Bitcoin Forum
December 14, 2017, 12:42:18 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [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 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Genesis Mining Presents: SGMiner-GM - now with Zawawa's GG! [Updated 17/01/2017]  (Read 121399 times)
Mahanton
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 433



View Profile
September 24, 2016, 12:05:23 PM
 #81


I REALLY appreciate the kernel Wolf- I tuned with it not thinking it would make a huge difference since on short runs of less than an hour it doesn't show much difference (unless HW are high).  After tuning the intensity & worksize for a 390 and running it for a continuous 24 hours here are my results:  I am running it at 1100/1250 (forgive the name of the rig- I wanted something that would stand out from the other names -  Grin)



On Claymore in Solo mode I averaged 31.1 at best.  

I big question that I was hoping you could shed some light on:
On a Rx 480 (8gb) - I get 29.3 with a low power Bios Mod and cannot get above 26.3 with this kernel.  It seems to run about 26 on an unmodded Rx 480 as well.  Is it a mem timing issue or the lower core (or is it the code)

btw- I am a man of my word and as soon as I get it on all my rigs I will send the tip  Cool. I have uploaded it to 4 rigs and will see how they perform over 24 hours


The speed of the 32.9 MH/s for the 1100/1250 on the 390 is very fast. Can you share your configuration file?

██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██

░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░
░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░██████░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░
░░░░░░░░░░░░░░███░░░░░░███░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░
░░░░░░░░░░░░██░░░░░░░░░░░░██░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░
░░░░░░░░░░░██░░░░░░░░░░░░░░██░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░
░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░
░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░
░░░░░░░░░░░██░░░░░░░░░░░░░░██░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░
░░░░░░░░░░░░██░░░░░░░░░░░░███░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░
░░░░░░░░░░░░░░███░░░░░░█████░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░
░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░██████░░░░██░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░
░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░

██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██

██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
1513212138
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513212138

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513212138
Reply with quote  #2

1513212138
Report to moderator
1513212138
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513212138

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513212138
Reply with quote  #2

1513212138
Report to moderator
1513212138
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513212138

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513212138
Reply with quote  #2

1513212138
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1513212138
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513212138

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513212138
Reply with quote  #2

1513212138
Report to moderator
1513212138
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513212138

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513212138
Reply with quote  #2

1513212138
Report to moderator
FFI2013
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Activity: 486


View Profile
September 24, 2016, 03:57:07 PM
 #82

nice job Wolf0 Im getting the same hashrate on my 290 and a little lower on my 270 and 280 as claymore's

Nousplatform██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
|██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
Gemniet
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 23


View Profile
September 24, 2016, 04:49:30 PM
 #83

I'm getting steady 30MH/s on each Fury X on stock clocks (1050/500). Claymore's can only get about 28MH.
A 390 at 1040Mhz gets 29Mh, with some overclocking I can surely can 32-33MH, but my cards warm up too much. Definitely the best miner out there.

The only issue I can spot is the CPU usage, which makes this miner basically worthless on weak CPUs. I couldn't run it on a single-core AMD CPU and a friend of mine had his rig crashing with a dual core Celeron installed. most mining rigs have very weak CPUs, and if this miner gets updated to support them, I am sure it will get much more traction.

What is the configuration of your R9 Fury?
nerdralph
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406


View Profile
September 24, 2016, 05:20:17 PM
 #84

[
I REALLY appreciate the kernel Wolf- I tuned with it not thinking it would make a huge difference since on short runs of less than an hour it doesn't show much difference (unless HW are high).  After tuning the intensity & worksize for a 390 and running it for a continuous 24 hours here are my results:  I am running it at 1100/1250 (forgive the name of the rig- I wanted something that would stand out from the other names -  Grin)



On Claymore in Solo mode I averaged 31.1 at best.  

What config are you using for the 390? xintensity, rawintensity?
Wolf0
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764


Miner Developer


View Profile
September 24, 2016, 08:24:02 PM
 #85


I REALLY appreciate the kernel Wolf- I tuned with it not thinking it would make a huge difference since on short runs of less than an hour it doesn't show much difference (unless HW are high).  After tuning the intensity & worksize for a 390 and running it for a continuous 24 hours here are my results:  I am running it at 1100/1250 (forgive the name of the rig- I wanted something that would stand out from the other names -  Grin)



On Claymore in Solo mode I averaged 31.1 at best.  

