Assessing the impact of TLB trashing on memory hard algorhitms

[mandica]

I have extracted a solo miner showed resolve, but the server node seems to be ignored, that is, the balls from the miner with chunks.

LOL true. I'm sorry man, just knocked this out blindly without access to an actual AMD card. For now, some further testing by others have indicated there presently no need to worry about allocation problems in the near future. I wil have to verify for myself to be absolutely sure though.

I'd could send you one of my 7950s if you want to pay for shipping i have a bunch laying around due to no motherboards to host them in.

This dag problem is getting huge for my my 900mh/s farm is down to like 700mh/s

The Dag problem is not a problem as it affect all the graphics cards. But I heard that it affects R9 380 less.

[Akarabzie]

I have extracted a solo miner showed resolve, but the server node seems to be ignored, that is, the balls from the miner with chunks.

LOL true. I'm sorry man, just knocked this out blindly without access to an actual AMD card. For now, some further testing by others have indicated there presently no need to worry about allocation problems in the near future. I wil have to verify for myself to be absolutely sure though.

I'd could send you one of my 7950s if you want to pay for shipping i have a bunch laying around due to no motherboards to host them in.

This dag problem is getting huge for my my 900mh/s farm is down to like 700mh/s

The Dag problem is not a problem as it affect all the graphics cards. But I heard that it affects R9 380 less.

I keep hearing this as well, but i don't think I've seen enough data to be sure about this yet, or the reason why the 380s aren't affected. Is it the difference in memory types or what? Also what kind of difference if any does the trashing have on the 380 vs 380X?

[RustyNoman]

I have extracted a solo miner showed resolve, but the server node seems to be ignored, that is, the balls from the miner with chunks.

LOL true. I'm sorry man, just knocked this out blindly without access to an actual AMD card. For now, some further testing by others have indicated there presently no need to worry about allocation problems in the near future. I wil have to verify for myself to be absolutely sure though.

I'd could send you one of my 7950s if you want to pay for shipping i have a bunch laying around due to no motherboards to host them in.

This dag problem is getting huge for my my 900mh/s farm is down to like 700mh/s

The Dag problem is not a problem as it affect all the graphics cards. But I heard that it affects R9 380 less.

I keep hearing this as well, but i don't think I've seen enough data to be sure about this yet, or the reason why the 380s aren't affected. Is it the difference in memory types or what? Also what kind of difference if any does the trashing have on the 380 vs 380X?

Yes. We need more data to assess the situation. I am also interested in knowing the performance of 380 vs 380x.

[Marvell1]

I have extracted a solo miner showed resolve, but the server node seems to be ignored, that is, the balls from the miner with chunks.

LOL true. I'm sorry man, just knocked this out blindly without access to an actual AMD card. For now, some further testing by others have indicated there presently no need to worry about allocation problems in the near future. I wil have to verify for myself to be absolutely sure though.

I'd could send you one of my 7950s if you want to pay for shipping i have a bunch laying around due to no motherboards to host them in.

This dag problem is getting huge for my my 900mh/s farm is down to like 700mh/s

The Dag problem is not a problem as it affect all the graphics cards. But I heard that it affects R9 380 less.

I keep hearing this as well, but i don't think I've seen enough data to be sure about this yet, or the reason why the 380s aren't affected. Is it the difference in memory types or what? Also what kind of difference if any does the trashing have on the 380 vs 380X?

Yes. We need more data to assess the situation. I am also interested in knowing the performance of 380 vs 380x.

I have both the 380 and 380x 4G cards and the hash rate is pretty underwhelming 18mh/s vs 19.5 mh/s max it seems.  They are both pretty power hungry too around 240 watts maybe 250 for the x.

a 7950 gets close to 23 mhs/s for around the same power.  One thing i do notice is the hash rate on the 380 and 380x has remained constant regardless of DAG size vs the drop in hash rate of the 7950s to around 22-21 mh/s   not sure to make of all of this .

I think the best bet right now is to get 390s and mix and match them with 380 so at least you get better relsae value on your GPU's vs the older cards unles you can get them really cheap.

the problem with the 390 and 390x is the run crazy hot and consume close to 300 wats of power , thats even worse with a 290x

I'm trying out various brands of 380x cards this week but form my estimation its not worth it to pay anthing more for the 380x at least for mining since it hashes only 5% higer than the 380 and uses more power basically a worthless card.   

