Bitcoin Forum
March 21, 2019, 05:18:12 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.17.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 ... 1136 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN] cudaMiner & ccMiner CUDA based mining applications [Windows/Linux/MacOSX]  (Read 3405973 times)
djm34
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288
Merit: 1040


View Profile WWW
February 04, 2014, 10:52:56 AM
 #3721

Well I just got ripped off of a YACoin block, it said the Yay!!! thing but the damn client never actually showed the block.
The client even said it found a block but it never appeared in my wallet, so sad...
Yacoin takes ~520 confirms. That usually takes a few hours after a found block.

The same happened to me with an UltraCoin block. My wallet lists 3 transaction in total, but only 2 incoming transactions from mining are actually displayed.

If you find a way to recover that missing transaction, please let me know.

I also had that problem while I was trying to mine yaccoin... over the 3 I was able to mine, one never made it to the wallet.
I looked into the log file of the wallet, there was something about rearranging the blockchain (I don't remember exactly what was written in there, but it was something like that...). So may-be an orphan ?

djm34 facebook page
BTC: 1NENYmxwZGHsKFmyjTc5WferTn5VTFb7Ze
Pledge for neoscrypt ccminer to that address: 16UoC4DmTz2pvhFvcfTQrzkPTrXkWijzXw
1553188692
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1553188692

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1553188692
Reply with quote  #2

1553188692
Report to moderator
1553188692
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1553188692

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1553188692
Reply with quote  #2

1553188692
Report to moderator
Crypto Casino Since 2014
Level Up & Get Even More Rewards!
Daily Treasure Chest
& Much More
Roll Hunt
Rakeback
Blackjack
Jackpot
Dice
Slots
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1553188692
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1553188692

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1553188692
Reply with quote  #2

1553188692
Report to moderator
1553188692
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1553188692

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1553188692
Reply with quote  #2

1553188692
Report to moderator
1553188692
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1553188692

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1553188692
Reply with quote  #2

1553188692
Report to moderator
cbuchner1
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 500


View Profile
February 04, 2014, 10:54:17 AM
Last edit: February 04, 2014, 11:38:47 AM by cbuchner1
 #3722


orphans would be shown in the transaction list, I think - and the money would be listed under "immature" at least temporarily.  Neither happened when this incident occured.

Christian
cbuchner1
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 500


View Profile
February 04, 2014, 10:55:26 AM
Last edit: February 04, 2014, 01:50:30 PM by cbuchner1
 #3723

A brave tester with 8 Fermi cards Tesla M2090 (thanks Choseh) just figured out the performance regression between 2013-12-18 and 2014-02-02. If you change the #if 0 in the fermi_kernel.cu to #if 1 (thereby enabling the previous version of the Salsa20/8 round function) you should see the previous performance figures again. Those who can compile the code themselves and want to mine on Fermi are welcome to make this change themselves. EDIT: False alarm apparently. My tester cannot reproduce this now

also there seems to be a bug in the autotuning code in salsa_kernel.cu

                            hash_sec = (double)WU_PER_LAUNCH / tdelta;

should very likely be

                            hash_sec = (double)WU_PER_LAUNCH * repeat / tdelta;

to factor in the number of repetitions in the measurement (we want to measure for 50ms minimum for better timer accuracy). So autotune was drunk after all!

So, it seems I should release fixes (new binary release) for these problems tonight.

Christian
morbooo
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4
Merit: 0


View Profile
February 04, 2014, 11:50:24 AM
 #3724

I'm having an issue mining scrypt with two GPU's: every time I start cudaMiner, one of them (not always the same) seems to return results which mostly doesn't validate. This is tested on Linux, using cudaMiner master, tested both on Z14x14 and T14x32. When I mine using a single card (selected with -d) all results validate... Any idea?
cbuchner1
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 500


View Profile
February 04, 2014, 11:54:19 AM
 #3725

I'm having an issue mining scrypt with two GPU's: every time I start cudaMiner, one of them (not always the same) seems to return results which mostly doesn't validate. This is tested on Linux, using cudaMiner master, tested both on Z14x14 and T14x32. When I mine using a single card (selected with -d) all results validate... Any idea?

this is a long shot: Would it help to downgrade the video driver to the exact version hat shipped with the CUDA 5.5 toolkit download from nVidia? Of course if your video cards are newer than this driver release, this is a no-go, as the driver would not recognize them ;-/

Christian
qwerty77
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 53
Merit: 0


View Profile
February 04, 2014, 11:56:33 AM
 #3726

I'm having an issue mining scrypt with two GPU's: every time I start cudaMiner, one of them (not always the same) seems to return results which mostly doesn't validate. This is tested on Linux, using cudaMiner master, tested both on Z14x14 and T14x32. When I mine using a single card (selected with -d) all results validate... Any idea?

