agis6
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 27
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
November 08, 2016, 05:42:27 PM |
|
Can u add values to your considerations ? It would be even better Thank you
Sure, here you go: A. 1 x R9 380 Ubuntu 14.04.4 desktop, fglrx Was 18-21 sol/s, now is 25-26 sol/s B. 3 x R9 380X Ubuntu 16.04.1 desktop, amdgpu-pro Was 84-89 sol/s, now is 92-93 sol/s C. 5 x RX470 + 1 x RX480 Ubuntu 16.04.1 server, amdgpu-pro Was 135-147 sol/s, now is 145-148 sol/s Setting OPTIM_SIMPLIFY_ROUND to 1 had the following results: A. 29-31 sol/s B. 92-97 sol/s C. no change
|
|
|
|
osnwt
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
November 08, 2016, 05:46:25 PM |
|
C. 5 x RX470 + 1 x RX480 Ubuntu 16.04.1 server, amdgpu-pro Was 135-147 sol/s, now is 145-148 sol/s
Just wanted to ask about CPU model and usage. It seems that the performance highly depends on the CPU. Running 470x2 on old single core gave me 7 per thread on 470. Slightly better mobo + CPU gave 14/thread (28 per 470) - almost your result, see below. Claymore's gives 45 Sol/s per 470 on Windows - on the 1st single core machine with 1GB of RAM (45 vs 14 Sols/s of this miner on the same mobo under Linux). The results with single card and few cards on the same machine are also quite different. I use G3240 dual core CPUs on my rigs and it is not enough to run this at full speed. So as for me, moving some filtering from CPU/bus into cards should be considered as a priority task if we want to outperform Claymore's miner. I've read that it is ALREADY faster. But trying on my cards (7950, 7970, 390, 390X, 470) - all with G3240 CPUs - I was not able to get the same results. Was close to with a single RX470 (Elpida RAM, 1500 straps, 2000 mem/1260 GPU - 46-47 Sol/s, Ubuntu 16.04 + amdgpu-pro 16.40) but without latest eXtremal patch. So I do not understand how do you get a half of that only (148/6=25 Sol/s) on you rigs, but almost sure that the CPU usage is the reason. Have no other ideas.
|
|
|
|
nerdralph
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
November 08, 2016, 06:58:18 PM |
|
Can u add values to your considerations ? It would be even better Thank you
Sure, here you go: A. 1 x R9 380 Ubuntu 14.04.4 desktop, fglrx Was 18-21 sol/s, now is 25-26 sol/s I was getting over 30 on v3 using tighter memory timings and a 980/1550 clock. http://nerdralph.blogspot.ca/2016/09/advanced-tonga-bios-editing.htmlStill have to merge/build v4 to test it.
|
|
|
|
nerdralph
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
November 08, 2016, 07:20:43 PM |
|
Just tested out v4 on Ubuntu/fglrx and a couple R9 380 cards. No material change. Reducing MAX_SOLS from 2000 to 500 reduces the amount of data xfer over the PCI-E bus, and gives me about a 3-5% speed improvement running sa-solver. In my fork I have OPTIM_SIMPLIFY_ROUND turned on, and the MAX_SOLS reduced. https://github.com/nerdralph/sa-nr
|
|
|
|
mrb (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1028
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
November 08, 2016, 07:28:51 PM |
|
Just tested out v4 on Ubuntu/fglrx and a couple R9 380 cards. No material change. Reducing MAX_SOLS from 2000 to 500 reduces the amount of data xfer over the PCI-E bus, and gives me about a 3-5% speed improvement running sa-solver. In my fork I have OPTIM_SIMPLIFY_ROUND turned on, and the MAX_SOLS reduced. https://github.com/nerdralph/sa-nrWatch out you are missing solutions if you reduce MAX_SOLS. It might be ok if it correspondingly reduces the Equihash runtime, but you have to look at how many solutions you lose on a good sample >1k, such as "./sa-solver --nonces 1000"
|
|
|
|
Streetlight9
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 38
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
November 08, 2016, 07:40:27 PM Last edit: November 08, 2016, 08:09:13 PM by Streetlight9 |
|
Just tested out v4 on Ubuntu/fglrx and a couple R9 380 cards. No material change. Reducing MAX_SOLS from 2000 to 500 reduces the amount of data xfer over the PCI-E bus, and gives me about a 3-5% speed improvement running sa-solver. In my fork I have OPTIM_SIMPLIFY_ROUND turned on, and the MAX_SOLS reduced. https://github.com/nerdralph/sa-nrWatch out you are missing solutions if you reduce MAX_SOLS. It might be ok if it correspondingly reduces the Equihash runtime, but you have to look at how many solutions you lose on a good sample >1k, such as "./sa-solver --nonces 1000" that good or bad, as I have just updated this miner. ![Huh](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/huh.gif) seems like its good. ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif)
