Bitcoin Forum
February 24, 2024, 04:36:28 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 26.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 ... 1135 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN] cudaMiner & ccMiner CUDA based mining applications [Windows/Linux/MacOSX]  (Read 3426760 times)
humanitybg
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3
Merit: 0


View Profile
January 29, 2014, 11:33:44 PM
 #3261

Guys can some upload a newer compiled version (I read that you guys are using new ones) since I have 0 idea how to compile on Windows. I want to test out how my GTX770 will do compared to the 12-18 release. Smiley
It is a common myth that Bitcoin is ruled by a majority of miners. This is not true. Bitcoin miners "vote" on the ordering of transactions, but that's all they do. They can't vote to change the network rules.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1708792588
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1708792588

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1708792588
Reply with quote  #2

1708792588
Report to moderator
bathrobehero
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2002
Merit: 1050


ICO? Not even once.


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 12:20:30 AM
 #3262

Since commit ~125, benchmark mode has gone rogue. The previous commit I complied and was fine was 114.



It's just a minor issue, but I thought it's worth mentioning.
I use solomining as benchmark now (no shares skewing with the numbers)

Not your keys, not your coins!
Morgahl
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70
Merit: 10


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 12:21:31 AM
 #3263

Hi I was wondering if you guys are doing only simple overclocking with afterburner or forced p-states.
On my EVGA 660Ti I use nvidia inspector to force p2-state which gets me up to 1215MHz (300MHz over stock).
Also my hashrate got a bit more stable with this and autotuning gets much more precise results since then.

This gets me 340khash/s for scrypt and 3.5khash/s for scrypt-jane.
This is with the 2014-1-22 version.
So I´m wondering why I´m actually still below a value from the scrypt-jane spreadsheet which apparently uses almost no OC.
I´ve tested lots of kernel cfgs but I can´t seem to get any higher.

Any ideas?

My exact config:
scrypt: --interactive=0 --hash-parallel=2 --launch-config=Y112x2 --texture-cache=1 --single-memory=0
scrypt-jane: --interactive=0 --hash-parallel=1 --launch-config=K7x23 --texture-cache=0 --single-memory=0 --lookup-gap=3

OC:
P0: clock-offset +160; mem-offset +300; power-target 153% (actually uses about 142% TDP)
P2: clock 1215MHz; forced
Driver: 332.21

Your, Mem offset might be going the wrong direction. There is zero bottleneck for Scrypt-Jane (@ -L 1) and almost none for Scrypt or Scrypt-Jane (@ -L 2+) in terms of memory throughput most times.

This may just be a Titan specific observation, but I literally see zero change to hash rate swinging from -502 to +300 in 100 steps, none. All a positive memclock did was raise the TDP utilization of the card for zero gain. You might find that lowering the Memclock will allow a more stable feed to the GPU and allow a higher clock as a result. If not at least you will see a reduction in TDP % saving you power costs in the long run.
cbuchner1 (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 502


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 12:39:05 AM
 #3264

cbuchner1, did you note my earlier post about autotune problems and K kernel performance regression?

So that regression really is bad. 254 kHash/s to 204 kHash/s with same kernel launch parameters between 2013-12-18 and current github.
That's a 20% drop in performance. I might play around a bit to see what I can find.


It's fixed! A radical simplification I made some time ago just turned out to having been a radical speed brake Wink

The K, T, X kernels are 10-15% faster now. Definitely for scrypt - but also slightly faster for scrypt-jane.

Too bad that for scrypt you would usually take the new Y, Z kernels (or the good old F kernel for Fermi).
So the overall benefit isn't that great.

Christian
bigjme
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 250


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 12:42:47 AM
Last edit: January 30, 2014, 12:59:25 AM by bigjme
 #3265

I will download and give it a test :-)

Edit: ok so it took 7 attempts and 3 downloads to get the latest build to compile. Bare in mind I have compiled every other release in 1 attempt. It was giving different errors constantly and even sometimes doing nothing

Finally got it to compile and found a drop in performance.
4.77khash/s for the latest
5.04khash/s on the one I built around 12 hours ago

Thats on yacoin with the same configuration as I posted earlier. It was not left to autotune I just ran the settings I did earlier

Owner of: cudamining.co.uk
cbuchner1 (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 502


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 01:18:37 AM
 #3266

I will download and give it a test :-)

Edit: ok so it took 7 attempts and 3 downloads to get the latest build to compile. Bare in mind I have compiled every other release in 1 attempt. It was giving different errors constantly and even sometimes doing nothing

Finally got it to compile and found a drop in performance.
4.77khash/s for the latest
5.04khash/s on the one I built around 12 hours ago

Thats on yacoin with the same configuration as I posted earlier. It was not left to autotune I just ran the settings I did earlier

For scrypt-jane I am seeing mixed results. GT 640 (Compute 3.5) seems a little slower, GTX 780 TIs on Linux slightly faster.
Maybe I can later offer an option to switch between these two (totally different) memory access schemes to the scratchpad.