I also got validation issues since the newest version, before I used 12-18 without any problems. I ran autotune several times and always got the same kernel cfg K16x20 for VTC for my GTX770. Is that appropriate for my card?
Also just upgraded my video driver, that didn't change anything
Notanon
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 389
Merit: 250


Pastor of Muppets


View Profile
February 04, 2014, 12:16:45 PM
 #3727

Tried the new version with autotune and got better results this time. Compared to 195kH/s on the previous version with custom settings, the new version is giving me an maximum of around 217kH/s for my GTX660, with about 215kH/s averaged so far. Worth the wait, IMO. Cheesy Instead of K10x16 with the last version, the new one is giving me better results with K10x28.

AMHash
ASICMINERROCKMINER ● Purchase from: AMHash (20Th/s min) ● Havelock (1Gh/s min)
Cloud-mining contracts: 0.0012 BTC per Gh ● Maintenance fee: $0.001551 per Gh per day ● Upto 6% Christmas Bonus

ManIkWeet
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 182
Merit: 100


View Profile
February 04, 2014, 12:32:07 PM
Last edit: February 04, 2014, 12:43:37 PM by ManIkWeet
 #3728

Well I just got ripped off of a YACoin block, it said the Yay!!! thing but the damn client never actually showed the block.
The client even said it found a block but it never appeared in my wallet, so sad...

Do a -rescan on the wallet
Took forever, did not work Sad

Well I just got ripped off of a YACoin block, it said the Yay!!! thing but the damn client never actually showed the block.
The client even said it found a block but it never appeared in my wallet, so sad...
Yacoin takes ~520 confirms. That usually takes a few hours after a found block.

The same happened to me with an UltraCoin block. My wallet lists 3 transaction in total, but only 2 incoming transactions from mining are actually displayed.

If you find a way to recover that missing transaction, please let me know.
Yes exactly this: It says I have 30 transactions but I only count 29.
Continueing my search...


Edit: If I do "listtransactions" in the GUI console (Help->Debug window->Console), it shows there's an "orphan" transaction, and the timestamp is correct, I am sad now that I lost a dollar Sad

BTC donations: 18fw6ZjYkN7xNxfVWbsRmBvD6jBAChRQVn (thanks!)
patoberli
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 106
Merit: 10


View Profile
February 04, 2014, 12:32:37 PM
 #3729


The same happened to me with an UltraCoin block. My wallet lists 3 transaction in total, but only 2 incoming transactions from mining are actually displayed.

If you find a way to recover that missing transaction, please let me know.

I don't have the slightest idea. Maybe the rescan function helps.

YAC: YA86YiWSvWEGSSSerPTMy4kwndabRUNftf
BTC: 16NqvkYbKMnonVEf7jHbuWURFsLeuTRidX
LTC: LTKCoiDwqEjaRCoNXfFhDm9EeWbGWouZjE
flatlanded
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 7
Merit: 0


View Profile
February 04, 2014, 12:35:54 PM
 #3730

What is the hashrate of GTX760 for pure script(not script-jane!)?

On average? I'd say between 300 and 330 khash/s with a decent O/C. I haven't tried the latest kernels for it yet though...

- Edit: 315 khash/s with the latest release (I have 2 - GTX 760's)
Please, post your settings , at 1228mhz i cant get more than 290khs!!!!!

Well for starters I have it at OC'd at 1280mhz (1293 is unstable for me with scrypt). Both gpu's are free from use (I'm using the iGPU for the monitor). Also, I found the x86 executable to be quicker than the x64.

-H 1 -d 1 -i 0 -l K6x32 -C 2 -m 1
morbooo
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4
Merit: 0


View Profile
February 04, 2014, 12:44:30 PM
 #3731

I'm having an issue mining scrypt with two GPU's: every time I start cudaMiner, one of them (not always the same) seems to return results which mostly doesn't validate. This is tested on Linux, using cudaMiner master, tested both on Z14x14 and T14x32. When I mine using a single card (selected with -d) all results validate... Any idea?

this is a long shot: Would it help to downgrade the video driver to the exact version hat shipped with the CUDA 5.5 toolkit download from nVidia? Of course if your video cards are newer than this driver release, this is a no-go, as the driver would not recognize them ;-/


I'm using the NVIDIA drivers from the Debian repositories, so downgrading isn't that easy... That said, I'm currently using the 319 driver series, which seems like the earliest one supported by CUDA 5.5. I've tried upgrading to the 331 driver series, but that doesn't change a thing.
cbuchner1
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 500