|
|
|
|
eXtremal
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
November 08, 2016, 07:50:05 PM |
|
My latest kernel results ( http://coinsforall.io/distr/input.cl), first row - original SA kernel, second - patched. Ubuntu 13.10, Catalyst 14.4, Radeon R9 290 900/1250 (downclocked) Total 29.1 sol/s [dev0 30.2] 4 shares Total 41.1 sol/s [dev0 42.0] 2 shares +40%
Ubuntu 16.04, NVidia 367, GeForce GTX1070 Total 196 solutions in 6588.2 ms (29.8 Sol/s) Total 196 solutions in 5334.1 ms (36.7 Sol/s) +20%
Ubuntu 16.04, amdgpu-pro 16.30, Radeon RX480 Total 50.4 sol/s [dev0 51.0] 4 shares Total 53.1 sol/s [dev0 53.2] 14 shares +4%
|
|
|
|
NewbieTreider
Member
![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif)
Offline
Activity: 89
Merit: 10
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
November 08, 2016, 07:52:09 PM |
|
v4 tested and running in ubuntu 16.04 with amd-gpu-pro 16.40! ... seems a bit more solutions per thread! Good work @mrb! ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif)
|
|
|
|
ioglnx
Sr. Member
![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif) ![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif) ![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif)
Offline
Activity: 574
Merit: 250
Fighting mob law and inquisition in this forum
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
November 08, 2016, 08:18:17 PM Last edit: November 08, 2016, 08:31:19 PM by ioglnx |
|
You last built solvers are causing hard freezes..sa_solver.exe crashes system on exit while the other is not doing anything just opens..and you can't close if you want to reboot system it locks the system and you need to power it off. Something strange happens with the last build ..the build before was working fine.
|
GTX 1080Ti rocks da house... seriously... this card is a beast³ Owning by now 18x GTX1080Ti :-D @serious love of efficiency
|
|
|
mrb (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1028
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
November 08, 2016, 08:23:18 PM |
|
My latest kernel results ( http://coinsforall.io/distr/input.cl), first row - original SA kernel, second - patched. Ubuntu 13.10, Catalyst 14.4, Radeon R9 290 900/1250 (downclocked) Total 29.1 sol/s [dev0 30.2] 4 shares Total 41.1 sol/s [dev0 42.0] 2 shares +40%
Ubuntu 16.04, NVidia 367, GeForce GTX1070 Total 196 solutions in 6588.2 ms (29.8 Sol/s) Total 196 solutions in 5334.1 ms (36.7 Sol/s) +20%
Ubuntu 16.04, amdgpu-pro 16.30, Radeon RX480 Total 50.4 sol/s [dev0 51.0] 4 shares Total 53.1 sol/s [dev0 53.2] 14 shares +4%
FWIW, exact same silentarmy code running on the same machine on an R9 Nano, dual booting into 2 OSes: * 33.2 sol/s with fglrx 2:15.201-0ubuntu0.14.04.1 on Ubuntu 14.04 * 47.4 sol/s with amdgpu-pro 16.40 on Ubuntu 16.04 So yeah, a +40% difference just by changing drivers... No wonder you found a way to rework the OpenCL code to get a +40% on fglrx, and it gets you only +4% on amdgpu-pro. amdgpu-pro compiles the OpenCL code just really, really well on its own, with almost no needs for manual tweaks.
|
|
|
|
ioglnx
Sr. Member
![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif) ![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif) ![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif)
Offline
Activity: 574
Merit: 250
Fighting mob law and inquisition in this forum
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
November 08, 2016, 08:32:56 PM |
|
But also +4% is something it just shows that optimizations can still be in cooperated
|
GTX 1080Ti rocks da house... seriously... this card is a beast³ Owning by now 18x GTX1080Ti :-D @serious love of efficiency
|
|
|
hacko.bg
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 52
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
November 08, 2016, 08:33:19 PM |
|
I have a few rigs with 8 x R7 265. Starts mining successfully, but in mining screen I see devX up to 6, meaning giving display of hashrate up to the 6-th card. Possible to make it 8 at least?
