On 8Gb cards 944 isn't best multi_hash. Try to use 1836.
I had the settings swapped in my post for 4gb and 8gb cards. 1836 for CN-Heavy/Saber dual threads. Will that even work? Of course not. I thought you wrote about v7 algo. On heavy algo max is 944 for 8Gb. On higher values speed is drops due to lack of vmemory. For heavy algo on 8Gb best multihash is 832 (and maybe 864) and dual threads. |
|
|
|
1.6.4 can produce compute errors on BC drivers, maybe you have a ton of those? That is why i recommend 18.3.4 or18.6.1 on the first page, it works a lot better on those drivers. Maybe if you can try it on one of those?
I have rather old rig with 4 polaris cards (8gb) and win 8.1. There are no recent amd drivers for win 8.1 so I'm still using August blockchain ones. And when I try to switch to bittube v2 and srbminer 1.6.4 I've got severe share drop (effective hashrate measures for 1 day 3.2 khs. miner still shows good hashrate on its console window, ~4khs) So I had to switch back to heavy and 1.6.0 version (( Don't wanna install win10 on this ancient rig .... Windows 10 is better and quicker than Windows 8.1. You must update 8.1 to 10. Polaris cards with 8Gb allready old and even ancient?.... |
|
|
|
Thanks for all your replies!
so if I summarize 0.31f is the best on all cards but the rx550?
you didn't report about rx560 but i've those cards and i reach 360 on cn heavy on f, more than previous. versions.
high priority is now:
Better autoconfig
fix no-gpu bug on win7 + betablockchain
fan speed and temperature
watchdog
I don't think that autoconfig option is so important... Often every card needs to fine tune... Still waiting heavy algo optimization to stop use SRB and go to JCE miner. Until use JCE only with normalv7 algo and based on it coins... |
|
|
|
@JCE-Miner keep up the good work. I get the below on 6 x RX 580 4gb, 2 x RX 570 4gb and 1 x RX 570 8gb on CN-Saber. 8gb card { "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 3, "multi_hash":944 },
4gb card { "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 4, "multi_hash":832 },
{ "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 4, "multi_hash":832 },
02:00:19 | Accepted by the pool.
02:00:20 | Hashrate GPU Thread 0: 768.12 h/s - Total GPU 0: 768.12 h/s
02:00:20 | Hashrate GPU Thread 1: 794.53 h/s - Total GPU 1: 794.53 h/s
02:00:20 | Hashrate GPU Thread 2: 797.66 h/s - Total GPU 2: 797.66 h/s
02:00:20 | Hashrate GPU Thread 3: 737.42 h/s - Total GPU 3: 737.42 h/s
02:00:20 | Hashrate GPU Thread 4: 528.76 h/s
02:00:20 | Hashrate GPU Thread 5: 527.76 h/s - Total GPU 4: 1056.51 h/s
02:00:20 | Hashrate GPU Thread 6: 794.66 h/s - Total GPU 5: 794.66 h/s
02:00:20 | Hashrate GPU Thread 7: 798.89 h/s - Total GPU 6: 798.89 h/s
02:00:20 | Hashrate GPU Thread 8: 709.82 h/s - Total GPU 7: 709.82 h/s
02:00:20 | Hashrate GPU Thread 9: 797.32 h/s - Total GPU 8: 797.32 h/s
02:00:20 | Total: 7254.89 h/s - Max: 7263.18 h/s
02:00:21 | Pool mining.bit.tube:13333
02:00:21 | Currency BitTube (TUBE)
02:00:21 | Current pool Difficulty 100001
02:00:21 | Valid Shares found 41
02:00:21 | Total hashes 2900019
On 8Gb cards 944 isn't best multi_hash. Try to use 1836. |
|
|
|
Wow, great speed! What settings in miner and overclock settings for 580 card you're using?
