Bitcoin Forum
September 25, 2016, 12:17:19 AM *
News: Due to DDoS attacks, there may be periodic downtime.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 [20] 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 »
  Print  
Author Topic: python OpenCL bitcoin miner  (Read 1192417 times)
brocktice
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 292


Apparently I inspired this image.


View Profile WWW
February 04, 2011, 05:56:34 PM
 #381

Fixed issue with lost results due to single output per kernel run (thanks OneFixt, ArtForz).

Ack, it broke compatibility with my daemon.py but I got it all fixed up. Thanks for the fixes!

http://media.witcoin.com/p/1608/8----This-is-nuts

My #bitcoin-otc ratings: http://bitcoin-otc.com/viewratingdetail.php?nick=brocktice&sign=ANY&type=RECV

Like my post? Leave me a tip: 15Cgixqno9YzoKNEA2DRFyEAfMH5htssRg
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1474762639
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1474762639

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1474762639
Reply with quote  #2

1474762639
Report to moderator
geebus
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 258



View Profile WWW
February 04, 2011, 11:09:04 PM
 #382

30Mhash/s slower after the update.

HD6950 went from 226M to 196M.

Feel like donating to me? BTC Address: 14eUVSgBSzLpHXGAfbN9BojXTWvTb91SHJ
sc8nt4u
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 278


View Profile
February 05, 2011, 12:33:22 AM
 #383

30Mhash/s slower after the update.

HD6950 went from 226M to 196M.

This makes me not want to update.

[Selling] Delta 120mm Fans 130CFM 3 Pin w/ 3 pin to 4 pin molex + fan screws
http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=22366.0
Chuck
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 92



View Profile
February 05, 2011, 12:52:47 AM
 #384

30Mhash/s slower after the update.

HD6950 went from 226M to 196M.

No obvious change for me ( 5850 ), still getting between 249M - 251M.

BTC: 1CKytBzLeA1QcFM33qgi9YWPq1ax3XEJ84
LobsterMan
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 74


View Profile
February 05, 2011, 07:21:22 AM
 #385

My hash rate is actually somewhat higher with the new version, I went from about 50mhash/s per gtx275 to around 58mhash/s, but my desktop is somewhat less responsive with the miners running now where it was not before
m0mchil
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 171


View Profile
February 05, 2011, 08:29:10 AM
 #386

@LobsterMan, the default '-f' is 30 now, use '-f 60' (previous default) or more if it hogs your desktop

Cablesaurus
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 302



View Profile WWW
February 05, 2011, 08:42:56 AM
 #387

30Mhash/s slower after the update.

HD6950 went from 226M to 196M.

No obvious change for me ( 5850 ), still getting between 249M - 251M.

No change for me either, getting the exact same, no slowdown.

PCIe Extender Cables; Dummy Plugs, Fans; PSU Cables; Cases & More
Visit www.Cablesaurus.com and our forum thread at http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=6128.0
FairUser
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 261


View Profile WWW
February 06, 2011, 12:16:19 AM
 #388

I'm still seeing several invalid stale hashes being submitted.

05/02/2011 16:12, 3725321b, accepted
05/02/2011 16:13, b794eb73, invalid or stale
05/02/2011 16:13, 898ceca7, invalid or stale
05/02/2011 16:13, bde1a5f3, invalid or stale
05/02/2011 16:14, 0a07cf1a, accepted

Any idea as to why?
slush
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358



View Profile WWW
February 06, 2011, 01:05:13 AM
 #389

I'm still seeing several invalid stale hashes being submitted.
Any idea as to why?

Maybe because they are really stale? http://blockexplorer.com/block/00000000000018cf119be227dcf0d7403b20dc9b8fa0c3d6bc9022c65baf9a39

FairUser
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 261


View Profile WWW
February 06, 2011, 06:02:48 AM
 #390

Literally just got these

05/02/2011 22:00, 2a07e960, accepted
05/02/2011 22:00, fe7439af, accepted
05/02/2011 22:01, 2a07e960, invalid or stale
05/02/2011 22:01, fe7439af, invalid or stale
05/02/2011 22:01, 2a07e960, invalid or stale
05/02/2011 22:01, fe7439af, invalid or stale
05/02/2011 22:01, 2a07e960, invalid or stale
05/02/2011 22:01, fe7439af, invalid or stale

This is on a stock miner....no mods of any kind.
6 getworks were requested, and the answer found were repeats.
FairUser
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 261


View Profile WWW
February 06, 2011, 06:05:40 AM
 #391

I'm still seeing several invalid stale hashes being submitted.
Any idea as to why?