|
|
|
|
eXtremal
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
November 08, 2016, 09:44:25 PM |
|
But also +4% is something it just shows that optimizations can still be in cooperated
Need tests on R9 2xx/3xx cards with new drivers. May be this patch takes effect only on NVidia and old flgrx drivers.
|
|
|
|
mrb (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1028
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
November 08, 2016, 09:52:37 PM |
|
But also +4% is something it just shows that optimizations can still be in cooperated
Absolutely. I even care about +1%, so I'll incorporate the changes!
|
|
|
|
krnlx
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
November 08, 2016, 10:17:38 PM Last edit: November 08, 2016, 10:51:09 PM by krnlx |
|
Finally fixed cpu load. libtime.c: #include <stdlib.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <dlfcn.h> #include <assert.h> #include <time.h>
/* Temprorary fix for silentarmy - nvidia The MIT License (MIT) Copyright (c) 2016 krnlx, kernelx at me.com */
int inited=0;
void *libc = NULL;
int (*libc_clock_gettime)(clockid_t clk_id, struct timespec *tp) = NULL;
static void __attribute__ ((constructor)) lib_init(void) { if(inited) return;
libc = dlopen("libc.so.6", RTLD_LAZY); assert(libc);
libc_clock_gettime = dlsym(libc, "clock_gettime"); assert(libc_clock_gettime); inited++; }
useconds_t sleep_time = 1200;
int clock_gettime(clockid_t clk_id, struct timespec *tp){ lib_init(); //printf("."); usleep(sleep_time); int r = (*libc_clock_gettime)(clk_id, tp); return r; }
gcc -O2 -fPIC -shared -Wl,-soname,libtime.so -o libtime.so libtime.c LD_PRELOAD="./libtime.so" ./silentarmy --instances=2 --use=0,1,2,3,4,5 Connecting to us1-zcash.flypool.org:3333 Stratum server sent us the first job Mining on 6 devices Total 0.0 sol/s [dev0 0.0, dev1 0.0, dev2 0.0, dev3 0.0, dev4 0.0, dev5 0.0] 0 shares Total 243.5 sol/s [dev0 36.8, dev1 39.7, dev2 38.8, dev3 43.7, dev4 50.7, dev5 33.8] 1 share Total 249.5 sol/s [dev0 39.6, dev1 38.1, dev2 39.6, dev3 40.6, dev4 51.5, dev5 40.1] 1 share Total 254.8 sol/s [dev0 35.7, dev1 41.6, dev2 43.3, dev3 41.0, dev4 50.2, dev5 43.0] 1 share Total 253.3 sol/s [dev0 31.2, dev1 41.1, dev2 44.6, dev3 42.6, dev4 51.0, dev5 42.8] 1 share Total 247.6 sol/s [dev0 31.9, dev1 38.5, dev2 44.8, dev3 40.8, dev4 51.5, dev5 40.0] 1 share Total 239.8 sol/s [dev0 31.2, dev1 38.0, dev2 43.6, dev3 39.3, dev4 47.6, dev5 40.0] 2 shares Total 244.4 sol/s [dev0 33.0, dev1 39.7, dev2 42.4, dev3 40.4, dev4 46.9, dev5 42.1] 2 shares Total 242.6 sol/s [dev0 32.2, dev1 40.1, dev2 42.9, dev3 38.1, dev4 47.1, dev5 42.2] 3 shares Total 241.7 sol/s [dev0 32.2, dev1 39.6, dev2 42.8, dev3 39.7, dev4 46.6, dev5 40.9] 5 shares Total 238.2 sol/s [dev0 32.9, dev1 39.6, dev2 42.8, dev3 37.7, dev4 45.8, dev5 39.4] 5 shares Total 238.4 sol/s [dev0 32.8, dev1 39.7, dev2 42.1, dev3 38.2, dev4 45.0, dev5 40.1] 6 shares Total 238.1 sol/s [dev0 