[RustyNoman]

I have extracted a solo miner showed resolve, but the server node seems to be ignored, that is, the balls from the miner with chunks.

LOL true. I'm sorry man, just knocked this out blindly without access to an actual AMD card. For now, some further testing by others have indicated there presently no need to worry about allocation problems in the near future. I wil have to verify for myself to be absolutely sure though.

I'd could send you one of my 7950s if you want to pay for shipping i have a bunch laying around due to no motherboards to host them in.

This dag problem is getting huge for my my 900mh/s farm is down to like 700mh/s

The Dag problem is not a problem as it affect all the graphics cards. But I heard that it affects R9 380 less.

I keep hearing this as well, but i don't think I've seen enough data to be sure about this yet, or the reason why the 380s aren't affected. Is it the difference in memory types or what? Also what kind of difference if any does the trashing have on the 380 vs 380X?

Yes. We need more data to assess the situation. I am also interested in knowing the performance of 380 vs 380x.

I have both the 380 and 380x 4G cards and the hash rate is pretty underwhelming 18mh/s vs 19.5 mh/s max it seems.  They are both pretty power hungry too around 240 watts maybe 250 for the x.

a 7950 gets close to 23 mhs/s for around the same power.  One thing i do notice is the hash rate on the 380 and 380x has remained constant regardless of DAG size vs the drop in hash rate of the 7950s to around 22-21 mh/s   not sure to make of all of this .

I think the best bet right now is to get 390s and mix and match them with 380 so at least you get better relsae value on your GPU's vs the older cards unles you can get them really cheap.

the problem with the 390 and 390x is the run crazy hot and consume close to 300 wats of power , thats even worse with a 290x

I'm trying out various brands of 380x cards this week but form my estimation its not worth it to pay anthing more for the 380x at least for mining since it hashes only 5% higer than the 380 and uses more power basically a worthless card.   

380x has 2048 cores while  380 has 1792. The core number is 14% higher, but the hash rate is just 5% high with higher power consumption. So it is not worth it.

[adaseb]

So we are currently at 1280MB for the DAG file size and most people are still mining. Was the bug fixed?

[Genoil]

So we are currently at 1280MB for the DAG file size and most people are still mining. Was the bug fixed?

It turned out the big bug wasn't really there. My (false) assumptions were based on reports by testers of dagSimCL who apparently didn't know how to tune their AMD cards correctly.

The impact of DAG size on hashrate is a fact though. While on Nvidia it has the most dramatic effects in certain circumstances, the impact on AMD cards has been growing steadily now to such a level that the 280X is now dethroned as most cost-effective card to mine on, losing its position to GTX970 on Win7/Linux. 

[adaseb]

So we are currently at 1280MB for the DAG file size and most people are still mining. Was the bug fixed?

It turned out the big bug wasn't really there. My (false) assumptions were based on reports by testers of dagSimCL who apparently didn't know how to tune their AMD cards correctly.

The impact of DAG size on hashrate is a fact though. While on Nvidia it has the most dramatic effects in certain circumstances, the impact on AMD cards has been growing steadily now to such a level that the 280X is now dethroned as most cost-effective card to mine on, losing its position to GTX970 on Win7/Linux. 

I noticed the decrease in speed also.


The 970 however seems to be at least double in price compared to the 280X.

[Genoil]

So we are currently at 1280MB for the DAG file size and most people are still mining. Was the bug fixed?

It turned out the big bug wasn't really there. My (false) assumptions were based on reports by testers of dagSimCL who apparently didn't know how to tune their AMD cards correctly.

The impact of DAG size on hashrate is a fact though. While on Nvidia it has the most dramatic effects in certain circumstances, the impact on AMD cards has been growing steadily now to such a level that the 280X is now dethroned as most cost-effective card to mine on, losing its position to GTX970 on Win7/Linux. 

I noticed the decrease in speed also.


The 970 however seems to be at least double in price compared to the 280X.

Yes it only counts when you have already ROI'd on the cards mining other coins

[sp_]

You can get the gtx 970 to 21 MHASH by putting the gtx 970 in P1 mode. (nvidia-smi tool).

