Bitcoin Forum
March 25, 2019, 03:05:16 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.17.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 [151] 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 ... 1136 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN] cudaMiner & ccMiner CUDA based mining applications [Windows/Linux/MacOSX]  (Read 3406276 times)
cbuchner1
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 500


View Profile
January 24, 2014, 08:45:57 AM
 #3001


I have two 560 ti 1GB and from basing your stats off the numbers Ive seen with my cards, it seems your about maxing out the performance you can get. I cant push either of my 560 TIs past .44kh/s on scrypt jane and about 175 k/hs on scrypt usually with -l F7x1. A thing to remember with the flags, is that it doesnt matter where or what order you put them in as long as the syntax is right.

the X kernel was meant to push Fermi a bit further with scrypt-jane. Together with -L 2 or -L 3 you might see some 1.x kHash/s for Jane.

The next release version will likely have kernel names like FS, FJ for the respective scrypt and scrypt-jane versions.

1553526316
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1553526316

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1553526316
Reply with quote  #2

1553526316
Report to moderator
If you see garbage posts (off-topic, trolling, spam, no point, etc.), use the "report to moderator" links. All reports are investigated, though you will rarely be contacted about your reports.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
knox203
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 79
Merit: 10


View Profile
January 24, 2014, 09:02:53 AM
 #3002

I just built the newest revision from github and am getting an error launching with: "cudaminer.exe -D --benchmark". I have two GTX 770's, so I'm not sure why it's selecting the "salsa" kernel. It should be using "Kepler", shouldn't it? Thanks!

cbuchner1
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 500


View Profile
January 24, 2014, 09:52:48 AM
 #3003

I just built the newest revision from github and am getting an error launching with: "cudaminer.exe -D --benchmark". I have two GTX 770's, so I'm not sure why it's selecting the "salsa" kernel. It should be using "Kepler", shouldn't it? Thanks!

pass the -d 0 flag to make it use just one device.

There seem to be problems using two at a time. These problems started when I moved to CUDA 5.5

Christian
dgc81
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1
Merit: 0


View Profile
January 24, 2014, 09:58:06 AM
 #3004

Code:
/home/zenitur/cudaminer-2013-12-18/CudaMiner-master/salsa_kernel.cu:166: undefined reference to `NV2Kernel::NV2Kernel()'
/home/zenitur/cudaminer-2013-12-18/CudaMiner-master/salsa_kernel.cu:165: undefined reference to `NVKernel::NVKernel()'
Run ./autogen.sh to regenerate the configure file, then rerun ./configure
knox203
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 79
Merit: 10


View Profile
January 24, 2014, 10:21:06 AM
 #3005

I just built the newest revision from github and am getting an error launching with: "cudaminer.exe -D --benchmark". I have two GTX 770's, so I'm not sure why it's selecting the "salsa" kernel. It should be using "Kepler", shouldn't it? Thanks!

pass the -d 0 flag to make it use just one device.

There seem to be problems using two at a time. These problems started when I moved to CUDA 5.5

Christian


I appreciate the help, Christian. That seemed to have done the trick! I noticed that after cudaMiner would crash, my main video card would mine about 100kh/s slower than my secondary back on the 12-18 release. A reboot would fix it, but then I found that enabling SLI then disabling SLI would take my main video card back up to the normal has rate. Dunno if this provides any insight, just something I noticed!
Lacan82
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 247
Merit: 250


View Profile
January 24, 2014, 12:09:42 PM
 #3006

But will it be without any windows opening ?

that window is unsightly and i wish you could minimize it to tray. there are methods to hide it entirely but if you do that, then you can't do things like turning it off and running it again on another pool.

Anyone knows a way to minimize it to tray?

put Start /B cudaminer.exe blah blah blah

in your batch file

chup
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 696
Merit: 262


Me, Myself & I


View Profile
January 24, 2014, 01:16:25 PM
 #3007

that window is unsightly and i wish you could minimize it to tray. there are methods to hide it entirely but if you do that, then you can't do things like turning it off and running it again on another pool.
Anyone knows a way to minimize it to tray?
Try cryptominers in a tray: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=149442.0
Highly customizable, so You have homework (xml-configuration file) to do.
Works for me.

SystmHash
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 37
Merit: 0


View Profile
January 24, 2014, 02:09:54 PM
 #3008

Hi Guys,

Planning to get a new card, thought maybe you could give some advice?  Huh Huh Huh

GIGABYTE GV-N780GHZ-3GD GeForce GTX 780 3GB $540
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125488

GIGABYTE GV-N78TOC-3GD GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB $680
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125489

Does the TI justify the additional $140?  Roll Eyes

Thanks!   Kiss


So sorry to post this again, but maybe someone could give me some advice, I would highly appreciate it!
BK124
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 23
Merit: 0


View Profile
January 24, 2014, 02:14:57 PM
 #3009


I have two 560 ti 1GB and from basing your stats off the numbers Ive seen with my cards, it seems your about maxing out the performance you can get. I cant push either of my 560 TIs past .44kh/s on scrypt jane and about 175 k/hs on scrypt usually with -l F7x1. A thing to remember with the flags, is that it doesnt matter where or what order you put them in as long as the syntax is right.

the X kernel was meant to push Fermi a bit further with scrypt-jane. Together with -L 2 or -L 3 you might see some 1.x kHash/s for Jane.

