c2n14
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 50
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
September 21, 2016, 12:58:52 AM |
|
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.
Wow, thanks! Now we are onto something ![Cheesy](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/cheesy.gif) With the below settings: "worksize": "192", "name": "eth", "algorithm": "ethash", "gpu-threads": "1", "xintensity": "4620" }], "no-extranonce": "true", "default-profile": "eth"
I got this: https://i.imgur.com/31l748y.pngHashrates are close to Claymores - but they could be a little better ![Wink](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/wink.gif) Just those HW errors ![Sad](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/sad.gif) - Any ideas?
|
|
|
|
OhGodAGirl
Full Member
![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif) ![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif)
Offline
Activity: 199
Merit: 108
Look, I'm really not that interesting. Promise.
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
September 21, 2016, 08:17:09 AM |
|
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.
Wow, thanks! Now we are onto something ![Cheesy](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/cheesy.gif) With the below settings: "worksize": "192", "name": "eth", "algorithm": "ethash", "gpu-threads": "1", "xintensity": "4620" }], "no-extranonce": "true", "default-profile": "eth"
I got this: ![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F31l748y.png&t=665&c=PxXF1Kq5Jnu31w) Hashrates are close to Claymores - but they could be a little better ![Wink](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/wink.gif) Just those HW errors ![Sad](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/sad.gif) - Any ideas? HW's are normal, as long as they're trickling in and not skyrocketing, it's all good.
|
|
|
|
c2n14
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 50
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
September 21, 2016, 10:42:39 AM |
|
@OhGodAGirl Big thanks ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) My last questions: 1) sgminer shows hashrate like this: 21.70M/20.21Mh/s - is this 20.21Mh/s my card's hashrate? I got 22 Mh/s @ CM ... 2) WU: 20-21/m for such hashrate - is it OK? TIA
|
|
|
|
NaN_PTS
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 49
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
September 21, 2016, 01:26:54 PM |
|
@OhGodAGirl Big thanks ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) My last questions: 1) sgminer shows hashrate like this: 21.70M/20.21Mh/s - is this 20.21Mh/s my card's hashrate? I got 22 Mh/s @ CM ... 2) WU: 20-21/m for such hashrate - is it OK? TIA The first value is an exponential moving average of your hash rate. Therefore, this value is a good measure of your current hash rate after a few minutes. The second value is an average over the whole run time and it should be equal to the first value after a few hour, if the pool connection is stable. One Radeon RX 480 8GB does about 23.8 MH/s with stock clocks and your card seems to be close to 21.7 MH/s (you have to run it longer). The WU (work units) are used to calculate the number of HW errors. Let's assume your card mines with an average of 20 MH/s and has an error rate of 2%. Then the expected WU value would be 20/m * (1-0.02) = 19.6/m. The hardware errors are normal, but they aren't shown by other Ethereum miners. A defective card typically produces 10 times more hardware errors then a working one.
|
|
|
|
nerdralph
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
September 21, 2016, 01:51:46 PM |
|
The WU (work units) are used to calculate the number of HW errors. Let's assume your card mines with an average of 20 MH/s and has an error rate of 2%. Then the expected WU value would be 20/m * (1-0.02) = 19.6/m. The hardware errors are normal, but they aren't shown by other Ethereum miners. A defective card typically produces 10 times more hardware errors then a working one.
Genoil's ethminer does report hardware errors. FAILURE: GPU gave incorrect result!
|
|
|
|
YIz
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
September 21, 2016, 06:39:54 PM |
|
Why is the miner abandoned? I'm getting higher hashrates than Claymore's and it's open source! A really good piece of software right there, apart for CPU usage.
|
|
|
|
c2n14
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 50
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
September 21, 2016, 11:17:10 PM |
|
@NaN_PTS
Thanks, and tomorrow I will check this.
@YIz
What's your card and settings?
|
|
|
|
NaN_PTS
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 49
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
September 22, 2016, 02:41:18 AM |
|
Why is the miner abandoned? I'm getting higher hashrates than Claymore's and it's open source! A really good piece of software right there, apart for CPU usage.