I am also wondering if you guys still see non-validating shares in conjunction with the lookup gap after this change?
 I can't see much activity when solo-mining, but the pool miners will notice.

Christian
bigjme
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 250


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 01:24:36 AM
 #3267

Solo mining myself, sorry
Again I will gladly test anything new you release. For anyone wondering my gpu is a evga gtx 780 hydro copper

Seems between the 660, 780, and 780ti there are very mixed results. Wish yacoin hadnt dropped in price so much. 1800 coins is only worth £27 now. Return on them seems very low

Owner of: cudamining.co.uk
djm34
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400
Merit: 1050


View Profile WWW
January 30, 2014, 03:07:36 AM
Last edit: January 30, 2014, 09:25:26 AM by djm34
 #3268

I noticed something strange today (herr... yesterday...). I was running on MRC in x64 windows version, at some point I look at the graphs from msi afterburner, the gpu was running all the time at 98% not at 99% as usuall.
I went back few hours later to the x32 version, then I had 50khash more and everything was running as usuall at 99%.

Another thing regarding the values given by the autotune, they seems to be off by a factor 2 (on the latest version... I was trying to find a config which could beat the Z one I use...

Another question regarding the lookup gap, to which N factors this one gives advantage. So far I only saw the effect on YAC.
I tried changing the L value for MRC or QQC, but that does'nt have any positive impact...

djm34 facebook page
BTC: 1NENYmxwZGHsKFmyjTc5WferTn5VTFb7Ze
Pledge for neoscrypt ccminer to that address: 16UoC4DmTz2pvhFvcfTQrzkPTrXkWijzXw
beachking2000
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 29
Merit: 0


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 04:24:40 AM
 #3269

Suffered a slight hit on khash with latest update today using the x kernel. Not sure why. My 460 V2 was at 130 khash dropped back to 120khash. My 660ti dropped from 183khash back to 180 so im guessing its more Fermi related. All in all minor stuff as for some reason I haven't noticed the stratum receive line failed error I would get occasionally after todays update.Anyways Keep up the good work it constantly seems like a awesome work of art. Someday Nvidia chips will smoke the crap outta amd for mining.
Edit: Noticed Chips are only utilizing 97 percent.
cwizard
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98
Merit: 10


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 04:49:50 AM
 #3270

Any idea when we'll get a release to play with, windows binaries?

Thanks,

cwiz
Trololo2060
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 22
Merit: 0


View Profile WWW
January 30, 2014, 05:42:07 AM
 #3271


Hi, tru to use GuiMiner-scrypt as it support cudaminer
OpNop
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1
Merit: 0


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 07:23:42 AM
 #3272

Can I call shenanigans on that 2014-01-29 660 TI added to the spreadsheet? I find it very unlikely that a stock 2GB card running the 12-18-2013 build is going to get 409Kh/s (79Kh/s faster then the top 660 TI)
patoberli
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 106
Merit: 10


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 08:52:50 AM
 #3273

Built for Windows x86 (also running on x64). https://www.dropbox.com/s/71p1xnwy442mz0m/cudaminer_commit_133_x86.rar
Download latest official cudaminer x86 release from first page and replace the cudaminer.exe with the new one.

YAC: YA86YiWSvWEGSSSerPTMy4kwndabRUNftf
BTC: 16NqvkYbKMnonVEf7jHbuWURFsLeuTRidX
LTC: LTKCoiDwqEjaRCoNXfFhDm9EeWbGWouZjE
cwizard
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98
Merit: 10


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 09:17:45 AM
 #3274

Built for Windows x86 (also running on x64). https://www.dropbox.com/s/71p1xnwy442mz0m/cudaminer_commit_133_x86.rar
Download latest official cudaminer x86 release from first page and replace the cudaminer.exe with the new one.