29.4, dev1 40.2, dev2 43.9, dev3 39.2, dev4 44.1, dev5 39.0] 7 shares Total 235.0 sol/s [dev0 29.0, dev1 38.0, dev2 44.1, dev3 38.3, dev4 41.7, dev5 38.0] 8 shares Total 236.0 sol/s [dev0 32.1, dev1 38.1, dev2 43.4, dev3 37.7, dev4 40.6, dev5 37.2] 8 shares Total 238.3 sol/s [dev0 31.5, dev1 40.5, dev2 44.4, dev3 39.0, dev4 40.4, dev5 37.9] 8 shares Total 238.5 sol/s [dev0 33.1, dev1 41.8, dev2 43.1, dev3 38.8, dev4 42.5, dev5 38.5] 8 shares Total 239.7 sol/s [dev0 33.6, dev1 40.5, dev2 44.0, dev3 37.8, dev4 42.5, dev5 38.1] 8 shares Total 240.3 sol/s [dev0 33.7, dev1 40.9, dev2 45.6, dev3 39.3, dev4 42.3, dev5 36.6] 8 shares Total 238.7 sol/s [dev0 32.9, dev1 41.7, dev2 44.7, dev3 38.0, dev4 41.0, dev5 37.8] 8 shares Total 238.3 sol/s [dev0 32.5, dev1 41.7, dev2 44.8, dev3 39.6, dev4 40.1, dev5 39.7] 8 shares Total 237.5 sol/s [dev0 32.5, dev1 41.0, dev2 45.2, dev3 39.1, dev4 38.9, dev5 39.8] 8 shares Total 239.0 sol/s [dev0 34.9, dev1 41.5, dev2 43.7, dev3 39.2, dev4 39.7, dev5 41.1] 11 shares Total 238.7 sol/s [dev0 35.5, dev1 43.1, dev2 42.5, dev3 39.1, dev4 41.7, dev5 41.5] 11 shares Total 237.0 sol/s [dev0 32.6, dev1 44.1, dev2 41.8, dev3 38.3, dev4 40.0, dev5 41.5] 11 shares Total 237.2 sol/s [dev0 32.6, dev1 43.7, dev2 39.9, dev3 38.6, dev4 39.9, dev5 40.7] 12 shares Total 239.3 sol/s [dev0 33.0, dev1 43.3, dev2 41.6, dev3 40.2, dev4 41.4, dev5 41.0] 13 shares 6 x 1070 CPU load on celeron 1840 top - 01:20:37 up 18:38, 3 users, load average: 3.66, 1.75, 0.91 Tasks: 151 total, 10 running, 141 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie %Cpu0 : 62.5 us, 1.0 sy, 0.0 ni, 36.5 id, 0.0 wa, 0.0 hi, 0.0 si, 0.0 st %Cpu1 : 59.2 us, 4.4 sy, 0.0 ni, 36.4 id, 0.0 wa, 0.0 hi, 0.0 si, 0.0 st KiB Mem : 3988068 total, 1317788 free, 1465128 used, 1205152 buff/cache KiB Swap: 0 total, 0 free, 0 used. 2204660 avail Mem
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 15266 krnl 20 0 29.619g 126804 94508 R 10.9 3.2 0:09.40 sa-solver 15273 krnl 20 0 29.614g 149356 111812 R 10.9 3.7 0:10.22 sa-solver 15269 krnl 20 0 29.599g 109488 90176 R 10.6 2.7 0:09.09 sa-solver 15271 krnl 20 0 29.599g 112464 90116 R 10.6 2.8 0:09.23 sa-solver 15275 krnl 20 0 29.610g 116104 94132 S 10.6 2.9 0:09.25 sa-solver 15268 krnl 20 0 29.599g 111812 90404 R 10.3 2.8 0:09.27 sa-solver 15265 krnl 20 0 29.609g 116228 94232 R 9.9 2.9 0:09.28 sa-solver 15272 krnl 20 0 29.610g 113848 94216 R 9.9 2.9 0:09.37 sa-solver 15263 krnl 20 0 29.599g 110692 90236 R 9.6 2.8 0:08.42 sa-solver 15264 krnl 20 0 29.599g 110464 90004 S 9.6 2.8 0:08.18 sa-solver 15274 krnl 20 0 29.599g 109500 90116 S 9.6 2.7 0:09.14 sa-solver 15267 krnl 20 0 29.599g 111504 90152 R 9.3 2.8 0:09.37 sa-solver You can adjust sleep time by changing the useconds_t sleep_time value
|
|
|
|
liomojo1
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
November 08, 2016, 10:20:53 PM |
|
Any news for windows release supporting nvidia? ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif)