I big question that I was hoping you could shed some light on:
On a Rx 480 (8gb) - I get 29.3 with a low power Bios Mod and cannot get above 26.3 with this kernel.  It seems to run about 26 on an unmodded Rx 480 as well.  Is it a mem timing issue or the lower core (or is it the code)

btw- I am a man of my word and as soon as I get it on all my rigs I will send the tip  Cool. I have uploaded it to 4 rigs and will see how they perform over 24 hours


LOL, you should see my worker names.

Code:
Donations: BTC: 1WoLFdwcfNEg64fTYsX1P25KUzzSjtEZC -- XMR: 45SLUTzk7UXYHmzJ7bFN6FPfzTusdUVAZjPRgmEDw7G3SeimWM2kCdnDQXwDBYGUWaBtZNgjYtEYA22aMQT4t8KfU3vHLHG
YIz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532



View Profile
September 24, 2016, 08:59:08 PM
 #86

I'm getting steady 30MH/s on each Fury X on stock clocks (1050/500). Claymore's can only get about 28MH.
A 390 at 1040Mhz gets 29Mh, with some overclocking I can surely can 32-33MH, but my cards warm up too much. Definitely the best miner out there.

The only issue I can spot is the CPU usage, which makes this miner basically worthless on weak CPUs. I couldn't run it on a single-core AMD CPU and a friend of mine had his rig crashing with a dual core Celeron installed. most mining rigs have very weak CPUs, and if this miner gets updated to support them, I am sure it will get much more traction.

What is the configuration of your R9 Fury?

I included it in the post - 1050/500. stock clocks, didn't change anything.

kilo17
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 910

aka "whocares"


View Profile
September 25, 2016, 02:17:31 AM
 #87

[
I REALLY appreciate the kernel Wolf- I tuned with it not thinking it would make a huge difference since on short runs of less than an hour it doesn't show much difference (unless HW are high).  After tuning the intensity & worksize for a 390 and running it for a continuous 24 hours here are my results:  I am running it at 1100/1250 (forgive the name of the rig- I wanted something that would stand out from the other names -  Grin)



On Claymore in Solo mode I averaged 31.1 at best.  

What config are you using for the 390? xintensity, rawintensity?


I still don't have it dialed in as the settings I used on that GPU do not work on a 6 GPU rig - If 1 or 2 cards don't hold the settings the HW errors go way up.  It was set at 256/608 xI.  Most people I think abandon the settings before seeing the average, it definitely takes 24 hours on ethpool or ethermine to see the true average.  Any run less than that will show a dramatic decrease in hashrate.  It seems to have big swings for a few hours and then settles down. I may switch to another pool to get a better average in 6-12 hours.

Bitcoin Will Only Succeed If The Community That Supports It Gets Support - Support Home Miners & Mining
kilo17
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 910

aka "whocares"


View Profile
September 25, 2016, 08:24:19 AM
 #88

After looking at my HW errors and explaining to someone last night in another thread what xI vs I vs rI it occurred to me that the shotgun approach I was using was flawed.

At the settings I was using I was making the GPU work 10 times harder and essentially getting 33mh by loading up the work and accepting the HW.  

So today I used some reasoning- although it is limited by my understanding of "4-way" vs "8-way".  The other quote I accepted was the one made by Oh-God-it's a Girl earlier in this thread.  SHe stated that HW errors are normal, when in fact they are not normal.

So I started from scratch using the info I have on hand.  Global work has been accepted as 16384 or a variation of that number.  Plugging that into the xI formula and knowing a 390 has 2818 shaders the xI equivalent would be about 5.81.  It decreased the HW works but hashrate is about 20mh.  I then decreased the worksize by a factor of 4 to 64 (only because everything in mining is a factor -lol - and we went from 8 way to 4 way) and I increased the the xI by 2^4 and get about 93.  Also increase the xI without decreasing the worksize increased HW.  Plugging those numbers into the miner I am getting respectable Hash rates of about 28mh on a 390 with 1100/1250 with very few HW.  

A little more tweaking and will increase the worksize and double the xI since it appears more threads are available with this miner using 4-way (at least I think)

Bitcoin Will Only Succeed If The Community That Supports It Gets Support - Support Home Miners & Mining
michkima
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 728



View Profile
September 25, 2016, 11:34:48 AM
 #89

After looking at my HW errors and explaining to someone last night in another thread what xI vs I vs rI it occurred to me that the shotgun approach I was using was flawed.

