|
JCE, what optimal parameters for Core i3 6100 3M L3 cache cn-v8?
I can reach 64 h/s on JCE and 75 h/s on XMRig.
|
|
|
|
Here is my rig with 6x 470 4gb. Is this normal for a 470 at 800ish hashrate?
[2018-12-24 12:30:37] GPU0 : 818 H/s [T: 51c, RPM: 1916, CC: 1140 MHz, MC: 2050 MHz][BUS:8]
[2018-12-24 12:30:37] GPU1 : 818 H/s [T: 52c, RPM: 1921, CC: 1140 MHz, MC: 2050 MHz][BUS:3]
[2018-12-24 12:30:37] GPU2 : 816 H/s [T: 51c, RPM: 1982, CC: 1140 MHz, MC: 2050 MHz][BUS:7]
[2018-12-24 12:30:37] GPU3 : 816 H/s [T: 47c, RPM: 1900, CC: 1140 MHz, MC: 2050 MHz][BUS:5]
[2018-12-24 12:30:37] GPU4 : 818 H/s [T: 49c, RPM: 1870, CC: 1140 MHz, MC: 2050 MHz][BUS:6]
[2018-12-24 12:30:37] GPU5 : 817 H/s [T: 44c, RPM: 1921, CC: 1140 MHz, MC: 2050 MHz][BUS:1]
Depends on algo... |
|
|
|
|
I didn't use CPU and old GPU for mining at now. 100-125 Watt CPU too much energy cost for 300-350 h/s on heavy. It's too much even for 500 h/s on v8...
|
|
|
|
Anyone mining UPX with Vega 56's?
I am using SRB V1.7.3 and Radeon 18.8.2.
I get 8700H/s per card but after a few minutes I start getting compute errors
Config:
{ "id" : 0, "intensity" : 230, "double_threads" : true, "old_mode" : true },
CC 1475
MC 1100
When I change the config to "old_mode : false" then I get no more compute errors but hashrate is only 6600H/s.
Even dropping CC, MC and intensity much lower I still get compute errors when using "old_mode" : true
Any advice?
Old mode + new drivers are a no go. Old mode creates kernels well, the old way, which worked OK with drivers up to 18.6.1 + Added a gpu_conf only parameter 'old_mode'. With the changes i made in 1.7.2, that allow the creation of kernels on drivers newer than 18.6.1, algos that use a scratchpad <=1MB (litev7, mox, dark, upx) suffer from a hashrate drop on Vegas (maybe others too, i didn't test). So if you set this parameter to true, it will create kernel the old way, and the speed on these algos should be back.
Don't forget, if you use old_mode : true, and compile the kernel on a driver newer than 18.6.1, you probably won't be finding any shares!
Thank Dok but even with the 18.6.1 I still get compute errors. I dropped the clocks and intensity lower and even upped the voltage without any luck. With "old_mode" : false" I get no compute errors but only have hashrate of 6600H/s Anything else I could try? Have you: 1. cleaned the cache folder in miner folder 2. remove old driver with ddu before installing new driver Dok is legend! No more compute errors after clearing the cache folder  You must take it as the rule - if you change drivers or miner version - you must clear cache folder. |
|
|
|
Yes, it works now... But encountered strange situation with b14. After several hours - about 5 or 6 one of GPU RX 580 8G drops speed about 120 h/s and didn't restore it untill restart miner... I will observe more on it... It seems to me or b14 real a bit slower than b13? About 2-3 h/s? EDIT: 8+ hours of heavy algo mining - no continous speed drops, speed looks the same as on b13. Maybe 1-2 h/s lower... Good job, JCE! |
|
|
|
Bingo that's it, once again you saved my release from a stupid bug, thanks so much! No matter you don't use the CPU to mine, it gets involved to do some partial hash to detect the broken shares (the red counter in the purple report). Otherwise, I couldn't tell the difference between a share refused by the pool because of bad fork, or real GPU memory/core failure. The impact is negligible on perf, but it may crash if the CPU side is wrong. Note that i borrowed the idea from Claymore 10+ miner.  Are you some dev angel or something? Your config of RX580 8G + Nicehash + AthlonFX triggered three bugs I could not or barely have detected myself, that's crazy you found all of them  quick answer above: the speed depends on the algo, if you mine Turtle or uPlexa you'll get very high speed, but as any other miner would, so it's not better, just different. uPlexa is an excellent coin to mine on an AES CPU, since the AES part is big and AES CPUs do it in a split second. Yes, I'm mining angel Just want to help. You did a lot of hard work. I'm testing and help... |
|
|
|
just tried and "works for me" but, what CPU do you have? There may be a conflict with the recent Bulldozer assembly, if you have a related processor.