|
|
|
|
krnlx
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
November 08, 2016, 10:57:06 PM |
|
with 3 instances getting 240-250 s/s on 6 x 1070 (eXtremal's input.cl and my cpu load workaround) Total 243.2 sol/s [dev0 32.1, dev1 40.7, dev2 42.4, dev3 41.3, dev4 47.3, dev5 43.1] 20 shares Total 244.0 sol/s [dev0 33.9, dev1 42.6, dev2 43.1, dev3 37.9, dev4 44.9, dev5 42.5] 21 shares Total 247.0 sol/s [dev0 34.2, dev1 42.7, dev2 43.1, dev3 37.2, dev4 44.9, dev5 43.5] 21 shares Total 245.4 sol/s [dev0 35.1, dev1 43.3, dev2 41.0, dev3 37.3, dev4 43.7, dev5 43.7] 21 shares Total 244.8 sol/s [dev0 34.4, dev1 44.6, dev2 39.9, dev3 37.6, dev4 43.5, dev5 44.5] 21 shares Total 243.8 sol/s [dev0 34.0, dev1 43.7, dev2 38.0, dev3 36.6, dev4 42.5, dev5 43.0] 21 shares Total 244.1 sol/s [dev0 35.1, dev1 45.1, dev2 38.9, dev3 37.2, dev4 42.9, dev5 44.0] 21 shares Total 244.5 sol/s [dev0 36.9, dev1 44.3, dev2 41.0, dev3 38.7, dev4 41.6, dev5 46.1] 21 shares Total 244.8 sol/s [dev0 37.2, dev1 43.9, dev2 39.9, dev3 38.0, dev4 42.8, dev5 43.8] 22 shares Total 243.4 sol/s [dev0 36.0, dev1 43.8, dev2 39.1, dev3 37.3, dev4 42.6, dev5 42.3] 23 shares Total 243.5 sol/s [dev0 35.8, dev1 43.9, dev2 38.0, dev3 38.2, dev4 41.7, dev5 42.5] 24 shares Total 243.4 sol/s [dev0 34.4, dev1 41.8, dev2 38.5, dev3 41.0, dev4 42.1, dev5 41.4] 26 shares Total 243.0 sol/s [dev0 34.5, dev1 42.3, dev2 38.9, dev3 42.0, dev4 41.0, dev5 40.5] 26 shares Total 243.0 sol/s [dev0 33.9, dev1 42.2, dev2 39.4, dev3 43.1, dev4 40.2, dev5 40.7] 26 shares Total 243.6 sol/s [dev0 34.5, dev1 42.7, dev2 41.8, dev3 43.6, dev4 40.7, dev5 40.8] 26 shares Total 243.5 sol/s [dev0 35.1, dev1 45.2, dev2 41.7, dev3 44.7, dev4 42.0, dev5 41.7] 28 shares Total 244.4 sol/s [dev0 34.7, dev1 45.2, dev2 41.8, dev3 44.5, dev4 42.0, dev5 39.8] 30 shares Total 243.0 sol/s [dev0 33.9, dev1 44.5, dev2 41.9, dev3 45.2, dev4 40.9, dev5 38.1] 30 shares Total 244.3 sol/s [dev0 34.5, dev1 43.4, dev2 42.5, dev3 45.9, dev4 40.0, dev5 40.6] 30 shares Total 245.6 sol/s [dev0 37.2, dev1 46.0, dev2 43.7, dev3 46.0, dev4 38.6, dev5 41.8] 30 shares Total 247.3 sol/s [dev0 36.9, dev1 48.5, dev2 44.1, dev3 45.5, dev4 40.0, dev5 39.8] 31 shares Total 245.2 sol/s [dev0 36.2, dev1 47.4, dev2 42.4, dev3 43.6, dev4 40.4, dev5 41.6] 31 shares Total 245.3 sol/s [dev0 36.4, dev1 45.6, dev2 43.2, dev3 44.3, dev4 40.0, dev5 41.5] 33 shares Total 244.9 sol/s [dev0 37.7, dev1 45.8, dev2 42.7, dev3 41.7, dev4 40.5, dev5 42.6] 35 shares Total 246.4 sol/s [dev0 37.4, dev1 46.1, dev2 42.1, dev3 40.8, dev4 41.4, dev5 43.1] 37 shares
|
|
|
|
antantti
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1015
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
November 08, 2016, 11:26:53 PM |
|
with 3 instances getting 240-250 s/s on 6 x 1070 (eXtremal's input.cl and my cpu load workaround)
Could you try with only one gpu? And 1,2,3,4 instances?