{ "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 16, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 0, "multi_hash":864 }, { "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 16, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 0, "multi_hash":864 }, This is the divine micron 1250/2200  Did you tried mukti_hash 832? Maybe it'll be better... |
|
|
|
In version 31f the overall performance on my rig with 12 552rx fell to 200+ hashes (from one card 347-> 330) The settings were exactly the same, the trick I used, maybe this version does not work now.)  I return to the royal 31e version of the miner  Developer, what drivers do you use for testing? I'm using 18.3.4. PS: Just in case, I bring the parameters of the video card on which the rig is assembled. Rx550 2gb Baffin 1150/1800 (1071/1500) 768sp/12cu (unlock 640/10), mem Elpida On the test card 588 on the new version, on the contrary, growth is seen on the Heavy Algo from 1100 to 1120 hashes! Wow, great speed! What settings in miner and overclock settings for 580 card you're using? |
|
|
|
Hello, Are they 2Gb cards ? It sounds that's some RX550 or 560 with those speed. With 2Gb i've a stable hashrate with multi-hash (intensity) of 432, and 448 or 464 when no screen is plugged. You've a rig of 13 cards, that's big under windows, maybe you reach some drivers limits somewhere. JCE is a pure OpenCL miner, i let OpenCL and the drivers allocate resources, so if your driver makes your hashrate drop, JCE tries nothing to prevent it. Safety first. I'm building 0.31f right now, with: Linked against official AMD SDK 3.0
Invalid shares detected by CPU now logs the Thread and Lane (good for memory diagnostic)
Still new OpenCL code, it's good on all my cards (HD7000, RX550, 560) but blind-experimental on RX570, 580 and vega. Reads: perfs may be worse than 0.31c
edit: 0.31f onlineHeavy algo is still the same as before? |
|
|
|
Memory 1340/1050
GPU 2065/880
Are you sure that you wrote all right? Almost, just got that switched, sorry. https://imgur.com/a/szk4pbZI showed you mine, will you show me yours? I use paratemeters close to yours. On my cards with hynix memory I recive 1125 h/s on heavy. |
|
|
|
doktor83
v7 algo
505 H/s 1215/1945 Gygabyte Rx550
505 H/s 1215/1900 Asus Rx550
495 H/s 1215-1230/1900-1935 MSI Low Profile Rx550
If i add fragments=338033747 in config when speed up about +10 H/s
You can lower fragments to 8388607. Result will be the same. |
|
|
|
Memory 1340/1050
GPU 2065/880
Are you sure that you wrote all right? |
|
|
|
good, at least you get an error message. I can investigate, thanks. I'm reworking my openCL, i hope I can make a version that is fast on all platforms. I can reach 360 on my little rx560 on CN-Heavy, which is better than before, but maybe those optims are bad on Vega... edit: https://community.amd.com/thread/129433Looks like OpenCL + Mingw (my compiler under Win64) don't work well together. Other miners use Visual Studio, so why they work fine. Theme on link is 8 years old... I think it's not a problem. XMRig AMD and Stak-XMR compiles with mingw64 and works fine. Problem maybe in AMD ADL wich need to compile... |
|
|
|
While installing the installation of MS VC++ redis fails, because it is already installed. Is there any workaround for this?
You can use unpacked archive with GGS. |
|
|
|
Zawawa is now focusing on private projects, I don't think he'll have time to develop GGS. He however told me in this thread that he has released open source kernels for ETASH on github.
I mean is someone able to expain how to reach these 30mh, when running out of the box i get only 25 :/ You must run optimization in GGS. |
|
|
|
Just started using SRBMiner and have a quick question...
If I change algos, say from CN7 to CNHeavy, do I need to delete the .srb files and let program recompile, or will the old .srb files work fine?
Thanks
If srb files created by version 1.6.3 or 1.6.4 it's no need to delete them. |
|
|
|
I don't know, all my blind fixes proved to be pretty bad so far. I'm still waiting for my own APU to be able to test a real case.
0.31d online now
When you optimize heavy algo? I forced to use SRB miner because it gives about 7,5% more speed on heavy. On CN-V7 speed is almost equal. |
|
|
|
set FORK=4
Thank you! on 6хRX552 - 6310 h/s, the optimal settings: { "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 16, "alpha" : 128, "beta" : 16, "gamma" : 8, "delta" : 8, "epsilon" : 8, "zeta" : 8, "index" : 1, "multi_hash" : 464 } Try alpha 64 beta 8, this can increase speed. |
|
|
|
Zawawa is now focusing on private projects, I don't think he'll have time to develop GGS. He however told me in this thread that he has released open source kernels for ETASH on github.
And what help it does for usual miners? I looked in github, zawawa on free time allready start to make version 2.0. But still without new nicehash algos... Even nicehash heavy is absent... |
|
|
|
Ok, thanks. I got it.
1.6.4. builds other heavy srb kernels. It have size about 2Mb as for cn-v7. And speed is some lower. If use srb builded 1.6.3 speed good, and size of srb kernel about 4Mb.
i did not touch cl kernels from 1.6.3 to 1.6.4, so probably you built on one driver , now with another, and maybe the compiler unrolls differently, that would explain the increased size. Size decreases. On 1.6.4 kernels builded with 18.7.1 are buggy. Speed is low, many compute errors. Now use 1.6.4 with srb kernels builded by 1.6.3 on 18.6 drivers... If you take 1.6.4 and install 18.6.1 and let the miner build the binaries it would work good. The problem here is the 18.7.1 drivers. Yes, I understand it. Just wanted all to know that on 18.7.1 new builded kernels not optimal, but old kernels works fine. |
|
|
|
Ok, thanks. I got it.
1.6.4. builds other heavy srb kernels. It have size about 2Mb as for cn-v7. And speed is some lower. If use srb builded 1.6.3 speed good, and size of srb kernel about 4Mb.
i did not touch cl kernels from 1.6.3 to 1.6.4, so probably you built on one driver , now with another, and maybe the compiler unrolls differently, that would explain the increased size. Size decreases. On 1.6.4 kernels builded with 18.7.1 are buggy. Speed is low, many compute errors. Now use 1.6.4 with srb kernels builded by 1.6.3 on 18.6 drivers... |
|
|
|
nice try, but… it's nothing like a legit script param.
If your config file is named config.bittube, param is simply:
-c config.bittube
Hi JCE-Miner, I already tryed this but the problem is the same. Doned a print: https://ibb.co/igtMSTThanks  looks like your commandline argument should be config.bittube.txt Doesn t work too.. Its very strange!! Another one variant: -c config.bittube.txt |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