edit: just found I put some BMI assembly in the bulldozer code, and not all bulldozer have BMI, so it may crash. If you have a modern but not Zen CPU, so it's probably the reason.
I use --no-cpu option... CPU is FX8320... |
|
|
|
|
Version GPU b14 - RX 580 8Gb cards - heavy algo - latest driver.
Miner closes after conneting to nicehash. He write "Pool changes difficulty..." as usual and than just closes without errors...
b13 works normal.
|
|
|
|
I use that config for my RX580 and my hashrate on pool is the same as the miner :
{ "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta" : 4, "index" : 1, "multi_hash":944 },
{ "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta" : 4, "index" : 1, "multi_hash":944 },
i tried beta 16 but got lower hashrate
Beta 16? |
|
|
|
Detecting OpenCL-capable GPUs...
CL_UNKNOWN_ERROR -1001
033.b12, win7
2xRx462, Rx562
JCE GPU miner didn't support Windows 7. It works on Windows 8+ |
|
|
|
could you give me the config you use, i blind-benched myself and found the speed to be the same. maybe the regression is in some specific cases only? i've just rebenched b6 and b7 and got almost the same speed. so i need your config and a confirmation the regression you observe is between b6 and b7 As a desperate attempt, a did a formal review between the b6 and b7 code and reverted, for Vega, all the differences. If it doesn't fix, so i'm running out of ideas. Online is the 0.33b12 GPU with that fix, and an extra little optim for all cards. I benched it to be ~0.2% within a range of -0.3% and +0.7%, so it should increase the hashrate, but it's so subtle that i'm not even sure the gain is positive.  On my RX 580 8Gb cards b12 hangs all system after short period of time after launch mining... Returning to b11 solves problem... |
|
|
|
|
And look on pagefile size. You need it big size!
Testing heavy algo on b11 now. Speed became the same as in SRB miner... But eff.hashrate impressive for now. Almost 5 hours of test - eff.hashrate is almost equal to speed... Now waiting more time to test...
|
|
|
|
I hope it's a thanks haha I don't understand right now but will use translator soon hahahaha :-)
Yes, he thanks to us. Agreed that problem in bios, will find other. |
|
|
|
Блин, нapoд, кaк вы пoлyчaeтe c rx588 1200 xeшeй? Moи дaют 850-900 Windows 10 AMD Driver 18.6.1 биocы шитыe, нa эфиpe 30 жмyт. кoнф: "gpu_threads_conf" : [ { "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 16, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 0, "multi_hash":944 }, { "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 16, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 0, "multi_hash":944 }, { "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 16, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 1, "multi_hash":944 }, { "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 16, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 1, "multi_hash":944 }, { "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 16, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 2, "multi_hash":944 }, { "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 16, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 2, "multi_hash":944 }, { "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 16, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 3, "multi_hash":944 }, { "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 16, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 3, "multi_hash":944 }, { "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 16, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 4, "multi_hash":944 }, { "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 16, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 4, "multi_hash":944 }, ], бaт: jce_cn_gpu_miner64.exe -c config.txt --no-cpu --any --forever --keepalive --variation %FORK% -o %POOL%:%PORT% -u %WALLET% -p %PASSWORD% %SSL% %* Биос, подходящий для эфира не всегда даёт хорошую скорость на Cryptonight. Нужен другой биос, который даст хорошую сокрость на Cryptonight, но будет медленная скорость на эфире. Есть и универсальные. Используй SRB bios editor. Там есть тайминги средние и для того и для того. Если нужна будет помощь с этим, пиши в личку. |
|
|
|
Maybe not yet, i let it run the whole day, and while the new v8 is fine, i still got some bad shares on Heavy, looks like i need an extra fix. i advise you skip your tests for now, unless you target v8.