At the settings I was using I was making the GPU work 10 times harder and essentially getting 33mh by loading up the work and accepting the HW.  

So today I used some reasoning- although it is limited by my understanding of "4-way" vs "8-way".  The other quote I accepted was the one made by Oh-God-it's a Girl earlier in this thread.  SHe stated that HW errors are normal, when in fact they are not normal.

So I started from scratch using the info I have on hand.  Global work has been accepted as 16384 or a variation of that number.  Plugging that into the xI formula and knowing a 390 has 2818 shaders the xI equivalent would be about 5.81.  It decreased the HW works but hashrate is about 20mh.  I then decreased the worksize by a factor of 4 to 64 (only because everything in mining is a factor -lol - and we went from 8 way to 4 way) and I increased the the xI by 2^4 and get about 93.  Also increase the xI without decreasing the worksize increased HW.  Plugging those numbers into the miner I am getting respectable Hash rates of about 28mh on a 390 with 1100/1250 with very few HW.  

A little more tweaking and will increase the worksize and double the xI since it appears more threads are available with this miner using 4-way (at least I think)

What is your GPU thread? one or two threads?

With 1100/1250, you are getting ony 28MH. That is slower than the Claymore miner speed.

FORTUNEJACK.COM[
                             
9 BTC WELCOME PACK FOR 1ST 5 DEPOSITS
FREE 1,000 mBTC daily for LuckyJack winners
[
           
]
Arnoldent
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 54


View Profile
September 25, 2016, 11:47:44 AM
 #90

I'm getting steady 30MH/s on each Fury X on stock clocks (1050/500). Claymore's can only get about 28MH.
A 390 at 1040Mhz gets 29Mh, with some overclocking I can surely can 32-33MH, but my cards warm up too much. Definitely the best miner out there.

The only issue I can spot is the CPU usage, which makes this miner basically worthless on weak CPUs. I couldn't run it on a single-core AMD CPU and a friend of mine had his rig crashing with a dual core Celeron installed. most mining rigs have very weak CPUs, and if this miner gets updated to support them, I am sure it will get much more traction.

What is the configuration of your R9 Fury?

I included it in the post - 1050/500. stock clocks, didn't change anything.

What is your sgminer setting? For example, gpu threads, work size or the intensity values. do you have lots of hard ware error?
YIz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532



View Profile
September 25, 2016, 12:55:51 PM
 #91

I'm getting steady 30MH/s on each Fury X on stock clocks (1050/500). Claymore's can only get about 28MH.
A 390 at 1040Mhz gets 29Mh, with some overclocking I can surely can 32-33MH, but my cards warm up too much. Definitely the best miner out there.

The only issue I can spot is the CPU usage, which makes this miner basically worthless on weak CPUs. I couldn't run it on a single-core AMD CPU and a friend of mine had his rig crashing with a dual core Celeron installed. most mining rigs have very weak CPUs, and if this miner gets updated to support them, I am sure it will get much more traction.

What is the configuration of your R9 Fury?

I included it in the post - 1050/500. stock clocks, didn't change anything.

What is your sgminer setting? For example, gpu threads, work size or the intensity values. do you have lots of hard ware error?


Code:
"gpu-powertune": "0",
"worksize": "192",
"name": "eth",
"algorithm": "ethash",
"gpu-threads": "1",
"xintensity": "1024"


Those are the settings, the intensity doesn't change much on both 512 and 256. 30Mh/s on stock clocks, no errors whatsoever.

fran2k
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 770


View Profile WWW
September 25, 2016, 01:20:28 PM
 #92

Nice release guys, will test asap.

I'm getting steady 30MH/s on each Fury X on stock clocks (1050/500). Claymore's can only get about 28MH.
A 390 at 1040Mhz gets 29Mh, with some overclocking I can surely can 32-33MH, but my cards warm up too much. Definitely the best miner out there.

The only issue I can spot is the CPU usage, which makes this miner basically worthless on weak CPUs. I couldn't run it on a single-core AMD CPU and a friend of mine had his rig crashing with a dual core Celeron installed. most mining rigs have very weak CPUs, and if this miner gets updated to support them, I am sure it will get much more traction.

