shouldn't buy these. At 129 it isn't worth it because when you calculate the megahash per dollar you get 2.325. You might as well go for a 5850 in staid of that because its ratio is 2.424.
Complete BS. Two of these will eat a single 6970 alive in terms of hashing power @ lower price tag. I would get two instead of buying a single 6970. It doesn't apply to everybody though since I have dual PCI-E on my old P5E board. You do realize I never recommended getting a 6970? The only two cards I believe are worth buying are the 5830($109) and the 5850 at the 160 mark. If you can find a card for less then retail and it beats these ratios then by all means get it but at the lowest retail price the 5850 and the 5830 are the best. |
|
|
|
|
It's very easy to get 320 out of a 5830 with latest drivers, 1.5 Phoenix and 3% hack.
320/130=2.46
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