View Profile
February 04, 2014, 01:05:59 PM
 #3732

I'm having an issue mining scrypt with two GPU's: every time I start cudaMiner, one of them (not always the same) seems to return results which mostly doesn't validate. This is tested on Linux, using cudaMiner master, tested both on Z14x14 and T14x32. When I mine using a single card (selected with -d) all results validate... Any idea?

this is a long shot: Would it help to downgrade the video driver to the exact version hat shipped with the CUDA 5.5 toolkit download from nVidia? Of course if your video cards are newer than this driver release, this is a no-go, as the driver would not recognize them ;-/


I'm using the NVIDIA drivers from the Debian repositories, so downgrading isn't that easy... That said, I'm currently using the 319 driver series, which seems like the earliest one supported by CUDA 5.5. I've tried upgrading to the 331 driver series, but that doesn't change a thing.

I think your bug report is the one that made my mind go

The CUDA constant memory (the c_N loop trip count, etc...) of most CUDA kernels is only initialized properly for the first GPU (use of a single static variable to mark initialization instead of a thread-specific static variable). Which explains the majority of the crashes people are seeing with multi-GPU. Thank you. The Fermi owners use a kernel that doesn't yet make use of such constants, and hence the multi-GPU support is working fine for them.

So this is also on the FIXME list for tonight.

However I think that in your case where you run two cudaminer instances this cannot be the root cause. So we will have to keep looking.

Christian
lordaccess
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 69
Merit: 10


View Profile
February 04, 2014, 01:21:03 PM
 #3733

I'm having an issue mining scrypt with two GPU's: every time I start cudaMiner, one of them (not always the same) seems to return results which mostly doesn't validate. This is tested on Linux, using cudaMiner master, tested both on Z14x14 and T14x32. When I mine using a single card (selected with -d) all results validate... Any idea?

this is a long shot: Would it help to downgrade the video driver to the exact version hat shipped with the CUDA 5.5 toolkit download from nVidia? Of course if your video cards are newer than this driver release, this is a no-go, as the driver would not recognize them ;-/


I'm using the NVIDIA drivers from the Debian repositories, so downgrading isn't that easy... That said, I'm currently using the 319 driver series, which seems like the earliest one supported by CUDA 5.5. I've tried upgrading to the 331 driver series, but that doesn't change a thing.

I think your bug report is the one that made my mind go

The CUDA constant memory (the c_N loop trip count, etc...) of most CUDA kernels is only initialized properly for the first GPU (use of a single static variable to mark initialization instead of a thread-specific static variable). Which explains the majority of the crashes people are seeing with multi-GPU. Thank you. The Fermi owners use a kernel that doesn't yet make use of such constants, and hence the multi-GPU support is working fine for them.

So this is also on the FIXME list for tonight.

However I think that in your case where you run two cudaminer instances this cannot be the root cause. So we will have to keep looking.

Christian


Mate any idea why although
I have 2 GTX 780 (and two cuda miners) one shows 520 khps and the other 605? Can it be that the one that the monitor is plugged loses hash power because of it? Any idea what is going on?

YinCoin YangCoin ☯☯First Ever POS/POW Alternator! Multipool! ☯ ☯ http://yinyangpool.com/ 
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=623937
Bwincoin - 100% Free POS. BRz1SNnSs6bGkJkG4kvw5ADSin5dBat3Cx
djm34
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288
Merit: 1040


View Profile WWW
February 04, 2014, 01:34:18 PM
 #3734

A brave tester with 8 Fermi cards Tesla M2090 (thanks Choseh) just figured out the performance regression between 2013-12-18 and 2014-02-02.

If you change the #if 0 in the fermi_kernel.cu to #if 1 (thereby enabling the previous version of the Salsa20/8 round function) you should see the previous performance figures again. Those who can compile the code themselves and want to mine on Fermi are welcome to make this change themselves.

also there seems to be a bug in the autotuning code in salsa_kernel.cu

                            hash_sec = (double)WU_PER_LAUNCH / tdelta;

should very likely be

                            hash_sec = (double)WU_PER_LAUNCH * repeat / tdelta;

to factor in the number of repetitions in the measurement (we want to measure for 50ms minimum for better timer accuracy). So autotune was drunk after all!

So, it seems I should release fixes (new binary release) for these problems tonight.

Christian

Yes, It works better this way. However there are still the problem with power increase between config but it is less apparent.
(strangely, I don't have that problem with the gtx660, its power stays at 100% and doesn't fluctuate)



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

Activity: 4
Merit: 0


View Profile
February 04, 2014, 01:43:01 PM
 #3735

I think your bug report is the one that made my mind go http://www.digitalsherpa.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/lightbulb1.gif

The CUDA constant memory (the c_N loop trip count, etc...) of most CUDA kernels is only initialized properly for the first GPU (use of a single static variable to mark initialization instead of a thread-specific static variable). Which explains the majority of the crashes people are seeing with multi-GPU. Thank you. The Fermi owners use a kernel that doesn't yet make use of such constants, and hence the multi-GPU support is working fine for them.

