@UnclWish I let the pre-b5 online on purpose, but that's very surprising you noticed no increase. I had +15/+20% on all the card I tested from the HD6950 to the RX. It's not impossible your Curacao chip doesn't get any extra speed, but very strange. And i dedicated the release to you, so sad  Thank you for heavy algo opt! And thanx for dedicating this to me )))). On RX 580 I have some increase in heavy algo... Not 10% but about 5%. Now triyng to find parameters for stable speed... 270X - Pitcairn... Why Curacao? Maybe I didn't have increase cause of 3,5Gb vmem for OpenCL? Or wrong parameters... What parameters you recommend? |
|
|
|
OpenCL bug 0.2-10: i could reproduce it on my rig by using exotic characters in the path where JCE exe was, and this case is fixed. But there may be another cause of bug. Did you use non-english path too?
Hashrate: first, yes, the +15% is not fake, but it can be canceled by the higher instability on some cards. On old cards, it's +20% faster and stable, easy. HD6000, HD7000, R7, R9... On big RX and Vega, things are more complicated.
I read here opposite results, so:
* Ensure you're talking about CN-Heavy and related, CN-v8 is not concerned by the 0.33b6 release
* Is it unstable on the 8Gb RX and Vega only? Sure that's the most common cards, but if this is the status, it's an important detail to track the bug down. I did my long-run tests on 2G and 4G cards only so far. If I need a 8G card to reproduce the bug, i've some, so i need to focus on them.
I suspend GPU support and dev for now, going back to CPU version where i've a fistful of Github tickets to close.
I didn't noticed any + in hashrate on my R9 270X 4Gb (3,5 OpenCL). On pre-b5 versions on heavy it was 420 h/s and now speed the same, only fee increased... |
|
|
|
|
On my RX 580 8G cards speed with b6 a bit lower, but still unstable. One of cards drops speed to 985 h/s and didn't rise it again...
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think that on HD6990 or 390 mining is profitable at this moment... Power costs more than these cards can mine...
|
|
|
|
my log
For Windows 64-bits
Detecting OpenCL-capable GPUs...
Found GPU 0, with:
Vendor: AMD
Processor: Ellesmere
Device: 01:00
Compute-Units: 32
Cache Memory: 16 KB
Local Memory: 32 KB
Global Memory: 8192 MB
Addressing: 64-bits
Preparing 2 Mining Threads...
+-- Thread 0 config ------------------------+
| Run on GPU: 0 |
| Multi-hash: 864 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 16 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 1 config ------------------------+
| Run on GPU: 0 |
| Multi-hash: 864 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 16 |
+-------------------------------------------+
Cryptonight Variation: Cryptonight-BitTube v2 of July-2018
Low intensity.
Starting GPU Thread 0, on GPU 0
Created OpenCL Context for GPU 0 at 000002a5cb731410
Created OpenCL Thread 0 Command-Queue for GPU 0 at 000002a5cb7cc200
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 0
Allocating big 3456MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 0...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 0...
Compilation of OpenCL kernels failed.
Error: CL_BUILD_PROGRAM_FAILURE Code: O-2.10
Starting GPU Thread 1, on GPU 0
Created OpenCL Thread 1 Command-Queue for GPU 0 at 000002a5d14944a0
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 1
Allocating big 3456MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 1...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 1...
Compilation of OpenCL kernels failed.
Error: CL_BUILD_PROGRAM_FAILURE Code: O-2.10
GPU Watchdog minimum hashrate: 10
Keep-Alive enabled
Devfee for GPU is 2.3%
21:55:34 | OpenCL Thread 1 failed, Stop.
21:55:34 | BitTube (TUBE) Mining session starts!
21:55:34 | GPU Compute allocation starts at 80% and reaches 100% after ~5min,
21:55:34 | during this time, the hashrate may be unstable and inconsistent.
21:55:34 | Let the miner warm-up if you're tuning for performance.
21:55:34 | OpenCL Thread 0 failed, Stop.
21:55:34 | Unloaded OpenCL kernels of GPU Thread 1
21:55:34 | Unloaded OpenCL kernels of GPU Thread 0
21:55:34 | Released OpenCL Thread 1 Scratchpad at 000002a5d1a360b0
21:55:34 | Released OpenCL Thread 0 Scratchpad at 000002a5d198ddd0
21:55:34 | Released OpenCL Thread 1 Command-Queue of GPU 0 at 000002a5d14944a0
21:55:34 | Released OpenCL Thread 0 Command-Queue of GPU 0 at 000002a5cb7cc200
21:55:34 | Released OpenCL Context 000002a5cb731410 of GPU 0
21:55:35 | Connecting to mining pool bittube.miner.rocks:5555 ...
21:55:35 | Pool connection socket closed.
