 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 »
|
generally you should be able to do more than 13, as long as your chipset supports and your MB doesn't fuck with you
even AMD buggy drivers of late(17.10.2 and above) are capable of 10+ GPUs, under certain conditions though the driver install with all cards inside may take VERY long time and this fucking manual switch to compute mode card by card is extremely annoying
A hint for you: [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Class\{4d36e968-e325-11ce-bfc1-08002be10318}\0001]
"KMD_EnableInternalLargePage"=dword:00000002 |
|
|
|
no i retire overclock! in what topic you tell this ? Is the Sol Coin is better to mine than eth? Dear ffthomas This values ? Just FYI: with Sapphire "ref" RX470 4GB cards I get 202-206sols/s using WattTool with 1200Mhz+1000mV GPU and 1750Mhz+950mV memory settings and -5x6.25mV voltage offset. Heat and wattage reduced significantly. I use 16.10.3 driver, Win10 OS, CZM 9.1 (-i 6) and all cards are connected with powered riser (6 GPUs/rig). You don't need to overclock the 470 to get 202-206sols/s. im can miner Sol and Eth at same time ? my psu is that  Thanks Almir Download WattTool and try to use the settings I mentioned in the previous post.
What type of PSU do you have? Did you overclock the cards or use modded bios?
Man, Your PSU is definitely NOT FOR MINING! You should buy something that is at least 80+ Gold Certified. Current price of Platinum certified PSUs makes them better choice for mining. Of course don't look just for certification, look instead for respectable brand and read reviews. |
|
|
|
Let me put here my findings in last 24 hours about Flypool and Dwarfpool. After all propaganda without numbers I decided to test both pools wit 2 rigs 820 h/s each. According to whattomine calculator and taking into account 1% pool fee and 2% Claymore fee this hashrate should give 0.091-0.094 ZEC per day My income with each rig was: Flypool - 0.08323 ZEC Dwarfpool - 0.10144774 ZEC During this period Flypool reports in stats page pool luck of 90% for last 24 hours. So calculated income should be approx. 0.091*0.9 = 0,0819 and that is less than what I got. Dwarfpool doesn't report pool luck. In last 24 hours the pool had approx. 3-4% of network hashrate and according to their stats they got 22 blocks during this time frame. This looks to me like 100% luck or something similar. Now my question is how they paid me 10% more? I can imagine 2-3 possible explanations for this. My conclusion so far is Flypool is on par, Dwarfpool really is paying more. Anyway, thank you Dwarfpool, i will watch those 2 rigs for another 24 hours  -1 for Dwarf - SSL hot topic isn't supported so dev fee there is 2.5% +1 for Dwarf - vardiff is very nice to my network connection Cheers |
|
|
|
Again: if someone thinks that encrypted connection is a bad idea, do not use it, miner allows you to do it, I doubt you will ever notice 0.5% difference in your income. I'm not going to remove plain connection, restrict pools, increase fees, etc, there is not any conspiracy theory or evil plan. It seems some people have too rich fantasy. In my opinion, ability to encrypt connection as an option is a good feature (and I'd like to support it a bit by reducing devfee), so I'm not going to remove it right now, though if I see that noone uses it I can remove it in future. Actually, I think about adding this feature to dual miner too, but now I'm not sure because here I've read a lot of ideas about bad sides of encryption, which looks really strange for me. Don't forget you mine cryptocurrencies, they all consist of pure encryption Please, don't forget about some users are happy to have SSL connection. At least, they don't want by any reason that anyone between them and the pool could read the data transferred. They don't want anybody expect, that it is mining. They don't want anybody to steal their wallet number and so on. So, an ability to use SSL is generally good. Guess what - SSL won't help you for that. Whoever captures your traffic he will know you are mining. Just you address and number of submitted shares will be concealed to certain degree. Shares you send could be recognized  They don't want anybody to steal their wallet number and so on. So, an ability to use SSL is generally good.
SSL helps here against traffic capture. You will reveal your account number by other means. Your wallet can be stolen by software running in your computer, not by capturing your miner's traffic. |
|
|
|
-ttli reduce entire mining intensity (for all coins) automatically if GPU temperature is above specified value. For example, "-ttli 80" reduces mining intensity if GPU temperature is above 80C.