The next release version will likely have kernel names like FS, FJ for the respective scrypt and scrypt-jane versions.



Thanks Christian, I had read about the X kernel earlier in the the thread, didnt realize it was in the recent 122 commit that I already had  Tongue. I saw my scrypt-jane numbers double to about .88k/h from before so good improvement there. I've got two 4GB 760s arriving today to replace these old 560 ti 1GB so it was a good send off to see their numbers double  Cheesy Thanks again for all the work on this.
cbuchner1
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 500


View Profile
January 24, 2014, 02:18:38 PM
 #3010

Does the TI justify the additional $140?  Roll Eyes
So sorry to post this again, but maybe someone could give me some advice, I would highly appreciate it!

My opinion is No. The 780Ti's have virtually no TDP headroom for overclocking (106% is the maximum with the stock BIOS), whereas the 780 cards can be sent to 120% (or 125%?) TDP and much higher overclock.

In Windows then the 780 and 780Ti get about the same output with OC. On Linux your overclocking options are more limited however.

I am currently doing 1.88 MHash/s on 3x 780Ti on Linux with a slightly modified BIOS. But now I wish I'd bought 780's instead...

Christian
bathrobehero
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666
Merit: 1027


ICO? Not even once.


View Profile
January 24, 2014, 02:56:52 PM
 #3011

The single memory switch turned on (-m 1) reduces my max total warps from 181 to 118 (for N 14 SJ, L 3), but it's needed for any texture caching (-C).
Is it supposed to work like this?

RIP Bittrex
RIP Poloniex
SystmHash
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 37
Merit: 0


View Profile
January 24, 2014, 03:01:01 PM
 #3012

Does the TI justify the additional $140?  Roll Eyes
So sorry to post this again, but maybe someone could give me some advice, I would highly appreciate it!

My opinion is No. The 780Ti's have virtually no TDP headroom for overclocking (106% is the maximum with the stock BIOS), whereas the 780 cards can be sent to 120% (or 125%?) TDP and much higher overclock.

In Windows then the 780 and 780Ti get about the same output with OC. On Linux your overclocking options are more limited however.

I am currently doing 1.88 MHash/s on 3x 780Ti on Linux with a slightly modified BIOS. But now I wish I'd bought 780's instead...

Christian


Thanks Christian! Keep up the good work buddy!  Kiss (no homo)
Jayjay04
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1379
Merit: 1000



View Profile
January 24, 2014, 03:12:37 PM
 #3013

But will it be without any windows opening ?

that window is unsightly and i wish you could minimize it to tray. there are methods to hide it entirely but if you do that, then you can't do things like turning it off and running it again on another pool.

Anyone knows a way to minimize it to tray?

put Start /B cudaminer.exe blah blah blah

in your batch file

Does't seem to do anything more .... ?!

                    ▄▄▄
                   █████
             ▄▄▄    ▀▀▀       ▄▄████╕
            █████          ▄▄███████▌
     ▄▄▄     ▀▀▀        ╓████████▀▀
    █████               ██████▀▀       ▄███▄
     ▀▀▀        ▄███▄    ▀▀▀           ▀███▀
                ▀███▀        ▄▄████╕
       ▁▄▄███▄           ▄▄████████▌
   ▁▄▆████████       ▄▄█████████▀▀       ▄███▄
 ▄█████████▀▔    ▄▄█████████▀▀           ▀███▀
▐██████▀▀▔   ,▄█████████▀▀        ▄▄▄
 ▔▀▀▀▔    ▄▄████████▀▀           █████
      ▄▄████████▀▀       ▄▄██▄    ▀▀▀
   ▄█████████▀       ▄▄███████▌       ▄▄▄
  ▐██████▀▀      ▄▄█████████▀▔       █████
   `▀▀▀      ▂▄█████████▀▀    ,▄▄µ    ▀▀▀
          ▂▆████████▀▀    ,▄██████▌
          ██████▀▀     ▄█████████▀
           ▔▀▀        ███████▀"
                      "▀▀▀╙
Hello!
STAKER
.The Next Proof-of-Stake.
KSmart Contract Tokene.














cbuchner1
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 500


View Profile
January 24, 2014, 03:24:42 PM
Last edit: January 24, 2014, 03:43:06 PM by cbuchner1
 #3014

The single memory switch turned on (-m 1) reduces my max total warps from 181 to 118 (for N 14 SJ, L 3), but it's needed for any texture caching (-C).
Is it supposed to work like this?

1D textures have a size limit on their X dimension. That restricts us to 2 GB.

2D textures much less so (because both dimensions X and Y can be quite large). Try using -C 2 instead.