I can fix it with a new binary - just needs to be recompiled against a better pthreads lib.

WILL THE SGMINER-GM RECEIVE UPDATES? --

I run this SGminer on a sensitive 280X rig that is not stable with Claymore and dual mining.    Currently, SGminer-gm is running under Ethos 1.1.1 on 4 280X cards, mining at 16.7MH/s at stock clocks.  It runs with less heat than either Genoil v1.1.7 or Claymore, and does not crash as often.  The CPU is a Haswell Celeron 1820 at 2.7GHz.  The rig is not perfectly stable, but it runs.

Are updated binaries gong to be posted for both Linux and Windows?  I am hoping that the repository will be an active one.       --scryptr

Did you manage to run Claymore´s dual miner stable in Ethos? Setup?
Gotottack
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714


View Profile
September 25, 2016, 01:31:01 PM
 #93

I'm getting steady 30MH/s on each Fury X on stock clocks (1050/500). Claymore's can only get about 28MH.
A 390 at 1040Mhz gets 29Mh, with some overclocking I can surely can 32-33MH, but my cards warm up too much. Definitely the best miner out there.

The only issue I can spot is the CPU usage, which makes this miner basically worthless on weak CPUs. I couldn't run it on a single-core AMD CPU and a friend of mine had his rig crashing with a dual core Celeron installed. most mining rigs have very weak CPUs, and if this miner gets updated to support them, I am sure it will get much more traction.

What is the configuration of your R9 Fury?

I included it in the post - 1050/500. stock clocks, didn't change anything.

What is your sgminer setting? For example, gpu threads, work size or the intensity values. do you have lots of hard ware error?


Code:
"gpu-powertune": "0",
"worksize": "192",
"name": "eth",
"algorithm": "ethash",
"gpu-threads": "1",
"xintensity": "1024"


Those are the settings, the intensity doesn't change much on both 512 and 256. 30Mh/s on stock clocks, no errors whatsoever.

Do you mean there is no hardware error?

I have R9 nano cards, with xintensity of 256 and work size of 64. there are tons of HW.


       ▀
   ▄▄▄   ▄▀
   ███ ▄▄▄▄  ██
       ████
    ▄  ▀▀▀▀
▄▄
      ██    ▀▀
██▄█▄▄▄████████
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▀▀███▀▀▀
██████████████████
████▄▀▄▀▄▀███▀▀▀▀▀
████▄▀▄▀▄▀███ ▀
████▄▀▄▀▄▀████████
▀█████████████████
]
,CoinPayments,
█████
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████
█████
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████
█████
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████
nerdralph
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406


View Profile
September 25, 2016, 04:16:22 PM
 #94

Can anyone tell me if this miner does stale share submits?  It didn't look like it does, and maybe someone can save me the trouble of digging through the source code.
YIz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532



View Profile
September 25, 2016, 04:17:57 PM
 #95

I'm getting steady 30MH/s on each Fury X on stock clocks (1050/500). Claymore's can only get about 28MH.
A 390 at 1040Mhz gets 29Mh, with some overclocking I can surely can 32-33MH, but my cards warm up too much. Definitely the best miner out there.

The only issue I can spot is the CPU usage, which makes this miner basically worthless on weak CPUs. I couldn't run it on a single-core AMD CPU and a friend of mine had his rig crashing with a dual core Celeron installed. most mining rigs have very weak CPUs, and if this miner gets updated to support them, I am sure it will get much more traction.

What is the configuration of your R9 Fury?

I included it in the post - 1050/500. stock clocks, didn't change anything.

What is your sgminer setting? For example, gpu threads, work size or the intensity values. do you have lots of hard ware error?


Code:
"gpu-powertune": "0",
"worksize": "192",
"name": "eth",
"algorithm": "ethash",
"gpu-threads": "1",
"xintensity": "1024"


Those are the settings, the intensity doesn't change much on both 512 and 256. 30Mh/s on stock clocks, no errors whatsoever.

Do you mean there is no hardware error?

I have R9 nano cards, with xintensity of 256 and work size of 64. there are tons of HW.



What is an hardware error? does the miner report it? because it runs okay here. there is a large number in the "HW:" section of the miner. what does it mean?