You can see if intensity was reduced in detailed statistics ("s" key).
You can also specify values for every card, for example "-ttli 80,85,80". You also should specify non-zero value for "-tt" option to enable this option.
It is a good idea to set "-ttli" value higher than "-tt" value by 3-5C.
NOTE: Check "KNOWN ISSUES" section. GPU indexes in temperature control sometimes don't match GPU indexes in mining!
...
-mvddc set target GPU memory voltage, multiplied by 1000. For example, "-mvddc 1050" means 1.05V. You can also specify values for every card, for example "-mvddc 900,950,1000,970". Supports latest AMD 4xx cards only in Windows.
I'm thinking about using the above features to manually specify my voltages/clocks/fan/temps etc in Claymore instead of using MSI AB (for a variety of reasons). Does anyone else do this, and if so, do you have any advice on does and don'ts, or other recommendations for transferring your MSI AB controls over to the miner (can you specify fan curve; is the default one pretty good)? My complaint with MSI AB is that the option to set all values for similar cards seems to cause a system hang every now and then, even though I know the settings work when applied individually, and manually adjusting voltages also periodically causes a hang, even though it's nothing related to the actual setting, just changing it. I'm using all brand new hardware, top of the line. Also, while tuning the rig for a new coin, I sometimes get stuck in a crash loop and have to disconnect a card so AB won't try to auto-set a value during boot. Then I turn off auto-set, but forget to turn it back on, etc. Too much effort when it seems like hardcoding them into the miner config might be easier (after it's all setup). If anyone has example config for a 7x470 4gb sapphire nitro+ oc rig, that would rule. I'm already aware it largely depends on the ASIC quality of each card. For fan control the options are "-tt" "-tstop" "-fanmin". There is no setting for fan curve, miner will adjust fan operation to achieve configured "-tt" temperature. Set it low and the fans will go louder, set it high and the fans will be much silent at low rpm. Tstop is safety measure I usually set to 85 or 90. I recommend you to leave a margin of 10 between tstop and tt. I specify fanmin for my RX cards in the range 25-30 % The point in setting mvddc is to allow for lower cvddc. GPU voltage can't be set lower than memory controller's voltage or it just won't work. Your other option here is using "WattTool" from overclock.net and use GPU vddc offsets. That way you don't have to mess with mvddc. WattTool can also save profile settings for your cards for usage in you startup bat file. |
|
|
|
Its an old cheap Sempron. Now you motivated me to try 1 card with Intel CPU.
Yeah thats probably why. I got a rig with that CPU also, the GPU load is never 100% and its always slightly slower. Not much you can do really. Maybe try unlocking the 2nd core, however it didn't work for me. Indeed I got few more hashes running the miner with my i5 |
|
|
|
Just curious, what's the reason for ssl in stratum?
Or am I way behind on something.
you can't modify ssl network packets thus can't disable devfee not entirely true hahaha ... ssl implemented to protect devfee is 1 of the main reason ! That is the ONLY reason as SSL adds nothing to mining. Actually it is worse as it adds lag to connection Actually MITM attack is possible not only to dev fee. Any connections can be modified by hacker if it's not secured. I encourage all of you to mine with SSL/TLS connection. MITM attack for miner's traffic? LOL, there are lot more interesting traffic for such capture if you have the skills and desire to do it The only complains of recent "hacker" attacks were due to total lack or security in Claymore's Remote manager. The bright people who exposed their rigs for external access deserve to be ashamed. RTFM, it was written there. The only purpose of the SSL is to protect dev fee, it gives nothing to us miners. Just to be clear - i never cheated Claymore's dev fee no matter how easy it was. He deserves to be paid for releasing excellent and feature rich software. |
|
|
|
for the people using r9 390, what is your hash and watts at the wall?
my 390x never passed 290 sols. probably takes 250w of the wall, maybe a bit more. its dying now 94c  my 290 passed 290 sols with v8 |
|
|
|
|
Its an old cheap Sempron. Now you motivated me to try 1 card with Intel CPU.
|
|
|
|
Juz use the latest ddu to uninstall 16.12.1, u will be fine DDU is best. It is much better than the AMD clean utility. But make sure you reboot into safe mode to do the clearn up. Yes, there is new DDU version for all of you who want to get rid of 16.12 driver http://www.wagnardsoft.com/?q=node/132Display Driver Uninstaller (DDU) V17.0.4.0 Released.