Single memory allocation may be severely limited by the Windows WDDM driver model as well. It should still be able to grab most of your card's memory on Linux though.
incorrect
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196
Merit: 100


View Profile
January 24, 2014, 03:31:11 PM
 #3015


Can anyone confirm this is safe? The user has very little activity here.
cbuchner1
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 500


View Profile
January 24, 2014, 03:42:12 PM
 #3016


So what are them overclockers getting out of a 780, Titan or 780Ti using the new Z kernel?. Have we hit 800kHash/s yet?

And considering the demise in YAC to BTC exchange rates... are there any other profitable scrypt-jane coins that we could mine? If some of you could share some firsthand experience that would be great...
Morgahl
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70
Merit: 10


View Profile
January 24, 2014, 03:47:10 PM
 #3017


Can anyone confirm this is safe? The user has very little activity here.

I have been running it with very decent gain of about 17% over the 12/18/2013 official binary on my Titan.
ghur
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 154
Merit: 100


View Profile
January 24, 2014, 04:07:35 PM
Last edit: January 24, 2014, 04:20:50 PM by ghur
 #3018

I build myself a binary of revision 295d239459e45cb6179655c02d82cd7974055088. (I'm not crazy enough to download a binary not compiled by the original author)
I've been running it for a day now mining scrypt.

I have Gigabyte 670 with a factory overclock to 980.

On the latest stable release:
Autotune with no other arguments landed on K14x16, which performed around at 285 khash.
By fiddling with some settings (-H 1 -i 0 -l K7x32 -C 0 -m 1) I got it to run at 300-ish.

Using the binary I compiled myself I found using the same settings as before the performance dropped some. (Don't recall the exact figures unfortunately).
However, I can report using "-H 1 -i 0 -l Y7x32 -C 1 -m 1" I got it to 330-ish at the same clock.
Deciding to push the GPU some more, bumping the clock to 1060 (I love how stable the temps are on this card), it starts running around 350-360 khash/s.

Another thing that changed, with the latest stable I get the best performance out of the 64-bit binary. Using the custom build, the 32-bit binary performs significantly better.

In a nutshell: new nvidia kernels are great.

Hope this helps Smiley

doge: D8q8dR6tEAcaJ7U65jP6AAkiiL2CFJaHah
Automated faucet, pays daily: Qoinpro
SystmHash
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 37
Merit: 0


View Profile
January 24, 2014, 04:10:23 PM
 #3019


And considering the demise in YAC to BTC exchange rates... are there any other profitable scrypt-jane coins that we could mine? If some of you could share some firsthand experience that would be great...


I'm currently on Vertcoin it's going up nicely.
bathrobehero
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666
Merit: 1027


ICO? Not even once.


View Profile
January 24, 2014, 04:33:39 PM
 #3020

-m 0, -C 0 uses up to 1963 MB, while anything with -m 1 (C 1/C 2) uses 1287 MB max. Anything above that crashes.

NVIDIA System Management Interface says that my card is in WDDM mode:
Code:
+------------------------------------------------------+
| NVIDIA-SMI 331.93     Driver Version: 331.93         |
|-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| GPU  Name            TCC/WDDM | Bus-Id        Disp.A | Volatile Uncorr. ECC |
| Fan  Temp  Perf  Pwr:Usage/Cap|         Memory-Usage | GPU-Util  Compute M. |
|===============================+======================+======================|
|   0  GeForce GTX 660    WDDM  | 0000:02:00.0     N/A |                  N/A |
| 42%   34C  N/A     N/A /  N/A |   2005MiB /  2047MiB |     N/A      Default |
+-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
But since the card is a secondary card, and I couldn't even attach a monitor if I wanted to due to my mobo not supporting it with the onboard graphics, there's not much info SMI can gather.
Anyway, is there a custom driver or something that would let me use the card purely for it's computational power without limitations?


And considering the demise in YAC to BTC exchange rates... are there any other profitable scrypt-jane coins that we could mine? If some of you could share some firsthand experience that would be great...
Well not really:
ZcC is in N 13 but it's recovering from a fork for a while now so no exhchanges at the moment (enters N14 on Febr 17);
CPR (Copperbars) is in N 13 as well but I dropped it for some reason, not sure what I didn't like about it... (enters N14 on Febr 21);
APC (Applecoin) has potential, but it's only in N 11. Looking at one of the pools, the average hashrate per worker is around 294 kH/s. My GTX 660 gets 59 kH/s and ~30-40% CPU utilization (with -H 2).
Also, there's a bunch of coins between N 4 and N 7 but those are pretty much hit and miss. (cachecoin, microcoin, internetcoin, qqcoin, velocitycoin, freecoin, etc)
Basically, I'm silently waiting for the Keccak optimization so that I can test the !%+ out of low N coins because I'm starting to dislike YAC a lot and there's no way scrypt is more profitable with low-mid range cards like a GTX 660 (260 scrypt khashes vs 3.4 SJ N14 khashes).

RIP Bittrex
RIP Poloniex
Pages: « 1 ... 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 [151] 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 ... 1136 »
  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!