So this is also on the FIXME list for tonight.
Awesome, looking forward to the fix. Thanks for the support Smiley

However I think that in your case where you run two cudaminer instances this cannot be the root cause. So we will have to keep looking.
Oh no I don't run two instances, I meant that one of the GPU's within the same cudaMiner instance produced invalid results. Which is in line with your explanation above. Running two instances of cudaMiner (one for each GPU) actually works perfectly, so this also confirms your hypothesis.
cbuchner1
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 500


View Profile
February 04, 2014, 01:54:05 PM
 #3736

Mate any idea why although
I have 2 GTX 780 (and two cuda miners) one shows 520 khps and the other 605? Can it be that the one that the monitor is plugged loses hash power because of it? Any idea what is going on?

I have 3 GTX 780Ti in one PC and two of them hash 10-20 kHash/s less than the fastest one. I attribute this to subtle differences in the PCI express connectivity.

But 100 kHash/s difference - ouch? played with the -H options yet?
trell0z
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 43
Merit: 0


View Profile
February 04, 2014, 02:11:09 PM
 #3737

Mate any idea why although
I have 2 GTX 780 (and two cuda miners) one shows 520 khps and the other 605? Can it be that the one that the monitor is plugged loses hash power because of it? Any idea what is going on?

I have 3 GTX 780Ti in one PC and two of them hash 10-20 kHash/s less than the fastest one. I attribute this to subtle differences in the PCI express connectivity.

But 100 kHash/s difference - ouch? played with the -H options yet?

Have you guys monitored your cards in afterburner? The topmost cards might be throttling more than the bottom one, or just that they boost to different mhz. Custom bios with disabled boost is awesome in general.
bathrobehero
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666
Merit: 1027


ICO? Not even once.


View Profile
February 04, 2014, 02:24:11 PM
 #3738

Mate any idea why although
I have 2 GTX 780 (and two cuda miners) one shows 520 khps and the other 605? Can it be that the one that the monitor is plugged loses hash power because of it? Any idea what is going on?

Primary cards are always going to perform worse as they are stressed by the OS, your browser, background apps and so on. Also,the -H flag could cause it so try -H 2 to exclude the CPU. If you're not using risers, chances are one of your card is hotter than the other, or at least requires a higher fan speed to keep it at lower temps so the fans are using more power on one card which very well means lower core frequencies when it comes to kepler. And those are not the only possible explanations, but my brake is over...

RIP Bittrex
RIP Poloniex
xblackdemonx
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 6
Merit: 0


View Profile
February 04, 2014, 02:41:34 PM
Last edit: February 04, 2014, 03:06:01 PM by xblackdemonx
 #3739

Hi, i'm using 2xGTX560 here

with 2013-12-10 version I get about 290kh/s
with 2013-12-18 version I get about 310kh/s but it freezes often
with 2014-02-02 version I get about 270kh/s  Huh

I'm using: cudaminer.exe -d 0,1 -i 0,0 -l F7x16,F7x16 -H 1,1 -C 1,1
lordaccess
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 69
Merit: 10


View Profile
February 04, 2014, 02:42:36 PM
 #3740

Mate any idea why although
I have 2 GTX 780 (and two cuda miners) one shows 520 khps and the other 605? Can it be that the one that the monitor is plugged loses hash power because of it? Any idea what is going on?

I have 3 GTX 780Ti in one PC and two of them hash 10-20 kHash/s less than the fastest one. I attribute this to subtle differences in the PCI express connectivity.

But 100 kHash/s difference - ouch? played with the -H options yet?

Since they are the same I use the same configuration. My problem is that if i start either one alone. It does reach 605. If I start em together They both reach 605 but after 2-3 minutes the gpu clock drops and the Voltage and the hash with them (drops to 520). It s the upper card and the the monitor is plugged in meaning the pcie is the most powerful. Also this card appears to have more temp (85C) than the one that works with max hash (75C). (but probably due to the limited space that it has to breath).

EDIT: I also saw the 2 next answers. Thanks I ll try to play with the H (althouh I doubt i ll see any difference).

YinCoin YangCoin ☯☯First Ever POS/POW Alternator! Multipool! ☯ ☯ http://yinyangpool.com/ 
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=623937
Bwincoin - 100% Free POS. BRz1SNnSs6bGkJkG4kvw5ADSin5dBat3Cx
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 ... 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!