Thanks, it vomited when I tried to use Y or Z kernel
cbuchner1 (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 502


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 09:49:05 AM
 #3275

Thanks, it vomited when I tried to use Y or Z kernel

no vomiting in this forum.

who's gonna mop this up?
cbuchner1 (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 502


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 10:00:58 AM
 #3276

Question of the day: What to mine with my nVidia cards?

Yacoin -> this coin is falling (failing?)
MRC -> no luck with solo mining at all. Trying a pool now (mrc.easy-mining.net pool seems to be fixed at last).
VertCoin -> who is currently into this coin? if you are, why?
middlecoin -> the DOGE rush is over, right?

I think what would really be helpful is a profitability calculator for various scrypt-jane coins, taking one's hash rate at different N-factors into account.

Christian

patoberli
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 106
Merit: 10


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 10:22:32 AM
 #3277

Wow, Litecoin difficulty is on a rollercoaster:
http://bitcoinwisdom.com/litecoin/difficulty
I think this is a good example for the influence of DOGE and I think MOON, which both probably are over now?!?

Oh and forgot to write, I don't see any difference in Build 113 with Kepler GT 640. Neither in scrypt (litecoin) nor in scrypt-jane (yacoin).

YAC: YA86YiWSvWEGSSSerPTMy4kwndabRUNftf
BTC: 16NqvkYbKMnonVEf7jHbuWURFsLeuTRidX
LTC: LTKCoiDwqEjaRCoNXfFhDm9EeWbGWouZjE
bigjme
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 250


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 10:33:59 AM
 #3278

Doge prices are going up and dowj still but the difficulty has shot up.

I do think we need some sort of profit calculator as things seem very hard to choose whats best at the moment

Owner of: cudamining.co.uk
djm34
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400
Merit: 1050


View Profile WWW
January 30, 2014, 10:53:32 AM
 #3279

Question of the day: What to mine with my nVidia cards?

Yacoin -> this coin is falling (failing?)
MRC -> no luck with solo mining at all. Trying a pool now (mrc.easy-mining.net pool seems to be fixed at last).
VertCoin -> who is currently into this coin? if you are, why?
middlecoin -> the DOGE rush is over, right?

I think what would really be helpful is a profitability calculator for various scrypt-jane coins, taking one's hash rate at different N-factors into account.

Christian



Right now, the MRC seems the most profitable (in terms of volume and value) with my one card setup (need a new psu to add my old gtx660 oem)... although the market place where you can exchange them are not so good...  and the price is going down.
The Hashrate for the 780ti is around 1380khash/sec.


I mined vertcoin last week, but this week I would get something like 20/day (390khash/s), not worth it.

QQcoin seems easy to solo mine however the reward can be anything between 4 and 40QQC.
I get around 600khash/sec and from the calculation I made, I should get 1 block every half hour.

Is there any new scrypt jane coin with low N factor around ?


djm34 facebook page
BTC: 1NENYmxwZGHsKFmyjTc5WferTn5VTFb7Ze
Pledge for neoscrypt ccminer to that address: 16UoC4DmTz2pvhFvcfTQrzkPTrXkWijzXw
AizenSou
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 938
Merit: 1000


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 11:36:51 AM
 #3280

I will download and give it a test :-)

Edit: ok so it took 7 attempts and 3 downloads to get the latest build to compile. Bare in mind I have compiled every other release in 1 attempt. It was giving different errors constantly and even sometimes doing nothing

Finally got it to compile and found a drop in performance.
4.77khash/s for the latest
5.04khash/s on the one I built around 12 hours ago

Thats on yacoin with the same configuration as I posted earlier. It was not left to autotune I just ran the settings I did earlier

For scrypt-jane I am seeing mixed results. GT 640 (Compute 3.5) seems a little slower, GTX 780 TIs on Linux slightly faster.
Maybe I can later offer an option to switch between these two (totally different) memory access schemes to the scratchpad.

I am also wondering if you guys still see non-validating shares in conjunction with the lookup gap after this change?
 I can't see much activity when solo-mining, but the pool miners will notice.

Christian


Hi Christian,

I still don't have time to research the profitability of scrypt-jane coins, so I still stick my cudaminer to scrypt coin. Earning steadily over 0.02 BTC/1Mhs daily now (as most as double as middlecoin & multipool co&). If you don't have time to research the new coins, just point your miner to pool.chunky.ms port 6666. I'm currently supporting and working with the pool owner to improve the profit calculator for the new coins.
Check pool.chunky.ms for more information  Wink
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 ... 1135 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!