Genesis Mining Presents: SGMiner-GM - now with Zawawa's GG! [Updated 17/01/2017]

[resort]

hey guys whats the most stable combination of miner software on dwarfpool ? i'm having lots of stuck rigs right now...

[1713295736]

1713295736

[1713295736]

1713295736

[1713295736]

1713295736

[FFI2013]

claymores miner have dual-mining capability by that it justifies the fee.

sgminer-gm performs worse than genoils miner which has no fee either.

either make the kernel public or get lost.

Dual mining, no problem, start sgminer, start another instance with another algo, yup, you're dual mining..

performs worse? Nah! On Hawaii even better! Just gotta set the correct intensity and work size.

what do u recommend for worksize and intensity for Hawaii

[OhGodAGirl]

Aye, the kernels aren't included. They were sold exclusively, after all. We may make a public kernel in the future.

But still - there is no nvidia support even nvidia does OpenCL.
They using AMD APP Framework for detection of OpenCL Device..so any word from the dev?=

He's mad because we won't sell him the private Ethereum kernel.

No means no, 'petey'.

[ioglnx]

Who is mad?
Me nope I can live without your miner..no need to be mad.

[Genoil]

Gave it a spin on a Tahiti (7950). Performance seems just about equal as my 1.1.7. Hard to really compare because of the different way of measuring. I'll rip the kernel out and dump it into ethminer to see if there's a noticeable difference.

One minor issue though is that the fans don't come back down to normal RPM when I exit the program (windows). 

[nerdralph]

Nice 4-way dagger loop. I might steal this 

I noticed that too.  Thought it would be faster than 8-way on Pitcairn, but it's actually slower (~10%).  Didn't dig any deeper to check VGPR use or try changing the unroll pragmas...

[OhGodAGirl]

Who is mad?
Me nope I can live without your miner..no need to be mad.

Not you mate, user peteycamey. Sorry, the quote didn't tag him.

[Genoil]

Nice 4-way dagger loop. I might steal this 

I noticed that too.  Thought it would be faster than 8-way on Pitcairn, but it's actually slower (~10%).  Didn't dig any deeper to check VGPR use or try changing the unroll pragmas...

CodeXL says on Ellesmere (Polaris), Tonga and Hawaii it does only 2 waves, Tahiti and Pitcairn 3 waves. But who cares, apparently it's faster 

[Eliovp]

Nice 4-way dagger loop. I might steal this 

I noticed that too.  Thought it would be faster than 8-way on Pitcairn, but it's actually slower (~10%).  Didn't dig any deeper to check VGPR use or try changing the unroll pragmas...

CodeXL says on Ellesmere (Polaris), Tonga and Hawaii it does only 2 waves, Tahiti and Pitcairn 3 waves. But who cares, apparently it's faster 

Mm, weird though, it's not faster on Ellesmere but it is on Hawaii..

perhaps i need to do some more tests i guess

[Genoil]

I poked around a little bit to also get Ellesmere/Tonga/Hawaii to 3 waves as well. Ultimately you only need to change line 255 into #pragma unroll 1 (saves 11 VGPR?!). But I don't know what effect this has. Really need to get me one of those cards..

[nerdralph]

Nice 4-way dagger loop. I might steal this 

I noticed that too.  Thought it would be faster than 8-way on Pitcairn, but it's actually slower (~10%).  Didn't dig any deeper to check VGPR use or try changing the unroll pragmas...

CodeXL says on Ellesmere (Polaris), Tonga and Hawaii it does only 2 waves, Tahiti and Pitcairn 3 waves. But who cares, apparently it's faster 

I used the linux binary distribution, which has pre-built kernels for worksize 64 and 192.  So I used worksize 128 to force it to use the opencl kernel source.   On Linux/fglrx it's 3 waves, so I'm not sure how much you should trust CodeXL.

