Bitcoin Forum
December 09, 2016, 05:31:36 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   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 1201433 times)
TurdHurdur
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 217


View Profile
March 20, 2011, 10:25:33 PM
 #701

Huh I am 10......
Pretty good spelling and grammar for 10, better than some other users, hah.

Wonder if you'll get COPPA'd...

What do you want Bitcoins for, buying NX codes? Tongue
1481304696
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481304696

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481304696
Reply with quote  #2

1481304696
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481304696
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481304696

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481304696
Reply with quote  #2

1481304696
Report to moderator
1481304696
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481304696

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481304696
Reply with quote  #2

1481304696
Report to moderator
1481304696
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481304696

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481304696
Reply with quote  #2

1481304696
Report to moderator
foxmulder
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 37


View Profile
March 20, 2011, 11:46:09 PM
 #702

May be the port 8332 blocked in your router.
allow transmission incoming & outgoing in router configuration page.
port forwarding google for your router model.

Like i said it's already on dmz, my computer is fully exposed to the internet without any intermediatary Sad, the listener not full time throwing up that error only occasionally, pocldbm can accept and send new work but i get lost on efficiency because of this lost 'packet'.

Please  donate me : 1Cxa2JZ1CE4DUSLtg3j7xaNBNiqjbjQtcG

Die hard x-files fans should use bitcoin, like mulder's says "Bitcoin is out there!".
marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2100



View Profile
March 21, 2011, 12:01:38 AM
 #703


Sounds like it could be hardware related, try another router? Test your connection integrity, packets lost on a ping test?

slush
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358



View Profile WWW
March 21, 2011, 12:58:12 AM
 #704

the listener not full time throwing up that error only occasionally

If it isn't permanent and the error appears only time to time, it might be problem on my side. Please PM me your pool login and time (ideally in UTC) when the problem appeared last time.

fatcom4
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 14


View Profile
March 21, 2011, 10:43:39 PM
 #705

Huh I am 10......
Pretty good spelling and grammar for 10, better than some other users, hah.

Wonder if you'll get COPPA'd...

What do you want Bitcoins for, buying NX codes? Tongue
1. Thanks, I have no idea why I type everything like this.
2. COPPA'd?
3. NX? It's for some online game.

http://bc.x14.eu/sigs/7c68dc28.png (http://bc.x14.eu/s/74)
There's a game called minethings (http://www.minethings.com/miners/index/+21974). It's awesome.
Nevezen
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 12


View Profile
March 23, 2011, 10:42:51 PM
 #706

Question.. what are vectors and how do they affect the performance of your miner specifically? If I recall correctly, vectors have something to do with stream processing?

Been playing around with the command arguments lately and when omitting -v, hashrate jumps up about +15M; for a lowly 8800GT, from 20M..

Decreasing the frames option makes the desktop almost unresponsive but contributes about +1M when setting from 120 to 10.. would like to know how this works as well.

13xzZGJWakghqCd9pBJ5uMrWcsdBGisDzt
urizane
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56



View Profile
March 23, 2011, 10:57:23 PM
 #707

As far as -v goes, I'm not entirely sure, but I think it just allows the calculations to take place in a wider field.  -f controls how long an instance of the miner can run for on the GPU (inverted to work on the concept of frame rate).  The larger the parameter, the more opportunities other tasks (such as updating the desktop) have at actually executing.  You may also want to mess with -w (work size).  For your GPU, I would probably guess 128 is best, but 64 might work as well.  I'm fairly certain 256 will spew randomly large hash/s at you and crash shortly thereafter.

If you haven't done so yet, at least check out puddinpop's RPC CUDA miner as this may net you a small boost in performance.  It won't be much at first, but you can do some tweaking to get more.
m0mchil
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 171


View Profile
March 25, 2011, 01:48:54 PM
 #708

New version is up. All changes are pool related.

- long polling is slightly better in preventing stales to escape to server;
- miner now supports 'time rolling' whenever there is 'X-Roll-NTime' header in HTTP response;
- improved check for end of current task

lupio
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3


View Profile
March 25, 2011, 01:53:46 PM
 #709

Hello,

I want use poclbm with my HD 5770 vapor-x.

You know the tools at install with poclbm ?


Thanks
urizane
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56



View Profile
March 25, 2011, 07:28:54 PM
 #710

Hello,

I want use poclbm with my HD 5770 vapor-x.

You know the tools at install with poclbm ?


Thanks

If you're running Windows, the first link in the first post on this thread should be all you need.  In the command prompt, navigate to the directory you unpacked poclbm to and type 'poclbm --help' to get an idea how to get started.

