Hmm, RC1 works flawlessly. I tried RC2 but it's bugged bad? I thought it might have been incompatible with sdk 2.1 (wont hash at all), so I tried 2.6. It has a different error, but it hashes slow compared to 2.6, and I refuse to use 2.6 and be forced to use high memory clocks and waste power. heres my config file. [general]
verbose = True
backend = http://1CxcPP8FVktppy4PHTYJKnZFqQeyZ3jArb:x@mining.eligius.st:8337
[cl:1:1]
kernel = phatk2
AGGRESSION = 14
VECTORS = true
BFI_INT = true
WORKSIZE = 256
[web]
disable = true heres the error with 2.1 sdk (cl:1:1)  heres the error with 2.6 sdk (cl:0:0)  back to using rc1 until bug is fixed. |
|
|
|
DiabloMiner now gets the same speed from SDK 2.6 as it got from SDK 2.1.
No need to stick with an old SDK.
..at high memory clocks. high memory = more power = less net profit. Also my 2.1 setup still has like 0.5% lead on 2.6. I see no reason to "upgrade" to the downgrade. |
|
|
|
|
Sorry for the noob question, but I hit W to write conf file using the default name, and it was saved, so I closed cgminer and reopened it, but it still asks for pool info? I tried cgminer -c cgminer.conf but it says JSON decode of file 'cgminer.conf' failed. what did I do wrong?
never mind, user error. forgot a comma when specifying sdk platform
|
|
|
|
Ebay can be cheap but careful to buy quality risers (there was a thread once with bad quality risers that burned), alternatively, a bit more expensive but still VERY cheap
9mart.com - 2 risers for $9, so $4.5 each with international shipping.
risers can be had even cheaper, 2.25 for 1 riser 1x -> 1x. just got to get a tool and cut out the one edge on the riser to allow putting a 16x card in there. quick search on ebay will find them. I stopped using my 16x risers because there are too many points for failure, and 16x risers require an annoying amount of force to put on, especially when you're trying to troubleshoot why your miner is having problems with 3 single gpu cards and a 1 kilowatt pc power @ cooling turbocool. |
|
|
|
|
so question remains: what the hell does it do besides be an expensive power strip?
|
|
|
|
So, 7770 is 1.5 times slower than 5770?  What a waste of money on this junk. What do you expect ? It has got less shaders. CGN shaders are not faster than VLIW5 shaders ... you mean gcn. graphics core next. |
|
|
|
Today's new GUI miner release has somewhat solved my problem.
I see that when I install 11.6, there are 3 devices, [cl:0:0], [cl:0:1], and [cl:0:2].
After installing SDK 2.1, there are now many more devices.
[cl:0:0] - Intel CPU
[cl:0:1] - Cypress
[cl:0:2] - Cypress
[cl:0:3] - Cypress
[cl:1:0] - Cypress
[cl:1:1] - Cypress
[cl:1:2] - Cypress
[cl:1:3] - Intel CPU
Which brings me to the conclusion that SDK installs an entire additional OpenCL platform for all devices. Makes perfect sense. Using the 0 platform devices, I get pretty decent hashrates (1.11 GH/s) and using the 1 platform devices I get pretty shoddy hashrates.
My CPU usage is once again 100% on one thread, but I can live with that unless someone can shed some light on how to avoid this, but at least i'm hashing!
use 11.12 driver to avoid cpu bug on 2.1 sdk with multi-gpu. and yes, 2.1 install path and platform is entirely different from amd app (2.4+). you can have 2.1 and any one sdk from 2.4-2.6 installed on the same system. my config looks like this on my gamer system. [general]
verbose = True
backend = http://1CxcPP8FVktppy4PHTYJKnZFqQeyZ3jArb:x@mining.eligius.st:8337
[cl:0:1]
kernel = phatk2
AGGRESSION = 4
VECTORS4 = true
BFI_INT = true
WORKSIZE = 64
[cl:1:1]
kernel = phatk2
AGGRESSION = 14
VECTORS = true
BFI_INT = true
WORKSIZE = 256
[web]
disable = true the first device is gpu i game on, and since memory speed is stock or a little higher, its best to use sdk 2.6 with it and vectors4 + w64. the second device is a dedicated gpu using 2.1 sdk. TdrDelay in registry was changed to be 15 seconds instead of default of 2 in order to prevent driver reset due to the high aggression. |
|
|
|
|
You dont need to say disabled for any device, unless you have autodetect up top. autodetect is really just a miner noob way of getting phoenix to work. All devices are "disabled" without autodetect unless you specify the devices later in the config file.
|
|
|
|
Seems like you could do 5 5970s in that with 7 single slot cards.