BattleField
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 53


View Profile
September 25, 2016, 05:35:38 PM
 #96

I'm getting steady 30MH/s on each Fury X on stock clocks (1050/500). Claymore's can only get about 28MH.
A 390 at 1040Mhz gets 29Mh, with some overclocking I can surely can 32-33MH, but my cards warm up too much. Definitely the best miner out there.

The only issue I can spot is the CPU usage, which makes this miner basically worthless on weak CPUs. I couldn't run it on a single-core AMD CPU and a friend of mine had his rig crashing with a dual core Celeron installed. most mining rigs have very weak CPUs, and if this miner gets updated to support them, I am sure it will get much more traction.

What is the configuration of your R9 Fury?

I included it in the post - 1050/500. stock clocks, didn't change anything.

What is your sgminer setting? For example, gpu threads, work size or the intensity values. do you have lots of hard ware error?


Code:
"gpu-powertune": "0",
"worksize": "192",
"name": "eth",
"algorithm": "ethash",
"gpu-threads": "1",
"xintensity": "1024"


Those are the settings, the intensity doesn't change much on both 512 and 256. 30Mh/s on stock clocks, no errors whatsoever.

Do you mean there is no hardware error?

I have R9 nano cards, with xintensity of 256 and work size of 64. there are tons of HW.



What is an hardware error? does the miner report it? because it runs okay here. there is a large number in the "HW:" section of the miner. what does it mean?

That is the hardware error. So even if the reported hash rate is high, with the large HW, your effective rate could be low.
Rugtilf
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 31


View Profile
September 25, 2016, 05:38:28 PM
 #97

Can anyone tell me if this miner does stale share submits?  It didn't look like it does, and maybe someone can save me the trouble of digging through the source code.


It does submit the stale shares. I saw in the command window, it says stale share detected, submitting.
toptek
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1120


View Profile
September 25, 2016, 07:29:26 PM
 #98

after many days of trying different setting this is what i came up with for my  power color 280 custom water cooled  not the X , i even did a bios edit with VBE7.0.0.7b.exe to lower the voltage to 1.18 i think this card has a locked voltage @ 1.25, after burner doesn't help there .

Code:
sgminer 5.3.0-gm - Started: [2016-09-25 15:20:26] - [0 days 00:02:24]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(5s):18.16M (avg):17.49Mh/s | A:4000000000  R:0  HW:1  WU:23.682/m
ST: 2  SS: 0  NB: 15  LW: 190  GF: 0  RF: 0
Connected to  diff 4G as user
Block: 44ca00cd...  Diff:0  Started: [15:22:29]  Best share: 5.09G
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[P]ool management [G]PU management [S]ettings [D]isplay options [Q]uit
GPU 0:  46.0C  45%    | 18.09M/17.49Mh/s | R:  0.0% HW:1 WU:24.544/m xI:1024
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[15:20:24] Started sgminer 5.3.0-gm
[15:20:24] * using Jansson 2.7
[15:20:24] Loaded configuration file awesome.conf
[15:20:24] Probing for an alive pool
[15:20:24] Startup GPU initialization... Using settings from pool us1.ethermine.org.
[15:20:24] Startup Pool No = 0
[15:20:24] Building binary ethashTahitigw64l4.bin
[15:20:25] Initialising kernel ethash.cl with nfactor 10, n 1024
[15:20:26] API running in IP access mode on port 4029 (15364)
[15:21:28] Accepted 82a43e75 Diff 5.09G/4G GPU 0


sgminer.conf I use, i get the lest HW errors with these setting , so Fair. I'm all ways trying different setting.

Code:
{
   "pools": [{
        "url": "stratum+tcp://stratumpool.address:port",
        "user": "ethaddress",
        "pass": "x"
   }],
    "profiles": [{
        "gpu-powertune": "20",
        "worksize": "64",
        "name": "eth",
        "algorithm": "ethash",
        "gpu-threads": "1",
        "xintensity": "1024"
    }],
     "no-extranonce": "true",
     "default-profile": "eth",
     "api-allow": "W:127.0.0.1/24,W:192.168.1.0/24",
     "temp-target": "72",
    "auto-gpu": true,
    "gpu-engine" : "1150",
    "gpu-memclock" : "1500",
    "gpu-fan": "45-85",
    "api-port": "4029",
    "temp-cutoff": "82",
    "api-listen": true,
    "auto-fan": true,
    "temp-overheat": "80"
}
I have awesome miner managing it.