edit: i noted all the results after a full day of mining, and all new features are good but heavy on modern cards, probably a back regression due to the hd7000 perf restore. i got good results after 1h of mining but the 24h average is 1% lower, i need to fix that.
on hd7000 the b10 is 2% better than b9 and on Zen i got the 0.6% extra perf too. same for v8 on rx about 0.4%
if you're only targetting heavy on RX, skip b10 for now.
Yes, ok. Waiting next version with modern cards heavy fix. Thank you for your hard work! |
|
|
|
Online is the 0.33b10 GPUFixed bad shares
As a consequence, the effective hashrate is closer to the instant one
Little optim for v8 on Zen CPU and RX GPU
Restored most of the perfs on HD7000
Warning when a non-AMD gpu is enabled
A subtle new feature is that the double-check now uses the Large Pages if possible, like the CPU miner. This is why you may see messages about large page allocated or freed even if you use the GPUs only. If large pages are not configured, no change. The tests I did on old GPUs was Stellite and v8 and Heavy on HD7950 and HD7850. Didn't try on HD6000 yet. This is a rare case where the CPU part of the GPU version is faster than the pure CPU one. Of course i will backport it to a CPU release soon (will be the 0.33h) Ok, let's test it... 1st observations - speed on heavy became lower than on B9 about 10-15 h/s. And now it lower than on SRB... |
|
|
|
|
I'm disconnect my R9 270X 4Gb from rig. No profit from it. Electrisity cost too high. My 270X gives 480 h/s on heavy about 100-110 Watt, 535 h/s on v8 about 125-130Watt. No profit.
|
|
|
|
Thanks, in fact it is strange that the pool reports a higher number, my effective net is supposed to be equal to the pool report. It's as strange to see it above than below. It already deduces bad shares, stale and fees. I'm preparing a version with a better pool-side effective hashrate compared to the instant blue one (even if it looks like it is already >100% ) and with some boost for v8 on the CPU part too, for Zen, measured +0.6% I fixed the remaining bad shares on Heavy that dates back from the b-x versions. There will be boost on v8 for RX too. I'd prefer a lower power usage. I won't mine V8 because it's too costly to mine. Agreed. I want lower power cost v8 too. Speed is allready normal, but power consumption too high... |
|
|
|
|
Tested heavy algo on SRB last version... Hmmm - it's very good! Speed stable as rock! On nicehash 20 hours of tests - speed on miner 2315 h/s, speed from pool - 2,3 kH/s. And for 20 hours only 2 errors - invalid nonce... Impressive...
JCE, waiting your next version to test... Please make something to increase effective hashrate...
|
|
|
|
Exccelent! On b9 speed on my RX 580 8Gb is 1195 h/s. Devfee is 0,9% - so my is about 1185 h/s. But total shares is 158/2/1 on 4:15 hours:min. So 3 from 158 - is about 1,89% bad shares... Effective hasrate is only 1015 h/s - it's low...
SRB gives 1187 h/s. Devfee is 0.85% - so my is 1177 h/s. Now will test - how much bad shares gives SRB...
xmrig is even better than both jce and srb if we talk about poolside performance xmrig didn't support latest drivers. Many compute errors... So it no in concuration... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
