|
zawawa, how is progress with new version?
|
|
|
|
I just build a new rig today, R9 280x and a fresh driver Adrenaline 18.5.2. Now this happens: C:\Claymore>NsGpuCNMiner.exe -pow7 1 -xpool ssl://us-east.cryptonight-hub.miningpoolhub.com:20596 -xwal account.worker -xpsw x
╔════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
║ Claymore's CryptoNote AMD GPU Miner v11.3 ║
╚════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╝
XMR: 2 pools are specified
Main Monero pool is us-east.cryptonight-hub.miningpoolhub.com:20596
C:\Claymore> What might be the reason? Look, what miner writes in log file. |
|
|
|
|
And what parameters (intensity) you use?
|
|
|
|
I'm getting ~500 H/s on R9 280x @ default settings, v1.6.0. Is that what should i expect? I was hoping more though
Point algo. Double threads enabled? Try to manual increase intensity. |
|
|
|
|
PHI1612 allready not profitable... Now it's need to mine Lyra2Z algo... But there is no miner for lyra2Z for Windows yet, except sgminer. But sgminer has kernel for lyra2Z six mounths old... Not sure that it will normal work...
|
|
|
|
[2018-06-08 23:07:33] Error CL_OUT_OF_HOST_MEMORY when creating clCreateCommandQueue for DeviceID 0 (Thread 0)
[2018-06-08 23:07:33] Error initing GPU's. Stopping miner process
what caused the error ? You can read? Miner all wrote to you. Not enogh memory on card. Lower intensity. 1.4.9 works, and 1.5.9 gives the following error with the same settings From 1.4.9 to 1.5.9 was 10 versions. I don't want to find in wich version what was changed. But you must understand that through 10 versions same settings can used by miner different ways. Just try to lower intensity and increase pagefile size to 8Gb * number of videocards. that's obviously not the point. installed 8 GB of RAM and 80 GB of virtual 6 cards . What algo? What intensity, worksize and threads? normalv7 "gpu_conf" : [ { "id" : 0, "intensity" : 112, "worksize" : 16, "threads" : 2}, { "id" : 1, "intensity" : 112, "worksize" : 16, "threads" : 2}, { "id" : 2, "intensity" : 112, "worksize" : 16, "threads" : 2}, { "id" : 3, "intensity" : 112, "worksize" : 16, "threads" : 2}, { "id" : 4, "intensity" : 112, "worksize" : 16, "threads" : 2}, { "id" : 5, "intensity" : 112, "worksize" : 16, "threads" : 2} ] Cards is 8Gb vmemory? Display connected to card id 0? If so, just try to id 0 card set intensity 108 or 110. And why worksize 16? 8 is works perfect. Try it. I noticed that 1.6.0 with worksize 16 and high intensity on 580 8Gb significant lower speed on the same intensity as worksize 8. |
|
|
|
[2018-06-08 23:07:33] Error CL_OUT_OF_HOST_MEMORY when creating clCreateCommandQueue for DeviceID 0 (Thread 0)
[2018-06-08 23:07:33] Error initing GPU's. Stopping miner process
what caused the error ? You can read? Miner all wrote to you. Not enogh memory on card. Lower intensity. 1.4.9 works, and 1.5.9 gives the following error with the same settings From 1.4.9 to 1.5.9 was 10 versions. I don't want to find in wich version what was changed. But you must understand that through 10 versions same settings can used by miner different ways. Just try to lower intensity and increase pagefile size to 8Gb * number of videocards. that's obviously not the point. installed 8 GB of RAM and 80 GB of virtual 6 cards . What algo? What intensity, worksize and threads? |
|
|
|
[2018-06-08 23:07:33] Error CL_OUT_OF_HOST_MEMORY when creating clCreateCommandQueue for DeviceID 0 (Thread 0)
[2018-06-08 23:07:33] Error initing GPU's. Stopping miner process
what caused the error ? You can read? Miner all wrote to you. Not enogh memory on card. Lower intensity. 1.4.9 works, and 1.5.9 gives the following error with the same settings From 1.4.9 to 1.5.9 was 10 versions. I don't want to find in wich version what was changed. But you must understand that through 10 versions same settings can used by miner different ways. Just try to lower intensity and increase pagefile size to 8Gb * number of videocards. |
|
|
|
Unable to get -cvddc to work, any help, thanks. Running Windows 10 Pro (x64) 1803, latest AMD drivers. Monitoring GPU core voltage with 'HwInfo64'. I have a small rig with two RX470 (one 4GB and one 8GB, bios modded) and can't get -cvddc to reduce the core voltage, no matter what I set it to it will not go lower than 988mV. Now if I use MSI Afterburner to reduce the core voltage it works, if I set the core voltage to -25mV (both cards) Hwinfo64 will show the voltage drop from 988mV to 963mV, but Claymore's -cvddc does nothing ? I've been using AB until now to reduce the core voltage but thought I'd give Claymore's option a try but with no success, I've just updated Windows to 1803 so I'm wondering if this is the problem. Getting between 880-900 h/s with these cards so I hate to have to roll-back Windows to 1703 in case it all goes horribly wrong. My Command Line: NsGpuCNMiner -xpool ssl://europe.cryptonight-hub.miningpoolhub.com:20580 -xwal user.worker -xpsw x -pow7 1 -ftime 5 -mport 0 -r 1 -h 1024,896 -cvddc 970,970
Why nobody dasn't allowes that HWInfo can read sensors wrong or with bugs due to new AMD driver's specifics? |
|
|
|
|
Why nobody dasn't allowes that HWInfo can read sensors wrong or with bugs due to new AMD driver's specifics?
|
|
|
|
[2018-06-08 23:07:33] Error CL_OUT_OF_HOST_MEMORY when creating clCreateCommandQueue for DeviceID 0 (Thread 0)
[2018-06-08 23:07:33] Error initing GPU's. Stopping miner process
what caused the error ? You can read? Miner all wrote to you. Not enogh memory on card. Lower intensity. |
|
|
|
Hello!