21:55:35 | Mining thread 0 stopped.
21:55:35 | Mining thread 1 stopped.
integrated GPU not avaiable
What about pagefile size? Did you have his size as amount of cards multiplied on 8Gb? |
|
|
|
Compilation of OpenCL kernels failed. Error: CL_BUILD_PROGRAM_FAILURE Code: O-2.10 (other miners work amd rx470 , recommended driver, compute mode)
Windows 7? It's not supported. GPU miner works only on Windows 8+. of course i have Win 10 ! (SRB miner works without problems) [/quote] Did you have integrated Intel GPU? Check your devices indexes. |
|
|
|
what am I doing wrong? work only CPU but GPU error: Compilation of OpenCL kernels failed. Error: CL_BUILD_PROGRAM_FAILURE Code: O-2.10 (other miners work amd rx470 , recommended driver, compute mode) my BAT set FORK=13 jce_cn_gpu_miner64.exe --no-cpu --doublecheck --watchdog 10 --retrydelay 10 --keepalive --auto --any --forever --variation %FORK% --low -o %POOL%:%PORT% -u %WALLET% -p %PASSWORD% %SSL% %* Windows 7? It's not supported. GPU miner works only on Windows 8+. |
|
|
|
You should try 0.33b4, it has some heavy optimization and it's stable for me. 0.33b5 should be avoided for now. It has increased fee but has very unstable heavy hashrate (especially the effective one). I'm a big fan of this miner and been using it for several months and I'm sure the creator will fix the problems but for now I would recommend to use previous versions or other miners. As for V8, I couldn't get close to teamred results, so I don't quite understand the new fee with explanation like "I only have teamred as a competitor, thus such fee". Also it looks like it would be fair to take that fee accordingly to the algo mined. For example jce is not better then others in cn-lite,xtl... So I would mine with other miners to save extra 1.5% of hashrate but I would definitely use jce for heavy variants with it's brilliant implementation (when it's fixed for stability).
Maybe you forgot that the 2+% fee is only for heavy algo and heavy based algos. For v8 and all other algos based on v7 or v8 fee is still 0.9%. |
|
|
|
|
Please, share optimal multi_hash parameters for RX 580 8Gb for heavy algo.
|
|
|
|
With the last version 0.33b5 i'm not that sure the best multi_hash is the max any longer. To be tested, but on my two RX560 one 2G one 4G, the 4G is no longer the fastest. And high values tend to make the hashrate less stable on RX.
I tried to lower multi_hash for heavy algo. It makes speed more stable, but it became slower. |
|
|
|
I am trying out JCE for the first time.
Getting 1660h/s per card.
What would be the best config for Vega 56's on BittubeV2?
This is my config.
"gpu_threads_conf" :
[
{ "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 0, "multi_hash":464 },
{ "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 0, "multi_hash":464 },
],
Thanks
Alpha 128, multi_hash as high as possible. |
|
|
|
Merci Lermite!
No worries about graphics/compute & crossfire. Got all that covered in registry.
"multi hash" was definitely the culprit. Getting much better values now that I reduced the rates. 480 was failing so I went down to 416. All cards worked. Slowly working my way back up now to find optimal value.
On different versions of Windows and drivers there is different amount of free videomemory on cards. So you just must try to lower multi_hash parameters multiples of 16. F.e. 464, 448, 432, 416. On heavy algo more multi_hash gives more speed. But if there is not enough videomemory, miner not always gives error, often it just significant decrease speed... This maybe Windows problem, when on start of miner it gives more videomemory than it gives it after launching, or something else... |
|
|
|
My GPU hash 0 h/s after 2 minutes...using auto config or manual, any help? (RX580 4g)
Too much overclock or undervoltage. Latest version needs to fix... Speed on heavy algo isn't stable for a long time... And what about cards with 3,5Gb of vram? On my Pitcairn 270X 4Gb(3,5Gb OpenCL) speed on heavy algo is almost the same as in previous versions, but fee more... |
|
|
|
|
Strange situation with 1 of my 580 8G cards... After 7-10 minutes speed became max. After another 5-10 minutes speed drops about 20% and didn't rise after that...
|
|
|
|
I am giving this a go on a rig with two 7950's but I get CL_UNKNOWN_ERROR -1001
Windows 7
Any ideas please?
GPU miner works only on Windows 8.1+ |
|
|
|
|
To stabilize speed on 580 8G try to set beta to 16.
|
|
|
|
I just want to give some feedback with new version 0.33b5 :
1. Performance definitely awesome.
2. Fee 2.1% I don't really mind about that.
3. RX 580 8 GB Most of card didn't reach peak hash rate and very difficult to reach peak hash rate.
4. RX Vega instantly reach peak hash rate without warm up.
So over all RX Vega will use 0.33b5 and RX 580 8 GB still use 0.33b4 because in 0.33b4 most of card reach peak hash rate easily.
hope you can improve warm up on 0.33b5 like in 0.33b4.