I told him to use SSE in the regenhash, but NOOOO... it should work on *ALL* the CPUs... That's the wrong conclusion. The high CPU usage only happens on Windows, so that one core shows 100% usage. Regenhash is executed every ~2s with one GPU. It seems to be a bug in libwinpthread because earlier sgminer had this issue on Windows, too.
|
|
|
|
kilo17
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 980
Merit: 1001
aka "whocares"
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
September 22, 2016, 03:11:57 AM Last edit: September 22, 2016, 03:29:51 AM by kilo17 |
|
I am still playing with settings on a 390 and 390x and have yet to find any settings that come close to Genoil or Claymore's. I am using 15.12 and have tried a full range of xintensity and worksizes and the best I have done on running it for an hour per setting is about 26mh. So far definitely not worth converting the farm to it yet but I am sure it will be when I find the correct settings.
Usually when I have problems setting up something it's because I have overly complicated the task--
|
Bitcoin Will Only Succeed If The Community That Supports It Gets Support - Support Home Miners & Mining
|
|
|
Genoil
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
September 22, 2016, 03:54:20 AM |
|
I get similar/marginally higher speeds using stock settings using 1 RX470 + 1 7950. Also when moving the kernel into my fork. It's good!
|
ETH: 0xeb9310b185455f863f526dab3d245809f6854b4d BTC: 1Nu2fMCEBjmnLzqb8qUJpKgq5RoEWFhNcW
|
|
|
kilo17
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 980
Merit: 1001
aka "whocares"
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
September 22, 2016, 04:05:49 AM |
|
I get similar/marginally higher speeds using stock settings using 1 RX470 + 1 7950. Also when moving the kernel into my fork. It's good!
Need to try that out, except yours doesn't have API support to use with AwesomeMiner - I wish it did ![Wink](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
|
Bitcoin Will Only Succeed If The Community That Supports It Gets Support - Support Home Miners & Mining
|
|
|
64dimensions
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
September 22, 2016, 05:51:33 AM |
|
Even with no hash improvement, lot's of operational info in one place.
I take it that the ability to use the GPU-vddc command, will be card dependent?
|
|
|
|
kilo17
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 980
Merit: 1001
aka "whocares"
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
September 22, 2016, 10:24:05 AM |
|
Up to 31.2 on a 390x running 1100/1250 - definitely making headway. A little more tuning and we have a winner ![Grin](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/grin.gif)
|
Bitcoin Will Only Succeed If The Community That Supports It Gets Support - Support Home Miners & Mining
|
|
|
|
YIz
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
September 22, 2016, 01:27:39 PM |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
YIz
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
September 22, 2016, 04:47:38 PM |
|
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. I'd love to see this miner fixed. would be adopted among miners very quickly.
|
|
|
|
scryptr
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1797
Merit: 1028
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
September 22, 2016, 06:28:15 PM |
|
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
|
|
|
|
kilo17
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 980
Merit: 1001
aka "whocares"
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
September 22, 2016, 06:31:54 PM |
|
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.
There is my problem, all of my rigs are on Celeron processors. I thought I was doing something wrong when it was not my settings at all. I got the 31 on a test bench with an i5 but cannot duplicate it on any rig
|
Bitcoin Will Only Succeed If The Community That Supports It Gets Support - Support Home Miners & Mining
|
|
|
OhGodAGirl
Full Member
![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif) ![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif)
Offline
Activity: 199
Merit: 108
Look, I'm really not that interesting. Promise.
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
September 22, 2016, 10:26:08 PM |
|
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 Hey scryptr, We do intend to keep it active - but it will be something that won't see an update for a few weeks. Our endgame goal is to keep updating and maintaining it for Genesis Mining, as well as support for future coins. Ethereum support is just the beginning.
|
|
|
|
OhGodAGirl
Full Member
![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif) ![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif)
Offline
Activity: 199
Merit: 108
Look, I'm really not that interesting. Promise.
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
September 22, 2016, 10:34:05 PM |
|
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. I'd love to see this miner fixed. would be adopted among miners very quickly. I've notified Genesis and we'll see what we can do - that's a minor fix so it shouldn't take long. Just need to wait until the appropriate people wakeup to push it to the repo. I'll keep the community updated.
|
|
|
|
|