Can U mine Cryptonight Heavy w/ this miner?
No. That's why we asking Claymore to update his miner. |
|
|
|
Hold on for a sec. I'm burying myself in the matrix of the GCN assembly right now.
I should be able to hit the 64 VGPR mark soon...
Be careful, we don't want to matrix has you...  |
|
|
|
Stop to attract to SRB miner. It unstable in hash speed as hell! To get max speed for my 580 cards I relaunch it 5-10 times. Rebuilding kernel bins is also different story...
Claymore's miners are stable as rock! Fast starting, stable speed.
Plus SRB miner slower on old 2xx and 3xx cards.
If people didn't like Claymore's miners they didn't use them.
Some people swear by one miner over another with almost religious fervour, I've used lots of different miners and use the one I feel happy with, be it Claymore, SRBminer or whatever, it sometimes comes down to a matter of individual preference, but one will never convince the fanatics - Die Heretic ! I use SRB miner right now. But it doesn't means that it's the best one. If Claymore returns to develope CN miner it can do best of them. That's why we here. I don't know what you're doing here... |
|
|
|
|
Stop to attract to SRB miner. It unstable in hash speed as hell! To get max speed for my 580 cards I relaunch it 5-10 times. Rebuilding kernel bins is also different story...
Claymore's miners are stable as rock! Fast starting, stable speed.
Plus SRB miner slower on old 2xx and 3xx cards.
If people didn't like Claymore's miners they didn't use them.
|
|
|
|
I know there more juice to this miner!
I'm using the latest 1.5.9 with 6x RX580s.
On Claymore 11.3 DevFree I get about 5200 H/S
On this one I get about 4890 H/S if lucky.
Something is not right, I think the kernel settings need tweaking or not working correctly.
Not sure why lower hash on some of the cards with same settings?
[2018-06-08 14:11:25] GPU0: 843 H/s [T: 56c, RPM: 2179, CC: 1150 MHz, MC: 2175 MHz][BUS:5]
[2018-06-08 14:11:25] GPU1: 773 H/s [T: 65c, RPM: 2124, CC: 1150 MHz, MC: 2175 MHz][BUS:1]
[2018-06-08 14:11:25] GPU2: 804 H/s [T: 60c, RPM: 2020, CC: 1150 MHz, MC: 2175 MHz][BUS:4]
[2018-06-08 14:11:25] GPU3: 784 H/s [T: 64c, RPM: 2132, CC: 1150 MHz, MC: 2175 MHz][BUS:3]
[2018-06-08 14:11:25] GPU4: 843 H/s [T: 53c, RPM: 2883, CC: 1150 MHz, MC: 2175 MHz][BUS:2]
[2018-06-08 14:11:25] GPU5: 843 H/s [T: 43c, RPM: 2992, CC: 1150 MHz, MC: 2175 MHz][BUS:6]
If you're compare with Claymore - you use v7 algo. Isn't it? You must set right intensity in SRB for your cards, not auto. On Claymore you also not got max speed... |
|
|
|
I know you all have your conspiracy theories that a miner must steal your hashrate, but i will have to dissapoint you.
Your math is bad, to get average of something you divide total with something, in this case :
Total time in seconds since connected to pool / total number of sent shares (good & bad)
And end of story. This is how you get average time needed to find a share.
Sorry im not stealing 9% of your hashrate.
Your case:
Mining time 15 hours, 3 minutes 10 seconds = 54190 sec (in this case this can be taken because you did not have pool disconnects)
Total shares : 1213
Average : 54190 / 1213 = 44.6 sec
Now check your screenshot.
Thanks for the reply, dear! There were no thoughts about theft of hash. Based on your mathematics, you can calculate the real hash of the miner 1213 * 240000 = 291120000 total hash. 291120000 h / 54190 sec = 5372 h/s. Why then this figure is obtained, not 5800? What am I doing wrong? I made calculations another way, but I'm agreed that there is something wrong... You calculate what speed miner gives and must. I calculate how much shares miner must give with mining speed and how much it findes. Miner gives less founded shares for speed that it indicates. i calculate next way: My speed is 2150 h/s. In hour - 2150 h/s * 3570 (-30 sec devfee) = 7675500 h. Now devide by difficulty - 7675500 h / 200007 = 38.38 shares. But real founded shares is about 33-34 in hour... |
|
|
|
|
Can you provide some alpha/beta version to test it?
|
|
|
|
not bad, i'm done with all algos but Heavy which is so different. but also offers the best opportunities to optimize.
i cannot get how Claymore did his 9.7 so stable and fast, on hd7000. I Cannot reach it on cn-classic. it was really a masterpiece of optim.
stability tests were success.
Good. I wait until I can test it on my 270X 4Gb. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