The best card for mining etherum is the r9 Nano. It does 28MHASH.

[Realetim]

You can get the gtx 970 to 21 MHASH by putting the gtx 970 in P1 mode. (nvidia-smi tool).

The best card for mining etherum is the r9 Nano. It does 28MHASH.

Does the R9 nano use more electricity? Which is more efficient in terms of hash per watt? Nano or 970?

[sp_]

You can get the gtx 970 to 21 MHASH by putting the gtx 970 in P1 mode. (nvidia-smi tool).
The best card for mining etherum is the r9 Nano. It does 28MHASH.

Does the R9 nano use more electricity? Which is more efficient in terms of hash per watt? Nano or 970?

The NANO use less electricity, but cost more.

[apriyoni]

You can get the gtx 970 to 21 MHASH by putting the gtx 970 in P1 mode. (nvidia-smi tool).
The best card for mining etherum is the r9 Nano. It does 28MHASH.

Does the R9 nano use more electricity? Which is more efficient in terms of hash per watt? Nano or 970?

The NANO use less electricity, but cost more.

The R9 nano costs £388 while the 970 costs £250. So there is £138 or $200 difference. that is quite a lot.

[sp_]

You can get the gtx 970 to 21 MHASH by putting the gtx 970 in P1 mode. (nvidia-smi tool).
The best card for mining etherum is the r9 Nano. It does 28MHASH.

Does the R9 nano use more electricity? Which is more efficient in terms of hash per watt? Nano or 970?

The NANO use less electricity, but cost more.

The R9 nano costs £388 while the 970 costs £250. So there is £138 or $200 difference. that is quite a lot.

33% faster and 55% more expensive, but it draws less power..

[rednoW]

You can get the gtx 970 to 21 MHASH by putting the gtx 970 in P1 mode. (nvidia-smi tool).

The best card for mining etherum is the r9 Nano. It does 28MHASH.

nope, the best card for eth is 390x now, fury is good for decred

[adaseb]

You guys are all wrong the best card to mine is probably the 7950/7970 since its can be bought second hand dirt cheap. And it gets 20Mh/s.

Buying the Nano or Fury? What are the chances that ETH will still be profitable the day you get ROI ?

[Satlite]

You can get the gtx 970 to 21 MHASH by putting the gtx 970 in P1 mode. (nvidia-smi tool).
The best card for mining etherum is the r9 Nano. It does 28MHASH.

Does the R9 nano use more electricity? Which is more efficient in terms of hash per watt? Nano or 970?

The NANO use less electricity, but cost more.

The R9 nano costs £388 while the 970 costs £250. So there is £138 or $200 difference. that is quite a lot.

33% faster and 55% more expensive, but it draws less power..

In percentage term, it could be a good deal if you  can squeeze 6 GPU and reduce the overhead of the system.

[RustyNoman]

I usually use 8 GPU in a system. 4x7990 + 4x other GPUs. AMD allow up to 8 GPU in the Windows sytem. So I use 8.

[Akarabzie]

I usually use 8 GPU in a system. 4x7990 + 4x other GPUs. AMD allow up to 8 GPU in the Windows sytem. So I use 8.

Most people don't like using the 7990s becuase they are pretty finicky and a pain to keep cool. I haven't had too much problem with mine after a pretty big underclock. I had one GPU go out on me while the other worked, and I had some problems with another one constantly crashing my system. I'd rather just run (5) 280Xs with no system downtime. Hey if you actually got 4x7990s running with no issues, more power to you. Your rig is like what 2100 watts?

[asrilani]

I usually use 8 GPU in a system. 4x7990 + 4x other GPUs. AMD allow up to 8 GPU in the Windows sytem. So I use 8.

Most people don't like using the 7990s becuase they are pretty finicky and a pain to keep cool. I haven't had too much problem with mine after a pretty big underclock. I had one GPU go out on me while the other worked, and I had some problems with another one constantly crashing my system. I'd rather just run (5) 280Xs with no system downtime. Hey if you actually got 4x7990s running with no issues, more power to you. Your rig is like what 2100 watts?

I have 4x7990+4x7970. I undervolt and underclock them a lot. 950mv, 850/1500 MHz, the power is about 1330 and hah rate = 156 MH/s.