EDIT: Also, there's a link in there for Kiv's GUI if you're not comfortable with command line stuff.
LobsterMan
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 74


View Profile
March 26, 2011, 01:59:58 AM
 #711

With the latest version while mining for myself, I seem to be getting intermittent "problems communicating with bitcoin rpc" errors. They appear and disappear seemingly randomly...
slush
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358



View Profile WWW
March 26, 2011, 02:12:15 AM
 #712

With the latest version while mining for myself, I seem to be getting intermittent "problems communicating with bitcoin rpc" errors. They appear and disappear seemingly randomly...

This may be related to the getwork locking in bitcoind, the same trouble as I solved. More people already reported troubles with mining on their own with many pending transactions.

You can a) patch the bitcoind with m0mchil's patch published yesterday b) Join my pool, now you even know how to do that Wink

jaybob20
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 5


View Profile
March 26, 2011, 07:45:13 AM
 #713

New version is up. All changes are pool related.

- long polling is slightly better in preventing stales to escape to server;
- miner now supports 'time rolling' whenever there is 'X-Roll-NTime' header in HTTP response;
- improved check for end of current task

Working much better for me now. Before this update, I had the miner restart if it threw a RPCError in getwork.
Now I see a bunch of "warning: job finished, miner is idle," but it keeps chugging along.
I haven't looked at the new code yet, but would some pre-fetching help?
m0mchil
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 171


View Profile
March 26, 2011, 08:27:34 AM
 #714


Working much better for me now. Before this update, I had the miner restart if it threw a RPCError in getwork.
Now I see a bunch of "warning: job finished, miner is idle," but it keeps chugging along.
I haven't looked at the new code yet, but would some pre-fetching help?

No. You need as fresh jobs as possible. Try to figure out why it fails to fetch new one in a reasonable time. If not in pool - there is an issue currently which can make getwork() extremely slow, see http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4853.0

travex
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 117


View Profile
March 26, 2011, 10:36:55 AM
 #715

Eh, do I have to disable crossfire for my 5970(1 card) using this miner guys ?
qed
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196


View Profile
March 26, 2011, 01:34:48 PM
 #716

Version 20110325 is a good 5%-10% slower on my 2nd and 3rd card compared to version 20110311.

Mobile App (Android)

Monitor miners, exchange rates and Bitcoin network stats.
m0mchil
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 171


View Profile
March 26, 2011, 04:37:02 PM
 #717

Version 20110325 is a good 5%-10% slower on my 2nd and 3rd card compared to version 20110311.

There is a change in the way '-f' works. Simply said, just use lower '-f' now to achieve same performance/desktop lag as before. 5% seems too much though, what's your setup? Is the first card faster?

qed
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196


View Profile
March 26, 2011, 04:58:47 PM
 #718

Version 20110325 is a good 5%-10% slower on my 2nd and 3rd card compared to version 20110311.

There is a change in the way '-f' works. Simply said, just use lower '-f' now to achieve same performance/desktop lag as before. 5% seems too much though, what's your setup? Is the first card faster?

3x HD 6950@725MHz and 0.950V.
Windows 7 64-bit and catalyst 11.4 RC2.
CrossfireX enabled.

With the 20110311 version everything is fine and i'm getting around 270 Mhash/s on each card. With the 20110325 the crossfire issue is back, random drop at 180-190Mhash/s and an average of 250-260 Mhash/s on the 2nd and 3rd card.

Thanks for your great work.

EDIT: I'm using "-f 60"

Mobile App (Android)

Monitor miners, exchange rates and Bitcoin network stats.
Raulo
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238


View Profile
March 26, 2011, 08:49:53 PM
 #719

Version 20110325 is a good 5%-10% slower on my 2nd and 3rd card compared to version 20110311.

On the contrary, on my 2x5970 Linux mining rig, no difference in hashspeed compared to older versions. Everything works fine.

1HAoJag4C3XtAmQJAhE9FTAAJWFcrvpdLM
OVerLoRDI
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 60


View Profile
March 27, 2011, 05:42:37 AM
 #720

Has anyone found some remedies I can get rid of the 100% core usage of poclbm?  I have 2 miners running with my 6970s and they each load up a core on my system.

The system seems to be tied to SDK 2.3 + 69xx cards.  I have two 5870s running on SDK 2.3 also and their instances of poclbm do not suck up much cpu time at all.

I tried the 11.4 RC1 driver that came out a few days ago, no change.  I'm back on 11.2 currently.

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!