Maybe because they are really stale? http://blockexplorer.com/block/00000000000018cf119be227dcf0d7403b20dc9b8fa0c3d6bc9022c65baf9a39

So getworks are now going stale even faster....thanks for clarifying.
m0mchil
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 171


View Profile
February 06, 2011, 01:59:07 PM
 #392

Literally just got these

05/02/2011 22:00, 2a07e960, accepted
05/02/2011 22:00, fe7439af, accepted
05/02/2011 22:01, 2a07e960, invalid or stale
05/02/2011 22:01, fe7439af, invalid or stale
05/02/2011 22:01, 2a07e960, invalid or stale
05/02/2011 22:01, fe7439af, invalid or stale
05/02/2011 22:01, 2a07e960, invalid or stale
05/02/2011 22:01, fe7439af, invalid or stale

This is on a stock miner....no mods of any kind.
6 getworks were requested, and the answer found were repeats.

There are two ways to get something like this - first one is using ask rate of more than ~12 seconds with an overclocked 5870 (stock max -a is 10 seconds). Other one is network problems triggering resubmission of results - this mechanism is removed since last version. Since you said it happened with stock miner I vote for the latter. 

Quantumboredom
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 31


View Profile
February 06, 2011, 09:50:27 PM
 #393

Hi. I'm trying to get this to work, and want to check it with the "testnet" I've heard about.

What I've done:
Followed the guide. After starting bitcon.exe -server and the .bat-file as described I get a cmd window with the hash speed showing.
I then copied the bitcoin.conf to %appdata%/bitcoin/testnet, ran bitcoin.exe -server -testnet and then launced the .bat-file as before. Again the hash speed is showing in a cmd-window, but after about 30 minutes with ~280000 khash/s I've still not gotten any messages about completed blocks. My impression was that that should happen very quicly on the testnet. What am I doing wrong?

Thanks for any help.
Cryptoman
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 728



View Profile
February 07, 2011, 05:17:36 AM
 #394

The last time I looked, the testnet difficulty factor was around 350.  Using that number as a guide, 280 Mhash/s should yield a block on average every 1.5 hours.

"A small body of determined spirits fired by an unquenchable faith in their mission can alter the course of history." --Gandhi
Quantumboredom
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 31


View Profile
February 07, 2011, 09:23:50 AM
 #395

Aye a couple showed up when I let it run for a while longer, thanks Smiley

Another question, it's ok to close poclbm.exe and bitcoin, correct? It isn't necessary to keep them running non-stop untill a block is solved?
Cryptoman
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 728



View Profile
February 07, 2011, 03:17:47 PM
 #396

Both m0mchil's python program and bitcoind must be running continuously for mining to take place.  I have no idea how to run or monitor detached processes on Windows, but my guess is that you have to keep the command windows open.  Maybe someone with Windows experience will chime in here.

"A small body of determined spirits fired by an unquenchable faith in their mission can alter the course of history." --Gandhi
Quantumboredom
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 31


View Profile
February 07, 2011, 03:23:48 PM
 #397

I think you misunderstood my question. I do keep both bitcoin.exe and poclbm.exe running at the same time, what I'm wondering is what happens if I restart the programs, or reboot my computer. Will I start again from scratch or does the mining continue where it left off?
Cryptoman
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 728



View Profile
February 07, 2011, 03:32:02 PM
 #398

Finding a correct hash is a completely random event, and the probability depends only on the hash rate and the total amount of time dedicated to mining.  You lose a little time having to reconnect to the network and retrieve the latest transactions, but it's pretty insignificant.  A 280 Mhash/s rig turned on for 12 hours a day should perform the same as a 140 Mhash/s rig running 24 hours a day.

"A small body of determined spirits fired by an unquenchable faith in their mission can alter the course of history." --Gandhi
BitLex
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588


View Profile WWW
February 07, 2011, 03:32:57 PM
 #399

Will I start again from scratch or does the mining continue where it left off?
Yes and yes.  Grin
it's not that you're making any "progress" that could be lost,
you start from scratch with any single hash, like drawing lottery-tickets a few thousand/million times a second,
you either get a winning-ticket, or a loser. won't help you to keep the loser in your pocket.

Quantumboredom
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 31


View Profile
February 07, 2011, 03:37:28 PM
 #400

Ok I understand, thanks for the help Cryptoman and BitLex Smiley
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 [20] 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!