|
|
|
|
krnlx
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
November 08, 2016, 11:34:26 PM |
|
with 3 instances getting 240-250 s/s on 6 x 1070 (eXtremal's input.cl and my cpu load workaround)
Could you try with only one gpu? And 1,2,3,4 instances? hmm.. I really don't know why my gpu0 card runs slower o_O $ LD_PRELOAD="./libtime.so" ./silentarmy --instances=3 --use=0 Connecting to us1-zcash.flypool.org:3333 Stratum server sent us the first job Mining on 1 device Total 0.0 sol/s [dev0 0.0] 0 shares Total 39.6 sol/s [dev0 39.6] 0 shares Total 38.2 sol/s [dev0 38.2] 0 shares Total 32.4 sol/s [dev0 32.4] 0 shares Total 33.2 sol/s [dev0 33.2] 0 shares Total 37.1 sol/s [dev0 37.1] 0 shares Total 37.0 sol/s [dev0 37.0] 0 shares Total 34.7 sol/s [dev0 34.7] 0 shares Total 34.6 sol/s [dev0 34.6] 0 shares Total 35.6 sol/s [dev0 35.6] 0 shares
but gpu1 and others LD_PRELOAD="./libtime.so" ./silentarmy --instances=3 --use=1 Connecting to us1-zcash.flypool.org:3333 Stratum server sent us the first job Mining on 1 device Total 0.0 sol/s [dev1 0.0] 0 shares Total 45.6 sol/s [dev1 45.6] 0 shares Total 53.0 sol/s [dev1 53.0] 0 shares Total 47.9 sol/s [dev1 47.9] 0 shares Total 45.8 sol/s [dev1 45.8] 0 shares Total 42.6 sol/s [dev1 42.6] 0 shares Total 43.5 sol/s [dev1 43.5] 0 shares Total 42.5 sol/s [dev1 42.5] 0 shares Total 42.6 sol/s [dev1 42.6] 0 shares Total 43.3 sol/s [dev1 43.3] 0 shares
Maybe because Xorg is running on it ? On windows 10 with Claymore's miner and rx470 cards, I have same issue - card, connected to monitor, runs slower +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | NVIDIA-SMI 367.27 Driver Version: 367.27 | |-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+ | GPU Name Persistence-M| Bus-Id Disp.A | Volatile Uncorr. ECC | | Fan Temp Perf Pwr:Usage/Cap| Memory-Usage | GPU-Util Compute M. | |===============================+======================+======================| | 0 GeForce GTX 1070 On | 0000:01:00.0 On | N/A | |100% 32C P0 40W / 195W | 15MiB / 8113MiB | 0% Default | +-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+ | 1 GeForce GTX 1070 On | 0000:03:00.0 Off | N/A | |100% 32C P0 42W / 195W | 6MiB / 8113MiB | 0% Default | +-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+ | 2 GeForce GTX 1070 On | 0000:04:00.0 Off | N/A | |100% 30C P0 41W / 195W | 6MiB / 8113MiB | 0% Default | +-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+ | 3 GeForce GTX 1070 On | 0000:05:00.0 Off | N/A | |100% 31C P0 41W / 195W | 6MiB / 8113MiB | 0% Default | +-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+ | 4 GeForce GTX 1070 On | 0000:06:00.0 Off | N/A | |100% 28C P0 41W / 195W | 6MiB / 8113MiB | 0% Default | +-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+ | 5 GeForce GTX 1070 On | 0000:07:00.0 Off | N/A | |100% 28C P0 41W / 195W | 6MiB / 8113MiB | 0% Default | +-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+ +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Processes: GPU Memory | | GPU PID Type Process name Usage | |=============================================================================| | 0 1751 G /usr/lib/xorg/Xorg 13MiB | | 1 1751 G /usr/lib/xorg/Xorg 6MiB | | 2 1751 G /usr/lib/xorg/Xorg 6MiB | | 3 1751 G /usr/lib/xorg/Xorg 6MiB | | 4 1751 G /usr/lib/xorg/Xorg 6MiB | | 5 1751 G /usr/lib/xorg/Xorg 6MiB | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|
|
|
|
krnlx
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
November 08, 2016, 11:44:39 PM |
|
Tried without Xorg(no overclock), gpu0 slower, don't know why. Cards overclocked by memory(+1000 = +500 on win), getting 41-42, no overclock 35-38. Shitty nvidia-setting can't run without X ;(
|
|
|
|
|