Code:

_temp_0_Hawaii_GenerateDAG.isa:NumVgprs             = 100;
_temp_0_Hawaii_search.isa:NumVgprs             = 83;
_temp_1_Pitcairn_GenerateDAG.isa:NumVgprs             = 100;
_temp_1_Pitcairn_search.isa:NumVgprs             = 83;
_temp_2_Tonga_GenerateDAG.isa:NumVgprs             = 100;
_temp_2_Tonga_search.isa:NumVgprs             = 83;

[NaN_PTS]

hey guys whats the most stable combination of miner software on dwarfpool ? i'm having lots of stuck rigs right now...

Hi, I think that the best possibility is to use a stratum proxy to connect to dwarfpool at the moment because dwarfpool's stratum implementation isn't supported by sgminer. The reason for that are the weird JSON replies of dwarfpool, which make it impossible to decide whether requests of sgminer were successful or not and sgminer assumes that its requests failed. Perhaps the operators of dwarfpool should be notified so that the issue can be fixed.

[c2n14]

Is here anyone who knows how to use it w/ Rx 480/470?

[oktay50000]

Is here anyone who knows how to use it w/ Rx 480/470?

for me with 480s it resets the system

[c2n14]

Not good

[NaN_PTS]

Is here anyone who knows how to use it w/ Rx 480/470?

for me with 480s it resets the system

Could you give a little bit more details, please? RX 470/480 work without problems in combination with AMDGPU-PRO and the only problem is that the driver reports a wrong number of CUs. Therefore, you have to use a larger xintensity or just use rawintensity and the hashrate for those GPUs can be increased by using 2 threads per GPU. Of course, ADL is not supported by AMDGPU-PRO.

[c2n14]

Is here anyone who knows how to use it w/ Rx 480/470?

for me with 480s it resets the system

... the only problem is that the driver reports a wrong number of CUs. Therefore, you have to use a larger xintensity or just use rawintensity and the hashrate for those GPUs can be increased by using 2 threads per GPU.

Could you share proper values of xintensity or rawintensity for 480/470?
And is worksize of 256 correct?
TIA

[NaN_PTS]

Is here anyone who knows how to use it w/ Rx 480/470?

for me with 480s it resets the system

... the only problem is that the driver reports a wrong number of CUs. Therefore, you have to use a larger xintensity or just use rawintensity and the hashrate for those GPUs can be increased by using 2 threads per GPU.

Could you share proper values of xintensity or rawintensity for 480/470?
And is worksize of 256 correct?
TIA

worksize: 192
rawintensity (rx 470): 1916928
rawintensity (rx 480): 2156544

You should try different intensities to optimize your hash rate

[c2n14]

worksize: 192
rawintensity (rx 470): 1916928
rawintensity (rx 480): 2156544

You should try different intensities to optimize your hash rate

Thanks for response!
I'm under Windows and with above settings I have 9.8 mhs only (with Claymore: 22 mhs) per card ;(

This is what I put in the config file:

Code:

    "profiles": [{
        "worksize": "192",
        "name": "eth",
        "algorithm": "ethash",
        "gpu-threads": "2",
        "rawintensity": "1916928"
    }],
    "no-extranonce": "true",
    "default-profile": "eth"

Any thoughts?
TIA

[NaN_PTS]

worksize: 192
rawintensity (rx 470): 1916928
rawintensity (rx 480): 2156544

You should try different intensities to optimize your hash rate

Thanks for response!
I'm under Windows and with above settings I have 9.8 mhs only (with Claymore: 22 mhs) per card ;(

This is what I put in the config file:

Code:

    "profiles": [{
        "worksize": "192",
        "name": "eth",
        "algorithm": "ethash",
        "gpu-threads": "2",
        "rawintensity": "1916928"
    }],
    "no-extranonce": "true",
    "default-profile": "eth"

Any thoughts?
TIA

I have no windows rig for testing, but I guess that 'gpu-threads: 2' might be the problem. I would start at 'gpu-threads: 1' and 'xintensity: 4620' because I'm not sure whether sgminer accepts rawintensity much larger than 2,000,000.