next my two MSI Radeon R7 370 2G not water cooled and old 7870 custom water cooled , hope to have this time next month, 1 480 and 1 470.

o yea i also mine XMR while while mining ETH with 4 and 8 core CPU's. that's a whole new tweak thing , I'll do once I have this down.
YIz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532



View Profile
September 25, 2016, 07:32:01 PM
 #99

I'm getting steady 30MH/s on each Fury X on stock clocks (1050/500). Claymore's can only get about 28MH.
A 390 at 1040Mhz gets 29Mh, with some overclocking I can surely can 32-33MH, but my cards warm up too much. Definitely the best miner out there.

The only issue I can spot is the CPU usage, which makes this miner basically worthless on weak CPUs. I couldn't run it on a single-core AMD CPU and a friend of mine had his rig crashing with a dual core Celeron installed. most mining rigs have very weak CPUs, and if this miner gets updated to support them, I am sure it will get much more traction.

What is the configuration of your R9 Fury?

I included it in the post - 1050/500. stock clocks, didn't change anything.

What is your sgminer setting? For example, gpu threads, work size or the intensity values. do you have lots of hard ware error?


Code:
"gpu-powertune": "0",
"worksize": "192",
"name": "eth",
"algorithm": "ethash",
"gpu-threads": "1",
"xintensity": "1024"


Those are the settings, the intensity doesn't change much on both 512 and 256. 30Mh/s on stock clocks, no errors whatsoever.

Do you mean there is no hardware error?

I have R9 nano cards, with xintensity of 256 and work size of 64. there are tons of HW.



What is an hardware error? does the miner report it? because it runs okay here. there is a large number in the "HW:" section of the miner. what does it mean?

That is the hardware error. So even if the reported hash rate is high, with the large HW, your effective rate could be low.

The effective hashrate on the pool is what I'm expecting.

scryptr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1190



View Profile WWW
September 25, 2016, 07:40:53 PM
 #100

Nice release guys, will test asap.

I'm getting steady 30MH/s on each Fury X on stock clocks (1050/500). Claymore's can only get about 28MH.
A 390 at 1040Mhz gets 29Mh, with some overclocking I can surely can 32-33MH, but my cards warm up too much. Definitely the best miner out there.

The only issue I can spot is the CPU usage, which makes this miner basically worthless on weak CPUs. I couldn't run it on a single-core AMD CPU and a friend of mine had his rig crashing with a dual core Celeron installed. most mining rigs have very weak CPUs, and if this miner gets updated to support them, I am sure it will get much more traction.

I can fix it with a new binary - just needs to be recompiled against a better pthreads lib.

WILL THE SGMINER-GM RECEIVE UPDATES? --

I run this SGminer on a sensitive 280X rig that is not stable with Claymore and dual mining.    Currently, SGminer-gm is running under Ethos 1.1.1 on 4 280X cards, mining at 16.7MH/s at stock clocks.  It runs with less heat than either Genoil v1.1.7 or Claymore, and does not crash as often.  The CPU is a Haswell Celeron 1820 at 2.7GHz.  The rig is not perfectly stable, but it runs.

Are updated binaries gong to be posted for both Linux and Windows?  I am hoping that the repository will be an active one.       --scryptr

Did you manage to run Claymore´s dual miner stable in Ethos? Setup?


CLAYMORE RUNS IN ETHOS--

On my other rigs, Claymore is very stable.  It is easy to set up, but off-topic for this thread.  Make a directory for Claymore in the home directory, copy the Linux binaries there, make sure libjansson is installed, and run Claymore as described in the Claymore README!!!.txt.  The command "sudo-apt-get-ubuntu install libjansson*" will install all of libjansson.  Don't forget the asterisk.  And, turn off mining in EthOS with "disallow" and "minestop".  If your launch scrypt is ready, launch Claymore.

Just a note: Claymore's README!!!.txt is mistaken for a BASH script in a Linux console.  It needs to be renamed with "mv READ*.txt readme.txt".  I could not open it to read without renaming it.       --scryptr

TIPS:  BTC - 1Fs4uZ6a9ABYBTaHGUfqcwCQmeBRxkKRQT
          DASH - XrK81tW31SLsVvZ2WX9VhTjpT6GXJPLdbQ
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 »
  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!