ChangeLog:
-Added support to AMD Crimson ReLive Edition 16.12.1 |
|
|
|
|
stable zec mining with my 280x:
gpu 1070
mem 1500
vddc 1.094
217 h/s
155W at wall
|
|
|
|
"secure" also means that you can't see anymore what the miner is sending - you now need a lot of trust that there is nothing hidden. this might work for claymore - but other will jump the ship and now you also have to trust them - before you could check it easily.
Just imagine version 10 doing only "secure", pools should hurry up investing in ssl stuff. |
|
|
|
Anyone try new AMD driver RELIVE ? work ? more performance or minor consuption ? .
AMD RE? No way Installed it on my test rig, REgot that code error43 again, that thing of the past RElives again. RErun AMD clenup utility, that 500MB package still lives in my drive. DIdn't bother DDU, REformat, dd *.img |
|
|
|
Dunno what the fuss is about. I updated to v9 right after it came out, going from v8 on all my rigs and there have been ZERO issues. A little more power use and spikes up about 40-50watts on the 5-6 GPU rigs, but nothing that can not be handled. I run my own BIoS on XFX based hardware and it's been stable since v9 came out, without any crashes etc.. I always say, check your hardware first as more than likely it's a power supply, cable or motherboard issue. Just because the v9 taxes your whole system more and IT can not handle it, doesn't mean it's bad. My r9-3xx/2xx GPU's added about 12-18% in hash rate, and the RX based GPU's about 4-5%. Sadly with the price of ZEC, I might have to switch back to ETH soon.  ZEC is a second life for my old 280x cards. ETH is for my new RX And about the fuss - electronics components do age, manufacturers use barely passing QA components, etc.... In my last batch of RX cards it was a miracle to find a card capable of doing 2100 memory on eth. Tested v9 on them and i had to reduce memory clock to default 2000 otherwise rig rebooted. My old 280x cards were running 1625 mem clock on ETH mining. They could mine ZEC with those settings with initial Claymore releases but with version 8 I had to set memory to default 1500 on all of them. With v9 I had to reduce 1 card to 1400 MHz for stable mining. Blaming "power spikes" is easy. More important is having discussion about the real causes and how to overcome them. |
|
|
|
Agreed. Waiting for "9.1". I've read the arguments, but this is not a stable miner.
Miner is stable, your hardware isn't. I have isolated the culprit card in my restarting rig and managed to make it run stable with v9. Now It hashes a little lower then the rest of my cards and still higher than v8. Sure you have to look into what's happening in your rig, it doesn't work stable out of the box like v8 if you have weak components. Increased hashrate comes at a cost. |
|
|
|
So true about hardware, manufactures and quality |
|
|
|
My BIOS is set to automatically power itself back on after shutdowns / power losses / reboots etc.
Mine too. And I also had a rig restarting several times per hour with v9. Also I have exactly identical rig running rock solid since v9 release. In all rare cases in the past when my PSU engaged a protection it didn't simply restart. I actually had to unplug it from 220V source. My point here is don't blame your quality PSU or Claymore Or blame him for writing a miner stressing your hardware worse than Furmark, Version 9 is now good for me |
|
|
|
|
Power spikes? Rig rebooted due to PSU protection? Tell me which one would do that instead of just shut down PSU itself:
OVP (Over Voltage Protection)
UVP (Under Voltage Protection)
OCP (Over Current Protection)
OPP (Over Power Protection)
and SCP (Short Circuit Protection)
|
|
|
|
Tahiti still rules. Power efficiency? NO. Compute efficiency? YES Old news and it's been this way for a long time. Newer gen cards are producing similiar hash rates and using considerably less power. Exactly. Still, looking at those figures I feel Ellesmere should be doing something like 250-260 h/s at 1050 MHz. Or there is some Open CL catch that is holding compute performance at lower levels? All this masqueraded by higher GPU and MEM clocks ....... |
|
|
|
|