Might want to read the thread. We still have to deal with 8 gpu driver limit. |
|
|
|
|
HOLY FUCKING SHIT! KIV IS BAAAAAAAAAAACK.
Kiv, will you support new phoenix 2 beta please?
|
|
|
|
Sad ... it's look like extremely difficult to integrate this fix into guiminer ....
Extremely difficult for someone who has no clue how to read, understand, and build source. Piece of cake for someone who does, like Kiv (who wrote guiminer), but he abandoned everyone. |
|
|
|
And I tested all above in identical situation except of the core frequency.
Oops on me reversing the order of the values. Now that was foolish.  Still I guess it still hasn't sunk in that the optimal memory clock at 500Mhz isn't the same as the optimal memory clock at 870 Mhz. All you have proven if you are really bad and getting optimal performance from a 5870/5970 as you efficiency (MH per MHz) is about 10% lower than most miners get across the board. Once again in case you ignored it from the prior post "For the record @ 500 MHz I get 225 MH (0.450 MH/MHz) and @ 820 I get 375 MH/s (0.457 MH/MHz)." and lastly A 5870/5970 with optimal settings gets roughly 0.46 MH (+/- ~.04) per Mhz. That hold true from 500 Mhz to 1000 Mhz+.
Now for max efficiency you are going to need to find the sweet spot on memclock which varies based on coreclock. If you see significantly less than that at any clock your settings are non-optimal or you sample is too small (should be at least 2000 shares, 5000 would be better). Thank you for laying the beatdown on this poor misguided soul. It was deserved. |
|
|
|
|
So dont use 2.6. I sure as hell dont. 2.1 all the way.
|
|
|
|
|
Jesus christ, just pay the man what you owe. its FOUR DOLLARS.
|
|
|
|
Higher clocks at equal voltage == better energy efficiency.
Well, no. Voltage is only one part of power usage, higher clocked cards use more current than lower clocked cards at the same voltage. That's why overclocked cards get hotter even when not overvolted. No, he's right, when taking the whole computer into the power efficiency picture. 10% more core frequency = 10% more power used (and generally mhash scales linearly with core speed), but the system has a baseline watts, so do some math with some assumed numbers... 100w baseline, 1000w used from video cards doing 2000 mhash. 1.8181 mhash/watt. Increase core speed by 10% without increasing volts, system is now at... 100w baseline, 1100w used from video cards doing 2200mhash. 1.8333 mhash/watt. |
|
|
|
Alright, got down to 800Mhz Core/ 300MHz memory. I'm getting 49c and 47c on the GPU cores, so that's not a problem.
The VRMs are at 82c/81c//81c for the first core, and 74c/75c/73c on the 2nd core. Lets say I don't raise the voltage above stock, would a high clock speed damage/degrade the card?
Nope, high core speeds won't kill a card. Temperatures are really the only thing that'll kill a card if you overclock smart. Most overvolting for mining is minor (maybe +0.025 to 0.075 in even the most extreme cases) and won't hurt the card either, anything above is generally overkill for 24/7 and generates too much heat to remain stable at the clock speed you may have aimed at. An example is one of my 5870's is stable at 1100 core and 1.200 volts with temperatures currently around 40c core and 68c VRM since it sits outside in the winter air. It requires more volts to hit a higher clock speed than 1100, but the higher temperature renders the higher speed unstable. I see a lot of gamers use even higher volts of 1.25+, probably because the cards aren't at 100% load with the games they're playing and temperatures are lower as a consequence. |
|
|
|
|
I thought 6770 was VLIW5, so the higher spu count is mostly irrelevant.
|
|
|
|
|
IIRC, sdk 2.1 wont work with your 6870, only 67xx or lower.
|
|
|
|
also,
keep in mind what 5970 cores is not full identical, due to different cooling efficiency
GPU core near fan has lower temperature and as result higher OC capability
But really had nothing to do with the OP's original problem. /shoo |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