Similar behavior. Not all cards reach max hashrate. Tests on polaris at 1250 core, 2000-2000 memory Tests on Vegas 1410 core, 950-1100 memory I did get a boost from 8gb polaris cards 1150-1180 to 1240-1260 H/s (~7%) 4gb polaris cards got a boost from 800 to 840 H/s (~5-6%) Reference Vega 56 modded got 1750 up from 1500 H/s (~17%) Vega 56 Pulse (Hynix) 1600 up from ~1400 before H/s (~18.5%) @JCE-Miner great work on cn-heavy. What your polaris 8Gb card memory? What miner settings you're use to reach 1250 H/s? |
|
|
|
Breaking changeWhen I started JCE-GPU, my competitors where SRB and Claymore. The JCE fees were aligned with SRB (0.9%) on purpose. Now the game has changed, Claymore is obsolete and the lead in performances is TeamRed. I'm getting on-par with him on v8, but i still lacked a decent implementation for Heavy-class to completely outperform SRB, leave it behind and have only one real competitor. I'm like Stalin, i avoid having two opponents at the same time. Dedicated to UnclWish who asked for it for a long time, here comes... JCE GPU 0.33b5 with +20% performance on Heavy/Haven/TubeTested on both HD7000 and RX cards, with perfs in the range +15% to +25% My HD7950 jumped from 335 to 415, my RX560 from 340 to 400 The bad news is that the fees are now aligned with TeamRed, at 2.1% (still a bit below their 2.5%) but only on Heavy-class algos, where the extra perf deserve them. On CN and CN-light, that's still 0.9%. If mixed with CPU, it's a weighted average, as before. 0.33b5 GPUHuge performance boost for Heavy/HVX/Tube
Respective fees increased to 2.1%
Very light perf boost for CN-v8
Ok, thanx! Let's try new version... Settings is the same as in prev versions, I hope... |
|
|
|
Lermite kindly provided optimal config for RX570, it may be good on RX580 too. Using 100% memory is good for CN-Heavy but not always for CN-v8 RX570 4G "gpu_threads_conf":
[
{ "mode": "GPU", "worksize": 8, "alpha": 64, "beta": 8, "index": 0, "multi_hash": 976 },
{ "mode": "GPU", "worksize": 8, "alpha": 64, "beta": 8, "index": 0, "multi_hash": 976 },
] RX570 8G "gpu_threads_conf":
[
{ "mode": "GPU", "worksize": 8, "alpha": 64, "beta": 8, "index": 1, "multi_hash": 1008 },
{ "mode": "GPU", "worksize": 8, "alpha": 64, "beta": 8, "index": 1, "multi_hash": 1008 },
] For my 2 RX 580 8G cards best multi_hash parameters for v8 are multiples of 96. Such as 1104, 1200 etc. Higher - speeder. Best is 1680, 1776 and 1872. |
|
|
|
3x RX 550 2GB (core 1315MHz, mem 2050MHz), Driver 18.10.2, Windows 10 1809 XMR v8 07:43:27 | Hashrate GPU Thread 0: 246.37 h/s
07:43:27 | Hashrate GPU Thread 1: 256.64 h/s - Total GPU 0: 503.01 h/s
07:43:27 | Hashrate GPU Thread 2: 246.37 h/s
07:43:27 | Hashrate GPU Thread 3: 249.34 h/s - Total GPU 2: 495.70 h/s
07:43:27 | Hashrate GPU Thread 4: 240.69 h/s
07:43:27 | Hashrate GPU Thread 5: 250.77 h/s - Total GPU 3: 491.46 h/s
07:43:27 | Total: 1490.16 h/s - Max: 1490.16 h/s conf "gpu_threads_conf" :
[
{ "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 16, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 8, "delta" : 8, "epsilon" : 8, "zeta" : 8, "index" : 0, "multi_hash":432 },
{ "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 16, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 8, "delta" : 8, "epsilon" : 8, "zeta" : 8, "index" : 0, "multi_hash":432 },
{ "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 16, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 8, "delta" : 8, "epsilon" : 8, "zeta" : 8, "index" : 2, "multi_hash":432 },
{ "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 16, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 8, "delta" : 8, "epsilon" : 8, "zeta" : 8, "index" : 2, "multi_hash":432 },
{ "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 16, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 8, "delta" : 8, "epsilon" : 8, "zeta" : 8, "index" : 3, "multi_hash":432 },
{ "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 16, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 8, "delta" : 8, "epsilon" : 8, "zeta" : 8, "index" : 3, "multi_hash":432 },
] You can lower worksize to 8. It can increase speed. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
